Poverty & Environment Times 06 2009

Environment & Poverty Times

06 2009

cember: the developing world is not coming to the table with an understanding that there is a low-carbon path to prosperity. All they see is what the developed world has done, which is a very high carbon path.

– What’s your ambition for 2010?

He laughs and looks out on the Norwegian wood outside the window.

– By the end of 2010? I want to see the global agenda seriously changed! TEEB and the Green Economy initiative have many recommenda-

UNEP/GRID-Arendal

tions for policy-makers, and their time is now. I want governments to start recognizing and rewarding the public benefits of conservation. We have to acknowledge the deep link of per- sistent poverty with lost nature and seriously start reversing that vicious cycle. We have to understand that greening our economies is not a cost but a gain, which will lead to sustainable wealth, lower risks, more jobs, less poverty, and so governments must start investing in this fundamental change. We have to start reflecting the economics of nature in our

National Accounts, and stop chasing that nar- row measure of progress called GDP growth, with which we are all obsessed. And we must get these fundamental game-changes going within the next few years, so that we can switch from an economy of unsustainable growth to an “economy of permanence” and a society in harmony with nature!

About the author: Håkon F. Høydal is a journal- ist at the Norwegian daily newspaper Verdens Gang (VG), Anne Solgaard works as a Capacity Development Officer at GRID-Arendal and Hedda L. Bredvold is a freelance photographer.

6 7

- - - -

- - - - - Economics for People and Planet

- - -

- - - - - - - - - By Tony Juniper - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -

- - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

- -

- - - - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - - -

- -

- - - - - - -

- - -

- -

- - - -

- - - -

- - - - - - - -

Ask a representative group of people what is the greatest threat facing humankind in the 21st century and many suggestions will follow. Terrorism, hunger and poverty will be there, so might a violent superpower confrontation, and disease epidemics will likely be among them. A few people would say that our ap- proach to economics should be at the top of the list. While all the others are real threats, the evidence increasingly suggests that this last one is most likely the correct answer.

The reason is simple. For all its sophistica- tions, mainstream neo-classical economics does not account the needs of, and the impacts of development on, nature. In fact, nature is set to be the ultimate limiting factor on human progress, welfare and fulfilment as we head toward the middle decades of this century. The developed world’s consumption patterns take little account of constraints that could in the not too distant future create grave dangers for human societies. At the same time, many environmental problems are not limited by country borders, and often poor communities in the developing world have to bear the greatest burden of impacts.

The scale of the oversight almost couldn’t be bigger. One widely cited study by the ecological economist Robert Costanza and his colleagues published in 1998 gave an indication of just how big. He and his co- authors set out to estimate the financial cost of replacing all the services provided to us by nature. Pollination of crops, restoration of soil fertility, recycling of wastes, the coastal protec- tion provided by coral reefs and mangroves, the creation of rain by natural forests and the climatic stability that enables human societies to develop were estimated to be about double the value of global GDP in that year.

In other words this study suggested that the part of the economy that we seek to grow and which is at the core of the political ambition of countries worldwide is actually worth only about half as much as the part that we do not measure, and which is apparently provided for free by nature.

We know now that those free services have been taken far too much for granted. Climate change is the most prominent issue in terms of media coverage and political attention. However, it is unfortunately not the only eco-

logical concern that should be high on our list. The depletion of so-called ecosystem services, ranging from deforestation to overfishing and from soil erosion to the reduced availability of freshwater, is already an economic concern in many parts of the world. So is the depletion of some non-renewable resources, such as conventional oil reserves.

- - - - -

- - -

-

- -

- - - -

- - -

- -

- -

While for many the relationship between eco- nomic and ecological conditions might seem like an academic discussion, there is every reason to believe that it is rapidly becoming a practical question of the most pressing kind. For while we treat nature as an endlessly avail- able and largely free service, it is fast dawning that on both counts these are dangerously flawed assumptions. While GDP has contin- ued to grow, nature has been progressively depleted, and this decline in free eco-services will increasingly limit GDP growth.

The main findings of the Millennium Ecosys- tem Assessment, for example, set out in 2005 how it will be very difficult to meet official poverty reduction targets if the degradation of ecosystems continues unabated. Similar conclusions have been reached in relation to climate change. If we change our approach toward economics, and our expectations as to what constitutes a good life, we might still avoid an ecological crash later this century.

The economic crisis that we are living through right now might be just the oppor- tunity we need to make the transition needed for people and planet. The question is, can we seize the moment, or will the temptation be to return to the ‘business as usual’ from before the crisis?

Clearly the possibilities are considerable. Equipping the world with the low carbon technologies needed to cut emissions to the level that will avoid the worst impacts of climate change is perhaps the biggest busi- ness opportunity in history. Clean vehicles, super efficient appliances, renewable power systems and smart grids could transform the impact of how we live – if only the measures are put in place to ensure these technolo- gies are deployed quickly – and to those in most need of development first. Similarly with the potential for resource efficient manufacturing and genuinely sustainable farming – the opportunity is there, if we wish to take it. Financial transfers from rich to developing countries via innovative new

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - -

- - - - - - - - -

- -

-

- - -

-

- -

-

- -

- - - - - - -

- -

- - - - - - -

- - -

- - - - - - - - - -

- - -

- -

- - -

-

- -

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

- -

- -

- -

- - -

- - -

- - -

- -

- -

- - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - -

financial mechanisms could help developing countries to keep their remaining forests, cutting emissions and conserving the vast biological wealth held in these ecosystems, while at the same time enabling sustainable poverty reduction.

- - -

- - -

- -

- -

- - -

- - -

The transformation to a green economy could create millions of jobs, generate new markets, stimulate new technologies and provide the opportunities for dynamic new businesses, and in the process yield massive social and economic benefits while at the same time conserving the natural systems upon which we all depend. New measures of economic development that consider human wellbeing rather than simply consumption levels, while simultaneously accounting for

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

the state of nature’s capital, are needed. If we pursue different economic priorities with different measures, then perhaps sustainable development can still become a reality.

While such a transformation until recently sounded like a utopian dream, it increas- ingly sounds like our only option to avoid a humanitarian and ecological catastrophe. The moment has certainly arrived to harness economics for people and the planet – the question is; how will we do it?

About the author: Tony Juniper is an indepen- dent campaigner for sustainable living. Special ad- viser to the Prince of Wales Rainforests Project and a Senior Associate with the Cambridge University Programme for Sustainability Leadership.

- - - - -

-- -

- -

- -

- - - - - - - - - - - - -

- -

- - - -

- - -

-

- - - - - - -

- - -

-

- - -

- - -

- - - - - - - - -

-

-- -

-

- - -

-- - - - -

- -

- - -

-

- - -

- -

- - - - -

- - -

- - - - -

- - -

- -

- - -

- - - - - - - - - - -

- -

-

-

- - - -

-

-- - - - -

- - -

- - -

- - - - - - - - - - -

- -

-

- - - -

- - -

-

- - -

-

-

- - - -

- -

Page 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6 | Page 7 | Page 8 | Page 9 | Page 10 | Page 11 | Page 12 | Page 13 | Page 14 | Page 15 | Page 16 | Page 17 | Page 18 | Page 19 | Page 20 | Page 21 | Page 22 | Page 23 | Page 24 | Page 25 | Page 26 | Page 27 | Page 28 | Page 29 | Page 30 | Page 31 | Page 32 | Page 33 | Page 34 | Page 35 | Page 36