但是,实际上,我们很难或根本无法给自然资产标上合适的价格。联 合国的报告中避开了像洁净空气这样无法直接拥有和买卖的自然资产,而只计算可以用市场价表示的自然资产,如天然气,镍和木材。即便如此,也许市场价无法反映出商品 真正的社会价值。经济理论家爱以养蜂为例,蜜蜂酿下可以在市场上兜售的蜂蜜,但它们也为周边的苹果树授粉,而这个有益的举动却不能被出售,也无法标 价。
No one is more aware of these limitations than the report s authors. Their estimates areillustrative, not definitive, says Sir Partha. The calculations are inevitably crude, just asthe first guesstimates of GDP were crude over 70 years ago. He hopes more economists willdo the hard but valuable work of pricing the seemingly priceless. The profession does notreally reward this work, says Sir Partha. But some economists do it anyway. Taylor Rickettsof the University of Vermont and his co-authors have even calculated the value ofpollination, showing that one Costa Rican coffee-grower benefited by $62,000 a year fromthe feral honey bees in two nearby patches of forest.
没有谁比该报告的作者更清楚它的局限性。帕特爵士说:他们的估算是对现有资本的补充性解释,并不是最 佳版本。报告的结果不免有不准确的地方,正如70多年前人们第一次约摸着估算GDP一样。他希望更多经济学家能做出艰苦且有价值的工 作,为世界的无价资产标价。帕特爵士还说:这项工作在业界并非真地有利可图。不管怎样,还有经济学家为此奉献着,佛蒙特大学的泰勒立克次和他的合著 者们甚至计算出了蜜蜂授粉的价值。结果显示,哥斯达黎加两小片树林中的野蜜蜂就能为一位咖啡种植主带来62000美元的利润。
【2015考研英语阅读国富实论】相关文章:
最新
2016-10-18
2016-10-11
2016-10-11
2016-10-08
2016-09-30
2016-09-30