4 ms·
The article explains why bans may be preferable to market-based solutions in this case. The gist is that it's easier to enforce a ban ("nobody is allowed to fis
by croissants 6y ago
The article explains why bans may be preferable to market-based solutions in this case. The gist is that it's easier to enforce a ban ("nobody is allowed to fish here until 2022! get out!") than any kind of pricing mechanism ("let's see, yesterday a random Chinese trawler came in and picked up, I guess, 4 tons of mackerel, so add that to the week's total and..."), and many of the relevant countries with depleted fisheries may not even have the regulatory capacity for the latter.
- stretchwithme 6y agoNo one is motivated to stop poaching as much as the person whose property is being stolen. A ban works if it's enforced. But who's going to call the enforcers when there's a violation? This is the reason the tragedy of the commons exists.
- stretchwithme 6y agoI think it's easier to spend money protecting a resource when money is being earned from that resource. And it's also easier for those who want to use a resource to respect the law if there's still a legal way to access the resource.