| 
4.6.3 Risks, Rights, and Practical Economics 
 Protecting forestlands, grasslands, and other natural ecosystems is often proposed 
  as the best way to maintain large carbon reservoirs at lowest cost. The cost 
  of such an approach, however, may in fact be significant, although low in comparison 
  with many of the options in the energy sector and attempts at forest protection 
  have failed in many parts of the world. The incentives to convert often far 
  outweigh the incentives to protect. This problem is often exacerbated by the 
  absence of well-defined, enforceable property rights, either private or public, 
  and the absence of other necessary institutions. In an open access situation 
  the incentives are to use it or lose it, since there are no certain 
  claims on the future use of the resource. Because there is no long-term claim 
  on the resource in the future, the result is that resources may be used wastefully 
  in excess of their economic optimum. Thus, deforestation and land clearing are 
  a form of the open access problem (Hardin, 1968). 
The costs of carbon management may not be distributed in the same way as the 
  benefits. Carbon management options in developing countries may have low market 
  costs but high local social costs in land commitments, and the benefits that 
  arise may not be shared with local peoples. Analysis of a forest protection 
  project in Madagascar suggests that there are financial benefits for local inhabitants 
  and social benefits for the global community, but short-term debits at the national 
  level (Kremen et al., 2000). Formal adoption of markets for forest carbon could 
  increase incentives for forest protection, especially if mechanisms assure that 
  local peoples share in the benefits. Similarly, costs and benefits may be realized 
  at different times; future benefits are often weighted against current costs. 
  How communities value present and future costs depends on wealth, culture, and 
  economic and environmental priorities. 
International consensus on carbon management begins to have important implications 
  for national sovereignty and personal property rights, an issue brought to prominence 
  by recent turmoil regarding international trade agreements (see Chapter 
  6 for a detailed discussion on policies, measures and instruments). 
 |