Recent articles have demonstrated the knowledge and accuracy of oil corporations' predictions made since the 1950s on the effects of their products on the global environment. But can the early relationship between oil corporations and national governments and lack of climate actions by both actors count as ecocide? If so, should remedial strategies appeal to freer markets for oil or greater state regulation? Cast within the wide context of investigating the collusion at play between powerful political-economic actors and decision-makers as monopolists and debates about 'the modern corporation and private property' (Berle and Means, 1932/2017), 'the new industrial state' (Galbraith, 1967), and 'the economic theory of regulation' (Stigler, 1971), the paper reviews the contentious relationship between states, corporations, and markets. Specifically, the article probes strategies of oil corporations and national governments intended to delay the inclusion of environmental concerns in policies and avoid accountability. Our method of content analysis of articles, reports, and international declarations of different actors and periods relies on a qualitative methodology and ontology of critical realism. We find that not only did oil corporations hide the truth, but also that national governments, that knew (or should have known) about the threat posed by oil industrial activities and which have wider responsibilities than corporations, did not act and are (at least) as responsible and as 'ecocidal' in what could be called an oil TNC-state alliance.

Accordingly, we open the avenues for redressing an evolutionary shift from markets and states to commons, and embedding power within communities (Polanyi, 1945) along with a more universal right to bring a case of ecocide against both transnational oil corporations and states that collude with them.