We have a rather busy stranding year this year, and
not enough online information on how to handle stranded cetaceans. Oh yes, I did
write about it here (English
version and Indonesian
version), but my daily hit is not big enough at the moment. There is also
an acute misunderstanding among practitioners in Indonesia about why stranding
events happen, e.g., many people think that whale sharks (Rhincodon typus)
and whales are the same. Now and then, we would have whale sharks entangled in
fishing nets in Indonesia... and the news would read ‘A big whale stranded in
XX Beach’ instead of ‘a whale shark got entangled in fishing net in YY Village’ - And that is not the only misunderstanding we have!
Whales, dolphins, marine mammals... Ecological stuff, socio-economics gossips and governance discourse!
Friday, September 28, 2012
Monday, September 10, 2012
Do we need to put a price in natural resources?
Matt Fox, a CI colleague of mine, forwarded me this
Guardian article written by George Monbiot. The article got me thinking
about the title of this post. Do we need
to put a price in natural resources? Also,
why do we need to put such a price? Can’t we just leave the nature as it is? Two
years ago, I would agree with Monbiot; putting a price on the rain and trees
and the dolphins seems to be unnecessary at best, and pretentious at worst. I
still understand his points though, he got the points alright.
I wish that the things are that easy, that all of us can truly live in
harmony, in a Zen way, with nature. That most of us are well-connected with our
highest plane of awareness, that we all understand and appreciate that every
being on Earth – nay, on this Universe – is connected to each other. But sadly,
that is often not the case. I am inclined to be okay with natural resource
valuation (i.e., putting value on natural resource), as long as it’s within
reason. But here’s the thing. I said ‘natural resource valuation’, not ‘natural
resource pricing’.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)