One of the most difficult discussions to hold with conservation-minded people is that markets can be designed to ensure the survival of some endangered species. Most arguments from such conservationists is to adopt the moral arguments about the need to conserve valuable species and ensure that there is proper bio-diversity. My understanding of this is that it is possible to design sensible markets that would ensure that many species that are endangered survive in good numbers and that some appropriate stabilization would follow. I have taken this argument on this blog in respect of tigers which I think are extremely regal animals which should be conserved through commercialization because markets are tiger-friendly.
I rehash the argument because I have read in this small article in the Irish Times about a man who was jailed for having killed and eaten what could have been the last wild Indochinese tiger. So Kang Wannian from Yunnan province of China has been sentenced to a ten-year jail term but one more valuable tiger has disappeared forever. The logic of commercialization suggests that it is possible to save more tigers by assigning property rights through auctions and allowing them to be owned and re-generated in sufficient numbers. The instinctive resistance to any form of commercialization is greater harm to tiger populations and leaves evidence of its futility. Given the scarcity of tigers, they should not end up as steak on a clam-collector's dinner table.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment