View source for Eco-capitalism

{{Short description|The view that capital exists in nature as "natural capital"}}
{{For|sustainable businesses|Sustainable business}}
{{redirect|Blue Greens|the colours |Blue-green}}
{{Green politics sidebar |Perspectives}}
{{Capitalism sidebar | Ideologies}}
'''Eco-capitalism''', also known as '''environmental capitalism''' or (sometimes<ref>{{cite web |title=Good company: the capitalists putting purpose ahead of profit |date=2019-11-24 |website=[[The Guardian]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230518001415/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/24/b-corps-captalism-for-an-environmentally-endangered-age |archive-date=2023-05-18 |url-status=live |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/24/b-corps-captalism-for-an-environmentally-endangered-age}}</ref>) '''green capitalism''', is the view that [[capital (economics)|capital]] exists in nature as "[[natural capital]]" ([[ecosystem]]s that have [[ecological yield]]) on which all [[wealth]] depends. Therefore, governments should use [[Market (economics)|market-based]]  [[policy instruments|policy-instruments]] (such as a [[carbon tax]]) to resolve [[environmental problem]]s.<ref>{{cite web|title= Definition of Eco-Capitalism|url= https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/eco-capitalism|website= collinsdictionary.com|access-date= 27 November 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Guttmann |first1=Robert |title=Eco-Capitalism: Carbon money, Climate Finance, and Sustainable Development |date=2018 |publisher=[[Palgrave Macmillan]] |location=London |isbn=9783319923574}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bosch |first1=Stephan |last2=Schmidt |first2=Matthias |title=Is the post-fossil era necessarily post-capitalistic? – The robustness and capabilities of green capitalism |journal=[[Ecological Economics (journal)|Ecological Economics]] |date=2019 |volume=161 |pages=270–279 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.04.001}}</ref>

The term "'''Blue Greens'''" is often applied to those who espouse eco-capitalism. Eco-capitalism can be thought of as the [[right-wing]] equivalent to [[Eco-socialism|Red Greens]].<ref>
{{cite web
|title= The rise of green capitalism
|url= http://roadtoparis.info/top-list/rise-green-capitalism/
|website= roadtoparis.info|access-date= 27 November 2015
}}
</ref>{{request quotation|date=August 2019}}

Critics of eco-capitalism, such as [[eco-socialists]], view continued [[economic growth]] and [[commodification of nature]] as an inevitability in [[capitalism]], and thus criticize [[bright-green environmentalism]].<ref name=cock>{{cite web|title='Green Capitalism' or Environmental Justice? A Critique of the Sustainability Discourse|author=Jacklyn Cock|url=https://admin.hsf.org.za/publications/focus/focus-63/Jacklyn%20Cock.pdf}}</ref><ref name=hegemony>{{cite journal |title=The Hegemony of Green Capitalism: A critique of the imaginary that the environmental crisis can be solved by capitalism |date=2019 |doi=10.13140/RG.2.2.11373.33762 |author1=Tibbe Smith Larsen }}</ref><ref name="Wright Nyberg 2015">{{cite web | last1=Wright | first1=Christopher | last2=Nyberg | first2=Daniel | title='Green capitalism' is a myth | website=Business Insider | date=2015-09-20 | url=https://www.businessinsider.com/green-capitalism-is-a-myth-2015-9 | access-date=2022-01-30}}</ref><ref name=schweickart2010>{{cite journal |last1=Schweickart |first1=David |title=Is Sustainable Capitalism Possible? |journal=Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences |date=2010 |volume=2 |issue=5 |pages=6739–6752 |doi=10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.05.020 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

== History ==
The roots of eco-capitalism can be traced back to the late 1960s. The "[[Tragedy of the Commons]]", an essay published in 1968 in ''[[Science (journal)|Science]]'' by [[Garrett Hardin]], claimed the inevitability of [[malthusian catastrophe]] due to liberal or democratic government's policies to leave family size matters to the family, and enabling the [[welfare state]] to willingly care for potential [[human overpopulation]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hardin |first1=Garrett |title=The Tragedy of the Commons |journal=Science |date=13 December 1968 |volume=162 |issue=3859 |pages=1243–1248 |doi=10.1126/science.162.3859.1243 |pmid=17756331 |bibcode=1968Sci...162.1243H |doi-access=free }}</ref> Hardin argued that if families were given freedom of choice in the matter, but were removed from a welfare state, parents choosing to overbear would not have the resources to provide for their "litter", thus solving the problem of overpopulation. This represents an early argument made from an eco-capitalist standpoint: overpopulation would technically be solved by a [[free market]]. [[John Baden]], a collaborator with Garrett Hardin on other works including ''Managing the Commons,'' founded the Political Economy Research Center (now called the [[Property and Environment Research Center]]) in 1982. As one of the first eco-capitalist organizations created, PERC's ongoing mission is "improving environmental quality through property rights and markets".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.perc.org/about-perc/percs-mission-vision |title=PERC's Mission & Vision |website=The Property and Environment Research Center |access-date=2017-03-02 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170303130554/http://www.perc.org/about-perc/percs-mission-vision |archive-date=2017-03-03 |url-status=dead }}{{verify source|current statement is different at https://www.perc.org/about-us/|date=December 2022}}</ref> The most popular eco-capitalist idea was [[emissions trading]], or more commonly, cap and trade.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.smithsonianmag.com/air/the-political-history-of-cap-and-trade-34711212/|title=The Political History of Cap and Trade|last=Conniff|first=Richard|date=August 2009|website=Smithsonian|access-date=2017-03-02}}</ref> Emissions trading, a market-based approach that allows polluting entities to purchase or be allocated permits, began being researched in the late 1960s. International emissions trading was significantly popularized in the 1990s when the [[United Nations]] adopted the [[Kyoto Protocol]] in 1997.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.mtholyoke.edu/~danov20d/site/history.htm|title=The Kyoto Protocol :: History|website=www.mtholyoke.edu|access-date=2017-03-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161211194941/http://www.mtholyoke.edu/~danov20d/site/history.htm|archive-date=2016-12-11|url-status=dead}}{{self-published inline|date=December 2022}}</ref>

==Eco-capitalist theorists==
*[[Terry L. Anderson]], a graduate of the [[University of Montana]] who received his Ph.D. from [[Washington University]],<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.perc.org/staff/terry-anderson|title=Terry Anderson |website=The Property and Environment Research Center |access-date=2017-03-03}}</ref> and who serves as the co-chair of the [[Hoover Institution]]'s Property Rights, Freedom and Prosperity task force, has advocated that free markets can be both economically beneficial and environmentally protective. Anderson specializes in how markets impact Native American communities and their economies. Anderson is a co-author of ''Free Market Environmentalism,'' a book that explores how free market ideas could be used to solve environmental issues, based on Anderson's conclusion on a few case studies.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Anderson |first1=Terry L. |last2=Leal |first2=Donald R. |title=Free Market Environmentalism |date=1991 |publisher=Avalon Publishing |isbn=0-936488-33-6 |oclc=22422408 }}</ref> 
*[[Bruce Yandle]], a graduate of [[Mercer University]], attended [[Georgia State University]] where he earned an MBA and PhD.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.mercatus.org/bruce-yandle|title=Bruce Yandle|date=2008-08-15|work=Mercatus Center|access-date=2017-03-03}}</ref> Yandle is the dean emeritus of [[Clemson University]]'s college of business. He is prominent in the field of eco-capitalism for his story of the "Bootlegger and the Baptist". Yandle's theory of the Bootlegger and the Baptist posits that ethical groups, religious institutions and business captains can align their organizations in the interest of regulation and [[economic growth]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Anderson |first1=T. |last2=Leal |first2=Donald R. |title=Free Market Environmentalism |date=2001 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-0-312-29973-6 }}{{page needed|date=December 2022}}</ref>
*[[Paul Hawken]] is the architect of the United States first [[natural foods]] company, Erewhon Trading Company, where all products were organically composed. Hawken founded the research organization, Natural Capital Institute, and developed [[Wiser.org|Wiser Earth]], a program focused on providing a platform for all to communicate about the environment. Hawken has authored hundreds of publications, including four best selling books.<ref name=":1">{{cite web|url=http://www.paulhawken.com|title=paul hawken|website=www.paulhawken.com|access-date=2017-03-01}}</ref> In his writings, Hawken stresses that many viable ecological options exist for businesses that will benefit the environment, while simultaneously bringing about [[economic profit]]. One idea discussed in his book, ''Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution'', is the possibility of developing lightweight, electricity-powered cars as an alternative to current transportation modes. Hawken attributes the hesitancy of adopting these options to lack of knowledge of these alternatives and high initial costs.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next Industrial Revolution|last1=Hawken|first1=Paul|last2=Lovins|first2=Amory|last3=Lovins|first3=Hunter|year=1999}}</ref> Hawken is now the head of OneSun, Inc., an energy corporation concentrated on low-cost solar.<ref name=":1" />
*[[Lester R. Brown|Lester Brown]] began his career as a tomato farmer in [[New Jersey]], before earning a degree at [[Rutgers University]] and traveling to a rural [[India]] for a six-month study of the country's food and population crisis.  Brown has primarily focused on finding alternatives which he contends  would provide solutions to the world's population and resources problem. With financial support from [[Rockefeller Brothers Fund]], Brown created the [[Worldwatch Institute]], the first dedicated to researching global environmental problems. In 2001, Brown founded the [[Earth Policy Institute]], an organization that outlines a vision for creating an environmentally sustainable economy. Brown has authored over 50 books and received 25 honorary degrees.<ref name=":2">{{cite web|url=http://www.earth-policy.org/|title=Earth Policy Institute – Building a Sustainable Future {{!}} Home|website=www.earth-policy.org|access-date=2017-03-01}}</ref> In his publications, Brown posits that the key to an eco-friendly economy is an honest market. He advocates for replacing harmful aspects of the environment, like [[fossil fuels]], with renewable energy.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.americanscientist.org/bookshelf/pub/lester-brown|title=An interview with Lester Brown » American Scientist|website=www.americanscientist.org|language=en-US|access-date=2017-03-01}}</ref> In June 2015, Brown retired from Earth Policy and closed the institute.<ref name=":2" />

==Transition to eco-capitalism==
The ideology of eco-capitalism was adopted to satisfy two competing needs:
#the desire for generating profit by businesses in a capitalist society and
#the urgency for proper actions to address a struggling environment negatively impacted by human activity.
Under the doctrine of eco-capitalism, businesses commodify the act of addressing environmental issues.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Prothero |first1=Andrea |last2=Fitchett |first2=James A. |title=Greening Capitalism: Opportunities for a Green Commodity |journal=Journal of Macromarketing |date=June 2000 |volume=20 |issue=1 |pages=46–55 |doi=10.1177/0276146700201005 |s2cid=55174978 }}</ref><ref name="god">{{cite book|last1=Smith|first1=Richard|title=Green Capitalism: the god that failed|date=2015|publisher=World Economics Association|isbn=978-1-911156-22-2|pages=55–61}}</ref>

The following are common principles in the transition to eco-capitalism.

=== Externalities: Correcting of a free market failure ===

A central part of eco-capitalism is to correct for the [[market failure]] seen in the externalization of [[pollution]]. By treating the issue of pollution as an [[externality]] it has allowed the market to minimize the degree of accountability. To correct for this market failure eco-capitalism would have to internalize this cost. A prime example of this shift towards internalizing externalities is seen in the adoption of a system for [[carbon trading]]. In a system like this people are forced to factor the pollution cost into their expenses.<ref name=Zenghelis2015>{{cite journal |last1=Zenghelis |first1=Dimitri |title=10. Decarbonisation: Innovation and the Economics of Climate Change |journal=The Political Quarterly |date=December 2015 |volume=86 |pages=172–190 |doi=10.1111/1467-923X.12239 }}</ref> This system as well as other systems of internalization function on large and small scales (oftentimes both are tightly connected). On a corporate scale, the government can regulate [[carbon emissions]] and other polluting factors in business practices forcing companies to either reduce their pollution levels, externalize these costs onto their consumers by raising the cost of their goods/services, and/or a combination of the two.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.2139/ssrn.1674446 |title=Pollution Externalities in a Schumpeterian Growth Model |year=2010 |last1=Koesler |first1=Simon |s2cid=51762639 |url=https://ub-madoc.bib.uni-mannheim.de/3001/1/dp10055.pdf }}</ref> These kinds of systems can also be effective in indirectly creating a more environmentally conscious consumer base. As the companies who are creating the most pollution face falling profit levels and rising prices their consumers and investors are inclined to take their business elsewhere. This migration of investment and revenue would then be expected to make its way to business who have already incorporated the minimization of pollution into their business model thus allowing them to provide lower prices and higher profit margins attracting the migrating consumers and investors.{{citation needed|date=April 2018}}

===Green consumption===
{{further|Green consumption}}
At the conception of the ideology, major theorists of eco-capitalism, Paul Hawken, Lester Brown, and Francis Cairncross, saw an opportunity to establish a different approach to environmentalism in a capitalist society.<ref name="god"/> These theorists posited that consumers as well as producers could shoulder the social responsibility of environmental restoration if "green technology, green taxes, green labeling, and eco-conscious shopping" existed.<ref name="god"/> The resulting "shopping our way to sustainability" mentality encouraged the development of [[organic farming]], renewable energy, green certifications as well as other eco-friendly practices.<ref name="god"/>

A 2015 report from the [[Nielsen Corporation]] lends credence to this theory. According to the report, consumers have more brand loyalty and are willing to pay higher prices for a product that is perceived as being sustainable. This is especially true among [[Millennials]] and [[Generation Z]].<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2015/green-generation-millennials-say-sustainability-is-a-shopping-priority.html|title=Green Generation: Millennials Say Sustainability Is a Shopping Priority|website=www.nielsen.com|access-date=2018-04-23|archive-date=2019-06-12|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190612070033/https://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2015/green-generation-millennials-say-sustainability-is-a-shopping-priority.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> These generations currently make up 48% of the global marketplace<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/reports/2017/the-nielsen-total-audience-report-q1-2017.html|title=The Nielsen Total Audience Report: Q1 2017|website=www.nielsen.com|access-date=2018-04-23|archive-date=2019-06-23|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190623165158/https://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/reports/2017/the-nielsen-total-audience-report-q1-2017.html|url-status=dead}}</ref> and still have not hit their peak spending levels. As these generations' preferences continue to shape how businesses operate and market themselves, they could drive a continued shift toward green consumption.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesinsights/2017/09/26/millennials-and-gen-z-are-the-new-bosses-of-the-boardroom/#7e3e1e7e67f4|title=Millennials And Gen Z Are The New Bosses Of The Boardroom|first=Stuart R.|last=Levine|website=[[Forbes]] }}</ref>

According to the Annual Review of Environmental Resources, "the focus of policy makers, businesses, and researchers has mostly been on the latter (consuming differently), with relatively little attention paid to consuming less".<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Peattie |first1=Ken |title=Green Consumption: Behavior and Norms |journal=Annual Review of Environment and Resources |date=21 November 2010 |volume=35 |issue=1 |pages=195–228 |doi=10.1146/annurev-environ-032609-094328 |doi-access=free }}</ref> A review of how to encourage sustainable consumption from the University of Surrey shows that, "Government policies send important signals to consumers about institutional goals and national priorities."<ref name="sustainablelifestyles.ac.uk">{{cite web|url=http://sustainablelifestyles.ac.uk/sites/default/files/motivating_sc_final.pdf |title=Microsoft Word - Motivating SC final.doc |access-date=2018-04-28}}{{unreliable source?|date=December 2022}}{{dead link|date=December 2022}}</ref> Governments can pull a variety of levers to signal this including product, trading, building, media, and marketing standards.<ref name="sustainablelifestyles.ac.uk"/>

===Carbon trading===
{{further|Carbon trading}}
Creating perhaps the first major eco-capitalist endorsement, many political and economic institutions support a system of pollution credits. Such a system, which assigns property rights to emissions, is considered to be the most "efficient and effective" way for regulating [[greenhouse gas emissions]] in the current [[neoliberal]] global economy.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bailey |first1=Ian |title=Neoliberalism, climate governance and the scalar politics of EU emissions trading |journal=Royal Geographical Society |date=2007 |volume=39 |issue=4 |pages=431–42 |doi=10.1111/j.1475-4762.2007.00770.x }}</ref> Especially in the case of tradable pollution credits, the resulting market-based system of emissions regulation is believed to motivate businesses to invest in technology that reduce greenhouse gas emissions using [[positive reinforcement]] (i.e. ability to trade unused credits) and [[punishment]] (i.e. the need to buy more credits).<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Prudham |first1=Scott |title=Pimping climate change: Richard Branson, global warming, and the performance of green capitalism |journal=Environment and Planning |date=2009 |volume=41 |issue=7 |pages=1594–613 |doi=10.1068/a4071 |doi-access=free |hdl=1807/78578 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

===Full cost accounting===
[[Environmental full-cost accounting]] explains corporate actions on the basis of the triple bottom line, which is best summarized as "people, planet, and profit". As a concept of corporate social responsibility, full cost accounting not only considers social and economic costs and benefits but also the environmental implications of specific corporate actions.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Griffiths|first1=M.R|last2=Lucas|first2=J.R.|title=Value economics: the ethical implications of value for new economic thinking|date=November 16, 2016|publisher=Palgrave Macmillan UK|isbn=978-1-137-54186-4}}</ref>

While there has been progress in measuring the cost of harm to the health of individuals and the environment,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/how-to-measure-the-environmental|title=How to measure environmental pressures from production and consumption?}}</ref> the interaction of environmental, social, and health effects makes measurement difficult. Measurement attempts can be broadly categorized as either behavioral in nature, like [[hedonic pricing]], or dose-response which looks at indirect effects.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.06.040 |title=A comprehensive review of full cost accounting methods and their applicability to the automotive industry |journal=Journal of Cleaner Production |volume=108 |page=1123 |year=2015 |last1=Jasinski |first1=Dominik |last2=Meredith |first2=James |last3=Kirwan |first3=Kerry |doi-access=free }}</ref> A standardized measurement of these costs has yet to emerge.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fao.org/nr/sustainability/full-cost-accounting/en/|title=Sustainability Pathways: Full-cost accounting|website=www.fao.org}}</ref> This should not be confused with the full-cost method used by organizations searching for oil and gas that "does not differentiate between operating expenses associated with successful and unsuccessful exploration projects".<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/full-cost-method.asp|title=Full-Cost Method|author=Investopedia Staff|date=14 May 2010}}</ref>

===Genuine progress indicator===
The current standard of using the [[gross domestic product]] (GDP) as an indicator of welfare is criticized for being inaccurate. An alternative to GDP, the [[genuine progress indicator]] compensates for the shortcomings of the GDP as a welfare indicator by accounting for environmental harms as well as other factors that affect consumption, such as crime and [[income inequality]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Talberth |first1=John |last2=Cobb |first2=Clifford |last3=Slattery |first3=Noah |title=The Genuine Progress Indicator 2006: A Tool for Sustainable Development |journal=Redefining Progress |url=https://sustainable-economy.org/wp-content/uploads/GPI-2006-Final.pdf|date=2006 }}</ref>

==Criticism and responses==
A fundamental criticism of the eco-capitalist idea rests on the idea that the [[commodification of nature]] and [[environmental services]] plus the principles of [[growth economics]] and [[sustainability]] cannot (easily) coexist.<ref name="The Ecologist 2018">{{cite web | title=Why economic growth is not compatible with environmental sustainability | website=The Ecologist | date=2018-02-22 | url=https://theecologist.org/2018/feb/22/why-economic-growth-not-compatible-environmental-sustainability | access-date=2022-02-03}}</ref><ref name=hegemony/><ref name=cock/><ref name="Wright Nyberg 2015"/><ref name=schweickart2010/><ref name="Roland Berger 2020">{{cite web | title=Can economic growth coexist with sustainability? | website=Roland Berger | date=2020-04-08 | url=https://www.rolandberger.com/en/Insights/Publications/Can-economic-growth-coexist-with-sustainability.html | access-date=2022-02-03|quote=Three of today's leading economic minds are challenging us to reconsider the way we view growth. One common thread runs through them all: it's time to slow down.}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Fox |first1=Nick J. |title=Green capitalism, climate change and the technological fix: A more-than-human assessment |journal=[[The Sociological Review]] |date=2022 |pages= |doi=10.1177/00380261221121232 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

A majority of the criticisms from traditionally unregulated [[capitalism]] is due to eco-capitalism's increased [[regulation]]. [[Carbon credit|Pollution credits]] (as a means for regulating greenhouse gas emissions) is traditionally at odds with economically laissez-faire ideologies. Elements of [[unregulated capitalism]] prefer environmental issues to be addressed by individuals who may allocate their own income and wealth,<ref>{{cite journal |last=Meltzher |first=Alan H. |title=Why Capitalism?|url=http://wpweb2.tepper.cmu.edu/facultyadmin/upload/url4_933269885961_why_capitalism.pdf |journal=Carnegie Mellon University and American Enterprise Institute |page=1 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150305224131/http://wpweb2.tepper.cmu.edu/facultyadmin/upload/url4_933269885961_Why_Capitalism.pdf |archive-date=2015-03-05 }}</ref> oppose the [[commodification]] of by-products like carbon emissions, and emphasize positive incentives to maintain resources through free-market competition and entrepreneurship.

Proponents of eco-capitalism view environmental reform like pollution credits as a more transformative and progressive system. According to these proponents, since free market capitalism as inherently expansionist in tendency, ignoring environmental responsibility is a danger to the environment.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/nov/26/capitalism-environment-green-greed-slow-life-symposium-tony-juniper|title=Capitalism v environment: can greed ever be green?|website=theguardian.com|last1=Juniper|first1=Tony|date=26 November 2014 |access-date=27 November 2015}}</ref> Approximately 36% of Americans are deeply concerned about climate issues.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/10/04/the-politics-of-climate/|title=The Politics of Climate|date=4 October 2016}}</ref>  Proponents of eco-capitalism typically favor political [[environmentalism]], which emphasizes negative incentives like regulation and taxes to encourage the conservation of resources and prevent environmental harm.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://newpol.org/content/myths-%E2%80%9Cgreen-capitalism%E2%80%9D |title=The Myths of 'Green Capitalism' |first=Brian |last=Tokar |date=Winter 2014 |access-date=2017-02-26 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170324064158/http://newpol.org/content/myths-%E2%80%9Cgreen-capitalism%E2%80%9D |archive-date=2017-03-24 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

Political theorist [[Antonio Gramsci]] cites theories of [[common sense]], which suggests that, in general, free market capitalism absent of environmental reform, is ingrained in the minds of its members as the only viable and successful form of economic organization through [[cultural hegemony]]. Therefore, the proposal of any alternate economic system, like eco-capitalism, must overcome the predominant common sense and economic status quo in order to develop opposing theories. Nonetheless, movements in the United States and abroad have continued to push for reforms to protect the environment in current capitalistic systems.<ref>{{cite web |last1=King |first1=Matthew Wilburn |title=Why the next stage of capitalism is coming |url=https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210525-why-the-next-stage-of-capitalism-is-coming |website=www.bbc.com |access-date=1 August 2021 |language=en}}</ref>

Another political theorist, Daniel Tanuro, explains in his book ''Green Capitalism: Why it Can't Work'' that for green capitalism to be successful, it would have to replace current mainstream capitalism with eco-socialist methods, while defying corporate interests:<ref>{{Cite book|title=Green Capitalism: Why it Can't Work|last=Tanuro|first=Daniel|publisher=Merlin Press|year=2013|isbn=978-1-55266-668-5|page=112}}</ref><blockquote>If by "green capitalism" we understand a system in which the qualitative, social and ecological parameters are taken in account by the numerous competing capitals, that is to say even within economic activity as an endogenous mechanism, then we are completely deluded. In fact, we would be talking about a form of capitalism in which the law of value was no longer in operation, which is a contradiction in terms</blockquote>However, Tanuro adds that social and economical change to the current capitalist systems is necessary, because technology will invariably increase emissions as manufacturing processes and distribution systems progress.<ref>{{Cite book|title=Green Capitalism: Why it Can't Work|last=Tanuro|first=Daniel|publisher=Merlin Press|year=2013|isbn=978-1-55266-668-5}}{{page needed|date=April 2018}}</ref> Tanuro argues for changes in three areas: 
# Use of transportation methods
# [[Agriculture]] and dietary changes
# Overall [[consumer]] lifestyle and market spending
Despite this argument, critics still claim that green consumption, sustainable behavior on the part of the consumer, is not enough to be instituted as a socio-environmental solution. In accordance with [[hegemony]], capitalism agrees that the government has little control over market and buyers, sellers, and consumers ultimately drive the market. In contrast, in green capitalism, the government would have more control therefore; consumers do not have direct power over the market, and should not be held accountable.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1590/S1414-49802012000100010 |title='Consumo consciente': O ecocapitalismo como ideologia |trans-title='Conscious Consumption': Ecocapitalism as Ideology |language=pt |journal=Revista Katálysis |volume=15 |issue=1 |pages=95–111 |year=2012 |last1=Silva |first1=Maria das Graças e |last2=Araújo |first2=Nailsa Maria Souza |last3=Santos |first3=Josiane Soares |doi-access=free }}</ref>

Environmental scholar [[Bill McKibben]] proposes "full scale climate mobilization" to address environmental decay. During World War II, vehicle manufacturers and general goods manufacturers shifted to producing weapons, military vehicles and war time goods. McKibben argues that, to combat environmental change, the American [[Military Industrial Complex]] and other national arms producers could shift to producing [[solar panel]]s, wind turbines and other environmental products in an eco-capitalist system.<ref>{{cite magazine|date=2016-08-15|title=We Need to Literally Declare War on Climate Change|url=https://newrepublic.com/article/135684/declare-war-climate-change-mobilize-wwii|access-date=2017-03-01|magazine=New Republic}}</ref>

== Appeal of renewable energy in the capitalist market ==
Tom Randall, a correspondent specializing in [[renewable energy]] for [[Bloomberg L.P.|Bloomberg]], calls to attention that [[wind energy|wind]] and [[solar energy]] are "outperforming" [[fossil fuel]]s.<ref name=":0">{{Cite news|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-06/wind-and-solar-are-crushing-fossil-fuels|title=Wind and Solar Are Crushing Fossil Fuels|date=2016-04-06|work=Bloomberg.com|access-date=2017-02-26}}</ref> In terms of investments, clean energy outperforms both gas and coal by a 2-1 margin. This positive margin may be attributed to the consistently falling price of renewable energy production. Renewable [[energy source]]s hold assertive advantages over fossil fuels because they exist as technologies, not fuels. As time proceeds, renewable energy becomes inevitably more efficient as technology adapts. Technologies for extracting fuels may change, but the fuels remain as constants. Both the solar and wind industries have proven growth over time: Over the last 15 years, the solar industry has doubled seven times and the wind industry has doubled four times.<ref name=":0" /> In contrast, the fossil fuel industry has declined over the last 15 years. America's coal industry has lost 75 percent of its value within the past few years.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.carbontracker.org/fossil-fuels-are-dead-the-rest-is-just-detail/|title=Fossil fuels are dead – the rest is just detail|website=www.carbontracker.org|date=29 July 2015 |language=en-US|access-date=2017-02-26}}</ref>

Renewable energy sources also gain advantages over the fossil fuel industry through [[Paris Agreement|international governmental support]]. Globally, governments implement subsidies to boost the [[renewable energy industry]]. Concurrently, various global efforts fight against fossil fuel production and use.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.cnsjournal.org/green-capitalism-builds-big-solar-should-we-throw-the-baby-out-with-the-bathwater/|title="Green" Capitalism builds Big Solar: Should we throw the baby out with the bathwater?|date=2016-04-10|work=CNS web|access-date=2017-02-26|language=en-US}}</ref> The demand for renewable energy sources has skyrocketed in the last 15 years, while fossil fuels have drastically fallen in demand (in capitalist societies).<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-04-06/wind-and-solar-are-crushing-fossil-fuels|title=Wind and Solar Are Crushing Fossil Fuels|date=2016-04-06|work=Bloomberg.com|access-date=2017-02-28}}</ref>

The worldwide concern of [[climate change]] (also known as global warming) is notably the largest contributor to the [[Sustainable energy|green energy]] industry's rapid acceleration, just as it is largely responsible for the decline of the [[fossil fuel industry]]. The overwhelming scientific consensus of climate change's reality and its potential catastrophic effects have caused a large part of the world's population to respond with panic and immediate action. While the world's response has been strong, environmentalists and climate scientists do not believe the response has been strong enough to counter climate change's effects, and that the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources is moving far too slowly.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.cnsjournal.org/green-capitalism-builds-big-solar-should-we-throw-the-baby-out-with-the-bathwater/|title="Green" Capitalism builds Big Solar: Should we throw the baby out with the bathwater?|date=2016-04-10|work=CNS web|access-date=2017-02-28|language=en-US}}</ref>

The global efforts and concerns of both governments and individuals to take action regarding implementing and transforming a society's energy sources from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources show the enormous potential of the green energy market. This potential is seen in the countless renewable energy projects under way. Currently, there are over 4,000 major solar projects being implemented.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.seia.org/research-resources/major-solar-projects-list|title=Major Solar Projects List|website=SEIA|language=en|access-date=2017-02-28}}</ref> These, and all renewable energy projects, set goals of long-term economic benefit.<ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.ucsusa.org/clean-energy/renewable-energy/public-benefits-of-renewable-power#.WLX9nxC2CuV|title=Benefits of Renewable Energy Use|work=Union of Concerned Scientists|access-date=2017-02-28|language=en}}</ref>

The [[Global Apollo Programme]], set up by both economists and scientists, has a goal of creating a solar capability that can stand as a cheaper alternative to coal-fueled power plants by 2025.<ref name="economist.com">{{cite news|url=https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2015/06/economist-explains-1|title=How renewable energy can become competitive|newspaper=The Economist|access-date=2017-02-28}}</ref> In [[Capitalism|capitalist markets]], solar energy has the very real potential of becoming a direct competitor to coal plants in less than a decade.

=== Barriers to transition ===
One of the most daunting barriers to the transition to an eco-capitalist system is the systemic barrier that can be created by former models. Dimitri Zenghelis explores the idea of [[path dependence]] and the how continuing to build infrastructure without foresight seriously impedes the implementation and benefits of future innovations.<ref name=Zenghelis2015/> Zenghelis uses the term "locked-in" to describe situations where the full implementation of a new innovation cannot be seen because an earlier infrastructure prevents it from functioning well. This barrier is exemplified in older cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and New York where the infrastructure was designed around [[urban sprawl]] to accommodate private vehicles. The sprawl has been researched with the results returning that the moving forward [[mega-cities]] need to be constructed as [[eco-cities]] if the hope of curving emission levels down is going to have any hope.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2013.09.003 |title=Incentives for China's urban mayors to mitigate pollution externalities: The role of the central government and public environmentalism |journal=Regional Science and Urban Economics |volume=47 |page=61 |year=2014 |last1=Zheng |first1=Siqi |last2=Kahn |first2=Matthew E |last3=Sun |first3=Weizeng |last4=Luo |first4=Danglun }}</ref>

==See also==
{{columns-list|colwidth=22em|
* {{annotated link|Business model}}
* {{annotated link|Climate justice}}
* {{annotated link|Ecotax}}
* {{annotated link|Ecological economics}}
* {{annotated link|Eco-nationalism}}
* {{annotated link|Eco-socialism}}
* ''{{annotated link|Enviro-Capitalists: Doing Good While Doing Well}}''
* {{annotated link|Environmental economics}}
* {{annotated link|Ethical consumerism}}
* {{annotated link|Free-market environmentalism}}
* {{annotated link|Geolibertarianism}}
* {{annotated link|Georgism}}
* {{annotated link|Green economy}}
* {{annotated link|Green growth}}
* {{annotated link|Green libertarianism}}
* {{annotated link|Greenwashing}}
* ''{{annotated link|Natural Capitalism}}''
* {{annotated link|Natural resource economics}}
* {{annotated link|Pigovian tax}}
* {{annotated link|Pink capitalism}}
* {{annotated link|Purple capitalism}}
* {{annotated link|Sustainable business}}
* {{annotated link|Tax shift}}
* {{annotated link|Tragedy of the anticommons}}
* {{annotated link|Tragedy of the commons}}
}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Further reading==
* Chapple, Stephen (2001) ''Confessions of an Eco-Redneck: Or how I Learned to Gut-Shoot Trout and Save the Wilderness at the Same Time''. Perseus Publishing. {{ISBN|0-641-54292-5}}
* Comolet, A. (1991) "Le Renouveau ecologique. De l'eco-utopie a l'eco-capitalisme" [The Ecological Renewal. From Eco-Utopia to Eco-Capitalism], Futuribles, 157(Sept.), 41–54.
* [[Corporate Watch]] (2016). "[https://corporatewatch.org/product/a-z-of-green-capitalism/ An A-Z of Green Capitalism]". Corporate Watch, London. 
* d'Humières, Patrick (2010) ''Le développement durable va-t-il tuer le capitalisme?'' Editions Maxima
* [[Amory Lovins|Lovins, Amory B]] & [[Hunter Lovins]] (1997) ''Factor Four. Doubling Wealth - Halving Resource Use'', with [[Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker|Ernst von Weizacker]]. Earthscan Publications Ltd, London
* Pons Rullan, Bartolome (2015) ''Ecoliberalismo. ¡Hay alternativas al Capitalismo!'' Ed. Verbum {{ISBN|978-84-9074-266-2}}
* [[Saral Sarkar|Sarkar, Saral]] (1999) ''Eco-Socialism Or Eco-Capitalism? A Critical Analysis of Humanity's Fundamental Choices''
* [[Porritt, Jonathon]] (2005, revised 2007) ''Capitalism: As if the World Matters''. Earthscan Publications Ltd, London. {{ISBN|978-1-84407-193-7}}

{{Green politics}}
{{Sustainability}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Eco-capitalism}}
[[Category:Eco-capitalism| ]]
[[Category:Capitalism]]
[[Category:Economic ideologies]]
[[Category:Environmental economics]]
[[Category:Green politics]]
[[Category:Ideologies of capitalism]]
[[Category:Political ecology]]