whalers whaling endangered species nature

A Smaller Example of a Larger Principle
market approach quota sustainable conservation

Saving Whales by Putting a Price on Their Tail?

Scientists suggest that tradable harvest quotas may reduce the slaughter of whales. This 2012 article is from Miller-McCune, Jan 11, on whales by J. Badham, followed by a press release from Fred Harrison, PhD, successful researcher, author, and forecaster.

by James Badham and by Fred Harrison

For decades, whalers and those opposed to whaling have been locked in a pitched battle over the fate of the world’s largest mammals, many species of which are threatened or endangered.

Anti-whaling groups, including Greenpeace, Sea Shepherd, and the World Wildlife Fund, spend some $25 million every year on efforts ranging from education to dangerous confrontations on the high seas to stop whaling. Yet, the number of whales killed each year continues to grow, having doubled since the early 1990s, according to International Whaling Commission figures.

As a staff writer at the Bren School of Environmental Science & Management at the University of California, Santa Barbara, I heard about an article released in Nature magazine suggesting an intriguing -- and sure to be controversial -- new way forward.

In “A market approach to saving the whales,” Bren School economist Christopher Costello and marine scientist Steve Gaines join Leah Gerber, a population ecologist and marine conservation biologist at Arizona State University, to suggest a market-based solution to saving whales.

They propose establishing a quota system for harvesting whales in which shares (the right to harvest) could be bought and sold, “creating a market that would be economically, ecologically, and socially viable for whalers and whales alike.”

The strategy has its roots in market-based approaches that have been effective in conserving land and reducing air pollution. Costello, Gaines, and UCSB economist John Lynham three years ago suggested using a similar system, “catch shares,” to prevent the collapse of valuable but teetering fisheries. That approach has received its share of flak, which a “whale shares” system would likely inherit.

This latest suggestion involves allocating “whale shares” in sustainable numbers to all members of the IWC, which includes both whaling and non-whaling nations. Recipients could then harvest their quota, hold onto their shares for a year, or permanently retire them. Trading of shares would occur in a carefully controlled global market.

In the two most extreme scenarios, whalers could end up purchasing all the shares and harvesting whales at the established sustainable level, or conservationists might purchase all the shares, so that no whales would be harvested.

“Because conservationists could bid for quotas, whalers could profit even without harvesting the animals,” the professors say, adding that anti-whaling groups would probably end up spending less to save a whale than they do now.

But would whalers settle for quotas? Whaling nations have previously proposed them, which would legitimize their harvest. Many anti-whaling groups, on the other hand, have opposed quotas for the same reason.

However, the authors write, “If quotas are set properly, transactions would reduce the number of whales harvested, quite possibly to zero, unlike existing protocols, which seem to be increasing the catches. … By placing an appropriate price tag on the life of a whale, a whale conservation market provides an immediate and tangible way to save them.”

To see the whole article, click here .

JJS: Paying for what one takes, and everyone sharing those payments (which represent the economic value of that part of nature), is the fundamental reform that will make it possible for an ecology/economy balance, for a people/planet harmony.

Fred Harrison: The documentary film written and presented by Fred Harrison -- The Killing Fields, which exposes how the tax system is responsible for destroying habitats and species -- is to receive two high-profile screenings:

* On 10th February at Oxford University. There will be a discussion regarding reforms to taxation to eliminate poverty, environmental damage, and social injustice.
* On May 6th: screened at the Brighton Festival. A panel discussion involving participants in the film -- conservationist Peter Smith, landowner/farmer Dr Duncan Pickard, and eco-warrior lawyer Polly Higgins -- will be chaired by Sir Richard Jolly.

The video was directed by Carlo Nero. Hosting these events will be Academy Award winning actress Vanessa Redgrave, who is this year's Guest Director of the Brighton Festival.

The DVD can be purchased from the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation. To visit the foundation, click here .

JJS: Here’s a brief preview hint. Since everything takes place somewhere, somewhere on land, the more land that humans use, the less they leave for other species and the more problems they create for others. And, interestingly, how we treat the value of land -- that is, to whom we pay when we take over some land -- that is of paramount importance.

---------------------

Editor Jeffery J. Smith runs the Forum on Geonomics and helped prepare a course for the UN on geonomics. To take the “Land Rights” course, click here .

Also see:

Ever had a noisy neighborhood?
http://www.progress.org/2010/noise.htm

Bolivia enshrines natural world's rights
http://www.progress.org/2011/cutcosts.htm

ClawBack details tax bias for big business ...
http://www.progress.org/2011/galbrait.htm

Email this articleSign up for free Progress Report updates via email


What are your views? Share your opinions with The Progress Report:

Your name

Your email address

Your nation (or your state, if you're in the USA)

Check this box if you'd like to receive occasional Economic Justice announcements via email. No more than one every three weeks on average.


Page One Page Two Archive
Discussion Room Letters What's Geoism?

Henry Search Engine