Points:
The free market is the best tool to preserve the health and sustainability of the natural environment - but: companies and corporations will over-pollute the environment if no relevant legal regulations exist
 - because: a market mechanism, left to its own devices, contains in-built incentives for over-utilization or even destruction of the environment
 - because: it is in the interest of the companies and corporations to do so
 - because: it is profitable
 - because: they receive the full benefit of producing a pollutant but, in general, they do not pay the full social costs of polluting the environment

- but: voluntary measure is unimpressive
 - because: studies sponsored by firms typically exemplify an illegitimately narrow focus that ignores a competitive market context and the prevalence of external effects (Wikipedia (2019))
- because: studies sponsored by firms assessing their own activities are invariably biased
- because: Governmental regulation proscribing polluting activities is not effective
 - because: the demands of regulation seldom appeal to the social conscience of industries or enterprise owners
 - because: violation is often seen as legitimate business practice
 - because: making profit is the main aim of doing business
 - but: if violation was punished severely enough so that it was not profitable, it would not happen
- because: regulation established is unjust and biased
 - because: large corporations play a large role in setting regulations, creating a system where things are far too biased in favor of them
 - but: this is merely a practical problem that neither validate free market environmentalism nor invalidate the regulation of government
- because: Regulations enforced by the companies themselves regarding the place as their own piece of property may be more effective
 - because: example: the case of Grand Banks fishery off Newfoundland (www.emagazine.com)
- but: in internalizing the costs of negative externalities imposed by the government, firms will face an incentive to reduce them (Wikipedia (2019))
- but: this solution makes invalid ethical assumptions about property (Rothbard (1982) )
- but: the practicability of this theory is extremely limited
- because: it is ill-suited to the reality
- because: it was theorized to account for adjacent effects where transaction costs for bargaining agents are typically small, which are in fact high (Wikipedia (2019))
- but: government regulation on pollution is effective if enforced
- because: establishing regulations may give false information to the market and public which results in uneconomic utilization of natural resources
- because: example: the case of the Newlands Reclamation Act of 1902 (Wikipedia (2019))
- because: regulation is too general and broad to deal with particular case
- because: Money is instead spent on meeting regulation rather than on reducing pollution

- but: free market environmentalism is entirely anthropocentric and ignores the innate value of nature outside of human use of it
- but: consequences, instead of the principles the measures seemingly based, should be assessed
- but: environmental protection can indeed be achieved through communities consciously designing institutional arrangements in response (Elinor (1986) )
 - but: this is an inefficient means
 - because: "what is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it." (Aristotle (1998) )

- but: The conservation of endangered species is highly implausible in free market environmentalism
 - because: there is little economic value in the species in question
 - but: some species used in traditional medicine become the basis for modern drugs (Wikipedia contributors (2007) )

| 31 hits by logged in students since 30 Oct 2008
|