4 ms·

That is quite a bold claim there. Do have any evidence that it is true? Are there studies you can cite or data that you can refer too? Your claim is that abs

That is quite a bold claim there. Do have any evidence that it is true? Are there studies you can cite or data that you can refer too? Your claim is that absent an economic or a personal ownership stake then one can not have an interest in protecting the land from pollution. This is a false statement for me personally so on strict logical grounds the claim is false but perhaps I'm an outlier.

wehadfun 13y ago
You want a study that says that someone cares about things they own? If the farmers actually owned the land they hopefully would have complained about near by factories, or stopped paying taxes on the land by now.
- Retric 13y ago
  Nobody owns the air but we all like to avoid lung disease and death.
- jshen 13y ago
  Many of the Superfund sites in the US were owned by the mining companies that left the extreme levels of pollution. The evidence is clear that ownership doesn't dissuade a company from polluting its own land when it can make a ton of money in the process.
toomuchtodo 13y ago
Its actually quite accurate: https://www.google.com/search?q=economics+private+vs+public+goods https://www.google.com/search?q=economics+private+vs+public+... Free rider problems, tradgedy of the commons, etc. The best examples are conservation with regards to fisheries and sought-after endangered specifies. You have to give people an economic incentive, which usually includes some sort of privitazaion of the resource (for fisheries, tradable quotas). I actually just read an entire chapter about this concept last night: http://books.google.com/books?id=lbOkUCVNSPoC&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=naked+economics+free+rider+problem&source=bl&ots=6Ot3KpsLR9&sig=gopN8MG_DsIX91gDBxu56TMySk0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FTTDUrv2B-mkyQHNg4DICw&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=naked%20economics%20free%20rider%20problem&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=lbOkUCVNSPoC&pg=PA31&lpg=PA...

wehadfun 13y ago

You want a study that says that someone cares about things they own? If the farmers actually owned the land they hopefully would have complained about near by factories, or stopped paying taxes on the land by now.

Retric 13y ago
Nobody owns the air but we all like to avoid lung disease and death.
jshen 13y ago
Many of the Superfund sites in the US were owned by the mining companies that left the extreme levels of pollution. The evidence is clear that ownership doesn't dissuade a company from polluting its own land when it can make a ton of money in the process.

toomuchtodo 13y ago

Its actually quite accurate: https://www.google.com/search?q=economics+private+vs+public+goods https://www.google.com/search?q=economics+private+vs+public+... Free rider problems, tradgedy of the commons, etc. The best examples are conservation with regards to fisheries and sought-after endangered specifies. You have to give people an economic incentive, which usually includes some sort of privitazaion of the resource (for fisheries, tradable quotas). I actually just read an entire chapter about this concept last night: http://books.google.com/books?id=lbOkUCVNSPoC&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=naked+economics+free+rider+problem&source=bl&ots=6Ot3KpsLR9&sig=gopN8MG_DsIX91gDBxu56TMySk0&hl=en&sa=X&ei=FTTDUrv2B-mkyQHNg4DICw&ved=0CC4Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=naked%20economics%20free%20rider%20problem&f=false http://books.google.com/books?id=lbOkUCVNSPoC&pg=PA31&lpg=PA...