Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

The Libertarian Case for Controlling Climate Change

Cross-posted from Legal Planet.

Libertarians are, of course, deeply suspicious of government regulation. This may lead to a reflexive rejection of climate change mitigation.   But Jonathan Adler, who provides a refreshingly distinctive view of environmental law from the Right, argues otherwise.  In a forthcoming article (only the abstract is available on SSRN), he contends that libertarians are making a mistake in opposing climate mitigation:

Even if anthropogenic climate change is decidedly less than catastrophic – indeed, even if it net beneficial to the globe as whole – human-induced climate change is likely to contribute to environmental changes that violate traditional conceptions of property rights. Viewed globally, the actions of some countries – primarily developed nations (such as the United States) and those nations that are industrializing most rapidly (such as China and India) – are likely to increase environmental harms suffered by less developed nations – nations that have not (as of yet) made any significant contribution to global climate change. . . .  As a consequence, this paper suggests a complete rethinking of the conventional conservative and libertarian approach to climate change.

Adler’s argument seems unanswerable to me.  Carbon emitters are causing harm to the property rights of others — for instance, through sea level rise that will directly deprive owners of portions of their land.  People who really care about property rights should worry a lot about climate change.  This doesn’t mean that they should necessary favor any particular approach to mitigation — Adler, for instance, favors heavy investments in developing new energy technologies.  Yet, to favor inaction is inconsistent with libertarian principles.

ADDENDUM.

Adler also favors a revenue-neutral carbon tax, like that proposed by James Hansen or Rep. Bob Inglis (R-SC), and think such a policy would be far better than cap-and-trade or traditional regulation. Here are a piece he did for TNR Online and some of the relevant posts on Volokh:

http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/backing-words-intelligent-targeted-action

http://volokh.com/posts/1177606109.shtml

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2008_01_27-2008_02_02.shtml#1201968666

http://volokh.com/2009/12/08/krugman-v-hansen/

http://volokh.com/2010/03/02/cap-and-trade-is-dead-long-live-cap-and-trade/

Showing 2,823 results

Daniel Farber | April 27, 2010

The Libertarian Case for Controlling Climate Change

Cross-posted from Legal Planet. Libertarians are, of course, deeply suspicious of government regulation. This may lead to a reflexive rejection of climate change mitigation.   But Jonathan Adler, who provides a refreshingly distinctive view of environmental law from the Right, argues otherwise.  In a forthcoming article (only the abstract is available on SSRN), he contends […]

Yee Huang | April 26, 2010

Inter-American Spotlight on the United States: Louisiana Residents Take Pollution Case to International Court

This is the April installment of CPRBlog’s series of posts highlighting legal developments in other countries and in international environmental law. Last month the New Orleans Times-Picayune reported that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) granted a hearing to the residents of Mossville, Louisiana, based on their petition asserting that the U.S. government has […]

Victor Flatt | April 23, 2010

Tenaska Deal Signals Sea-Change in Climate Change Regulation, but Itself May be Too Good to be True

On Monday, the Environmental Defense Fund announced that it had reached a settlement with Tenaska Inc. to withdraw opposition to that company’s proposed “Trailblazer Energy Center,” a 600 megawatt coal fired power plant in West Texas. In return for dropping its objections, the EDF signed an agreement with Tenaska that the company will sequester 85% […]

Yee Huang | April 22, 2010

Tyson Taken to Task: Oklahoma Jury Awards Poultry Growers $7.3 Million

Earlier this month an Oklahoma jury awarded $7.3 million to current and former poultry growers for fraud, negligence, and violations of a state consumer protection act committed by Tyson Foods, Inc. This verdict is not surprising as Tyson, like other major poultry processors, wields considerable economic clout in its relationship with poultry growers. This imbalanced […]

Patrick MacRoy | April 22, 2010

EPA’s Rule on Lead Paint a Cause for Celebration, but Challenges Remain

Guest blogger Patrick MacRoy is Director of Community-Based Initiatives and RRP Training Program Manager for the National Center for Healthy Housing. He launched the first “train-the-trainer” program to help increase the supply of accredited RRP training providers and has been working on related policy issues. Today marks a major milestone in the century-long battle against […]

Ben Somberg | April 21, 2010

Christopher Schroeder Confirmed to DOJ Post

Former CPR Member Scholar Christopher Schroeder was confirmed today by the Senate for his position as Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Policy. Schroeder, most recently a professor at Duke University School of Law, was nominated for the post in May 2009.

James Goodwin | April 21, 2010

Eye on OIRA: Sunstein Brings Behavioral Economics to NHTSA Tire Fuel Efficiency Program

On March 19, OIRA Administrator Cass Sunstein issued the office’s first Review Letter of the Obama Administration, telling the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to redo their studies on how to design the labels for the agency’s new “Tire Fuel Efficiency Consumer Information Program.” (For background on Review Letters and the other types of […]

Matthew Freeman | April 21, 2010

Food, Inc. Airs on PBS; Put Your Hands on the Table and Step Away from the Hamburger

The tagline that the producers of Food, Inc. are using to promote their Academy Award-winning documentary is “You’ll never look at dinner the same way.” They’re quite right. The film airs on many PBS stations this evening (and on others throughout the course of the next week). See for yourself. I came to it expecting that I’d end […]

James Goodwin | April 20, 2010

Eye on OIRA: Is EPA About To Take a U-Turn on Coal Ash?

For the past 6 months, OIRA has hosted an all-out assault on EPA’s proposed coal ash waste rule, as a parade of representatives from King Coal and the coal ash reuse industry have walked in to attack any and every aspect of the hybrid approach the agency reportedly proposed. (Under the hybrid approach, EPA would […]