4 ms·
It’s complicated. Iceland is less corrupt than many nations with tropical rainforests, so your dollars are more likely to actually be used as you intended. Ther
by spenczar5 4y ago
It’s complicated. Iceland is less corrupt than many nations with tropical rainforests, so your dollars are more likely to actually be used as you intended. There is very little logging industry competing against you and virtually no poaching so your effort is more durable, too.
It’s hard to quantify these things and get a conclusive answer on which is better; I think we can leave it at “both are good.”
- lucb1e 4y ago> There is very little logging industry I wonder why :P When I was in Iceland, they told me the reason they don't have forests anymore is that the vikings and other later settlers logged it. (Of course, a random horse tour person isn't the best source so I could very well be misinformed.)
- yownie 4y agoyou were correctly informed, it was a combination of early settlers logging heavily plus long forest regrow times due to sparse sunlight plus sheep overgrazing saplings.