An overview of a free-market approach to climate change and conservation

Author(s):  
Richard L. Sandor ◽  
Eric C. Bettelheim ◽  
Ian R. Swingland

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Reuben Covshoff

Manitoba has strategized from 2002 onwards to incorporate a free-market approach into Manitoba's Provincial Nominee Programme in order to fulfill its labour market goals. In the grand scheme of attracting new Argentinean Jewish immigrants, it was an opportunity for these people to leave their homeland that was suffering under an economic depression and a currency crisis. Both the provincial government (through the Manitoba Provincial Nominee Programme) and an ethno-cultural institution (the Jewish Federation of Winnipeg) forged a partnership that matched these immigrants with jobs and also helped integrate them into the Winnipeg Jewish community. Seventeen interviews of Argentinean Jews now living in Winnipeg explained how they had a choice of emigrating to Spain, Israel or the United States but they selected Winnipeg and they give their reasons for doing so.


2018 ◽  
Vol 93 (1) ◽  
pp. 16-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louise Arnold ◽  
Christine Sullivan ◽  
Felix A. Okah
Keyword(s):  

2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy J. Whitmore
Keyword(s):  

2009 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 296-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan H. Adler

The dominant approach to environmental policy endorsed by conservative and libertarian policy thinkers, so-called “free market environmentalism” (FME), is grounded in the recognition and protection of property rights in environmental resources. Despite this normative commitment to property rights, most self-described FME advocates adopt a utilitarian, welfare-maximization approach to climate change policy, arguing that the costs of mitigation measures could outweigh the costs of climate change itself. Yet even if anthropogenic climate change is decidedly less than catastrophic, human-induced climate change is likely to contribute to environmental changes that violate traditional conceptions of property rights. Viewed globally, the actions of some countries—primarily industrialized nations—are likely to increase environmental harms suffered by other countries—less developed nations that have not (as of yet) made any significant contribution to climate change. It may well be that aggregate human welfare would be maximized in a warmer, wealthier world, or that the gains from climate change will offset environmental losses. Yet such claims, even if demonstrated, would not address the normative concern that the consequences of anthropogenic global warming would infringe upon the rights of people in less-developed nations. As a consequence, this paper calls for a rethinking of FME approaches to climate change policy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document