I'll take the risk of going first.
I think society has always had a challenge putting an economic and a monetary value on things that don't have a direct cost. We all do that with our personal lives. How much do you work compared to how much time you spend with your family? What's the economic return of spending time with your family? As a society we have challenges with that.
If we're going to deal with trying to get compensation for the economic and natural resource capital, maybe we have to at least do some trial projects, trying to put an economic value on it. If it's a scarce resource, the more value you put on it, maybe you start generating some revenue from that.
I will comment on donating to a conservation easement or group. Ecosystems are a dynamic, moving thing. They change, and they need to change, especially on a prairie landscape, where I am. Even our boreal forest needs recruitment and renewal. A lodgepole pine forest, like that in the Cypress Hills, needs to be burnt to open the cones so those plants can renew. We have to change the definition of preservation and protection. It needs to become a dynamic thing. If we create a mechanism by which society can pay a producer of the economic capital for producing that, it's a step forward. It will be a learning process, but it has to start somewhere.