Building the consensus: The moral space of earth measurement

• We develop a new set of criteria for the evaluation of Earth measurement frameworks
• The criteria are rooted in environmental ethics (and extend on Norton's Convergence Hypothesis)
• We apply the criteria to Nahlik et al.'s review of ecosystem services frameworks (published in Ecological Economics in 2012)
• The criteria may also be applied to other frameworks, including IPBES and SEEA
• The pragmatic benefit is a (theoretically rooted) approach to improve universal acceptance and uptake of complex Earth measurement frameworks.

We chart the moral space of Earth measurement with the aim to develop practical tools to evaluate and improve Earth measurement frameworks (including environmental-economic accounting and ecosystem services). Based on a survey of environmental ethics, we develop four concepts that are fundamentally important to fostering agreement in debates over Earth measurement frameworks among stakeholders with diverging belief systems. The four concepts can thus be used as criteria to evaluate the completeness and defensibility of existing measurement frameworks. The first two concepts, the consideration of broad human values and long time frames follow the landmark work by Bryan Norton. We further propose the adoption of the capital approach and precaution as the third and fourth concept, respectively. We conclude with suggestions for how current frameworks could be rendered more complete, defensible and internationally acceptable.