> I take economic value to mean tradable/purchasable by another party.

Improving public health and reducing e.g. lung cancer can have value for the national economy, even if individual people do not perceive tradable value in things like buying a home on a street with less polluted air, or quitting smoking.

I guess I'm trying to differentiate hard values from soft. Hard values typically show a more direct path between the product and the action making that product. Like carbon markets that directly influence the planting of trees. There's a chain of custody between those two items that we can (read: should be able to) track.

Every value is a soft value. Everything has some usefulness, and we guess at the level of usefulness. You might think that something like an auction is good for defining hard value, but the winners curse [1] shows auctions are just good at finding people with the biggest error in their estimation. A food is another nice example. Might not be interested at all right now, but wait 24 hours without eating, and i'll be all over that meal.

Value is a slippery concept, and i think i'm willing to go out on a limb and say all value is subjective.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Winner's_curse