Arguing Ecosystem Values with Paraconsistent Logics

The valuation of ecosystem services prompts dialogical settings where non-trivially inconsistent arguments are often invoked. Here, I propose an approach to the valuation of ecosystem services circumscribed to a logic-based argumentation framework that caters for valid inconsistencies. This framework accounts for preference formation processes underpinned by a paraconsistent model of logical entailment. The value of an ecosystem service is produced in the form of an ordering over competing land-use practices, as per the arguments surviving semantical probing.