Suchergebnisse

As a tool for making decisions about long-term environmental policy, environmental economics does not work on its own terms. It works well as a tool for analyzing environmental policy given clear, exogenously defined costs and benefits. As such, environmental economics can work well as a tool for analyzing policy in the short term. But many of the most salient issues in international environmental politics are salient specifically because they have a fundamental long-term component. Economic tools have trouble pricing environmental goods, and the farther the cost element of cost/benefit analysis is projected into the future, particularly through the analytical tool of the discount rate, the less reliable estimates are likely to be. At a certain point, the compounding of this decreasing reliability makes the cost estimates analytically counterproductive. As such, this paper concludes that fundamental decisions about the relationship between economic activity and the natural environment in the long term need to be informed by ecocentric rather than economic thinking.

Scholars and activists are concerned, sometimes simultaneously, with mitigation of anthropogenic climate change and the environmental effects of globalization. Many analysts argue that a solution to both problems is localization; increasing the costs of transportation should increase the cost of long-distance transportation, making local and regional exchange economically relatively more efficient. The argument here, however, is that dealing with climate change will have the effect of reinforcing patterns of economic globalization, at the expense of patterns of economic nationalization and continentalization. Transportation by sea has historically been, and continues to be, more fuel-efficient than transportation by land. Limiting anthropogenic carbon emissions in transportation therefore favors sea transport over land transport. Historically, patterns of trade favored global seaborne trade routes over trade within land-based regions. The model to look in understanding the effect of action on climate change on global trade pattens, therefore, is not the future proposed by the localists, it is at historical patterns.

Scholars & activists are concerned, sometimes simultaneously, with mitigation of anthropogenic climate change & the environmental effects of globalization. Many analysts argue that a solution to both problems is localization; increasing the costs of transportation should increase the cost of long-distance transportation, making local & regional exchange economically relatively more efficient. The argument here, however, is that dealing with climate change will have the effect of reinforcing patterns of economic globalization, at the expense of patterns of economic nationalization & continentalization. Transportation by sea has historically been, & continues to be, more fuel-efficient than transportation by land. Limiting anthropogenic carbon emissions in transportation therefore favors sea transport over land transport. Historically, patterns of trade favored global seaborne trade routes over trade within land-based regions. The model to look in understanding the effect of action on climate change on global trade patterns, therefore, is not the future proposed by the localists, it is at historical patterns. 13 References. Adapted from the source document.

A review essay on books by (1) Kevin P. Gallagher & Jacob Werksman (Eds), The Earthscan Reader on International Trade and Sustainable Development (London: Earthscan, 2002); (2) Carolyn L. Deere & Daniel C. Esty (Eds), Greening the Americas: NAFTA's Lesson for Hemispheric Trade (Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2002); & (3) Robert C. Paehlke, Democracy's Dilemma: Environment, Social Equity, and the Global Economy (Cambridge, MA: MIT, 2003).