The Environment Protected by Private Property Rights

Alex Boler

The environment is threatened by polluting industries, poachers, trash and more trash, and a long list of other things, all caused by man. The solution is simple: more government regulation. Right?

Well, no. There is a better alternative: bolstering private property rights and privatizing public spaces is a better solution to preserving the environment and valuable property.

Private property rights ensure that if one person (or business) violates another’s property with pollution, the harmed party is able to recoup damages (through the legal system). Should your neighbor pour some chemicals on your lawn, and it causes damage to you or your property, you can sue for restitution and recompense. This offsets the damage to your property, plus it punishes the polluter. Under a system where property rights were expanded, and public lands were privatized, polluters would be much less inclined to take action that would damage another party’s property and the environment.

However, in our current system, many polluters are able to pollute public spaces because there is no private owner inclined to protect that space. In our current system it is more cost effective to pollute than innovate. If public spaces were privately held, industry would need to be more responsive to the damages they were causing other property owners. Under such circumstances, industry would be more likely to innovate, and as a result the environment would benefit.

We can also protect endangered species by reinforcing private property rights. Poaching of endangered species mostly occurs in the public lands. If poaching occurred on private property it would simply be trespassing, destruction of property, and theft. Hunting on private lands is often managed by the owner in order to preserve the value of the property.

A good example of this can be seen in Africa, where in many places wild animals on public lands were being poached to the extent that many were coming dangerously close to local extinction. This changed in certain areas, when local tribes were given property rights and allowed to harvest the animals as a resource. The tribes saw that it was important to protect these animals. The tribes guarded the animals, and the poachers were able to turn to a more efficient legal enterprise. As a result, in some areas wild animal populations have rebounded.

In the United States, bison were once an endangered species, but property rights and the profit motive have helped their numbers grow. Ted Turner, the largest private landowner in the United States, raises bison on several of his ranches. He now serves bison meat in his restaurants. Because of this, bison, now a resource, have become more plentiful.

Fundamentally, when a person places greater value on property rights, he also places greater value on the environment. His preferences are affected such that he is less likely to harm the environment when making rational decisions. Harm to the environment is viewed as a cost. One of the best ways to decrease a person’s likelihood to harm the environment is to increase his valuation of it. This can be done by education, so that individuals like and enjoy the environment, but the most direct way is to privatize public spaces. In a system where private property rights dominate all spaces, harm to the property of another will be punished in arbitration.

Legislation created by a group of power-hungry politicians, and enforced by a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats, is very unlikely to do any net-good. In the end, private property rights are the better alternative. They ensure that the incentives necessary for human prosperity are in place, and such rights create a situation in which the environment can be protected legally and fairly.