Uh... Economists advocate making carbon and land prices reflect their true costs. Identifying, studying and correcting market failures, internalizing externalities etc are some of the most fundamental concerns of Economics as a field.
That is a niche movement, especially the one publicly espoused by "economics". The public face of economics, and therefore the one used to justify policy enaction is highly skewed by think tanks, endowed chairs, consultancies, and restricted hiring into the fed and other economics policy seats.
Economics can only produce costs on what it can measure and accurately estimate.
Economics can't even produce accurate estimations on the restricted space of human economic activity.
How can it POSSIBLY produce accurate estimations for the multiple orders of magnitude more complicated biological and natural worlds?
In fact all that does is provide fear, uncertainty, and doubt to the regressive economists and the polluters, and allow them plenty of denial room as they externalize costs of pollution and dumping and destruction on society as a whole.
This is a "science" where the mere mention of any regulation is still considered fundamentally wrong to a powerful, well-funded, and very public sizable portion of the intellectuals. And since that aligns with the rich and privileged of the world, it will continue to be the most public and pronounced aspect of the "science".
