Recently, NPR reported that we are changing the formula for making environmental policy. In the past, we asked, what is the cost of what we want to do and what are, or are not the benefits? Through scientific study we determined when a species was about to become extinct and why. Now we ask, what is the "total economic value" of other species and their environment?
Used as an example was the "total economic value" of the polar bear. I am intrigued that as we prepare to experiment with the natural and fragile tundra of Alaska, we develop a new formula to help us accept yet another questionable environmental intrusion and perhaps the loss of magnificent animals.
Will a formula of "total economic value" give us yet another way to justify our disregard for our role in the extinction of other living things.?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
No comments :
Post a Comment