In my first lesson of economics nine years ago, we read a tale that conveyed Adam Smith’s underlying ideas behind the “Invisible Hand.” The morale of the story, as you probably know, is that free markets can make everyone better off. At Rio+20 the story is often told differently. Markets need to be tamed, incentives need to be rectified, and policy makers need to establish legislation that internalizes the negative environmental externalities. Hence, free markets are more often regarded as the problem, rather than as the solution. So what’s the right version of the tale when it comes to saving the environment?