In every marketing narrative, it’s a common assertion: our organization considers the environment in its operations. Yet, we all know this is not enough. Nature is being depleted at an alarming rate. Sea levels are rising, polar ice is melting, species are becoming extinct, and natural areas are being deforested. Capitalism has led people to view nature as subordinate, treated as someone’s possession. We claim ownership over land or materials, with nature often seen as secondary to our economic interests. Isn’t it time we found a solution to this issue?
The massive exploitation of nature arises because the economy does not account for damage to our natural living environment. Government plans and business strategies are based on economic calculations, assuming the economy is the foundation of society. However, it’s actually nature from which the human world originated and upon which it still depends.
A minuscule portion of the revenues and profits directly derived from nature are reinvested into our ecological infrastructure. A drastic change is needed to address this issue. Altering the ecological system requires shifts in perspective. Only with new ways of viewing reality can we correct this deeply ingrained flaw.
With this approach, I aim to write my blog post today. The idea of fully capitalizing nature struck me as contradictory to my article’s introduction, yet it sounds logical to me. We could express our natural heritage in monetary terms by assigning it a financial value. By literally putting a price tag on it, nature’s value suddenly becomes more tangible and manageable.
Nature is immensely valuable, yet we are losing it because it’s perceived as free. Would we respect it more if we had to pay for it?
Why don’t we always pay for using or abusing the ecosystem? Humanity should compensate for the harm done to nature, whether through deforestation, soil depletion, depletion of fossil fuels, or use of clean water. Payments should also be made for excesses, such as CO2 emissions into the atmosphere or the amount of waste dumped. Money should be paid so it can be reinvested into maintaining a healthy environment.
A global entity representing nature economically would be ideal. It would determine which ecosystems are economically worthwhile to preserve. This idea stems from the current system’s failure, where sustainability is often about greenwashing, with companies acting out of concern for their reputation. Establishing a global economic institution for nature could significantly impact environmental protection and our planet.
Of course, I understand that the implementation of a global organization is highly complex, but I’ve put this thought on paper to make you think about the ecological problem. Together, we can work towards a better world with a living environment where the interests of humans and nature are as balanced as possible. This means enough space for people, but also for forests and other natural areas.