The bruntland commission called for internalizing social and environmental issues in 1987 to correct traditional economic development models. In 2012 Rio + 20(UNCSD) we shifted towards green market/green growth and to the sustainable development partnership of the economy and the environment and partially fulfill the bruntland fixing request by internalizing environmental issues only. And this got global political endorsement in the 2015 Paris agreement.
Internalizing means that environmental issues are now endogenous issues to the green market development model ;and therefore they are reflected in the green market price mechanism so that it sends to right green market signals to firms and consumers and to economies, yet the approach that has been followed so far apparently is still dealing with envorinmental issues as externalities.
And when you do that then you are dealing with environmental issues through dwarf green markets and away from perfect green market thinking as the dwarf market is not cleared by the green market price, but by a dwarf market price.
Did we start with the wrong green foot since 2012? I think yes, what do you think?
I don't have an answer to your specific question, but I do know that we were talking about global warming 40 years ago; and the Limits to Growth book that took a systems view of environmental, population and business issues highlighted the problems associated with focussing too much on growth. Politicians can't be relied on to create policy settings that change business and consumer behaviour.
Dear Francis, thank you for your note.
If does not directly relates to the question asked, but it can be linked:
a) 40 yeas ago the traditional market of Adam Smith was as distorted it was in 1987 when the bruntland commission called for making it socially and environmentally friendly, but before 1987 any environmental margin or social margin to be added to the traditional market price was called a distortion and opposed by economists, now we know if we do that we are correcting distorted markets. So green markets are traditional markets corrected to reflect enviromental concerns.
b) at the time of the limits of growth attention was only on economic growth, and we know today that as there are limits to economic growth, there are also social limits to eco-economic growth as since 1987 to 2012 a paradigm shift from traditional market(economy only development) to the green market(economy and environment development) took form and toiok place so the stage has changed, the traditional market of 40 years ago is gone....
c) In 2012 UNCSD Rio +20 in "the future we want" the shift to the green economy, green market and green growth was formally made and in 2015 paris agreement it got global political endorse.
Problem is: Green market thinking or green economy thinking requires that environmental isses be internalized in the price mechanism so that green producers and green consumers can respond well to green market price signals. Under green markets environmental issues are now endogenous issues, not externalities anymore. However, the UN and all goverments and OECD, WB, IISD, IIED,,,,and so on are still treating environmental issues as externalities and to do these they have set up dwarf green markets....unconnecting to green market price mechanism and because of this they need to rely on an array of green taxes....
d) Because of this problem I asked the question as we shifted to green markets to be able to deal with green market problems so we should have used from the start perfect green market theory and perfect green market practice and internalize environmental issues in the pricing mechanism of those markets, but no those leading the paradigm shift decided to use dwarf green market theory and dwarf green market practice to address green market issues still treating environemental issuss as externalities...a total violation of the theory-practice consistency principle...
Have a nice day Francis!
Good day Francis,
I am sharing here this article unpublished and you can use it as food for thoughts:
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
Have a nice day
Article Is Environmental Externality Management a Correction of Adam...
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...
Michael, good day. It is fine with me, if people endorses sustainable developmentwashing just as if was fine with me when people complained in 2012 about greenwashing, but what is being done and you described there is being implemented outside green market theory and reflects the low carbon approach now behind the paris agreement, but his is not consistent with green market theory and practice...a market where green producers and green consumers take the signals of green market price to make production and consumption decisions, or is it?.
In my papers I show that in 2012 we shifted in theory to green markets, but since then we have gone towards dwarf green markets such as low carbon based markets; and apparently knowing that these markets are not green markets they are being marketed as green markets.....
Thank you for your comment
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
Sharing article here:
The Flipping of Traditional Economic Thinking: Contrasting the Working of Dwarf Green Market Thinking with that of Green Market Thinking to Highlight Main Differences and Implications
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334535200_The_Flipping_of_Traditional_Economic_Thinking_Contrasting_the_Working_of_Dwarf_Green_Market_Thinking_with_that_of_Green_Market_Thinking_to_Highlight_Main_Differences_and_Implications
Yes, quietly main players in development have moved away from science based principles at the heart of perfect market thinking, perfect economies and perfect growth...and moved towards the unthinkable before 2012, a move to non-free market and permanent government intervention
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Psychology
- Attitude