Institutional basis for new political economy

Environment and economy have been presented as binaries since the birth of modern environmentalism in 1960s. However there are also attempts to reconcile the contradictions between them. Sustainable development is one of such conceptual attempts to further economic development without harming environment. However, there were fears, as Daly expressed, that such concept would only be an instrument for unchecked economic growth. If we see the current trend of eco-business and corporate environmentalism, Daly's doubts are now turning into truths. When our policies are only focused on making the big businesses green without checking their influence as if there will no world outside the current consumerism and corporatism, we will not reach to the roots of our current environmental woes. The concept of eco-business seeks solution only at the actor level, which is important for the short run, but they are neither sufficient nor instrumental on correcting injustices created by consumerism and corporatism. Dauvergne and Lister have also accepted that eco-business on its own cannot alter the underlying logic of accelerating consumerism and unequal globalization behind the increasing power of big business.

Krugman recommends using market-based instruments, such as cap and trade, carbon tax and direct control in order to pay the price of externalities and correct environmental problems. Although his recommendation seems seeking solution within the existing political-economic structure, that echoes a reformist, he is arguing for using state's coercive power to regulate the the economic activities that harm environment. This is more than seeking solution within the existing system.

Klein goes further and argues for use of coercion from both levels: state and grass-root, in order transform the current political economy which, according to her, has remained as main problem for both, environmental degradation and social justice. Although I share most of her points, the argument still has some contradictions. For example, she is advocating for transforming the current political economic structure without elaborating her imagined new structure. At some point she sounds supporting the stiff state regulation, but at other points, she has also argued for more community control. Even though we may resolve problems arisen from corporatism and big business, can we address any contradictions between state and community in order to govern the environment? Once we resolve the institutional basis for alternative governance of environment in new political economy, I think we can go beyond seeking reforms in the current political economic structure. Otherwise recommendations of Dauvergne and Lister and of Krugman would be only ways to bring changes although at a limited level.