Final answer:
From an economic standpoint, aiming for zero pollution is not considered viable due to the balance that must be struck between production needs and environmental quality, as well as the economic impacts of such a strict goal.
Step-by-step explanation:
From an economic perspective, pursuing a goal of zero pollution is not considered a sound policy. The rationale behind this is that economics requires a balance between production and environmental quality. Zero pollution might not be achievable given current technologies and production processes. While the use of technology does provide ways to reduce emissions and pollution, there is always some degree of environmental impact associated with production.
Moreover, the concept of externalities and the social costs of pollution indicate that there is an economic cost to pollution that businesses may not account for in their production costs. Consequently, external costs necessitate governmental or market-based interventions to reduce pollution. Governmental limits have traditionally been set on the amount of pollution allowed, but more flexible, market-oriented policies have been proposed to reduce pollution more cost-effectively. Zero pollution could be overly restrictive and costly, potentially stunting economic growth and innovation.
Therefore, an optimal policy would seek to minimize pollution where possible, through cost-effective measures, while also considering the economic implications of such policies. This balance aims to ensure that environmental protection does not unduly hinder economic development, thus maintaining the sustainability of both the economy and the environment.