Global warming is a fact, and our consumption is a cause of it. The relevant question is how to deal with it. Our point of departure is free-market environmentalism, which argues that markets are an important way to avoid commons, as well as suggests that adaptation - as opposed to mitigation - makes more political and economic sense. Free market environmentalism is controversial in some circles, though we see it as generally appropriate to address challenges with global environmental commons. We add to the free-market view Elinor Ostrom's emphasis on polycentrism, which is the most significant way to bring people and their organizations into decision-making. Though polycentrism is not perfect - more participation is not always good - it is still a useful starting point. We conclude by explaining why climate justice is not an alternative to market-based approaches; rather, markets are an important way to achieve environmental justice, as is polycentrism.
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.