Putting a Price on Nature
Biological diversity and healthy eco-systems are what support our planet and our rapidly growing human population, the loss of which would be disastrous on so many levels.
The Global Economic Symposium, has proposed the concept of a New Economy of Nature, which explores efficient ways of valuing natural resources for policy-making, law-making and economic purposes. It has proposed the financialisation of nature; whereby environmental valuation would measure a country’s wealth in terms of natural resources rather than just its capacity to produce and consume goods and services. Not only will a country’s natural resources be valued but so too will its capacity to manage those resources in a sustainable way. Thus by valuing the natural resources and how they are managed by a country, overall, what this hopes to achieve is less environmental degradation because a country’s total value depends on the ability to sustain its environment.
Could the financialisation of nature indeed be a way to protect the world’s ecosystems? Picture: Yasuni National Park in Ecuador. Published by
Sara y Tzunki on Flickr under a CC BY-NC 2.0 license.
However, does adding a monetary value to nature work to reduce the amount of nature being lost? Are international frameworks and conventions capable of establishing binding agreements holding governments to account for actions committed within sovereign borders? Will we need to rethink the sovereign state system?
What are some of the ways around the world that the preservation of the environment is successfully pursued alongside economic growth? Is the market economy the answer? Should we be placing a price on nature? Or are there non-financial ways of managing our biodiversity and ecosystem?
The last 3 global climate summits in Copenhagen, Cancun and Warsaw have shown the limitations of politics 1.0 in a globalized and more complex world. Shouldn’t there also be economic consequences attached to irresponsible corporate behaviour?
The continuing pursuit of fossil fuels to power our world, such as fracking in the United States, coal and coal seam gas in Australia and the exploitation of natural resources in Siberia, are not novel approaches to addressing our future energy needs and our environmental dilemma. If we continue to rely on fossil fuels and fail to achieve global governance on this issue, will we face a global crisis?
Below this article you will find multiple perspectives from the Future Challenges blogger network on “Putting a Price on Nature”.
Tags: BIODIVERSITY, CLIMATE CHANGE, economics, economy, ENVIRONMENT, Global Economic Symposium, nature
Lourdes Gomez
Most recent Local Views on ‘Putting a Price on Nature’
-
The Indigenous People of the Amazon have a proposal to safeguard forests
Written by Chiara Di Gaetano
on May 26, 2015. The idea of putting a price on nature to preserve it may seem like a good idea: in the end, it is fair and is just to protect something we could not live without. Let us consider here the issue from a different point of view, the one of the […]
-
The “Green Life Value” as a new way to put a price on nature
Written by Aown Kaz
on March 5, 2014. In our modern world the financialization of nature is already done whether we like it or not. For instance the price of a tree is determined by its timber. Only a quarter of the actual use of a tree is through its timber though. Therefore in establishing the economics […]
-
Nigeria Needs More than Just Pricing Nature
Written by Chioma Agwuegbo
on March 5, 2014. There’s no doubt that Mother Nature is complaining about the damage (e.g. pollution in all its forms) we humans have exerted on it over the years. Not only is Nature complaining but she is reacting also. Remember: Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines? Hurricanes Manuel and Ingrid in Mexico? Tornadoes in Oklahoma? […]
-
A befitting price of nature
Written by Mubatsi
on March 5, 2014. Uganda’s nature is priceless. But, can we attach a monetary value on nature? Yes and no. If I conserve forests, pay me per tree planted or per river bank protected so that I can buy my essential needs and be as comfortable as those who misuse nature. That’s one argument. […]
