Natural resources are provided free in the environment, and it is therefore morally wrong to impose any economic costs or values on the environment. In the contemporary setting, individuals seek to enhance their financial goals at the expense of the environmental resources that sustain human life. The economic exploitation of the environment causes uncertainties that lead to environmentally-related ailments such as health complications that arise from the misuse of natural resources that support health. Nevertheless, the incidence of diseases does not make it necessary for economic actors to impose a value that will make the society to pay for costs that are a result of someone else’s exploitation.
Notably, the economic value placed on the environment is a form of exploitation for society. Indeed, it is the right of every human to enjoy the natural rights that the environment provides. In essence, establishing an economic value on the environment would be a violation of fundamental human freedom. Moreover, it is inadequate to quantify the price of life on the basis that better environmental protection leads to better health among people (Dranove, 2003). Cost-benefit analyses have long been used by different practitioners to impose the need to create an economic value that aids the government to develop sustainable environmental preservation (Hanley & Spash, 2003). However, such costs should not be imposed on society, but on the individuals who promote the degradation of resources. In a nutshell, putting an economic value on the free resources of the environment is a form of moral decay and exploitation of the innocent (Pearce et al., 2006). A good example of a scenario that involves unjustified economic value on the environment is the current policies that Hong Kong uses to sustain the environment. Air quality is a concern for the city, where the innocent often face strict regulations while other people continue in practices that create environmental concerns. In this regard, the economic value placed on environmental sustainability is not sensible.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
References
Dranove, D. (2003). What's your life worth?: Health care rationing-- who lives? Who dies? Who
decides?. Upper Saddle River, NJ: FT Prentice Hall.
Hanley, N., & Spash, C. L. (2003). Cost-benefit analysis and the environment . Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar.
Pearce, D. W., Atkinson, G., & Mourato, S. (2006). Cost-benefit analysis and the environment:
Recent developments . Paris: OECD.
