Climate Action and Economies Can Grow Together
Kieran Cooke, Climate News Network
By Kieran Cooke, Climate News NetworkThis piece first appeared at Climate News Network.
LONDON — We can have our cake and eat it. That’s the main message of a new study that says the idea that we have to choose between battling against climate change or promoting growth in the world’s economy is a “false dilemma”.
The report, The New Climate Economy, was produced by the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate, chaired by Felipe Calderón, the former president of Mexico, and including eminent economist Lord [Nicholas] Stern.
Calderon, addressing what he describes as a “false dilemma”, says: “The message to leaders is clear. We don’t have to choose between economic growth and a safe climate. We can have both.”
Lord Stern, author of the 2006 Stern Review, which comprehensively detailed, for the first time, the economic consequences of not taking action on climate change, says decisions being made now will determine the future of both the economy and the climate.
“If we choose low-carbon investment, we can generate strong, high-quality growth – not just in the future, but now,” he says. “But if we continue down the high-carbon route, climate change will bring severe risks to long-term prosperity.”
The commission’s report, released at the United Nations in New York shortly before a major UN climate summit, says there are now big opportunities for achieving strong economic growth and, at the same time, lowering emissions across three sectors:
- Building more compact, better connected cities will improve the quality of life of urban dwellers, improve economic performance, and lower emissions.
- Improved land use can cut emissions resulting from deforestation. Restoring 12% of the world’s degraded land would dramatically raise farmers’ incomes.
- More and more of the world’s energy is likely to be generated by renewables, cutting dependence on highly-polluting coal. Renewables is now a big growth industry, spurring on various economic activities.
The report says that about US$90 trillion is likely to be invested in infrastructure in the world’s cities, agriculture and energy systems over the next 15 years, and spending should be directed towards low-carbon growth that would not only benefit the climate but also business productivity.
The study calls for the phasing out of huge amounts spent worldwide on subsidies for fossil fuels – currently US$600 billion, compared with US$100bn for renewable, the report says. Competitive energy markets, consistent government policy, a strong price for carbon, and greatly expanded research in low carbon technologies are also needed.
If fully implemented, the report’s authors calculate, a reduction of up to 90% in emissions could be achieved by 2030, and dangerous climate change would be averted.
Although the report’s findings have been endorsed by a wide range of leading politicians, business figures and economists, there are those who would argue against the idea that economic growth can be achieved alongside meaningful action on climate change.
For example, the New Economics Foundation (NEF), a UK thinktank, contends that indefinite global economic growth is unsustainable.
In a 2010 report, Growth Isn’t Possible, the NEF said economic growth is constrained by the finite nature of the planet’s natural resources. “Growth forever, as conventionally defined, within fixed though flexible limits, is not possible,” it said. “Sooner or later, we will hit the biosphere’s buffers.”
Others would point out that although a carbon market has been in operation for several years, the price of carbon has failed to rise. The introduction of market forces and competition in the energy sector in many countries has done little to lessen greenhouse gas emissions.
In many countries, including India, China, Australia and some states in Europe, a central role in driving economic growth is still played by coal, the most polluting of all energy sources.