Skip to content

On protecting the Chaco


However, Vidal fails to highlight the most important point facing conservationists – the lack of available funding needed to protect this wilderness.

It costs lots of money. So, you who worry about such things, dig into your pockets and go and buy this land. For the price of that semi in southern England that you live in you could buy 2,000 hectares or so of this forest.

Well, go on, what are you waiting for? Isn\’t preserving the environment the most important thing of all?

6 thoughts on “On protecting the Chaco”

  1. Long ago the free market writer Doug Casey suggested that the simplest way to save the rain forest was for all the well-off eco-chums( who spend fortunes financing the Sierra Club and many other eco-freakshows ) to take their cash and buy the Amazon jungle instead. The only obstacle to this would be the Brazillian state. At the time (early 1990s) it was his opinion that personal property was not that secure if the govt of the time got greedy.Brazil is now looked on as a rising economic power so perhaps that has changed.

  2. And because we individually aren’t putting our hands in our pockets there will be some bugger in Government or with the ear of Government keen to put their hand in our pocket instead.

    Oh look, there is. Small sums now but they will grow and I expect Defra/DfID/DeCC will already be funding individual projects in far flung places as part of the UN’s Convention on Biological Diversity.

    Why is it Britain’s Government into eco-wibble right up to the hilt and has been for some time?

  3. Evil Chritians growing biofuels eh? It wasn’t so long ago that opposing biofuels was heresy and proof that you were an evil right-winger.

    The times move fast under environmentalism.

  4. hang on a minute … doesn’t basic public goods free rider logic tell you that if left to private actors even if people do value the rain-forest at Y such that the optimal investment in rain-forest protection is X, what will actually happen is investment x delivering a shortfall of Y-y.

    if you are an evil right winger – believer in the basics of free market economics – the theory is telling you that governments ought to be doing this

    Tim adds: But ownership of the Chaco is not a public good: for the clear and obvious reason that it’s both rivalrous and excludable.

  5. oh come on – I may never set foot in a rainforest or see a Siberian tiger in the wild, yet I place some value on their existence. I cannot be excluded from valuing the existence of rainforests, nor does my appreciation of them diminish the quantity available.

    who wants to save the rainforests (or Chaco) because they want to use them in the sense that is excludable and rivalrous?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *