Friday, October 24, 1997
Alternatives for saving Mother Earth
PROPERTY RIGHTS: Make private land owners accountable for
pollution,
natural resources to solve problems
By Daniel B. Rego
Whenever you turn on the news, you’ll hear about
environmentalism and the need to regulate the pollution of
business. The media makes businesses seem like nothing but
get-rich-quick schemers while the government is described as an
enlightened institution which is so amazingly above human
fallacies. The truth, though, is buried under the cries of "save
the rain forest." In actuality, it is the government that is the
greatest danger to the environment. The lack of accountability and
property rights allows for the pollution and rape of the
environment. The false cries of environmental regulators and
so-called ecologists are frightening indeed.
The claims that we will soon deplete our natural resources are
certainly frightening. The sheer ludicrousness of this becomes
evident since these assertions have been made for hundreds of years
and, more often then not, have never come true. One reason is the
simple concept of supply and demand. During the oil crisis of the
’70s, there was a sharp decline of oil supplies, thus causing
prices to increase. The short-term reaction was the rapid
consumption of a limited resource. But in the long run, more
fuel-efficient cars were introduced, people started to rely more on
carpooling and public transportation. Thus the crisis was
weathered.
This can also be clearly seen by the whale-oil crises of the
19th century. When whales became scarce, prices of whale oil rose.
People looked for alternatives, and as the demand dropped, the
prices declined. Even with the lowered price, people still didn’t
use whale-oil very much.
A solution to the environmental problem can be seen by the use
of private property rights. The lack of private property can be
seen by cattle grazing on the English commons. Villages in 16th
century had communal grazing fields. Because one would benefit from
getting the most the quickest way, and since others could do the
same and limit the amount one could use, individuals used the
property extensively, which eventually led to agricultural problems
of never-used land. This led to the Enclosure Movement which
affirmed private property rights, eliminating the problem since
everyone took care of their property so that they could continue to
benefit from it.
This can further be seen by the herds of African elephants. In
central Africa, the elephants roam unowned in unfenced territory.
Kenya, for example, has tried to stop poachers, but the number of
African elephants in Kenya dropped from 65,000 to 19,000 in the
first decade the policy was in effect. In Zimbabwe, though, local
people have been given property rights over elephants (the right to
hunt the herds). This encouraged the people to preserve elephant
herds so that they could continually benefit from them. Since
affirming property rights over elephants, the number of elephants
has increased from 30,000 to 43,000. The number of elephants has
increased to the point where they are now overpopulated, and excess
ivory can be sold in the world market.
Pollution harms private individuals and private property. The
solution is to make companies and individuals culpable for
pollution. This includes protesting the private property rights of
individuals and companies. When this is hard to determine, e.g. air
emissions, the resolution can be found in two possibilities. The
first is to determine when the cost of not polluting by a company
(which is sloping downward as the number in tons of pollution
increases) is equal to the cost to society of the company polluting
(which is sloping upward ). A tax is levied at that rate. The
company then cuts back the pollution to the equilibrium point
because it is cheaper to not pollute then to pay that tax.
Many today wish to regulate exactly how all companies deal with
their pollution. But this is often uneconomical. A small solution
for this can be found in the free market.
The answer is to give a company the right to pollute a certain
number of tons of pollutant and to allow those rights to be bought
and sold. This means that a company may find it cheaper to not
pollute and sell part of the right to pollute to a company that
finds the opposite to be true. This results in minimum pollution
while allowing for maximum efficiency and savings. An environmental
group may put its money where its mouth is and buy up those rights
to pollute and thus reduce the total pollution output.
The enforcement of property rights and finding persons and
companies to be accountable for the pollution they produce is the
key to a clean environment while maintaining economic
prosperity.