ArticlePDF Available

Sustainability thoughts 140: How can the consequences of the 2012 green market paradigm shift avoidance move that led to the world of dwarf green markets of today be highlighted, including the green Marxism threat?

Authors:
  • Independent QLC researcher

Abstract and Figures

The Brundtland commission in 1987 highlighted the need to address the social and environmental weaknesses of the traditional development model by moving away from traditional market thinking, which is based on the social and environmental externality neutrality assumptions. The United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development decided to prioritize the environmental issue recognizing that it was a real and binding issue so there was a need to move away from business as always by going the green market way, which was a move consistent with the academic consensus at that time, but in the end instead of going green markets global and local decision makers went the dwarf green markets way. In other words, instead of setting up environmental pollution reduction markets and promoting a new way of life under green consumers, green producers, green economics, green population dynamics, green culture and education, and so on to address the environmental pollution head on since 2012 and creating that way a path towards the environmentally clean economy, they decided to set up environmental pollution management markets. Environmentally pollution management markets are still profitable pollution production markets delinked from the transition to environmentally clean market paths. Which raises the question, how can the consequences of the 2012 green market paradigm shift avoidance move that led to the world of dwarf green markets of today be highlighted, including the green Marxism threat?
Content may be subject to copyright.
Citation:
Muñoz, Lucio, 2022. Sustainability thoughts 140: How can the consequences of the 2012
green market paradigm shift avoidance move that led to the world of dwarf green markets
of today be highlighted, including the green Marxism threat?, In: International Journal of
Latest Research in Engineering and Technology(IJLRET), Vol. 8, Issue 10, Pp. 05-17,
October, ISSN: 2454-5031, India.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sustainability thoughts 140: How can the consequences of the 2012 green market paradigm
shift avoidance move that led to the world of dwarf green markets of today be highlighted,
including the green Marxism threat?
By
Lucio Muñoz*
* Independent Qualitative Comparative Researcher / Consultant, Vancouver, BC, Canada Email: munoz@interchange.ubc.ca
Abstract
The Brundtland commission in 1987 highlighted the need to address the social and
environmental weaknesses of the traditional development model by moving away from
traditional market thinking, which is based on the social and environmental externality neutrality
assumptions. The United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development decided to prioritize
the environmental issue recognizing that it was a real and binding issue so there was a need to
move away from business as always by going the green market way, which was a move
consistent with the academic consensus at that time, but in the end instead of going green
markets global and local decision makers went the dwarf green markets way. In other words,
instead of setting up environmental pollution reduction markets and promoting a new way of life
under green consumers, green producers, green economics, green population dynamics, green
culture and education, and so on to address the environmental pollution head on since 2012 and
creating that way a path towards the environmentally clean economy, they decided to set up
environmental pollution management markets. Environmentally pollution management markets
are still profitable pollution production markets delinked from the transition to environmentally
clean market paths. Which raises the question, how can the consequences of the 2012 green
market paradigm shift avoidance move that led to the world of dwarf green markets of today be
highlighted, including the green Marxism threat?
Key concepts
Green market, green market paradigm shift, green market paradigm shift avoidance,
dwarf green market, traditional market, environmentally dirty traditional market,
environmentally clean market, clean market, dirty market, pollution reduction markets,
environmental externality management markets.
Introduction
a) The road to transition from environmentally dirty traditional markets to
environmentally clean markets
The idea of the road to transition to the environmentally clean economy(ECLM), but that
was never built as expected since 2012 despite the loud intentions to go green economies, green
markets, and green growth(UNCSD 2012a; UNCSD 2012b) was shared recently(Muñoz 2022a),
which consists of two one after the other steps, first step is the setting up green markets as
pollution reduction markets, and then the second step is to transition this green market to the
environmentally clean economy by closing slowly but permanently the renewable energy
technology gap as indicated in Figure 1 below:
Figure 1 above tells us that to transition from environmentally dirty traditional
markets(TM) to environmentally clean markets(ECLM) we need to set up first green
markets(GM) that comes along when the traditional market pricing mechanism internalizes the
environmental cost of doing business(I[E[C]]) to become a green market price; then we invest in
closing the renewable energy technology gap(RETG) to transition the green market(GM)
towards the environmentally clean market(ECLM) until the renewable energy technology gap is
closed(RETG---> ), meaning that economies now are full renewable energy based. Hence, the
green market(GM) is an environmental pollution reduction market(EPORM), which approaches
the environmentally clean market(ECLM) as the renewable energy technology gap(RETG) is
closed. Notice that the ideas above are consistent with the 1987 Brundtland Commission(WCED
1987) called to addressing the environmental sustainability problems embedded in the traditional
market development model shared by Adam Smith(Smith 1776).
Implications:
1) The shift from environmentally dirty markets(TM) to green markets(GM) means a
full perfect shift: a shift to a green culture in terms of green consumers, green producers,
green market prices, green microeconomics, green macroeconomics, green population
dynamics, and so on; 2) By making pollution reduction a profitable enterprise then green
producers have the incentive to produce in the long term at the lowest green market price
possible, which provides the incentive to invest in closing the renewable energy technology gap
as soon as possible by permanently substituting non-renewable sources of energy for
renewable ones as the lowest pollution content in the production process takes us to the lowest
green market price possible, leading to more cleaner production and green profits; and 3)
Setting up green markets(GM) and transitioning them to the environmentally clean
economy(ECLM) means a better future for the environment and the economy as
environmentally clean economies are good for both the economy and the environment.
b) The Thomas Kuhns paradigm evolution loop for the shift from environmentally dirty
traditional markets to the green markets
When the environmentally dirty traditional market(TM) is subjected to the Thomas
Kuhns paradigm evolution loop it leads to green markets(GM) as it removes the environmental
externality problem embedded in it through environmental cost internalization(Muñoz 2022b), a
situation summarized in Figure 2 below:
Figure 2 above details the working of the Thomas Kuhns paradigm evolution loop when
applied to the environmentally dirty traditional market(TM), which goes in general as follows: i)
The traditional market produces pollution/environmental externalities(c) so TM - c; ii) The
extreme accumulation of pollution/environmental externalities(c) leads to a paradigm crisis in
the environmentally dirty traditional market(c-PC), which may lead to paradigm death(PC--
PD); iii) To avoid paradigm death(PD), the extreme paradigm crises(PC) leads to academic
consensus(CC) to change paradigm to one that corrects the environmental abnormalities of the
environmentally dirty traditional market(PC--CC); iv) Academic integrity ensures that the
paradigm shift to green markets GM actually takes place as per academic consensus CC as
indicated by the blue arrow(CC---GM); and v) the paradigm shift knowledge gap created when
the shift to green markets takes place is closed by internalizing the environmental cost in the
pricing mechanism leading to green market pricing creating the knowledge base needed to
properly implement and promote green markets(TM--GM)..
Therefore, the Thomas Kuhns paradigm evolution loop for the environmentally dirty
traditional market(TM) under academic integrity and consensus showed in Figure 2 above leads
to a shift to green markets(GM) as indicated by the blue arrow from CC to GM; and to the
closing of the green market paradigm shift knowledge gap created stimulating the growth of
knowledge as indicated by the green arrow from TM to GM.
Implications
1) The Thomas Kuhns revolution loop in Figure 2 above is actually a transformation
loop as it leads to the correction of the environmentally dirty market in crisis through
environmental cost internalization, shifting it in the process towards the green market(TM----
GM); and 2) The shift from environmentally dirty markets TM to green markets GM means
a shift from traditional market pricing to green market prices, a shift from independent choice
to codependent choice, and a shift environmentally unfriendly thinking to environmentally
friendly thinking, at the micro and macro level.
c) Linking the road to transition to clean markets with the Thomas Kuhns paradigm
evolution to from dirty traditional markets to green markets
When we connect the components of the road to transition from environmentally dirty
traditional markets to environmentally clean markets in Figure 1 and the components of the
Thomas Kuhns paradigm evolution loop for the shift from environmentally dirty traditional
markets to the green markets in Figure 2 above we create a direct link between the Thomas
Kuhns paradigm evolution loop as it applies to the correction of the environmentally dirty
traditional market TM to shift it to green markets GM and the road to transition to the
environmentally clean markets as shown in Figure 3 below:
We can use Figure 3 above to highlight three main points: i) The end result of the
Thomas Kuhns evolution loop as it applies to correcting the environmentally dirty traditional
market(TM) is a shift to green markets(GM), a shift to pollution reduction markets as indicated
by the blue arrow; ii) The correction of the environmental pollution problem embedded in the
environmentally dirty market(TM) through environmental cost internalization(I[E[C]]) shift the
traditional market TM to green markets GM closing this way this part of the green market
paradigm shift knowledge gap that needs to be closed up to build the knowledge base of the
green market as indicated by the green arrow from TM to GM; and iii) The Thomas Kuhns
revolution loop through its end product, green markets(GM), has a directly link to the path
towards environmentally clean markets, where increasingly closing the renewable energy
technology gap(RETG--∞) by permanently substituting non-renewable sources of energy for
renewable ones transitions green markets GM towards environmentally clean markets ECLM as
indicated by the green arrow from GM to ECLM.
Moreover, we can see in Figure 3 above that the Thomas Kuhns loop under academic
consensus and academic integrity is linked to a new way of life and knowledge base under green
markets, green economies, green growth, green micro and macro economics, all the way until
green markets become environmentally clean markets.
The positive implications that can be extracted from Figure 3 above are the following: i)
The end result of the Thomas Kuhns evolution loop, green markets GM, do not have the
environmental problems associated with the environmentally dirty traditional market TM as
environmental costs are now internalized; ii) The world of green markets GM is the world of
environmental pollution reduction markets EPORM, where as the pollution cost associated with
green economic activity decreases the green market price decreases and green profits increases;
ii) Investments geared to closing the renewable energy technology gap to bring in non-pollution
based energy/renewable energy sources to increasingly and permanently substitute pollution
based energy/non-renewable energy would lead to even lower green market prices and to more,
but increasingly cleaner responsible production, consumption, and population dynamic behavior;
iii) as green markets demand a higher proportion of less polluting sources of energy as time
passes, the value of non-renewable energy sources will decrease, and dependency on them will
decrease too as then moving as fast as we can towards the environmentally clean economy is
better for businesses in terms of green profits and better for consumers in terms of green savings;
and iv) as for the green market world to succeed in coming to exist and during the transition to
environmentally clean markets we need a cultural shift consistent with it such as a culture of
green producers, green consumers, green population dynamics, and its respected educational
backing through green micro-economics and green macro-economics as well as the greening of
science in general.
d) The need to understand the consequences of green market paradigm shift avoidance
We can see from looking at Figure 3 above that avoiding a paradigm shift to green
markets after the Thomas Kuhns revolution loop leads us to academic consensus to change
paradigm under academic integrity to move to green markets will have expected consequences,
that could be detrimental to the problem we are trying to solve, namely, the environmental
pollution problem and problems with the transition to the environmentally clean economy; and
detrimental to the countries that signed on green market paradigm shift avoidance in case of
natural and man-made non-renewable energy disruptions. In other words, going dwarf green
markets through green market paradigm shift avoidance will have expected direct and indirect
consequences consistent with the breakup of the systematic structure summarized in Figure 3
above, which will be more apparent once the environmental crisis under environmental pollution
management with global warming as an indicator goes from getting worse since 2012 to a state
of out of control in the future.
Hence, there is a need to understand the consequences of going the way of dwarf green
markets since 2012 instead of the way of green markets as it was expected to as the climate crisis
goes from bad to uncontrollable under dwarf green market management. And this raises the
question, How can the main consequences of the 2012 green market paradigm shift avoidance
move that led to the world of dwarf green markets of today be highlighted, including the green
Marxism threat?. Among the goals of this paper is to provide an answer to that question.
Goals of this paper
a) To point of the broken structure of the Kuhns revolution loop for the shift to green
markets as well as the broken road towards environmentally clean markets that comes along with
green market paradigm shift avoidance in order to go dwarf green markets; b) to highlight the
direct and indirect consequences of the 2012 green market paradigm shift avoidance in order to
go the dwarf green market way; and c) to stress that if the pollution management plan goes
uncontrollable, the dwarf green market will tend towards collapse opening up two possible
paradigm evolution routes, green markets route and the green Marxism route.
Methodology
First, the terminology used in this paper is introduced. Second, some operational
concepts and rules are given. Third, the broken structure of the Thomas Kuhns revolution loop
shifting dirty traditional markets to green markets and of the road towards environmental clean
markets that results from the decision to go green market paradigm shift avoidance in order to
implement dwarf green markets are highlighted. Fourth, the direct and indirect implications of
green market paradigm shift avoidance to go the way of dwarf green markets are pointed out.
Fifth, The possible paradigm evolution routes that the dwarf green market may take if the
environmental issue under management goes uncontrollable, namely the green markets route or
the green Marxism route or both routes at the same time are discussed. And sixth, some food for
thoughts and relevant references are shared.
Terminology
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TM = Traditional market GM = Green market
PO = Pollution EPO = Environmental pollution
EPORM = Environmental pollution reduction markets PC = Paradigm crisis
ECLM = Environmentally clean market PD = Paradigm death
TKTL = Thomas Kuhns transformation loop AI = Academic integrity
RETG = Renewable energy technology gap RK = Red Marxism
I[c] = C = Environmental cost internalization GK = Green Marxism
E[C] = c = Environmental cost externalization A = Dominant social component
CC = Academic consensus to change paradigm a = Dominated social component
DGM = Dwarf green market B = Dominant economic component
b = Dominated economic component C = Dominant environmental component
c = Dominated environmental component DM = Dirty market
CLM = Clean market ETM = Environmentally dirty traditional market
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operational concepts and paradigm Kuhns loop transformations, relevant models,
externalization and internalization rules
A) Operational concepts
1) Science, the world based on the scientific truth, this world falls if invalidated.
2) Ideology, the world based on the non-scientific truth, this world will tend to persist even if
invalidated.
3) The theory-practice general consistency principle, the world where the theory of the model
must match the practice.
4) The different model general inconsistency principle, the world where the theory and
practice of different models are inconsistent with each other.
5) Academic facts, the science based truth.
6) Alternative academic facts, the non-science based truth.
7) Academic blindness, the inability to see academic facts due to the existence of knowledge
gaps, paradigm shift based or otherwise.
8) Willful academic blindness, the willingness to ignore academic facts and consensus.
9) Sustainability, the world where the interplay of sustainability theory and sustainability
practice is aimed at fixing or correcting embedded externality problems.
10) Sustainable development, the world where the interplay of sustainable development theory
and sustainable development practice is aimed at patching or managing embedded externality
problems.
11) Academic integrity, the duty to respect and defend academic facts and consensus.
12) Golden paradigm, one that does not creates abnormalities.
13) Flawed paradigm, one that creates abnormalities.
14) Kuhns loop, the science based mechanism that leads to paradigm shift through abnormality
correction.
15) Dirty economy, a pollution based economy.
16) Clean economy, a pollution less based economy.
17) Red Marxism, capitalism need to be replaced as it is destroying societies.
18) Green Marxism, dwarf green capitalism must be replaced as it is destroying nature.
19) The red socialism market, the social justice and equality based market.
20) The green socialism market, the environmental justice and equality based market.
21) Green capitalism, capitalism supported by green markets.
22) Dwarf green capitalism, capitalism supported by dwarf green markets.
23) Traditional market, the market cleared by the traditional market price.
24) Green market, the market cleared by the green market price.
25) Red market, the market cleared by the red market price.
B) Paradigm structures
1) A golden paradigm
If we have a dominant paradigm R and it is a golden paradigm GOM, then it produces no
externalities or no abnormalities A
i) GOM = R
As it can be seen in expression i) above the golden model GOM does not produce
abnormalities.
2) A flawed paradigm
If we have a dominant paradigm R and it is a flawed paradigm FLM, then it produces n
externalities or abnormalities A so as A1,A2,….
ii) FLM = R(A1, A2,….An)
As it can be appreciated in expression ii) above the flawed model FLM produces n
abnormalities.
C) The Thomas Kuhns transformation loop(TKTL) under academic integrity
1) Impact on the golden paradigm
If we subject a golden paradigm GOM = R to the Thomas Kuhns transformation
loop(TKTL), the process will have no impact on it as it has no abnormalities A to correct, golden
paradigm GOM remains a golden paradigm GOM
iii) TKTL(GOM) = TKTL(R) = R = GOM
The expression iii) above tells us that the golden model displays TKTL loop neutrality as
it has no abnormalities to remove.
2) Impact on the flawed paradigm
If we subject a flawed paradigm FLM = R(A1,A2,….An) to the Thomas Kuhns
transformation loop(TKTL), the loop process will be active until all abnormalities are corrected
and a golden paradigm GOM arises
iv) TKTL(FLM) = TKTL[R(A1,A2,….An) -------R = GOM
The expression iv) above tells us that the TKTL loop process transforms flawed dominant
paradigms FLM in the end into golden paradigms GOM by correcting the abnormalities
A1…..An affecting them and shifting them in the process.
D) Relevant market structures
If we have the following: a = social abnormality, c = environmental abnormality, A =
dominant society, C = dominant environment, and B = the dominant economy, then the structure
of relevant markets can be stated as indicated below:
1) The traditional market as a golden model
i) TM = B
Under externality neutrality assumptions the traditional market TM in section i) above is
a golden paradigm, it produces no abnormalities.
2) The traditional market under social abnormalities(a)
ii) TM = aB
Under no social externality neutrality assumptions, the traditional market TM in section
ii) above produces social abnormalities a. It is a flawed paradigm as it has social abnormalities
to correct.
3) The traditional market under environmental abnormalities(c)
iii) TM = Bc
Under no environmental externality neutrality assumptions, the traditional market TM in
section iii) above produces environmental abnormalities c. It is a flawed paradigm as it has
environmental externalities to correct.
4) The traditional market under socio-environmental abnormalities(ac)
iv) TM = aBc
Under no socio-environmental externality neutrality assumptions, the traditional market
TM in section iv) above produces socio-environmental abnormalities ac. It is a flawed
paradigm as it has social and environmental externalities to correct.
5) The red market under environmental abnormalities(c)
v) RM = ABc
Under no environmental externality assumptions, the red market RM in section v) above
produces environmental abnormalities. It is a flawed paradigm as it has environmental
externalities to correct. Notice that in the red market RM, both society(A) and economy(B) are in
dominant form.
6) The green market under social abnormalities(a)
vi) GM = aBC
Under no social externality assumptions, the green market GM in section vi) above
produces social abnormalities. It is a flawed paradigm as it has social externalities to correct.
Notice that in the green market GM, both the economy(B) and the environment(C) are in
dominant form.
7) The sustainability market has no abnormalities
vii) SM = ABC
The sustainability market SM in section vii) above produces no abnormalities as all
components are in dominant form since all components are now endogenous to the model. It is a
golden paradigm as it has no abnormalities to correct.
E) Abnormality externalization and internalization rules
If y, x, z are three abnormalities and Y, X, Z are the corrected variables and if E[ ] =
externalization and I[ ] = internalization, then the following holds true:
a) E[Y] = y b) E[X] = x c) E[Z] = z
d) I[y] = Y e) I[x] = X f) I[z] = Z
g) I[E[Y]] = Y h) E[I[y]] = y i) E[YX] = yx
The broken Thomas Kuhns revolution loop and broken road to clean economies under
willful academic blindness
When green market paradigm shift avoidance takes place against academic consensus for
paradigm chance towards green markets(GM) due to willful academic blindness so the world can
go dwarf green markets(DGM), then both the Thomas Kuhns revolution loop and the transition
road to environmentally clean markets shown in Figure 3 above are broken as indicated in Figure
4 below:
We can appreciate based on Figure 4 above that going dwarf green markets(DGM) in
order to manage environmental pollution problem as indicated by the orange arrow from CC to
DGM and from DGM to c has the following effects: i) it breaks the paradigm shift to green
markets as indicated by the broke blue arrow from CC to GM; ii) it breaks the transition to the
environmentally clean economy as indicated by the broken green arrow from GM to ECLM; and
iii) it breaks the growth of green market knowledge as indicated by the broken green arrow
between TM to GM. Also we can point out based on Figure 4 above that if we stay in the long-
term under pollution management markets like the dwarf green market(DGM) and stay
unconnected to the academic consensus(CC) as indicated by the broken arrow from PC to CC,
even if the environmental pollution problem goes out of control, then the only paradigm
evolution route available to the dwarf green market(DGM) given the extreme pollution
management crisis(PC) leads to paradigm death(PD) as indicated by the continuous arrows from
DGM to c to PC to PD,
Implications:
1) The move from environmentally dirty markets(TM) to dwarf green markets(DGM)
instead of to green markets(GM) means there is an imperfect shift: a shift to a dwarf green
culture in terms of dwarf green consumers, dwarf green producers, dwarf green market prices,
dwarf green microeconomics, dwarf green macroeconomics, dwarf green population
dynamics, and so on; 2) By not making pollution reduction a profitable enterprise and going
the environmental pollution management way then dwarf green producers do not have the
incentive to produce in the long term at the lowest dwarf market price possible, which means
that dwarf green producers do not have the incentive to invest in closing the renewable energy
technology gap as soon as possible by permanently substituting non-renewable sources of
energy for renewable ones as they do not need to operate at the lowest pollution content in the
production process to achieve the lowest the dwarf market price possible, leading to more
cleaner production and green profits, as they are fine producing at the environmental
pollution management cost set by the environmental pollution manager and they are happy
with dwarf green profits and without direct environmental accountability for the actual
pollution content of their products; and 3) Setting up dwarf green markets means that we are
setting up markets that cannot be transitioned to the environmentally clean economy, meaning
an unclear future for the environment and the economy as environmentally clean economies,
which are good for both the economy and the environment, cannot be reached.
The direct consequences of going dwarf green markets in 2012 to follow the environmental
pollution management route
We can use Figure 4 above to highlight three main direct complications created by going
dwarf green markets(DGM) instead of green markets(GM): i) The end result of the Thomas
Kuhns evolution loop as it applies to correcting the environmentally dirty traditional
market(TM) is a shift to green markets(GM), a shift to pollution reduction markets, but this is
now blocked when green market paradigm shift avoidance takes place as indicated by the broken
blue arrow; ii) The correction of the environmental pollution problem embedded in the
environmentally dirty market through environmental cost internalization(I[E[C]]) to shift the
environmentally dirty traditional market TM to green markets GM closing this way this part of
the green market paradigm shift knowledge gap that needs to be closed up to build the
knowledge based of the green market does not take place as now instead of going the
environmental pollution reduction way we go the environmental pollution management way as
indicated by the orange arrow from CC to DGM; and iii) The Thomas Kuhns revolution loop
through its end product, green markets(GM), is no longer in direct link to the path towards
environmentally clean markets as indicated by the broken arrows from GM to ECLM as it is now
blocked and the dwarf green markets(DGM) does not have a link to environmentally clean
markets ECLM as indicated by the broken orange arrow from DGM to ECLM. This is because
dwarf green markets DGM are there, not to produce goods and services with the lowest pollution
content possible, but to meet the pollution management schedule as set by the pollution manager.
Moreover, we can stress based on Figure 4 above that the dwarf green market(DGM) is
not linked to academic consensus and academic integrity(CC) as the Thomas Kuhns loop under
academic consensus and academic integrity was as it is supported by willful academic blindness,
and therefore, the dwarf green market world(DGM) is delinked to a new way of life and
knowledge base under green markets, green economies, green growth, green micro and macro
economics, all the way until green markets become environmentally clean markets. Dwarf green
markets are linked then to a way of life and knowledge base under dwarf green markets, dwarf
green economies, dwarf green growth, dwarf micro and macro economics, without a possibility
to become environmentally clean markets as they are bound to manage environmental pollution
forever.
The negative direct consequences of green market paradigm shift avoidance to go dwarf
green markets consistent with Figure 4 above are the following: i) Dwarf green markets(DGM)
still have the same environmental problems associated with environmentally dirty traditional
markets as the root cause of the environmental pollution problem is not yet internalized, just the
pollution problem of the environmentally dirty traditional market is being managed as indicated
by the arrow from TM to c; ii) The world of dwarf green markets DGM is the world of
environmental pollution management markets EPMM where the dwarf green market price
associated with dwarf green economic activity is not linked to the green market price and to
green profits as dwarf green market producers are price takers under ongoing government
intervention; ii) Investments in dwarf green markets(DGM) are not geared to closing the
renewable energy technology gap to bring in non-pollution based energy/renewable energy
sources to increasingly and permanently substitute pollution based energy/non-renewable energy
as soon as possible; and this is because dwarf producers have no incentive to produce at lowest
dwarf market price possible, and to produce more, but increasingly cleaner responsible
production, consumption, and population dynamic behavior as dwarf green market producers can
make money by just simply passing to consumer the environmental management cost set by
governments as they can make money that way; iii) as dwarf green markets have no incentive to
demand a higher proportion of less polluting sources of energy as time passes, the value of non-
renewable energy sources will increase, and dependency on them will increase too as there is no
incentive then to move as fast as we can towards the environmentally clean economy, it is better
for dwarf green businesses in terms of dwarf green profits just to move at the pace the pollution
management cost is set, leaving dwarf green consumers no choice but to consume what the dwarf
green market produces and to pay dwarf green prices; iv) For the dwarf green market world to
succeed in coming to exist and since it does not need to transition to environmentally clean
markets, it needs to create a world of dwarf green producers, dwarf green consumers, dwarf
green population dynamics, and its respected educational and academic backing through dwarf
green micro-economics and dwarf green macro-economics as well as the dwarf greening of
science in general; and v) therefore, dwarf green markets(DGM) are not green markets(DGM) as
dwarf green markets are environmental pollution management markets, not environmental
pollution reduction markets.
The indirect consequences of going dwarf green markets in 2012 to follow the
environmental pollution management route
As going dwarf green markets(DGM) instead of green markets(GM) can be seen as
trying to avoid correcting the environmental pollution problem right away by pretending to do
something environmentally friendly through environmental pollution management without the
environmental pollution management programs having a direct link to the root cause of the
environmental pollution problem they are trying to manage, they create openings for serious
green Marxism(GK) claims in the name of saving what remains of nature right away by moving
away from capitalism as usual as a profit only seeking enterprise to a nature protecting and
restoring enterprise without capitalism, a new way of life under environmental equality without
freedom. Green Marxism/green socialism(GK) claims can gain more relevance against dwarf
green markets(DGM) if we take the time from 2012 to 2022 where dwarf green markets(DGM)
have been in place due to green market paradigm shift avoidance as the short to medium term
development span where the practice shows that indicators linked to the environmental pollution
management program like the frequency and severity of global warming phenomena are getting
worse, not better since 2012 under dwarf green markets. The green Marxism(GK) threat to
dwarf green market thinking(DGM) is shown in Figure 5 below:
Figure 5 above shows that when the dwarf green markets(DGM) enters into a worsening
environmental pollution management crises PC and the quality of nature is diminished in front of
our eyes and the frequency and severity of global warming issues worsen, then green
Marxism(GK) claims will be easier to be made against dwarf green capitalism as indicated by
the gray arrow from GK to PC. Notice in Figure 5 above that since the dwarf green
market(DGM) move takes place against academic consensus(CC) and remains outside academic
consensus(CC) once in place as indicated by the broken arrow from PC to CC, then when the
environmental pollution management program fails and the paradigm crises(PC) goes from
worse to worse it leads only to paradigm death(PD) as indicated by the arrow from PC to PD;
and then the green Marxism world GK will take over after paradigm death as indicated by the
broken gray arrow from PD to GK.
The paradigm evolution routes available for the dwarf green market when the
environmental crises tends towards uncontrollable under the environmental pollution
management program
If the pollution management program under dwarf green markets goes from worse to
uncontrollable, then there will be need to save capitalism by bringing back dwarf green markets
toward academic consensus(CC) to finally implement the green markets(GM) or we need to face
the loss of dwarf capitalism(DGM) and the coming of green Marxism(GK) or we may witness a
bipolar word where portions of the world are under green markets(GM) and others under green
Marxism(GK), options pointed out in Figure 6 below:
Figure 6 above shows the 3 possible routes that dwarf green markets(DGM) will follow if
the environmentally pollution management program goes uncontrollable and liked to more
frequent and more severe global warming impacts: i) The going back to the green market(GM)
solution as indicated by point 1 by the paradigm crisis(PC) avoiding death(PD) by going the way
to academic consensus to finally implement green markets(GM); ii) The going towards green
Marxism/green socialism(GK) solution as indicated by point 2 after the uncontrollable paradigm
crisis(PC) leads to paradigm death(PD) and to the move to green Marxism(GK); and ii) The
bipolar solution, in response to the uncontrollable environmental pollution management program,
some countries go the way of green markets(GM) following arrow at point 1; and some countries
go the way of green Marxism(GM) following arrow at point 2.
The case when dwarf green markets finally go towards green markets
When to avoid paradigm death and save capitalism dwarf green markets(DGM) go finally
the green market(GM) way, then the link between the Thomas Kuhns revolution loop and the
road to the environmentally clean economy(ECLM) is restored, as shown in Figure 7 below:
Figure 7 above indicates that when the dwarf green market(DGM) under environmentally
pollution management fails and goes uncontrollable as indicated by the broken orange arrows
from CC to DGM and from DGM to c, but before paradigm death(PD); and then its paradigm
crises(PC) reaches for academic consensus(CC) to finally go the green market(GM) way to save
dwarf green capitalism then a shift to green markets(GM) actually takes place as indicated by the
black arrow from PC to CC at point 1. The move to green markets(GM) saves capitalism
transforming dwarf green capitalism into green capitalism, restoring the Thomas Kuhns
revolution loop and restoring the transition link between green markets and environmentally
clean markets in the process.
The case when dwarf green markets are replaced by green Marxism
When no action is taken to save capitalism or actions are taken too late during the
uncontrollable pollution management crisis(PC), then the failure of the environmental pollution
management program under dwarf green markets(DGM) leads the dwarf green market towards
paradigm death(PD); and it is taken over by green Marxism(GK) in order to protect the
remaining nature from capitalism as it can be seen in Figure 8 below:
Figure 8 tells us that when the dwarf green market(DGM) goes from uncontrollable
paradigm crisis(PC) to paradigm death(PD), then green Marxism(GK) takes over as indicated by
the continues gray arrow from PD to GK. Notice that under green Marxism(GK) there is no
capitalism, green or dwarf green or clean, only the protection and nurturing of nature matters. In
other words, under green Marxism(GK) the economy and society exist only to protect and
nurture the environment as it is a nature first model.
The case of the bipolar world when some countries go green markets and some counties go
green Marxism
When as the result of the failure of dwarf green markets to manage the environmental
pollution problem some countries choose to go the way of green markets(GM) to save capitalism
and other go the way of green Marxism(GK) to give up capitalism, then we have a bipolar world
as shown in Figure 9 below:
Figure 9 above shows a world where as the result of the failure of dwarf green
markets(DGM) we end up with a bipolar system made up by the green market world(GM) and
the green Marxism world(GK), which sooner or later would go into a cold war: green capitalism
vrs green Marxism.
Food for thoughts
i) Would green markets win a cold war against green Marxism? I think Yes, what do you
think?; ii) Would green socialism be a threat to the world of perfect green markets? I think No,
what do you think?; and iii) Was green market paradigm shift avoidance good for deepening the
worlds dependency on non-renewable sources of energy? I think Yes, what do you think?
Conclusions
First, it was pointed out that willful academic blindness leads to green market paradigm
shift avoidance and to the world of dwarf green markets. Second, it was highlighted that the
coming of dwarf green markets has direct consequences such as it breaks the Thomas Kuhns
paradigm evolution loop that leads to the change towards green markets; it breaks the transition
road from green markets to environmentally clean markets; and it blocks the growth of green
market knowledge. Third, it was stressed that if dwarf green markets fail in their environmental
pollution management duties and the global warming issue goes uncontrollable as they are
disconnected from academic consensus under academic integrity and disconnected from green
market prices, the only paradigm evolution route after death they have is to go the way of green
Marxism, an indirect consequence of green market paradigm shift avoidance. Fourth, it was
indicated that if before paradigm death comes dwarf green markets seek academic consensus to
finally go green market to save capitalism, then the dwarf green market world will become the
green market world together with the transition link towards environmentally clean markets.
And fifth, it was stated that if when the dwarf green market goes uncontrollable some countries
choose to go the way of green markets and some countries choose to go the way of green
Marxism, then there will be a bipolar world where for a time the green market world will coexist
with the green Marxism world.
References
Muñoz, Lucio, 2022a. Sustainability thoughts 139: How can the 2012 road to transition
from environmental pollution based traditional economies to the environmentally clean
economies that the world never built be pointed out?, In: International Journal of
Education Humanities and Social Science(IJEHSS), Vol. 5, No. 05, Pp. 65-77, ISSN: 2582-
0745, India.
Muñoz, Lucio, 2022b. Sustainability thought 172: What is the structure of the general
Thomas Kuhns paradigm evolution loop when the traditional market is a golden
paradigm and when it is a flawed paradigm?, In: CEBEM-REDESMA Boletin, Año 16, Nº 9,
September, La Paz, Bolivia.
Smith, Adam, 1776. The Wealth of Nations, W. Strahan and T. Cadell, London, UK.
United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development(UNCSD), 2012a. Rio+20 Concludes
with Big Package of Commitments for Action and Agreement by World Leaders on Path for a
Sustainable Future, Press Release, June 20-22, New York, NY, USA.
United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development(UNCSD), 2012b. The Future We
Want, June 20-22, New York, NY, USA.
World Commission on Environment and Development(WCED), 1987. Our Common Future,
Oxford University Press, London, UK.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citation:
Muñoz, Lucio, 2022. Sustainability thoughts 140: How can the consequences of the 2012
green market paradigm shift avoidance move that led to the world of dwarf green markets
of today be highlighted, including the green Marxism threat?, In: International Journal of
Latest Research in Engineering and Technology(IJLRET), Vol. 8, Issue 10, Pp. 05-17,
October, ISSN: 2454-5031, India.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
When the Brundtland Commission said in 1987 that the business as usual model of Adam Smith needed to address the social and environmental issues associated with it, this meant that there was a socio-environmental pollution problem separating the dirty traditional economy from the clean economy. When the UNCSD in 2012 gave priority to addressing the environmental issue only associated with the dirty traditional market model, this meant that there was an environmental pollution problem between the environmentally dirty traditional market and the environmentally clean market. This situation brought the need to think about how the transition from the environmentally dirty traditional market to the environmentally clean market could be framed step by step, but instead of thinking in terms of transition to the environmentally clean economy attention was given since 2012 to adopting environmental externality management based markets or dwarf green markets. Whether mainstream thinkers in the sustainable development area failed in 2012 to see how the transition road from environmentally dirty traditional markets to environmentally clean markets could be built is not clear, but what it is clear is that there is no transition link from dwarf green markets to environmentally clean markets as dwarf green markets are still active environmental externality based markets as the root cause of the environmental problem is not yet corrected. And this raises the question, how can the 2012 road to transition from environmental pollution based traditional economies to environmentally clean economies that the world never built be pointed out? What are the implications of this? Among the goals of this paper is to provide answers to those questions.
Article
Full-text available
Abstract Since 1776 when Adam Smith shared with us the perfect market theory it was presented as a golden paradigm, a model that does not produce social and environmental abnormalities no matter how much it grows. When social and environmental externalities accumulated to the point of producing extreme social and environmental crises which could no longer be ignored it was accepted that the traditional market model was a flawed model, a model that produces social and environmental abnormalities as it grows; and therefore, a model in need of abnormality corrections. As flawed models are the raw materials that feed the Thomas Kuhn’s revolution loop leading towards paradigm shift and the growth of knowledge when the abnormalities embedded in those models are corrected; and golden models are neutral material for the Kuhn’s revolution loop as they have no abnormalities to correct, then this situation raises important questions such as What is the structure of the general Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm evolution loop when the traditional market is a golden paradigm and when it is a flawed paradigm? What are the implications of this? Resúmen Desde 1776 cuando Adam Smith compartió con nosotros la teoría del mercado perfecto se presentó como un paradigma dorado, un modelo que no produce anormalidades sociales y ambientales por mucho que crezca. Cuando las externalidades sociales y ambientales se acumularon al punto de producir crisis sociales y ambientales extremas que ya no podían ser ignoradas, se aceptó que el modelo de mercado tradicional era un modelo defectuoso, un modelo que produce anormalidades sociales y ambientales a medida que crece; y por lo tanto, un modelo que necesita correcciones de anomalías. Los modelos defectuosos son la materia prima que alimenta el ciclo de la revolución de Thomas Kuhn que conduce al cambio de paradigma y al crecimiento del conocimiento cuando se corrigen las anomalías incrustadas en esos modelos; y los modelos dorados son material neutral para el ciclo de la revolución de Kuhn ya que no tienen anomalías que corregir, entonces esta situación plantea preguntas importantes como ¿Cuál es la estructura del ciclo de evolución del paradigma general de Thomas Kuhn cuando el mercado tradicional es un paradigma dorado y cuando es un paradigma defectuoso? ¿Cuáles son las implicaciones de esto?
The Wealth of Nations, W. Strahan and T
  • Adam Smith
Smith, Adam, 1776. The Wealth of Nations, W. Strahan and T. Cadell, London, UK.