2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

I recently heard that the United Nations is collecting data quantifying the economic value natural processes add to our economy. 

For example, bees that pollinate plants add value to our economy.  They play a role that keeps the whole food chain in tact.  If our economic/environmental policies were to interrupt that process (habitat loss, pollution, etc...) then we would have lost on our investment.

In policy making are we considering the economic value of the natural processes of the ocean?  And without understanding that process, how can we know that our policies aren’t doing much more harm than good?

posted 2 years, 11 months ago
view in context