17 Land

In fact, it can be challenging to determine if environmental protection improves the economy because these benefits are frequently difficult to quantify with just one or two simple numbers. As was mentioned in the parts before, it is impossible to put a price on environmental harm. But first, from an economic perspective, whether it is worthwhile to conserve the environment relies on whether, all other things being equal, the marginal value it offers is larger than or equal to the marginal cost. We must also take into account the opportunity cost or the price of giving up alternative possibilities in favor of environmental protection, which you can also refer to Cost and Forest Management.

Land. Again, let’s think about whether the advantages of taking land for environmental protection exceed the negatives. At first, it may seem like the cost of preserving land is too high to be viable. This comprises the costs associated with the initial setup, purchasing, constructing, and planning for establishing a new reserve. Medium-term Ongoing management costs, materials, and the cost of labor for maintenance (which is also a labor cost). If those lands are not preserved, the marginal cost can be utilized to plant trees to expand the logging industry, to be used as agricultural land to grow crops or to be used as residential land to generate income from real estate. From this point, it is true that the opportunity cost on the land from preserving the environment is so huge that it would not be possible to address the issue totally by preserving the land. It would also produce a lot of animosities because it harms a lot of people’s interests.

But let’s think in the long term way.  Economic growth and land conservation can complement one another. If land uses are productive and energy systems efficient, they will both drive strong economic growth and reduce carbon intensity.^[1] According to the new climate economy report, The global demand for food and fuel is growing rapidly due to population explosion and rapid social development, and this is increasing the pressure on nature and ecosystems. Agriculture is expected to require 70% more food supply by 2050, and demand for wood products will triple what it is today. But more than 25% of agricultural land is now being severely degraded, and about 12 million ha of productive land is being lost each year due to unsustainable agricultural practices, with about 7.6 million ha of forest being permanently converted to other uses each year. Therefore, it is necessary to conserve land and develop it sustainably, and it is clear from this report that there are many benefits to be gained from land conservation.^[2]

In any case, there are many incentives that governments can use to encourage businesses and the public to conserve land, to value the potential benefits of conservation, and to consider the opportunity costs of conservation in the short term and the damage to ecosystems in the long term. The benefits of forest conservation are often not directly economic, but they will bring economic benefits in the long run. For instance,  Sometimes these natural landscapes can also serve as a kind of infrastructure, facilitating adaptation and management. This is in contrast to the “grey structures” built by humans, which are socially and economically more difficult to remove. For example, forests can be used as a means of flood mitigation, where they act as “sponges” to influence the timing and magnitude of water flow. Water is stored in the porous soil and slowly released over time, which can reduce the damage to cities from heavy rainfall and flooding, such as in western China, where forests provide flood mitigation that saves an average of one billion dollars per year. In Vietnam, the restoration of 18,000 ha of mangrove forests has saved them an average of $7.3 million annually in maintenance costs. At the same time, restoring at least 350 million hectares of forest could generate net benefits of $170 billion a year from watershed protection, increased crop yields, and forest products. ^[3]

As was stated at the outset, whether it is worthwhile to conserve the environment relies on whether the marginal benefits outweigh or are equivalent to the marginal costs. What are the benefits of preserving the land, then? First, even without considering the long term, the land can make a sizable profit through outdoor leisure like fishing and hunting. The same can be said of wilderness watchers. Furthermore, it is undeniable that preserving the environment creates more jobs. Some claim that by safeguarding the land, more people will lose their jobs because businesses will fire employees owing to decreased workloads. However, this is not exactly the truth. According to WeCounservePA, The agricultural and forest products sectors that depend on these lands suffer when they are destroyed wantonly by development, and farming communities lose the vitality required to maintain local agribusinesses and the whole agricultural economy sustainably. Between 1982 and 2007, over-exploitation in the US destroyed 23,163,500 acres of agriculture. ^[4] The economic costs and benefits of natural resources, which will be discussed in the next section, are also somewhat similar to land in that their economic value will be reflected in the long term.