Continuous economic growth is impossible. WE have to limit "growth" and plan for development if we are to have an Open Future.

Your own knowledge is the powerhouse that makes your personal input valuable.

Comments on The Economics of Limits by John S Veitch

Big Bucks isn't enough

Nom-de-plume: Kam Date: 13 March, 2010

Thank you for a coherent and comprehensive summary of the global/Canterbury position and what appears to be the obvious route to managing resources. I am worried by two things: the proposal that we measure the resource and provide scientific information about environmental water gives ample scope for thousands of dollars to be paid to someone with interests to produce a "report" that backs a predetermined desired outcome - surely we already monitor the flows of our rivers and extrapolations from past data already provide a view of the likely future. Such new, loaded "reports" are not unknown!

Secondly, the "if anybody" part of free water allocation. Life requires water, as it does air. First the environmental need for water, then the household needs must be met at no cost, rationed when necessary. Actually, a charge towards infrastructural maintenance would probably be acceptable but I would hate to see profiteering on such a basic necessity.

Thirdly, the allocation of the remainder, and the "highest bidder" approach sounds to me like a fast road to monoculture. Do we really want the biggest gang to have it all? Shouldn't resultant pollution, for example, be weighed in against the money they might have to offer. There must be a criteria for allocation that is wider than just having the bucks.

Regards
Kam

Please feel free to comment on these reports.