1. Editorial

  • Guest Editorial, by Tommaso Luzzati and Igor Matutinović

2. News from ESEE and its members

  • Report from ESEE 2013: the 10th International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics, June 17-21, Reims, Brussels, Lille.
  • Election to the board of the ISEE
  • ISEE International Biennial Conference 2014: "Equity Within Planetary Boundaries"
  • New Center for Design, Innovation and Sustainable Transition (DIST) in Denmark, including ecological economics
  • New project: Ecological macroeconomics and sustainable transition – critical and constructive perspectives
  • Journal News

3. Other News

  • Call for papers: Special issue on "Framing Degrowth: from diagnosis to development alternatives"
  • Call for papers: Environmental Justice: Empirical Concerns and Normative Reasoning
  • New Journal "Challenges in Sustainability"

4. Hot topic

  • Environmental movements are busy—in Turkey and around the world, by Begum Ozkaynak

5. Events

  • Canadian Society for Ecological Economics, Toronto, 31 October - 2 November 2013
  • Linking Policy and Science for Sustainable Innovation, Brussels, 10-11 October 2013
  • Policy Mixes in Environmental and Conservation Policies, Leipzig, Germany 25-27 February 2014

6. Job openings

  • Lecturer (Docent) in Sustainable Inovation

7. Students and early career

  • Envecon 2014 – call for papers
  • ESEE 2013 Student paper prize winners Q&A
  • Student research exposé

1. Editorial


  Guest Editorial, by Tommaso Luzzati [i] and Igor Matutinović [ii]

This short editorial just asks some questions. Everyone knows that asking questions is often inconvenient. Many cultures inhibit asking questions. The reasons why this occurs are complicated and a discussion about them is far beyond the purpose of this short note. The issue has been explored mainly within education science (see e.g. the seminal contribution of Hofstede, G. 1986, Cultural differences in teaching and learning, International Journal of Intercultural Relations, Vol. 10, pp. 301-320). Asking questions can be problematic since in many instances the answer may be unknown. This may create an inconvenient feeling of uncertainty in a social group that is bound together with common values and beliefs, as any scientific community is. In other cases, questions may uncover incompetence of the person who asked it or weaken her or his authority. In both cases, once discussions get started, there is a possibility of causing disagreement and conflicts that might put the community involved in danger.

At the same time, asking questions is crucial for any progress in learning and knowledge. It can be safely affirmed that Ecological Economics is routed in critical thinking. For this reason we do not hesitate to ask the readers of the ESEE newsletter some questions that we see being pertinent to our scientific community. They are genuine questions, in a sense that we do not know the answers and no a priori truth is available. Most of them come out from our constant participation to the ESEE conferences (probably since Geneva 1997).

Our conferences are great events, well organized and with a pleasant atmosphere, including the last one, in Lille. We are very grateful to the conference organizers who take the burden of organizing so beautiful meetings. At the same time, in the course of the recent years we feel increasingly frustrated, wondering whether this was the last one that we wish to attend. Is this just a personal feeling arising as we become older or is there something more to it?

The first dimension of frustration is related to identity: Do ESEE conferences properly reflect the ecological economics scientific identity as it was built in the nineties on the pillars of interdisciplinarity and heterodoxy? Do they focus on real issues that arise in the interaction of three complex systems – ecological, economic and social? We see the reductionism of environmental economics and the mathematical formalism of equilibrium economics increasingly creeping in this originally pragmatic and heterodox worldview. Instead, we believe that usage of systems science and complexity perspective/tools is more in line with the Ecological Economics theoretical identity. Somehow, the guidelines for conference contributors have been neglecting that point. How much conference space has been dedicated over the past ten years to furthering our understanding of far from equilibrium dissipative systems laid down by seminal works of Georgescu-Roegen, Herman Daly, and others? A closely related question is why don’t we have sections that addresse in a systematic way methodological tools that can further our capability of understanding and modeling the interactions between the economy, the society, and the natural environment?

The second dimension of our frustration is that in spite of the fact that each conference has a unifying theme there is a large amount of topic fragmentation, which creates an informational fog. Also, the sheer number of presentations contributes to informational entropy and makes the task of organizing them around coherent sub-themes nearly impossible. Consequently, many sessions appear inconsistent in their content while similar or interrelated issues are often scattered in disparate locations. In our view, the number of presentations should be reduced by at least a fourth, which would likely contribute to their quality and help to keep the theme of the conference in focus. Our question is then: What stands in the way of reducing the number of presentations, the number of sessions and increasing their focus and thematic coherence?

To wrap it up – we dared to put forward these questions to stimulate dialogue and provoke others to express their views, which may all contribute to improving the quality of our biannual gatherings.

[i] University of Pisa, Dipartimento di Economia e Management.

[ii] GfK – Center for Market Research and University of Zagreb, Faculty for Electrical Engineering and Computing.



2. News from ESEE and its members

Report from ESEE 2013: the 10th International Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics, June 17-21, Reims, Brussels, Lille.

The 10th International Conference of the European Society took place in Lille (France) at Université Lille1 between 18 and 21 June 2013. The Conference was preceded by a two-day workshop which brought together 40 PhD and Master students and several senior scientists in Reims (June 17-18, 2013) and by a policy-event hosted by the European Parliament group of the Greens in Brussels (June 18th). Moreover, the conference was coupled with the 8th Congress of the International Network on Organizations and Sustainable Development (RIODD) and all the plenary sessions and several events were common to both conferences.

Picture 1: Introduction to the Policy event by Inge Røpke, Brussels, European Parliament, June 17th, 2013 (©Pletnev Dmitri, Chelyabinsk State University, Russia)

The theme of ESEE 2013 was "Ecological Economics and Institutional Dynamics" and the variety of the contributions is reflected in the final program accessible here. The success of all the events organized is reflected by the large number of participants (575 participants coming from 41 countries) and the overall quality of the contributions (as reflected by the results of the satisfaction survey). Considering the ESEE 2013 Conference alone, 365 papers were presented in the framework of the 90 parallel and special sessions which were organized and 25 posters were displayed during the conference and presented during the poster session. Plenary sessions were well-received and even if the agenda couldn’t offer always enough time for in-depth discussions, coffee breaks, lunches and dinners allowed continuing the discussions engaged during all these exciting sessions. From my point of view, one of the milestone events during this conference was the roundtable on “The institutionalization of Ecological Economics: cross-continental dialogue”, with an exciting debate between Inge Røpke, Richard B. Howarth and Clive Spash, moderated by Tom Bauler.

All abstracts, presentations and full papers are now available in the online conference archive ( – it is necessary to create an account to obtain the pdf of the papers which were uploaded by the authors. The journal Environmental Policy and Governance (EPG) will publish a special issue covering material from this conference and other publication opportunities will be explored in a second step.

Picture 2: The local organizing committee, during the closing session, Lille, June 21st (© Irene Ring, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research - UFZ, Germany)

The next biennial ESEE conference will take place on 30th June – 3rd July, 2015 in Leeds, UK.


Olivier Petit

ESEE 2013 organising committee & ESEE Conference committee Chair


Election to the board of the ISEE

The ISEE Election of seven Board Members and President Elect will take place in November 2013. The elected candidates will serve for the term January 2014 to December 2016. The President-elect will then serve as President from January 2017 for two years and subsequently as past-President for a further two years.

You are invited to suggest names of candidates for the Nominating Committee to consider. It would be helpful to add brief biographical and contact details for each candidate you suggest.

Please email your suggestion(s) to

ISEE International Biennial Conference 2014: "Equity Within Planetary Boundaries"

Save the date: The ISEE Conference will take place from 13 - 15 August 2014 in Reykjavik, Iceland. More information will be circulated in due time.

New Center for Design, Innovation and Sustainable Transition (DIST) in Denmark, including ecological economics

Aalborg University has established a new Center for Design, Innovation and Sustainable Transition (DIST) at its Copenhagen campus. Grounded within the tradition of science and technology studies, the center is dedicated to conducting research on the socio-technical and economic dynamics of moving towards more sustainable societies and to developing modes of intervention that engage a broad array of actors. This dual approach provides a unique setting for collaboration. The DIST ambition is to work closely together with external partners to change existing development paths while continuing to advance new research agendas. DIST is also involved in a number of different educational programs and offers PhD training.

DIST is headed by Professor Ulrik Jørgensen and brings together researchers from the humanities, the technical and social sciences. Among the professorships related to DIST is a Professor of ecological economics, Inge Røpke.

More information:

New project: Ecological macroeconomics and sustainable transition – critical and constructive perspectives

At the Center for Design, Innovation and Sustainable Transition (DIST), Aalborg University’s campus in Copenhagen, a new project recently started with support from the Velux Foundation. The aim of the project is to contribute to the development of an ecological macroeconomics that, in contrast to both neoliberal and Keynesian perspectives on the economic crisis, incorporates the solution of climate and environmental problems in the design of macroeconomic strategies. The challenge is to resolve the dilemma that, on the one hand, economic growth increases the global environmental and distributional problems, and on the other hand, negative growth implies social problems and the risk of social collapse. Therefore, the key concern must be to transform society in ways that make it prosper without economic growth.

As a contribution to the development of an ecological macroeconomics and to promote sustainable transition, the project has three focus areas:

-    Critical analyses of the underlying assumptions upon which much economic policy with implications for sustainability is premised, with the aim of developing policies based on alternative assumptions.

-    The role of economic institutions for sustainable transition and the possibilities for changing these institutions.

-    Popularising the basic ideas in ecological economics and related heterodox strands of thought like market sociology.

The primary theoretical framework for the project is ecological economics, which is applied both to challenge traditional understandings of current economic-political problems and as a point of departure for the formulation of constructive ideas for alternative paths of development. In addition, the project draws on broader macroeconomic discussion, perspectives from market sociology, and theory about sustainable transition.

The project is led by Inge Røpke ( A project description can be found here.

Journal News

Access to the Journal Environmental Values

Members of the ESEE have free online access to the Journal Environmental Values for the current year. This requires using codes via the publishers website at:

To get access codes please email the ESEE Secretary, Begum Ozkaynak ( who will supply these to any current ESEE member.

Access to the Journal Environmental Policy and Governance (EPG)

ESEE 2013 participants have access to the internet version of the journal Environmental Policy and Governance (EPG) for two years, as EPG subscription was included in their conference registration fees. ESEE members who did not attend ESEE 2013 can subscribe to the EPG journal at the same price (40 euros ESEE members, 30 euros for students). The ESEE Treasurer will contact ESEE members by email providing the details for EPG subscription.

ESEE 2013 Special Issue of EPG

The journal of Environmental Policy and Governance will produce an issue covering material from the ESEE 2013 conference “Ecological Economics and Institutional Dynamics” organised in Lille, France. In line with the conference theme, the special issue focuses on the institutional dimensions of Ecological Economics. The EPG-ESEE 2013 editorial process is planned to be finalised by February 1, 2014.


3. Other News

Call for papers: Special issue on "Framing Degrowth: from diagnosis to development alternatives"

Guest editors: Joan Martinez-Alier, Esteve Corbera, Viviana Asara, Federico Demaria, Iago Otero, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals (ICTA), Ecological Economics and Integrated Assessment Unit, Barcelona, Spain.

Targeted journal: “Development and Change”. Please follow the Authors’ Guidelines at the journal’s website

Deadline for abstracts (between 300 and 500 words): September 15st 2013

Deadline for final drafts (between 8,000 to 10,000 words including notes and references): 30th October 2013

Please send all documents, including any further enquiries to Viviana Asara (

Call for papers: Environmental Justice: Empirical Concerns and Normative Reasoning


Journal: Analyse & Kritik, Issue 1/36, 2014


Issue co-editor: Gordon Walker (Lancaster)


Environmental philosophers and ethicists normally think of environmental problems as ones on a grand scale. Nowadays they often address climate change, its prospective global consequences and cosmopolitan normative dimensions. Meanwhile, however, epidemiologists, geographers and sociologists have worked on a more medium and local scale and collected a mass of data documenting the extremely uneven local environmental circumstances many people live under: circumstances pertaining to diminished health and life-qualities and potential risk of harm. The label “environmental justice” arose from the black community in the US but has travelled to the European context and to problems of a similar, if not as obviously racialised kind. According to the European Commission 500,000 people are dying per year due to pollution, and on average a year of reduced life-expectancy is due to environmental hazards. Whose lives these are is a pertinent question of inequality and potentially injustice, along with many others that might be asked about the consequences of uneven patterns of environmental quality and resource access in different parts of the world.


This issue plans to address the “justice frame” that provides the normative background for empirical studies in this field – either the ethical presuppositions taken for granted in ongoing research or attempts at explicit normative argument. How do distributive, procedural, political and other forms of justice come into claimmaking and relate to each other? How do empirical methods and justice concepts connect, and what new objects of concern are emerging? To what extent do we have a right to a healthy environment, and which institutions should be involved in achieving and sustaining this? Is local environmental justice part of social justice, or has it self-standing importance? How does environmental justice differ from and/or relate to ecological justice? What are its criteria, besides or beyond equality?


Contributions addressing these (and related) questions are highly welcome. If interested, please send a short abstract of your prospective article to one of the editors.


Deadline for this issue: January 2014.


Publication: April 2014.

New Journal "Challenges in Sustainability"


Challenges in Sustainability is an international, open access, academic, interdisciplinary journal, a new environment to discuss environmental, social and economic aspects of our society, aiming toward sustainability and sustainable development. We welcome research articles, reviews, communications or short notes.


4. Hot Topic

Environmental movements are busy—in Turkey and around the world, by Begum Ozkaynak

The environmental movement in Turkey was busy with protests in summer 2013, which resulted in two amazing success stories. The Gezi Park demonstrations that erupted across Turkey in June had initially begun in opposition to plans to replace the only green space left in Taksim with a shopping mall and/or a luxury hotel, under the rubric of rebuilding the Ottoman Military Barracks. Accompanied by an incredibly rich sense of humor that eventually led to the suspension of the construction project, the demonstrations were later likened to the Occupy movements and the May 1968 protests. Recently, a massive coal-power plant project on Turkey’s Black Sea coast, in Gerze, Sinop was also suspended thanks to community resistance. The Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) of the proposed plant was rejected, remarkably for the fourth time, as the majority of construction was in a forested area. The Ministry of Environment and Urbanization is apparently not asking for another revision or for a new EIA at this time. Indeed, local residents have been struggling since 2008 to cancel the thermal power plant project in the area via a platform (Green Gerze Platform) they formed to resist the company and the state. In 2011, despite harsh police intervention, they effectively prevented bulldozers from entering the construction zone and have been occupying the site since then.

The collective spirit, joint action and resulting success stories confirmed once again what environmental resistance can achieve, and gave much needed hope to hundreds of other environmental movements in the country. Indeed, people in Turkey have been trying to defend their rural and/or urban spaces against mining activities, dam building and hydroelectricity projects, thermal and nuclear power plants, and other gentrification and urban transformation projects since the 1990s. While Turkey’s economy more than doubled in size in these past two decades, its population grew by 32 percent—putting immense pressure on the nation’s ecosystem and natural reserves.

Today, one of the most important items on Turkey’s agenda is conflicts related to large infrastructure projects. In addition to a number of large-scale hydropower projects such as the Ilısu Dam, these mega projects include a third bridge over the Bosporus Strait (which will destroy Istanbul’s last remaining forests), a third airport in Istanbul (supposed to become the world’s largest airport), two nuclear power plant projects (in Akkuyu and in Sinop), and a huge canal to connect the Black and Marmara Seas. In the league of Unnecessary Imposed Mega Projects, these plans might be enough to name Turkey champion (see the Third European Forum for more on this). These mega projects, coupled with other “smaller” projects that are extractivist in nature (such as mining for minerals and building materials, small-scale hydropower projects, industrial waste disposal) clearly demonstrate that Turkey’s growth pattern is characterized by the enclosure of public spaces, extensive environmental degradation, and the subordination of environmental interests to those of national and international capital owners.

In Turkey, thanks to EJOLT, together with our political ecology working group in Istanbul, we are currently engaged in efforts to demonstrate this through the “Map of Environmental Injustices in Turkey.” While still a very preliminary and incomplete map that consists of some 80 well-known environmental resistance movements as described by local activists and scholars, it has already attracted much attention. One major newspaper (Hurriyet Sunday, 14 July 2013) reproduced the map adding some comments of its own, under the title “Turkey’s Environmental Resistance Map: The environmental movement in Turkey did not begin with brutal  police intervention against the Gezi Park protesters, but this became a reminder of environmental problems.”

Of course, environmental movements in the world are very busy too! The efforts of the Ecuadorian public to keep oil companies out of Yasuni-ITT and save the Yasuni Initiative; the No-Tav movement in the North-West of Italy, citizen protests in Romania against the Rosia Montana gold mine are cases in point. In fact, one of the primary objectives of EJOLT is to compile an online world database of environmental conflicts and resistance movements, and link them with social metabolism and socio-environmental indicators. Imagine the impact such a world map of environmental injustices will then make! Note that EJOLT also offers a free access resource library about environmental justice, including a series of reports produced by Environmental Justice Organisations and scholars from all around the world. Just check:


5. Events

Biennial conference of the Canadian Society for Ecological Economics, Toronto, 31 October - 2 November 2013

The Canadian Society for Ecological Economics Conference (CANSEE) is holding its biennial conference at York University, Toronto, 31 October - 2 November 2013. The theme for the conference is Sustaining the Commons: Ideas and Actions for a Green Economy.

For more information visit the conference website: here

Linking Policy and Science for Sustainable Innovation, Brussels, 10-11 October 2013

In the 3rd EU Dialogue on linking SCP and Growth Debates, part of the EU project RESPONDER, a selected group of policy makers and researchers will come together to discuss areas of contention between sustainable consumption and economic growth from the perspective of innovation.

For more information, click here

Policy Mixes in Environmental and Conservation Policies, Leipzig, Germany, 25-27 February 2014

Call for abstracts now open until 4 October 2013!

In most countries, environmental and conservation policies build on strategies involving a wide range of policy instruments. Within these policy mixes, economic instruments are gaining increasing attention from policy-makers and analysts. This holds for policies designed to conserve and finance biodiversity and secure ecosystem services as much as for climate, energy and water-related policies. However, there are still many open questions regarding the combination of several instruments in a policy mix. What is the role of different instruments or instrument types in a policy mix? What frameworks and empirical methods for policy mix design and analysis are available?  How can the various instruments be assessed in their contribution to environmental objectives, cost-effectiveness, cross-financing, social and distributional impacts or institutional requirements, when assessing policy mixes rather than single instruments?

The conference brings together both researchers and practitioners to discuss novel approaches to instrument analysis and design in policy mixes, covering applications to a wide range of environmental and conservation policies. Parallel sessions will cover theoretical contributions as well as case studies from all relevant disciplines such as political science, economics, law, ecology and other social and natural sciences. We encourage integrative approaches bridging between science and society and combining knowledge from different disciplines for successful environmental and conservation policies.

More information: here
Download the Call for Abstracts: here


6. Job openings

Lecturer (Docent) in Sustainable Innovation

The School of Innovation Sciences of Eindhoven University of Technology has a vacancy for a lecturer in Sustainable Innovation.

For more information follow this link.


7. Students and early career

Envecon 2014 – call for papers

The next UK Network for Environmental Economists conference will take place on Friday 14th March, at the Royal Society, London. This year the focus is on tools of environmental economics. Please submit your abstract by Friday, 29th November 2013 to


For more information, follow this link.


ESEE 2013 Student paper prize winners Q&A


Stefano Carattini (SC)

Geneva School of Business Administration, University of Applied Sciences of Western Switzerland, and Departament de Teoria Económica, Universitat de Barcelona, Spain


Kristofer Dittmer (KD)

Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain and Research & Degrowth, Barcelona, Spain


1. Can you tell us about your current research interest (e.g. PhD topic), education, affiliation and further plans?

KD:  I am doing a PhD at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona about local currencies, which I was quite excited about at the outset, but am now rather sceptical of. At the moment I am interested in monetary and banking reform. As to my education, I abandoned Architecture in Seville after three years to study ecological economics, or so I thought, at Gothenburg University. Environmental economics it was, and very different from what I had expected, but I finally got to study ecological economics at the Master level at the UAB.


SC: After obtaining an MSc in Economics from the University of Lausanne, I decided to move to the University of Barcelona (UB) where I am currently following a doctoral program in Economics. Barcelona is increasingly becoming a hub for Ecological Economics and at UB I found a very experienced supervisor, Jordi Roca. I also work as teaching assistant at the Geneva School of Business Administration for Andrea Baranzini, thus I benefit also from his knowledge. My thesis deals with climate change and in particular with both bottom-up (e.g. trust and collective action) and top-down (e.g. environmental taxation) solutions for mitigation.



2. What role ESEE plays in your research?

KD:  I think it is great that some ecological economists are doing research about monetary and banking reform, and are engaging with heterodox monetary theories, as the ESEE 2013 conference made me more aware of.


SC: Ecological Economics plays a fundamental role in enriching the discussion around environmental policy, by challenging preconceived ideas and supporting thinking outside the box. In the same vein, thanks to its conferences and workshops, ESEE provides a very stimulating environment wherein fruitful intellectual exchanges are made possible, giving the chance to young researchers as me to receive challenging, rewarding or simply supportive comments from both established scholars and peers. At the same time, social interactions and informal exchanges are encouraged, helping participants to find good colleagues and start building their own network.



3. Your paper: title, main objective, research-policy problem. How long did you work on it? How many people where involved? What was most difficult? What would you suggest to your colleagues?


KD: The paper is a literature review called “Local currencies for purposive degrowth? A quality check of some proposals for changing money-as-usual”. It draws upon research about local currencies to assess their performance with respect to four criteria related to degrowth, or radical ecologism: community-building, advancement of alternative values in economic exchange, facilitation of alternative livelihoods, and eco-localization. The general objective is to evaluate the research basis for the degrowth movement’s advocacy of local currencies. I worked on the paper intermittently for two years, and was able to write it mainly thanks to a period as visiting researcher at the University of Liverpool, where Peter North helped guide me through the literature. The most difficult bit was to frame and limit what began as a comprehensive review of local currencies, since they have several, sometimes conflicting objectives. I finally settled for the framework of degrowth, which entailed the worrying decision to withdraw an earlier submission. I have not been overly swift at publishing, so my advice for succeeding in publishing with minimal distress will be stated in the negative: don’t pick a subject that is very exotic to your institution, and don’t prioritize acquiring broad knowledge over getting things to look like an academic paper.


SC: The paper “Unconventional Determinants of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Role of Trust”, written with Andrea Baranzini and Jordi Roca (and available at SSRN), seeks to fill a gap in the analysis of the determinants of greenhouse gas emissions. This gap is represented by the absence of social norms in the standard approach. Intrigued by Elinor Ostrom's idea that trust between individuals could foster cooperation also with global dilemmas (e.g. climate change) as it can do with local commons, we look for evidence in the literature and in the data. In both we find empirical support for her intuition. Using a panel of European countries we show for instance that the effect of trust on emissions is not negligible. To illustrate this result, we imagine what would be the impact on Spanish emissions if trust in Spain could be as high as in Sweden. We find that this change in trust would imply a reduction in emissions of about 12.5%, everything else equal. This figure would mean a relatively small change compared to the reductions in emissions that are requested by most climate scientists to avoid dangerous interferences with the climate system, but still represent an important step in the right direction. Climate change mitigation requires people to change behavior. We suggest that higher trust between individuals may increase their willingness to improve efforts to reduce energy consumption and accept costly climate policy, since they feel more comfortable with their decisions as they expect other people to do the same.


I have faced some conceptual and empirical challenges while working at this project. For instance, since trust is not directly observable and measurable, an attentive analysis of the different manners to measure trust (and their implications) revealed to be necessary. In addition, it also seemed important to provide additional factual details on the way trust affects emissions, giving empirical substantiation to the otherwise somewhat abstract mechanism linking trust to emissions. In addition, our findings open the way for new questions, which however are left for further research. All in all, it seems to me that most challenges have become opportunities to improve the research quality. From my very short experience, I would suggest to my peers to look for critiques on their research projects and improve them accordingly, but to not give up on the essence of their idea.


Student research exposé

For the next ESEE newsletter we are again looking for a student who wants to give a short introduction to themselves and their research. This is a great opportunity for some exposure to your work within wider ecological economics circles!


Please write an answer to the four questions below in a Word document (max 500 words in total), include a photo of yourself, and email to by November 31. The four questions we would like you to answer are: Tell us about yourself? What are you researching? If you were in charge of the world economy for one day, tell me one thing what you would do and why? Tell me one thing that you think many ecological economists don’t realise, but should. Please use the questions as headings to your answer.