Jeffrey Sachs: Pricing can’t cure all environmental ills

Natural resources people — foresters, river masters, biologists, botanists, agronomists, farmers, rock climbers and miners — understand almost instinctively that wise management of natural resources takes a blend of wisdom in commercial sectors and by government. Still, every once in a while some newly-minted Ph.D. in economics, or some economist who recently learned that governments own 86% of the land in Nevada, put forth a “bold proposal” to let the markets resolve environmental issues. Let pricing do it, they say.

Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, gives a short interview to the Wall Street Journal’s economics bloggers, in which he details why pricing cannot do the entire job, with examples:

Sachs: Pricing plays a role. Certainly with carbon emissions we need a price. But it’s almost never enough when we’re talking about really big technological changes. When you think of the computer industry and its roots in defense, when you think of the Internet with its root in defense and the National Science Foundation, when you think about drug development and the crucial role of the National Institutes of Health – one major industry after another has always relied, and needed to rely, on a mix of public and private actions.

When we’re talking about something as basic as a sustainable technology this is going to be inevitable. Think about how we’re going to climb out of the mess on nuclear power for example. We need a nuclear power industry in this country but it’s tied up in knots. Pricing by itself isn’t going to do it. There has to be public acceptability, there has to be sense of security that a regulatory framework, safe storage and nonproliferation protection is in place. These are just too complicated to be solved by a price.

For many other things, such as watershed management, there isn’t even a price that turns them into a market. The issues of watershed management involve different rights of upstream and downstream users, and different types of users. [like agriculture, households and industry.] The right price is going to be different. Pricing plays a role, but so does basic science, eminent domain, right of passage and liability.

Sachs is widely experienced in international economics, and in alternative economics. As an advocate of free markets generally, he’s pretty deep into development ideas. You won’t always agree with his opinions, but you’d do well to pay attention to what he says and the data upon which he bases his opinions.

Teachers, this is a short answer that covers a wealth of issues in your economics courses.


7 Responses to Jeffrey Sachs: Pricing can’t cure all environmental ills

  1. jd2718 says:

    Is he undoing the damage he has done? No.

    And even here, he starts by praising the role of the market.

    You can’t create general misery, then get a bye for toning down the policies.


  2. Ed Darrell says:

    Sachs’ departure from the Chicago School solutions should be even more remarkable, then, no?


  3. jd2718 says:

    I think your commenters are right. As one of the primary advocates of economic “shock therapy” Sachs bears some personal responsibility for some pretty horrendous declines in health, nutrition, and general welfare. I’m uncomfortable seeing him promoted, even with a caveat.



  4. mpb says:

    In a wide-ranging interview with Truthout’s Geoffrey Millard, bestselling author and investigative journalist Naomi Klein discusses the catastrophic failures that has ensued from the free-market reforms that has spread throughout the world over the past few decades. Klein explains that the rise in “disaster capitalism” is also leading to an increase in worldwide violence that will only get worse.


  5. Mark F. says:

    I’ll give you an advance warning on Klein’s book. I found it to be extremely infuriating to read. Not because it was poorly written or boring. The material she covers just made me so angry and frustrated and depressed that it took me a long time to read it. I literally had to read it a couple of chapters at time with long breaks (i.e. days) before I could tackle it again. As I’ve said to others that I’ve recommended it to , I can’t say I enjoyed it, but it was extremely enlightening. Also, it’s not some crazy conspiracy theory type book. It’s extremely well researched and referrenced.

    Web site here:


  6. Ed Darrell says:

    Sachs is a big player in Yergin’s Commanding Heights. I think there are some huge difficulties with the Friedman and Chicago School ideas, especially as implemented. I don’t see Sachs as pushing bad stuff to get where he wants to be, however.

    Not familiar with Klein’s book at all. Thanks for the suggestion.


  7. Mark F. says:

    Are you familiar with Naomi Klein’s “The Shock Doctrine”? She discusses Sachs and his contribution to “disaster capitalism” in several chapters. It’s not pretty to say the least. I remember seeing Sachs quite often on “The News Hour” in the years immediately after the Poles kicked the communists out of office and the rest of the eastern block got out from under the control of the USSR. Little did I know the consequences of the policies that he was advancing at the time.


Please play nice in the Bathtub -- splash no soap in anyone's eyes. While your e-mail will not show with comments, note that it is our policy not to allow false e-mail addresses. Comments with non-working e-mail addresses may be deleted.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: