Incidentally, open oceans are worth only $135, temperate forests $1,127 and grasslands $2,698 per hectare. All the open oceans, Atlantic, Pacific, Indian and Arctic, and the millions of life forms they are home to are under threat. So are grasslands that give us food, water and other natural resources and help keep climate change in check. Yet they are worth almost nothing.

The monetary value of coastal ecosystems, according to the study, is a pitiable $26,760 per hectare. Coastal and inland wetlands are worth only $12,163 and $16,534 a hectare, and lakes a shocking $3,938 a hectare. According to the UN Environmental Programme, about 40 percent of the people live within 100 kilometers of coastlines, which means they get sustenance from coastal ecosystems and wetlands. Yet the combined worth of the two coastal systems is worth a mere $38,933 a hectare.

Perhaps something went wrong with the study. Else, how could the researchers assign a monetary value of 197,900 per hectare to coral reefs? Still, it does not do any justice to the true worth of coral reefs, which apart from their wide range of biodiversity also provide food for an estimated 1 billion people.

We need money to survive, but money is not the be all and end all of life. Assigning monetary value to every natural resource and system may be a good idea for the market, but it is certainly not conducive to protecting the planet. The nine ecosystems the researchers have studied have sustained life for millions of years. And their worth is beyond the value of all human possessions.

Yet the study has tried to weigh the ecosystems with a few a pieces of paper, which incidentally we get by exploiting the same ecosystems.

Is this a ploy to let market forces run amok with even the most sacrosanct benefits that nature has to offer? The answer is obvious.