Saturday, May 01, 2004
Only neo-liberals had the answer!
In ‘The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses’ (1997) in describing a neo-liberal approach to environmental protection, John Dryzek theorises (though not advocates) the privatisation of whales. Each whale would be privately owned (by whalers, tourists or whale philanthropists), each with a vested interested in their protection for future use. The value of each individual whale would, of course, be decided by the market.
Thus, a rosy future is promised for whales.
Environmental destruction is characterised as being a problem of ownership. Where private property rights do not exist, even public protection (through government regulation) cannot protect heritage, animals and ecosystems. Public parks, for example, are never tended to as well as private gardens.
This theory can be extended. It is not just a question of ownership, but one of interest. Where an individual has a private interest in the protection of a natural object, the implications of that interest overlap as if it was owned.
Thus, we can all look forward to a rosy future for the Wandering Albatross. Now that Ladbrookes and punters worldwide have an interest in them (and this is not the same as ownership) they have a vested and financial interest in their long-term protection.
Only neo-liberals had the answer!
Posted by Living with Matilda at 8:57 AM
Read this first:
http://www.planetark.com/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/24957/story.htm
Whilst my own conservationist values have a different philosophical starting point*, sometimes you have to admire the audacity and imagination of neo-liberal responses to ecological problems.In ‘The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses’ (1997) in describing a neo-liberal approach to environmental protection, John Dryzek theorises (though not advocates) the privatisation of whales. Each whale would be privately owned (by whalers, tourists or whale philanthropists), each with a vested interested in their protection for future use. The value of each individual whale would, of course, be decided by the market.
Thus, a rosy future is promised for whales.
Environmental destruction is characterised as being a problem of ownership. Where private property rights do not exist, even public protection (through government regulation) cannot protect heritage, animals and ecosystems. Public parks, for example, are never tended to as well as private gardens.
This theory can be extended. It is not just a question of ownership, but one of interest. Where an individual has a private interest in the protection of a natural object, the implications of that interest overlap as if it was owned.
Thus, we can all look forward to a rosy future for the Wandering Albatross. Now that Ladbrookes and punters worldwide have an interest in them (and this is not the same as ownership) they have a vested and financial interest in their long-term protection.
One can envisage millions of gamblers, placing bets online, watching to see if ‘their’ bird gets to Antarctica first. And what’s more, you have generated further economic growth. This concept can be extended to wildebeest, bison, Arctic terns, seals, you name it.
Hey presto ! You’ve got environmental protection
.
Posted by Living with Matilda at 8:57 AM
Disclaimer:
| I am employed by Brisbane City Council. All views expressed in this blog are my own and in no way reflect the views of my employer. |
Weasel Word(s) of the day:
From WeaselWords.com.au
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home