I think a big problem with many 'environmental' questions is that until recently they were only being discussed by the lunatic fringe green movement who all tend to be strongly left wing. They have only in the last two decades (at most) moved into the real world where the rest of us live. So we are still in very early days in terms of working out just how market mechanisms and democratic accountability can interact with environmentalism in order to make things actually happen. We now have enough examples to demonstrate that the market can work very well and effectively with environmental aims, but there are still a lot of fundamentals that need to be established and tested even as regards the theory let alone the practice.
I think so far the main thing that has been demonstrated is that for any environmental goal to be achieved long term it has to provide a positive economic incentive (as opposed to just a negative one of punitive taxation on pollution). Which is kind of 'duh' obvious, but sometimes the obvious needs to be stated several times before it becomes obvious.
The classic example is the Amazonian rainforest. Green activists have railed against deforestation for decades and it made no difference. Then, in the last few years, people started offering cash for replanting trees (carbon offsetting) and lo and behold the biggest cattle barons have got together to start replanting trees - and coincidentally now have a stronger incentive to do something about the illegal squatters who so often contribute to deforestation. Of course the pure-blooded greens are furious because they don't want the nasty market being involved, and they like to see the cattle barons as their enemies, but the fact remains that for the first time ever trees are being encouraged on the biggest most productive ranches in Brazil. One would have to be churlish not to be pleased about that.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-03-15 12:05 pm (UTC)I think so far the main thing that has been demonstrated is that for any environmental goal to be achieved long term it has to provide a positive economic incentive (as opposed to just a negative one of punitive taxation on pollution). Which is kind of 'duh' obvious, but sometimes the obvious needs to be stated several times before it becomes obvious.
The classic example is the Amazonian rainforest. Green activists have railed against deforestation for decades and it made no difference. Then, in the last few years, people started offering cash for replanting trees (carbon offsetting) and lo and behold the biggest cattle barons have got together to start replanting trees - and coincidentally now have a stronger incentive to do something about the illegal squatters who so often contribute to deforestation. Of course the pure-blooded greens are furious because they don't want the nasty market being involved, and they like to see the cattle barons as their enemies, but the fact remains that for the first time ever trees are being encouraged on the biggest most productive ranches in Brazil. One would have to be churlish not to be pleased about that.