Abstract

Deliberative Monetary Valuation (DMV) encapsulates a range of approaches that integrate participation, reflection, discussion and social learning into monetary valuation of environmental and other public goods, or budgetary decisions relating to provisioning of such goods. The term was first employed by Spash (2007, 2008a). In DMV, small groups of participants explore values and preferences for different policy options through a process of reasoned discourse. DMV has developed as a critical response to more established valuation methods, particularly the contingent valuation method (CVM) and cost-benefit analysis (CBA), which have been challenged both by ecological complexities and the intricacies and multidimensionality of human values. DMV has also been advocated as a more ‘democratic’ approach to valuation that can enhance the perceived legitimacy of policy making, as a result of increased public participation and better understanding of values (Howarth and Wilson, 2006). Others have used DMV to work with participants with limited formal education and literacy, and have pointed out that group-based, rather than individual/household, decisions and shared values are the norm in many parts of the world, especially for managing public goods (Kenter et al., 2011). Thus there are a range of different motivations for DMV that shape how it is put into practice.