4 ms·
With land, not using it is the equivalent to a privately funded conservation site. Its not necessarily a bad thing. Many capitalistic countries also have adver
by loonster 5y ago
With land, not using it is the equivalent to a privately funded conservation site. Its not necessarily a bad thing.
Many capitalistic countries also have adverse possession laws, where if someone uses the land for X number of years, it becomes theirs.
- have_faith 5y agoThis loophole is solved by making it that declaring the land as such status means the land is commited to that use for a minimum number of years that makes the conservation meaningful. Something like a decade minimum with a high bar for converting it for other usage afterwards. Farmers in the UK for instance already have some incentives to leave some fields alone.