Freedom, Society, and State - Ludwig von Mises Institute

that the government policy would be some sort of
compromise between the interests of the "public" and
tho s e 0 f' "b u sin e s s • " Itse em s I ike I y, howe ve r, t hat
those of business would gradually emerge dominant.
Libertarians, in short, believe that government
itself is solely responsible for pollution. Its
failure to recognize property rights in water and air
spa c e has res u I ted i nth em be i n g t. rea ted a s n f r e e
goods," which meant that since no unit of these goods
would be individually owned or valued, they were abused
and wasted, i.e., polluted. And they further argue
that no government can deal effectively with pollution
si nee i nth e a b senceofIn d i v i d ua I owner s hip of air
space and water, there is no market in these areas.
Thus the government has no way of determining how the
sup ply 0 f air spac e and wa t e r 0 ugh t to be a I I 0 catedt 0
enhance the ut iii ties of all members of society. The
only alternative is to establish arbitrarily a certain
1 eve I 0 f pol I uti 0 n a s the rna x i murn and then imp0 s e i t
upon everyone. But since many would be willing to endure
greater amounts in return for such benefits as a
h i g her s tan dar d 0 f I i v i ng, wh i leothe r s wo u I d pre fer a
lower level of pollution, this method satisfies practically
no one.
We do not have a problem of land pollution. A
cannot dump his garbage into B's backyard. It is important
to realize that this is so only because property
rights in land are usually well defined. Once proper
t y rig h t sin air spa c e and wa t e r we repe r mit ted,
lib e r tar ian s rna i n t a i ntha t the prob I em 0 f pol I uti 0 n i n
these areas would likewise cease to exist. In a system
of universal private property, A's injection of soot or
noise into the air space of B would be just as much a
violation of the latter's property rights as if A willfully
destroyed B's shrubs by pouring poison on them.
The remedy I ies in the courts upholding the neighbor's
pro p er t y rig h t s by for c i ng t he po I I uter, i. e ., t he inv
a d e r 0 fan 0 the r 's pro per t y, t 0 rna keres tit uti 0 n to
the victim.
The question of how much pollution should exist
would be determined by the actions of each property
owner.(69) Each individual would be free to use his
property as he saw fit but would be responsIble for any
" s p ill 0 v e r" 0 n t 0 a not her's proper t y • Thosewhow0 u I d
be willing to suffer a higher level of pollution in
ex c han g e for m0 net a r y com pensat Ion from the po I 1uti ng
source would be free to do so. Consequently, such
302