Trees and crops reclaim desert in Niger [because they started allowing private ownership]

Intrnational Herald Tribune ^ | February 11, 2007 | Lydia Polgreen

[grundle]

In this dust-choked region, long seen as an increasingly barren wasteland decaying into desert, millions of trees are flourishing, thanks in part to poor farmers whose simple methods cost little or nothing at all.

These gains, moreover, have come at a time when the population of Niger has exploded, confounding the conventional wisdom that population growth leads to the loss of trees and accelerates land degradation, scientists studying Niger say.

From colonial times, all trees in Niger had been regarded as the property of the state, which gave farmers little incentive to protect them. Trees were chopped for firewood or construction without regard to the environmental costs.

But over time, farmers began to regard the trees in their fields as their property, and in recent years the government has recognized the benefits of this by allowing individuals to own trees. Farmers make money off the trees by selling branches, pods, fruit and bark. Because these sales are more lucrative over time than simply chopping down the trees for firewood, the farmers preserve them.

"The benefits are so many it is really astonishing," Larwanou said. "The farmers can sell the branches for money. They can feed the pods as fodder to their animals. They can sell or eat the leaves. They can sell and eat the fruits. Trees are so valuable to farmers, so they protect them."

Ibrahim Idy, a farmer in Dahirou, a village in the Zinder region, has 20 baobab trees in his fields. Selling the leaves and fruit brings him about $300 a year in additional income. He has used that money to buy a motorized pump that draws water from his well to irrigate his cabbage and lettuce fields.

[grundle]

This is a great article about the good things that happen when a poor country adopts property rights.

[VictoryGal]

This is really smart. Conservative values at work, improving lives!

[magslinger]

This is a great article about the good things that happen when a poor country adopts property rights.

Maybe we should suggest that Malibu Jeni try this in Michiganistan.

[aquila48]

What a wonderful story...

This should be in the front page of every paper and nightly news... and every teacher should be using this as a real life example of how private property and capitalism enriches people and protects the environment.

But I'm not holding my breath...

I'm going to do my small part, though, by emailing it to all my friends (liberal or otherwise) and acquaintances.

[grundle]

I agree with you. This deserves way more attention than it's getting.

[Kevmo]

That's the solution to global warming and depleted fisheries: parcel out private ownership.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/162/3859/1243

Famous essay by Garrett Hardin: Tragedy of the Commons.

[Old Professer]

What's this going to do to Al Gore's plans for the Third World?

[Old Professer]

Have you read the entirety of your link?

The author is proposing spay and neuter programs for humans some 39 years ago when AGW was in its crib.

It's an anti-family screed.

Philosophically his reasoning is faultless.

Malthusian mutterings are the hallmark of the ignored elite.

[dirtboy]

From colonial times, all trees in Niger had been regarded as the property of the state, which gave farmers little incentive to protect them. Trees were chopped for firewood or construction without regard to the environmental costs. But over time, farmers began to regard the trees in their fields as their property, and in recent years the government has recognized the benefits of this by allowing individuals to own trees.

Classic Garrett Hardin.

[Old Professer]

Here's a comment on your link:
"Another expression of scarcity was the ‘tragedy of the commons’ that was popularised by Garrett Hardin, a prominent biologist (11). Hardin acknowledged his intellectual debt to William Forster Lloyd (1794-1852), an obscure British economist who originated the idea in a pamphlet in 1833. Lloyd began with the idea of a common pasture on which villagers could graze their cattle. At first there was no problem, since the land area was ample to support a relatively small number of cattle. But as the number of cattle grew larger it became impossible for the land to support them all. Hardin used this metaphor to illustrate the broader need for limits on economic growth, and this idea has become widely accepted by environmentalists."

This sort of thinking leads to loss of freedom and control.

The above quote came from http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1952/

[Kevmo]

Yes, I read the entirety of Garrett Hardin's essay and other nonsense by him. He was a perfesser at UCSB where I went to school. That doesn't mean that I agree with his conclusions. His observations were very keen and I've observed for myself that there are some great benefits to parcelling out private ownership, like the fact that I (will some day) own my own house.

The key to environmental recovery is to give the devastated areas to people who care enough about it to protect it, while at the same time making a living off it. I don't know what "Malthusian mutterings" are, but one of Aristotle's maxims, that it is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without accepting it, is an approach that I find useful when I steal liberal reasoning for my own purposes.

[Kevmo]

This sort of thinking leads to loss of freedom and control.
***Baloney. The farmers who were overgrazing their cattle on the common areas lost freedom and control. If that area had been divided out as privately owned, the farmers would have had freedom and control over their own property and there would have been no "tragedy of the commons".

[Richard from IL]

Ping