I’ve considered myself an environmentalist for almost 20 years, and during this time I’ve been a member of many environmental organizations. For my birthday a couple of years ago my brother got me a membership to the Sierra Club, which surprisingly I had never joined. I soon received my first issue of Sierra Magazine and over the course of the year was generally pleased with the articles, finding them generally well-written and poignant. I renewed my membership in 2005.
In June of this year I received the July-August issue of Sierra Magazine and in it was an article entitled, “The Common Good”, by Jonathan Rowe of the Tomales Bay Institute. The title sounded interesting, but after just a couple paragraphs I was surprised that the article had made its way into the magazine. It is little more than a shoddy, poorly-reasoned polemic against the field of economics and the “market-system.” It contains many glaring mischaracterizations of economics and amazingly, in a bizarre feat of circular logic, the author cites methods developed and implemented by economists over many decades as potential solutions to environmental problems that supposedly are beyond the scope of economics. At the same time, the author continually fails to adequately define his terms or offer persuasive evidence to support his grandiose claims. In short, this article appeared anomalous in a magazine that (despite many legitimate polemics against Bush Administration policies) had stayed clear of knee-jerk liberalism and the dubious ideological prescriptions that accompany it. (For the record, Mr. Rowe he has agreed to debate me at the Institute where I teach and from all indications he appears to be a nice man).
Being that my academic training is in economics, no doubt my offense at this piece was greater than the average reader. I have a pet-peeve for people and organizations that criticize economics without having a solid grasp of what it is they are criticizing, and who believe that simply pointing out that there are serious environmental problems in the world and that the world is partly governed by markets is de facto evidence that markets are to blame (i.e. weak correlation is not proof of causation). Whereas this form of naiveté is commonplace amongst some of the more wide-eyed students I come across (i.e. me when I was younger), there is really no excuse for one of the country’s preeminent environmental organizations that boasts almost 800,000 members to be publishing, and thereby sanctioning, such intellectual sophistry.
I decided to write a piece in defense of economics entitled, “Why Environmentalists Should Embrace Economics,” and submit it to the Sierra Magazine for publication. A number of drafts made the rounds amongst my colleagues and friends (to receive a finished copy please email me at [email protected]). Soon thereafter, I received an email from the Sierra Club saying that after reviewing the piece they have decided that it doesn’t “meet their needs at this time”. I asked for clarification, and also informed them that I think it is incumbent upon them to publish at least some type of response to Mr. Rowe’s piece (there are many more qualified people than I who I’m sure would happily oblige). They eventually replied and said that on first reading my article was deemed too “technical” (you can judge that for yourself), but they would review it again. I have not heard back from then since.
We are living at a time when there is a strong backlash against environmentalism and pieces like, “The Common Good” do little more than add fuel to the fire. The majority of Americans are generally supportive of environmental causes, but become wary when environmentalists spend an exorbitant amount of time criticizing the capitalist economic system that has propelled America to such prominence and virtually unparalleled material well-being. While everyone understands that some spheres of life should not be subject entirely to market forces, using overly broad and ill-defined notions of what constitutes the “commons” is more likely to convince people that environmentalists are leftover communists than to draw rightful attention to the many serious problems plaguing open-access resources (it’s also simply sloppy thinking). In addition, with conservatives in charge of all the branches of the Federal Government rallying against the “encroachment of the market system” is clearly not a winning strategy.
Unfortunately, Mr. Rowe and the Sierra Club don’t seem to get it. Charges that economists are largely ignorant and that the “market” is some sort of monster preparing to destroy every last thing on Earth may stoke people’s passions and provide fodder for those who continue to romanticize life in pre-capitalist societies, but it does more harm than good since it obscures rather than clarifies the key causes of environmental degradation.
What is especially frustrating about the perspectives voiced in “The Common Good” is that free-market principles are actually one of the environment’s greatest allies. Many environmental groups now understand this and recognize that it is actually the absence of markets, or policies that distort them, that are at the root of most environmental degradation (see the excellent speeches by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on this subject).
In the September/October issue the Sierra Magazine ran a piece highly critical of corporations. While there is much to criticize and dislike about aspects of corporate behavior, this piece also was skewed given that corporations provide so much good for society, including quality goods and services and most of the country’s employment. In one bizarre sentence the author quotes someone who suggests that we enact laws that prohibit all pollution; yes, zero pollution allowed in society! Nonsensical corporate-bashing seemed like another emotional freebie that Sierra just couldn’t resist cashing in on.
Just this month in the November/December issue the Sierra Club finally published a letter critical of Mr. Rowe’s piece, but for me this is too little too late. I have decided not to renew my membership in 2006. I also want to urge others to shift their resources away from the Sierra Club to other environmental organizations that have a healthy respect for the power of markets, such as Environmental Defense, The Nature Conservancy, and the Natural Resources Defense Council.
This is one of the beauties of the market; you can let your money do to the talking. And you can rest assured people will listen.
J.S.