Green Economy

[SYEDA SABAHAT]

Different shades

S. Ahmed discusses the pros and cons of a green economy

The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) 2008 report, Green economy successes in developing countries, defines it as one that results in improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities.

According to the report, green economy is characterised by substantially increased investments in renewable energy, low-carbon transport, energy-efficient buildings, clean technologies, improved waste management, improved freshwater provision, and sustainable agriculture, forestry and fisheries. These investments are driven by, or supported by, national policy reforms and the development of international policy and market infrastructure.

Environmentalist Karl Burkat defines green economy as being one that is based on renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal, marine, including wave, biogas, and fuel cell); green buildings (green retrofits for energy and water efficiency, residential and commercial assessment; green produces and materials); clean transportation (alternative fuels, public transport); water management (water reclamation, greywater and rainwater systems, low-water landscaping, water purification and stormwater management); waste management (recycling, municipal solid waste salvage, brownfield land remediation and sustainable packaging);and land management (better agricultural practices, habitat conservation and restoration, urban forestry and parks, reforestation and afforestation).

But how does green economy fit intoPakistan’s scheme of environmental plans? According to an official of the Pakistan Environmental Protection Agency, the concept offers multiple opportunities and can lead to development that is low on emission and is climate resilient.

“For a country like Pakistan, green economy remains a far-fetched notion,” he says. “With the per capita income being $1,207 in the 2010-11 fiscal, the country has been classified as poor according to a UN report. For the majority living under one dollar a day, green economy remains an unheard concept. While on paper the concept of sustainable development and poverty eradication sounds great, in reality it is otherwise.”

He further added that the EU has been trying to adopt all that is entailed in the green economy concept but the Third World countries lag behind. We do not have the required financial and economic stability or systems that are needed to work in this direction. In a country where the term ‘environmental friendly’ remains on the back burner, how do you expect GE to take root?

“GE is costly in the short term and aiming for it at the cost of pressing development issues might seem a bad idea but in the long run it will lead to sustainable economic growth and will cut down poverty,” the official said.

The UNEP report, Towards a green economy: pathways to sustainable development and poverty eradication states that a green economy can help in various areas.

“Over the next decade, shifting to sustainable agriculture could increase global employment by as much as four per cent. Forest conservation and reforestation could boost formal employment in this sector by 20 per cent by 2050. Improved energy efficiency across all transport modes combined with modal shift would increase employment by about 10 per cent above business as usual by 2050. Expansion of renewables and investments in energy efficiency could generate employment that is 20 per cent higher than business as usual by 2050,” it states.

However, critics say that GE can be used a tool to sideline developing countries. A report by Zero Waste Europe shows that the world extracts 50 per cent more raw materials today than it did in 1980; yet 80 per cent of this is consumed by the wealthiest 20 per cent.

“Land, fresh water, forests, fish, minerals, fossil fuels and the carbon space in our atmosphere are all seen as commodities which can be taken by people with money and power. This increases the threat of a ‘natural resource grab’ by wealthy states, multinational corporations and individuals—all at the expense of the poor. There is evidence that the high-consumption lifestyle of the wealthiest 20 per cent is forcing the world’s poorest 20 per cent into the margins,” the report noted.

In this backdrop, it is important that the interest of the poor and marginalised countries is safeguarded. There should be a greater emphasis on transforming the global economic model so that sustainability is achieved along with greater equity. Also, it is crucial that the wealthy countries rethink their consumption and allow for sustainable consumption for all.

source http://www.dawn.com/2012/04/01/different-shades-2.html

[SYEDA SABAHAT]

Ground reality

Head of Climate Change Study Centre, SDPI, Shakeel Ahmed Ramay answers queries regarding green economy and Pakistan

How can green economy help Pakistan?
Green economy can help us only if it is implemented as a tool, and not as an objective. We have to realise that if we use it an objective, it will be simply replacing sustainable development, which is not acceptable. For example, let’s suppose you plan to go to Lahore from Karachi, and you commute by train. Your objective is to reach Lahore, for which you are using the train as a tool. Similarly, we need to use the concept of green economy to reach our goal of sustainable development, and green economy itself should not be our goal.

What are the risks and challenges involved in implementing green economy?
We need to understand how to use green economy in order to bring a difference. We already have a concept on which we have worked on for years; we should build on that, instead of introducing something new.

Secondly, when introducing green economy, we should have the understanding of the socio-economic development of Pakistan. As of now we don’t have the resources to implement an ideal situation which other countries may have been able to.

Therefore, we need to study our ground realities, work around them, and eventually we will be able to realise an ideal situation.

As for challenges, given our economic situation, our biggest challenge could be finances since we have few sources to finance such projects. The other challenge is technical expertise which, again, is not very strong. We will need time to overcome these challenges.

There’s a fear that green economy is nothing more than a tool to widen the gap between the rich and the poor countries. Is it true?
This is quite true. The developing countries feel that the developed countries are using green economy as a diversion tactic.

That is, they want to divert attention from other climate change issues which are yet to be resolved or completed. As a result, what they push to the forefront is not sustainable development which is the real goal, but green economy which is a path, and this attitude has a negative impact on developing countries.

What should we expect from the forthcoming UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20)?
Twenty years ago, the Third World countries were promised assistance in terms of food and agricultural security, etc., but these promises are yet to be fulfilled. In Rio+20, these nations would expect to see commitments translated into action; we are now tired of listening to the same promises for two decades. —A.R.


source
http://www.dawn.com/2012/04/01/ground-reality.html

[SYEDA SABAHAT]

Not so green, after all

The international community should take into account a country’s stage of development and impose more lenient obligations on developing countries regarding their transition to a more environmentally friendly and sustainable economy, writes Rizwana Naqvi

While there are talks about switching to ‘green economy’ for better well-being and social equality and significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological shortages, all is not as perfect as it is made to appear.

The term green economy gives the impression that it is environment friendly, i.e., it is meant to conserve natural resources, minimise pollution and environment damaging emissions while producing products that do not harm the environment.

However, the move towards green economy has raised concerns among developing countries which fear that the transitioning may lead to more inequalities between rich and poor countries and hinder the latter’s economic development and the ability to reduce poverty. It is being questioned whether the process of achieving such an economy keeps into consideration economic growth of poor countries and social development goals such as poverty eradication and job creation.Developing countries also fear that the promotion of green economy may give rise to unhelpful or negative developments and that the original inspiration for the 1992 Earth Summit—to merge goals of sustainability and development—may be compromised.

Some countries feel that they lack technological know-how, which places them at a competitive disadvantage in the race for future markets. It is said that if environmental standards for products are adopted developing countries that are unable to meet the standard would face the prospect of losing their exports.

It would be more beneficial if developing countries are provided resources and technology to upgrade their environmental technology and standards rather than penalise them. As Dr Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the IPCC (Intergovernmental Penal for Climate Change), mentioned in his address to the Copenhagen’s Climate Congress’s opening session, rich nations’ efforts to push rapidly growing nations to cut their carbon emissions would be more effective if the focus was also on more rapid technology transfer and green economic development.

At the same time some developing countries fear that developed countries would try to come up with some fraudulent package in an attempt to secure new markets for their own environmental technologies; one of the reasons for this may be to overcome the effects of the current financial crisis.

Another concern expressed by developing countries is that many developed countries provide their companies huge subsidies for research and development of environmentally sound technologies. Since developing countries do not have the resources to provide matching subsidies they are left at a disadvantage. They may be forced to compete with production that is subsidised in the industrialised world and face even worse competitive situation if they have to lower their tariff on environmental products.

Many countries feel that green economy may be used to put trade barriers on the exports of developing countries. The developed countries may use green economy to justify unilateral trade measures, such as imposing a ‘carbon tariff’ or ‘border adjustment tax’ on products of developing countries on the ground that these generated emissions of carbon dioxide above a certain level during production process, or that the exporting country does not have the emission controls of a standard deemed adequate by the importing country.

This would penalise developing countries that do not have financial resources or low emission technology and would violate the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities’. It will not only strengthen inequalities between rich and poor nations and hinder their growth but the developing countries may also view it as an attempt by developed countries to evade their commitment to assist developing countries and instead shift the burden of adjustment onto them.

Another risk is that green economy may be misused by countries to gain access for their goods and services into markets of other countries under the guise of environment; for example, developed countries may demand elimination of tariffs on their ‘environmental’ goods.

It is also feared that developed countries may use green economy as a condition for aid, loan and debt rescheduling or debt relief. This may pressure the affected countries to take environmental measures without giving any consideration to sustainable economic and social development and equity goals. It is also being said that the idea of treating all countries in the same manner, regardless of their stage of development is not correct. The international community should take into account a country’s stage of development and impose more lenient obligations on developing countries regarding their transition to a more environmentally friendly and sustainable economy.

Since the developed countries have played a major role in greenhouse gas emissions and depletion of resources, the developing countries feel that rich and poor countries should not be seen on similar terms in relation to the causes and burden of resolving environmental problems and that developed countries should bear a larger burden of costs and responsibilities. They were putting a much greater strain on natural resources and environment and because they have a larger capacity to meet the costs.