WHY DESTROYING THE ENVIRONMENTAL DESTROYERS
IS NOT ENOUGH TO ENSURE CONSERVATION

The central idea underlying our economic-incentives approach is that long-term conservation will very rarely occur in poor countries unless many people there come to feel they are personally better off protecting local ecosystems and wildlife rather than exploiting their natural resources destructively.

Remote Ju/Hoan (Bushman) Village in Northeastern Namibia

If the worst industrial, commercial, and government environmental destroyers were somehow all eliminated, that would not provide an acceptable income for rural resource owners in developing nations.  Most people in poor countries want improved economic and social welfare for themselves and their families: They want better access to education, better medical treatment, transportation improvements, and a broad array of material goods.  If the majority of people in wealthy developed nations want more and more prosperity, there is no reason to doubt that this will also be true of people in the less affluent states.  People everywhere are aware of the high economic standard of living enjoyed by the residents of developed nations, and poor people everywhere want some of the same benefits for themselves.

The vast majority of environmental groups focus their efforts on attempting to combat ecologically destructive practices, and these efforts are often desirable.  However, destroying ecological wrong-doers does not come close to establishing the essential conditions for long-term nature preservation.  The people in rural areas of developing nations have few ways of increasing their income and economic welfare EXCEPT by exploiting their remaining natural resources.  They will exploit these resources rather than remain mired in poverty.  This is happening in countless places now, and the MAJOR cause of this progressive ecological degradation is rising aspirations for economic welfare shared by many millions or billions of people in poor nations, not the "evil machinations" of international resource-exploitation corporations.  These corporations exist and their actions are destructive, but stopping them is only a start. 

We believe that effective conservation programs must find ecologically sustainable ways to improve the lives and livelihoods of the people in environmentally valuable areas, or else rural communities will exploit their natural resources on a nonsustainable basis.  Even if all the "bad people" and "bad companies" magically disappear, environmental systems and features will continue to undergo harmful exploitation because many "good people" have no other alternative income sources.  Most people will not let their families starve to save trees and tigers, no matter what environmental laws, environmental textbooks, or environmental agencies may tell them.  And even if they are not actually starving, many people in developing countries want to increase the economic welfare of their families in the same way that many people in wealthy, developed societies continue to insist on the need for economic growth and greater prosperity.

Environmentalists have to find ways to persuade people in ecologically valuable and vulnerable areas that their environment is worth more to them alive than dead.  Otherwise, continued ecological destruction is inevitable. This explains why EcoVitality is searching for goods and services that can be produced in developing nations and can form the basis for integrated conservation and development programs that WILL improve the incomes and perceived welfare of rural villagers. 

Sustainable Development Requires Sustainable Access to Sustainable Markets

The main product of EcoVitality's business enterprises is conservation itself.  Our creation of new markets for conservation- compatible goods and services is a means to attain environmental protection on a more stable, lasting basis than conventional conservation approaches have been able to attain.  Improvement in the economic and social welfare of rural communities in poor countries is another major benefit of our approach.