In today’s world issues of global
climate change and environmental degradation have become a topic of serious
public discussion. Newspapers and magazines publish various articles exposing
the dangers of global warming and ecological destruction. Corporations and
governments around the world are initiating various ‘green movements’. So the
question comes, how much of these stories are real? If our planet is in a state
of crisis what kind of policies are effective? This paper examines some of the
environmental crises in the recent past. Environmentalists are not always right
when they predict, but they sometimes points out potential environmental
crises. Similarly most policies suggested by them to handle the crises are too
radical and not viable. Liberal policies which use the market mechanisms to
solve the crises are the most effective ones.
Modern environmentalism can trace
its roots back to the Marxist ideologies in 1960s. (Murray I., 2008). The
movement gained popularity after the release of Rachel Carson’s book The Silent Spring, addressing concerns
about population. In 1972 Club of Rome, a global think tank published the book The Limits of Growth which sold 12
million copies in 30 languages, reinforcing the environmentalist’s claims. The Limits of Growth took five factors
that determine and limit the growth; population, agricultural production,
natural resources, industrial production and pollution. The report predicted the
Malthusian catastrophe, which is rise in the population would increase the
pressure on food and non renewable resources. But time proved all these
predictions wrong. According to Lomborg, the main drawback of this report was
that the authors assumed all the factors to grow exponentially. But as the
technology developed, conserving resources became easier and also more deposits
were discovered. Similarly population growth also decelerated due to changes in
policies and improvement in educational levels (Lomborg B., 2012). This is a
fine example where environmentalists got it spectacularly wrong.
But we cannot ignore the fact that
environmentalists showed us some of the relevant and serious problems as well
such as global climate change. Though skeptics say that the global climate
change is a myth, there is enough scientific evidence to prove otherwise. The
green house effect theory states that changes in the levels of gases such as
carbon dioxide, methane and aerosol particles in the atmosphere can alter the
atmospheric temperature (Arrhenius, 1896). The average global air temperature
over the past century has risen over 0.7 degree Celsius (Palutikof, J. 2002).
There are many natural factors for the rise in air temperature such as aerosol
emission from volcanoes and solar irradiance. But they account only 0.2 degree
Celsius. Environmentalists also pointed out matters such as the depletion in
ozone layer and ecological destruction, both having relevant evidence for
support.
Even though environmentalists
identify the problems humanity is facing, the policy alternatives suggested by
them are too radical and can affect our current way of life. This might be
because environmentalism originated from the Marxist ideology. It is against
liberty and economic development (Kuhner, 2009). Iain Murray (2008) in The Really Inconvenient Truths identifies some of the best examples
of these environmental cobra effects. Murray with considerable evidence proves
that ethanol produces more carbon dioxide when it’s grown, processed and
distributed than it saves. In a world where millions of people die every year
due to starvation, growing bio-fuels would reduce the available crop land,
hence raising the food prices. Another case is that of DDT. Although DDT is bad
for human beings when exposed in large quantity, its usage helped in a great
deal to reduce the spread of malaria in Africa. After DDT was banned the once
defeated malaria started spreading in dangerous rates in Africa. These are just
two examples of failed environmental policies.
Radical policies are only viable if
it can sustain the economic growth and human progress. One of the best examples
is the implementation of Montreal protocol which banned the usage of CFC. Since
we had alternative substances for CFCs, the ban was effective and did not hurt
the economic growth. As a result the ozone layer started recovering (UN, 2012).
But usually the best way to formulate environmental policies is through market
based environmental policy Instruments. One of the best examples of such
policies is the international carbon emission trading adopted in the Kyoto
Protocol. It was highly effective in bringing down the net emissions in the
adopted countries (UNFCC, 2011). Similarly many such market mechanisms have
been successfully implemented for Lead, SO2, and CFCs. In recent years a whole
new branch of economics called the environmental economics came into existence.
Another instrument governments can adopt is the use of subsidies for promoting
eco-friendly products such as hybrid cars. The government can also impose taxes
on polluting industries and products and simultaneously offer incentives for
‘green practices’.
We cannot deny the fact the
environmental degradation is happening. But the scale of this crisis is
sometimes exaggerated or miscalculated by environmentalists like in the case of
The Limits of Growth. But on the
other hand, many issues raised by environmentalist need serious attention.
There is enough evidence to show that the man made global warming and its
effect on the planet. But addressing these issues needs careful and prudential
planning. Environmentalists are mostly scientists and the movement itself has
Marxist background. The policies suggested by the environmental groups may not
be the best one to solve the situation. Some of them have produced results
contrary to their objective. Markets and Liberal Economics can provide
effective mechanisms to solve the issues with sustainable growth rate. So in a
nutshell, environmentalists are good at analyzing the situation and giving the
actual picture, but they exaggerate when they provide us with normative
statements. The recent collaboration of economics and environmentalism would
help us by giving effective solutions.
(958
words)
*-----------------------*-----------------------*
References:-
Arrhenius, Svante (1896). On the influence of
Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground. Philosophical Magazine and Journal of
Science. April 1986, series 5, volume 41 pages 237-76
Kuhner, S Jeffery T. (2009). A convenient lie.
Washington Times, The (DC), 1.
Lomborg,
Bjorn (2012), Environmental Alarmism,
Then and Now. Foreign Affairs, Jul/Aug 2012, Vol. 91 Issue 4, p24-40, 17p
Palutikof, J (2002), “Global Temperature Records”, Climate
Research Unit, University of East Angila,
Murray,
Iain (2008). The Really Inconvenient
Truths. Regnery Publishing, 2008
United Nations (2012), ‘Ozone layer on track to
recover over next five decades, Ban says on International Day’ United Nations
Home Page, accessed online December 26th 2012, <http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=42902&Cr=ozone&Cr1=#.UNqLzeTPc2u>
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (2011)’ Compilation and Synthesis of fifth national communications’
UNFCC Home Page accessed online December 26th 2012 <http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2011/sbi/eng/inf01.pdf>
