Opposition to globalization by environmentalists tends to fall into two camps: a so-called “green” counternarrative and an “ecological” one. The green counter-narrative assumes that we have already witnessed sufficient harm done to the environment due to globalization and thus prescribes taking action now to oppose further globalizing forces. It is confident in its knowledge about the causes of environmental degradation as they relate to globalization and certain in its wholesale opposition to globalization. In contrast, the ecological counter-narrative is less certain about globalization's record of environmental harm but worries about future threats given the scale and intensity of globalization's increasing reach. Rather than call for immediate action and wholesale opposition, it seeks further research to identify—and specific policy initiatives to avoid— potentially massive but as yet unknown effects of globalization on the environment. Policy analysts opposing globalization are caught between the counter-narratives and often subscribe to elements of each. The challenge is to find another, more compelling counternarrative in which real-time environmental harm can be treated more seriously than it is in either of the two primary counterparts.