What do you call someone who takes a good or service produced by another, uses it, and doesn’t pay the producer? According to the Spanish language dictionary, a thief is anyone who appropriates what belongs to others without authorization or compensation. But what happens when this “theft” occurs between humans and nature? This gives rise to what can be called ecological iniquity.
Imagine two brothers who inherit a 10,000-hectare field with an almost impenetrable native forest. This forest, an ecosystem full of life, has remained intact for centuries.
One of the brothers, Santiago, decides to preserve it as it is, respecting its natural value and biodiversity. His reasoning is ethical: Why destroy a wonder that took centuries to form?
The other brother, Sergio, decides to clear the forest to grow cereals and oilseeds. His rationale is economic: How much money will he make by selling the wood and preparing the land for agriculture?
Here, ecological ethics clash with economic ethics. Sergio, the oilseed producer, will buy seeds, fuel, pay workers, and use tractors, among other inputs.
But he will also benefit from his brother’s biodiversity: he will use the land’s fertility, the pollination from the bees living in the forest, and the climate regulation and flood control provided by Santiago’s ecosystem.
These ecosystem services are invaluable, at least not visibly or officially recognized.
The commercial value of ecosystem services
The question is clear: Why don’t ecosystem services have a commercial value? These services, essential for our daily lives—the air we breathe, the water we drink, the biodiversity that maintains our healthy ecosystems—have long been considered “superabundant” by traditional economics.
However, that view is changing. Water, air, biodiversity, and fertility can no longer be seen as superabundant goods. They are finite resources, and their value should be recognized and adequately compensated.
Since the introduction of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, sustainability has evolved from being solely environmental to also encompassing social and economic aspects.
The planet is the foundation of all pillars of development. Without a healthy planet, there is no prosperity or well-being for people.
Against ecological iniquity and towards a global recognition of ecosystem services
Efforts such as those of the New York Stock Exchange and other private initiatives aim to create environmental asset companies, known as Natural Asset Companies (NACs), that would sell these ecosystem services to companies that do not produce them.
The UN has also established guidelines for accounting for these services through its Biodiversity Office (UNEP) in Nairobi, but there is still a long way to go.
Meanwhile, the risk of an environmental collapse, according to the World Economic Forum, is becoming increasingly imminent. The latest reports indicate that we could face an irreversible ecological crisis in just 10 years.
And in the meantime, we continue to be “environmental thieves”, taking advantage of the services nature provides us without offering anything in return.
In this context, a fundamental question arises about ecological iniquity: Why have we not yet understood that nature, like any other good or service, should be rewarded?
By Rodolfo Tarraubella, president of the EcoConciencia Foundation.
Have you visited our YouTube channel yet? Subscribe now!
