Hello, generally force cannot and will not solve environmental issues. They can be solved with policies but not with rush or flash policies. For instance, governments cannot ban carbon emissions or decree a reversion to pre-industrialisation within a month or year. That is not possible, for it will everyone worst off. I think it needs a blend of innovative and careful policy interventions to encourage mitigation and transition with flexible timelines.

Dear Lucio Muñoz , very interesting question, even though I don't know much about dwarf green markets and even though I agree with Khan Teyim Pila , I would like to add a consideration: I think in some developed so-called capitalist countries, the intervention should be tough regulation of their activity - i'm thinking of oil and tech companies, the usual suspects. So in this case I'd say force, not against citizens but against big corporations which are responsible for much of the destruction caused. In countries outside say the G7 or the G20 or the general movers and shakers of the world, I think policy would be more likely to achieve the desired environmental goals, provided that there is enough awareness of the enormity of the changes required (and honesty on the part of the government).

I hope this brings something into the discussion!

Dear Khan and Haris, thank you for commenting. You need to know what is the role of governments under perfect markets/green markets and under imperfect markets/dwarf green markets, then you can see if the goverment will react with policy or force when there is market/policy failure.

You can find some food for thoughts in the following articles:

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/333640876_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?_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6Il9kaXJlY3QiLCJwYWdlIjoic2VhcmNoIiwicG9zaXRpb24iOiJwYWdlSGVhZGVyIn19

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/305067067_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

Dear Lucio Muñoz , many thanks for these links, the articles look really interesting, I will try to read them through and then hopefully come back with a more informed response!

In recent years, the issue of environmental protection has gained significant attention worldwide. As governments strive to address the challenges posed by climate change and other environmental concerns, they must also consider how to handle environmental protests effectively. While some argue that governments should deal with these protests through force, I firmly believe that policy is a more appropriate and effective approach.

Firstly, dealing with environmental protests through policy allows for a peaceful resolution of conflicts. By engaging in dialogue and negotiation with protesters, governments can better understand their concerns and work towards finding mutually beneficial solutions. This approach promotes social cohesion and prevents unnecessary violence or harm to both protesters and law enforcement personnel.

Secondly, policy-based responses to environmental protests are more likely to lead to long-term sustainable solutions. By addressing the root causes of these protests through legislation and regulation, governments can enact meaningful change that benefits both the environment and society as a whole. Forceful measures may suppress protests temporarily but fail to address underlying issues adequately.

Furthermore, policy-based approaches demonstrate respect for democratic principles such as freedom of speech and assembly. Governments have an obligation to protect these fundamental rights while ensuring public safety. By engaging in open dialogue with protesters and considering their demands within the framework of policymaking processes, governments can uphold democratic values while still maintaining law and order.

Moreover, dealing with environmental protests through force risks exacerbating tensions between citizens and authorities. The use of excessive force can lead to further polarization within society and erode trust in government institutions. In extreme cases where force is employed without proper justification or restraint, it may even escalate into human rights abuses or civil unrest.

However, it is essential for policies addressing environmental concerns not to be overly restrictive or burdensome on businesses and individuals. Governments should strive to strike a balance between environmental protection and economic growth, ensuring that policies are fair, feasible, and based on scientific evidence. This approach will foster cooperation rather than confrontation between governments and citizens.

In conclusion, when it comes to dealing with environmental protests, policy-based approaches are far more effective than the use of force. By engaging in dialogue, addressing root causes through legislation, upholding democratic principles, and promoting long-term sustainability, governments can effectively address environmental concerns while maintaining social harmony. It is crucial for governments worldwide to adopt such an approach to ensure a sustainable future for our planet.

References:

1. Hadden J., & Lemos M.C. (2020). Environmental Protests: A Global Analysis of Their Causes, Consequences and Implications for Climate Governance. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 42: 1-8.

2. Della Porta D., & Tarrow S.G. (2012). Interactive Diffusion: The Coevolution of Protest Networks in the Web 2.0 Era. Mobilization: An International Quarterly 17(3): 253-273.

3. Bäckstrand K., & Lövbrand E.(2016). The Road to Paris: Contending Climate Governance Discourses in the Post-Copenhagen Era.International Environmental Agreements: Politics Law and Economics16(3): 415-432.

George, do you know what the responsibility/role of governments is under perfect market such as in perfect green market thinking and under imperfect market thinking/dwarf green market thinking is? Your answer as complete as it looks indicates you are thinking with half a foot in each of those opposing schools of thoughts. Keep in mind, when you go from perfect market to perfect market the role of governments is the same. When you go from perfect markets to imperfect markets the role of governments is reversed.

Please think a little more and please read the context supporting the nature of these question.

I do appreciate exchanging ideas.

Lucio