Maybe it's just my mood today, but my first reaction to this news is that it is just one more way to argue about the price tag we can put on nature. At first glance it seems like a good thing to value California's forests as a great carbon sink. That means we have something of value here. Something to be preserved, conserved, used wisely for the most good.
But as soon as you put that price tag on our forests, those in the business of making money will want to find a way to capitalize on that value.
Who will gain from this type of valuation? And who will lose? If we take an historic view, such as in outlined in the book Imperial San Francisco , it is not the people living in the Sierra who have gained from the value of our resources. Gold, water, timber resources and receipts have all streamed downhill.
Will this be the first time that a valuable commodity stays in place in order to enrich the Sierra, California and the world? Take a look at who owns the forests right now. Is that who has the opportunity to get rich from carbon trading? Most forests are in the hands of few private industries, the feds and the state, right?
I truly don't understand the economic mechanics of this new valuation process. And I think that bears a much closer look.
the many uses of trees
Maybe it's just my mood today, but my first reaction to this news is that it is just one more way to argue about the price tag we can put on nature. At first glance it seems like a good thing to value California's forests as a great carbon sink. That means we have something of value here. Something to be preserved, conserved, used wisely for the most good.
But as soon as you put that price tag on our forests, those in the business of making money will want to find a way to capitalize on that value.
Who will gain from this type of valuation? And who will lose? If we take an historic view, such as in outlined in the book Imperial San Francisco , it is not the people living in the Sierra who have gained from the value of our resources. Gold, water, timber resources and receipts have all streamed downhill.
Will this be the first time that a valuable commodity stays in place in order to enrich the Sierra, California and the world? Take a look at who owns the forests right now. Is that who has the opportunity to get rich from carbon trading? Most forests are in the hands of few private industries, the feds and the state, right?
I truly don't understand the economic mechanics of this new valuation process. And I think that bears a much closer look.
Catherine Stifter