They, like fair trade advocates, say there is a race to the bottom in ecosystem health and human health and that all means of measuring well-being (which are honest unlike GDP) are causing quality of life to degrade.
Accordingly, they seek to divide the world into ecoregions and make certain types of competition between them invalid, and have safe trade between them to protect the natural capital and ecosystem health of each of them to a locally-defined standard. This they hope would reverse the race to the bottom and start a competition to make each ecoregion compete instead to attract individual capital which would apply its creativity in part to the renewal of natural capital and biodiversity.
Whether this fits into visions or best cases or is just one of many threats to various types of countries, more or less depends on your faction. Blues probably think it's a bad idea as it interferes with what they call "free trade". Pinks would be concerned that not everyone in every region would be "equal" and that it would not be "fair". Reds would argue it was "bourgeois". In other words politics as usual takes over as soon as you try to discuss any reasonable idea like this. Maybe it's better to just make it happen by proving it works for simpler problems like the Consumerium Governance Organization or a guild. Or maybe not.
See w:bioregional democracy if all this interests you. Really, it should.