economy.^49 In the end, the right considers the maintenance of a liberal
economic order its absolute political priority. It thus favors a form of
“liberal environmentalism,” which would rely on “the market...as
the preferred means to solve environmental problems.”^50
Advocates of liberal environmentalism consistently lean toward
voluntary rather than coercive measures to respond to environmental
challenges. By nature more flexible, such measures are more in tune
with the operation of markets than are binding regulations. Not sur-
prisingly, the American government was at the outset among the most
ardent proponents of the establishment of carbon markets to counter
climate change.^51 Ironically, as the left’s interest in carbon markets
grew, the right began to distance itself from the idea, having realized
that it could not be implemented without active public interventions.
The resistance of conservatives toward binding regulations has been
expressed in a variety of contexts. Most notably, opposition to the
Kyoto Protocol was built to a large extent on a rejection of the treaty’s
requirement for firm governmental commitments.^52 Traditionally
hostile to the intervention of international institutions in environ-
mental matters, the right has also shown little enthusiasm for the
creation of a World Environment Organization or an Environmental
Security Council.
Making a different reading of the evidence available, the greens and
the left regard the protection of the environment as crucial for the
future of humanity. Taking the long-term view, their approach lays
stress on the principle of “inter-generational equity,” whereby today’s
generations have responsibilities toward future generations.^53 Envir-
onmentalists are also more critical of a development model centered
on capitalist growth and expansion. Moderates like Nicholas Stern
(^49) Associated Press, “Bush Defends Kyoto Opposition,”The Philadelphia
50 Inquirer, July 1, 2005.
Steven Bernstein,The Compromise of Liberal Environmentalism, New York,
51 Columbia University Press, 2001, p. 121.
David G. Victor,The Collapse of the Kyoto Protocol and the Struggle to Slow
52 Global Warming, Princeton University Press, 2001, p. 5.
Charli E. Coon, “Why President Bush Is Right to Abandon the Kyoto
Protocol,” Backgrounder no. 1437, Washington, DC, The Heritage
Foundation, May 11, 2001 (www.heritage.org/Research/Energyand
Environment/BG1437.cfm).
(^53) World Commission on Environment and Development,Our Common Future,
Oxford University Press, 1987, p. 348.
The core currency of political exchange 213