In the summer issue of PERC Reports Charles Kolstad, author of Environmental Economics, suggests that “free market environmentalism works well for problems pertaining to natural resource allocation, where well-defined property rights solve the problem of excludability,” but that it is “less efficient at dealing with environmental goods, such as the provision of clean air, which is nonrival.”
As Kolstad points out, proponents of free market environmentalism often offer a solution to air pollution that includes a technological innovation such as seeding emission streams with tracers to determine specific sources of ambient pollution. Another solution is to rely on common law—"if party A is causing injury to party B through pollution discharge, then party A may seek remedy in court."
Kolstad believes these ideas for managing air pollution are unsatisfactory. What are your thoughts?
Founded 30 years ago in Bozeman, Montana, PERC—the Property and Environment Research Center—is the nation’s oldest and largest institute dedicated to improving environmental quality through property rights and markets.
PERC’s publications, each designed to resonate with specific groups, move ideas generated at PERC to broader audiences.
Research is at the heart of PERC's work, with a focus on the question: What is the link between economic growth and environmental quality?
The goal of PERC’s programs is to fully realize the vision of establishing “PERC University,” where scholars, students, policy makers, and others convene to expand the applications of free market environmentalism.
PERC's fellowships share a common goal of exposing new scholars, students, journalists, and policy makers to free market environmentalism, as well as enable scholars already familiar with FME to explore new applications.
PERC continues to publish and present a broad range of research and discussion through podcasts, videos, and other multimedia channels.