Why do we keep on 'color' coding all these development initiatives? There is green economy. Then, blue economy. Next thing we know there will be 'rainbow' economy. I think this color coding scheme simply adds to confusion when after all it's just about sustainable development and sustainability.

Can't we just stick with SD and further refine its concept about how it leads to sustainability?

You did not answer the question Rory so no much I can add.....But I will tell you, there can not be green economy and green growth without green markets,...but if you can show me that there can be I would be happy to know....

Have a nice day

Lucio Munoz: As soon as someone gives an answer or comment to one of your million questions you will write an answer and promote links to your research. You keep on asking the same questions on and on again.

That is not a problem per se, but your questions are not even good ones. And you keep persisting on your answers, so why even ask? Just to "prove" people with other opinions or approaches wrong?

Dear Hendrik, thank you for your comment.  Asking questions is a good way of exchanging and/or clarifying ideas

Dear Hendrik, thank you for your comment.  When I see a question and provide my best answer hoping that the person who get my feedback benefit from it or hoping that if I am wrong he or she will tell me or  show me that I am wrong and why.....

I ask questions that seem trivial or not as good ones as you said and hope for people to give their best answer and go from there...I usually provide my answer or position in advance or when I reply... and hope that if I am wrong those commenting will take the time as I do to show why they think I  may be wrong...

To me the best feed back you can get is the one that force you to calibrate or even abandon your ideas all together....

Sorry If I made you unconforatable with my questions and replies

have a nice day

Carbon pricing in itself is not really a non-green market approach. The fact that someone emits and another is being paid for undertaken sequestration measures is a green market initiative. Consider a world without manufacturing or industralisation and carbon pricing. I think both GE and GM must not be independent of each other

 Dear Evans, to make ideas simpler to convey I write about green markets and dwarf green markets.

Green markets are cleared by green market prices which reflect both the economic and environmental cost of production, there are green producers and green consumers interacting in these markets to determine the green quantity to be produced and consumbed.  Green markets send signals to those emiters that the higher their emission the higher their prices will be and that gives them the incentive to produce at lower emission levels to be able to attract more green consumers searching for products and services with less carbon....you see....green markets send the signal that polluting less, emiting less is good for business....

Dwarf green markets  like carbon pricing or environmental externality management frameworks are not clear by green prices, but dwarf prices, as they are dealing still with environmental issues as externalities when in green markets they must be endogenous issues, there are no green producer and no green consumers in dwarf green markets: and therefore is no green quantify to be produced and consumed.....You see Dwarf green markets send signals to those emiters that polluting is good bunissess as long as they can pay other to clean up.......

Consider a world without industrial pollution so the environmental externality is zero(EM = 0)....the green price(GP = P + EM) would be then equal to the traditional market price(TMP = P) as the environmental margin(EM) is zero:

GP = P + EM = P = TMP

The above is consistent with Adam Smith assumption that environmetnal issues were externality issues and therefore EM = 0  in the traditional market thinking

So under green markets the pollution sequestraton business should be expected to tend to zeo  in route towards the dominant renewable energy based economy; and under dwarf green markets the pollution sequestration business should be expected to boom until system collapse....

Just for you Evans hopefully not making other unconfortable  I am sharing these two papers one published and one  about to be published as food for thoughts:

Perfect Green Markets vrs Dwarf Green Markets: Did We Start Trying to Solve the Environmental Crisis in 2012 With the Wrong Green Foot? If Yes, How Can This Situation Be Corrected?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305994500_Perfect_Green_Markets_vrs_Dwarf_Green_Markets_Did_We_Start_Trying_to_Solve_the_Environmental_Crisis_in_2012_With_the_Wrong_Green_Foot_If_Yes_How_Can_This_Situation_Be_Corrected

Is Environmental Externality Management a Correction of Adam Smith’s Model to Make It Environmentally Friendly and Shift it Towards Green Markets or Is It a Distortion on Top of Another Distortion?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/309463581_Is_Environmental_Externality_Management_a_Correction_of_Adam_Smith%27s_Model_to_Make_It_Environmentally_Friendly_and_Shift_it_Towards_Green_Markets_or_Is_It_a_Distortion_on_Top_of_Another_Distortion?ev=prf_pub

Have a nice day

Article Perfect Green Markets vrs Dwarf Green Markets: Did We Start ...

Article Is Environmental Externality Management a Correction of Adam...

There are fundamental problems here, which is unlikely to be resolved in the foreeable future: For a start you cannot organise a market without (explicitly or implicitly), assigning ownership to the relevant resource. Who owns the atmosphere? Who owns biodiversity?. For resources within a national territory, this problem can to a degree be covered by indirect taxation, thereby implicitly assigning the ownership of the resource to the government. The tradable permit system, for which I coined the name “Previous Polluter Owns principle (Rediscovering Sustainability, Gower 2013) works (if it works) only for specific well identified and measurable resources and also required prior agreement.

I am clear that regulation has its role to play.

There are other papers on this issue on our website: RediscoveringSustainability.org.uk

Dear Aart, if you look at this from outside the box there is no "fundamental problem"

Suppose you have firm X generating the following stream of environmental costs making up the environmental margin(EM).....in the market clear by the traditional market price "P"

                                                     n

EM = C1 + C2 + ......+ Cn   = Sum of Ci

                                                   C= 1

a) if firm x operates under the traditional market thinking then EM = 0 because Adam Smith assumed so even so the environmental externality cost is real so this market is priced at the traditional market price(TMP) as follows:

TMP = P  Since EM = 0

Since the environmental externality assumption makes EM = 0

b) Now if under green markets the pricing of firm X must be:

GP= P + EM   

Since the full environmental margin or externalty(EM) must be internalized in the pricing mechanism to create green producers and green consumers and green markets and green economies....

c) you see....GP > P

the traditional market sends over production and over consumption signals to traditional markets as polluting is free and therefore by leaving pollution cost created out of the pricing mechanism you can produce and consume at lower prices tending to the lowest prices.....Green markets sent  an efficient signal to green producers and green consumers that polluting less is benefitlal for both of them as the it would lead to lower production and consumption prices as producer will see in incentive to produce at the lowest carbon/pollution content possible to meet the demand of green consumers for less carbon/pollution based goods and services....

c) If you can put a price on carbon(C1), you can put a price on other externalities(C2).....as carbon pricing based markets are doing

Dear friends, here sharing my most recent article which I trust you may find interesting in terms of food for thoughts:

If Going From Free Markets to Non-Free Markets is the Way to Go: Does This Means the End of Rational Decision Making Thinking or Is This Just a Temporary Block of a Perfect Paradigm Shift to Green Markets?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312092336_If_Going_From_Free_Markets_to_Non-Free_Markets_is_the_Way_to_Go_Does_This_Means_the_End_of_Rational_Decision_Making_Thinking_or_Is_This_Just_a_Temporary_Block_of_a_Perfect_Paradigm_Shift_to_Green_Mark

Article If Going From Free Markets to Non-Free Markets is the Way to...

Those interested in green market thinking may find the following article full of food for thoughts

From Traditional Markets to Green Markets: A Look at Markets Under Perfect Green Market Competition

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330617155_From_Traditional_Markets_to_Green_Markets_A_Look_at_Markets_Under_Perfect_Green_Market_Competition

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330701187_From_Traditional_Markets_to_Green_Markets_A_Look_at_Markets_Under_Perfect_Green_Market_Competition