Likewise, the focus on hi-tech innovation obscures and marginalizes innovation
from the grassroots (Smith and Ely, this book) and through wider mobilizations
of citizens (Leach and Scoones, this book). Such local innovation processes are
frequently motivated by a mesh of sociocultural and livelihood concerns, and
understandings of ecology and sustainability, which diverge from the narrow
notions of ‘green’ and ‘economic benefit’ encompassed in most technocentric green
economy discourses.
Marketized transformations
A second narrative centres on calls for marketized transformations to sustainability.
Here, the market is the agent of transformation, which through pricing, creating
markets and property rights regimes, unleashes new rounds of ‘green accumulation’.
Hence the diagnosis of the problem is market failure, lack of green entre -
preneurialism and failure to allocate and sufficiently protect private property rights.
For example, the World Bank’s 2003 World Development Report on ‘Sustainable
Development in a Dynamic Economy’ advances the idea that the spectacular failure
to tackle poverty and environmental degradation over the last decades is due to a
failure of governance, ‘poor implementation and not poor vision’ (World Bank,
2003). The report notes, ‘Those [poverty and environmental problems] that can
be coordinated through markets have typically done well; those that have not fared
well include many for which the market could be made to work as a coordinator’.
The challenge for governments is therefore to be more welcoming of private
actors through, among other things, ‘a smooth evolution of property rights from
communal to private’ (World Bank, 2003, p133). Markets are thus emphasized as
the key drivers of sustainable development, while recognizing that markets can
only work in this way once states have intervened in particular ways.
The emergence of ideas about the marketization of nature and the green
economy has been dramatic. As Jacobs (2012a) documents, rarely heard before 2008,
market-oriented green economy concepts are now prominent in policy discourses
across governments and international economic and development institutions alike.
Thus, the World Bank and other multilateral development banks have ostensibly
embraced green growth as a core goal, while the OECD has committed itself to
a green growth strategy (OECD, 2011). Similarly, the UNEP has strongly promoted
a green economy agenda (UNEP, 2011). These international institutions have jointly
established a ‘Green Growth Knowledge Platform’ to build knowledge about the
field. Green growth and/or a green economy have been adopted as explicit policy
objectives in a number of countries, including some of the world’s largest econ -
omies, and many NGOs and alliances have also bought into the concept.
Those now promoting green growth and the green economy claim that it is
not a substitute for sustainable development, but a way of achieving it. However,
this elision overlooks the extent to which the framing of a green economy
represents a distinct set of meanings, politics and imperatives. As Jacobs (2012a)
argues, the emphasis is on a level of environmental protection that is not being
12 Ian Scoones, Peter Newell and Melissa Leach
from the grassroots (Smith and Ely, this book) and through wider mobilizations
of citizens (Leach and Scoones, this book). Such local innovation processes are
frequently motivated by a mesh of sociocultural and livelihood concerns, and
understandings of ecology and sustainability, which diverge from the narrow
notions of ‘green’ and ‘economic benefit’ encompassed in most technocentric green
economy discourses.
Marketized transformations
A second narrative centres on calls for marketized transformations to sustainability.
Here, the market is the agent of transformation, which through pricing, creating
markets and property rights regimes, unleashes new rounds of ‘green accumulation’.
Hence the diagnosis of the problem is market failure, lack of green entre -
preneurialism and failure to allocate and sufficiently protect private property rights.
For example, the World Bank’s 2003 World Development Report on ‘Sustainable
Development in a Dynamic Economy’ advances the idea that the spectacular failure
to tackle poverty and environmental degradation over the last decades is due to a
failure of governance, ‘poor implementation and not poor vision’ (World Bank,
2003). The report notes, ‘Those [poverty and environmental problems] that can
be coordinated through markets have typically done well; those that have not fared
well include many for which the market could be made to work as a coordinator’.
The challenge for governments is therefore to be more welcoming of private
actors through, among other things, ‘a smooth evolution of property rights from
communal to private’ (World Bank, 2003, p133). Markets are thus emphasized as
the key drivers of sustainable development, while recognizing that markets can
only work in this way once states have intervened in particular ways.
The emergence of ideas about the marketization of nature and the green
economy has been dramatic. As Jacobs (2012a) documents, rarely heard before 2008,
market-oriented green economy concepts are now prominent in policy discourses
across governments and international economic and development institutions alike.
Thus, the World Bank and other multilateral development banks have ostensibly
embraced green growth as a core goal, while the OECD has committed itself to
a green growth strategy (OECD, 2011). Similarly, the UNEP has strongly promoted
a green economy agenda (UNEP, 2011). These international institutions have jointly
established a ‘Green Growth Knowledge Platform’ to build knowledge about the
field. Green growth and/or a green economy have been adopted as explicit policy
objectives in a number of countries, including some of the world’s largest econ -
omies, and many NGOs and alliances have also bought into the concept.
Those now promoting green growth and the green economy claim that it is
not a substitute for sustainable development, but a way of achieving it. However,
this elision overlooks the extent to which the framing of a green economy
represents a distinct set of meanings, politics and imperatives. As Jacobs (2012a)
argues, the emphasis is on a level of environmental protection that is not being
12 Ian Scoones, Peter Newell and Melissa Leach