This news is about environmental issues. How current laws about protection of nature are not working, and how we need something new to innovate and help us to stop destroying our Home.
Ecosystem services are not exactly the first thing that comes up to our minds when we think about saving our planet. Usually we think about Greenpeace and other non profit organizations.
According to economics, people respond to incentives. Activicts don't make profits or create jobs from this organizations. So someone came out with the idea of payment for ecosystem services (PES) that tries to save the world and make money at the same time.
Nevertheless some activicts think that this project is just another way to give more power to the rich corporations. They think that moral values about our nature can't be treated in economics terms, beside the fact that nature can't be priced.
Another problem with this corporations is the fact that, for example the system will pay landowners to plant some kind of seed and, since people respond to incentives, they might plant gennetically improved trees.
The transaction costs of this kind of companies are higher than other ones, so it would be more likely to work in development countries.This issues should be resolved by the government, who is in charge to provide the common welfare and not by the companies who work for their own interests.
The question is, do we have another choice? I mean apparently, old ways to save the world are not working, but is that the only way to make it better? because leaving it all up to the private market could be a very dangerous ans risky way to do it.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/18/what-wrong-price-on-nature?INTCMP=SRCH
I'm not opposed to genetically tampering some species of plants, since it can help with problems like this one, but as you say, landowners answer to incentives and maybe basic food is not the prime product to make nowadays.
ResponderEliminarMaybe government could increase taxes on those products that are not good for the population, or maybe they should legislate about the subject, demanding that at least 10 o 20% of the land is planted with whatever product people need.
I think that better than wait for any organization, we should start worring for our enviroment. For example, in my house, me and my family recycle things like plastic bottles, yogurt containers, paperboard... I think with little things we can star saving the planet (:
ResponderEliminarThis is an interesting article. One question of the modern criminal law, is if the environment should be included in their catalogue of rules.
ResponderEliminarNot taking it as the only way, but one way more to hel the world, I think it's a great idea. Education is important, obviously, but adding incentives to it is even better. Besides, our world works that way: education, health and many other services can't be priced, but we sometmes need to give incentives to the the people to offer them when the state can't do it by his own.
ResponderEliminar