It will work in helping the wealthy and their corporations. It’s worked out so well for the US.
I imagine it will appear to work great on paper but in reality it will be a tragedy of corruption and bullshitting.
But critics of the approach say that OECMs have been shown to allow industrial activities, like logging, especially in B.C. where they are widely used. A 2022 report from two environmental groups said that other-conserved areas were falsely inflating B.C.’s progress to its nature protection goals, because most of these areas were still open to logging.
Yup
Why would private money do that… 😔
Not all private money will, this article pointed out legitimate uses, this isn’t a condemnation of people being too greedy and self interested for this to work, it is a condemnation of the idea that the rich won’t use this to eviscerate the beautiful landscapes of Canada under the guise of protecting them and erase any positive gains this process accomplished.
You know that is what the rich will do, it is the only choice they ever make unless they are terrified of the mob outside their estate.
I mean just look at the vague name, the handwavey definitions and opaque presentation, it feels custom designed for Lumber companies who want to sell the idea of them clearing Old Growth to plant a forest of monoculture trees as “planting trees to protect Canada’s natural wealth!”.
We all know how this bullshit goes, is it not the same story over and over again?
We all know how this bullshit goes, is it not the same story over and over again?
Always is. The system demands it.
Sounds like they’re not asking private money to chip in but counting private conservation projecrs to their stated goal of protected land.
Oh, private money never ever does anything bad for the average citizen.
No.
Could these ‘private money’ include “Common Pool Resource institutions” in the sense of Elinor Ostrom? Would that be an option for managing some of the commons in Canada?
