On the occasion of the launch of
Development 55.1 'Greening the economy',
Sarah Cook, Director of UNRISD, talks about the problems and
limitations of the green economy, its lack of a social dimension, and
her expectations for Rio +20.
Q.: What is the main message of this issue of Development, ‘Greening the economy’ produced in partnership with UNRISD?
A.: This
issue addresses possibilities and contestations around 'greening the
economy' as an approach to sustainable development. The concept of
‘green economy’ has emerged in recent years as a potential solution to
the interrelated social, economic and ecological crises – for some it
appears as the 'magic bullet' that will drive a new phase of green
growth. For many authors in this volume, however, current green economy
policies are built on the same mechanisms that created crises, and risk
reinforcing or exacerbating serious social inequalities and
exclusions.
The papers highlight in particular
the neglect of the conventional 'third pillar' of sustainable
development – the social dimensions. Through this ‘social’ lens, they
challenge key elements of current approaches to green economy – the
valuation and commoditization of nature and its management through
market-based trading mechanisms; the capacity of the current economic
system to generate necessary incentives for sustainable consumption and
production patterns; as well as the assumption that poverty eradication
and more equitable development will follow from low-carbon growth
provided compensatory or protective mechanisms are in place to address
any negative social consequences.
Instead, these papers offer critical
assessments of the opportunities, costs and benefits of such policies
for different populations and social groups. They convey a range of
voices and perspectives (from local perceptions to global debates)
around justice, equity and fairness, and point to the importance of
social policies and governance processes for ensuring an inclusive and
just green economy. Empirical studies show how certain groups are
impacted both by environmental change and by policy responses, but more
importantly reveal the practices and agendas being pursued among diverse
groups - women, small farmers, local communities, indigenous groups,
southern NGOs, at times in conjunction with governments or corporate
actors – which create alternative possible visions, approaches and
pathways to sustainability.
Q.:
In October 2011 UNRISD held the conference on 'Green Economy: Bringing
back the social dimension'. How can a Green Economy that takes into
account social and cultural aspects be achieved?
A.:
Any single answer or 'green print' would risk falling into the
conventional development trap: one approach or solution is not feasible
for such complex challenges. What the conference offered was a
refocusing of attention towards key but neglected areas of enquiry,
pointing to the limits of dominant frameworks and providing insights
gained from often marginalised forms of knowledge.
The conference brought together a
body of empirical analysis – from post-industrial to low income
countries across all regions of the world – showing how market
mechanisms have contradictory consequences (sometimes unforeseen but
often predictable) for the livelihoods and well-being of affected
populations. Through these analyses, the possibilities of alternative
approaches to a 'greener' economy were articulated – pathways not
reliant solely on market-based solutions, but rooted in local
livelihood, knowledge and value systems, and implying different roles
and consequences for states, markets, corporations, civil society and
communities.
Collectively the conference
participants raised fundamental questions: whose values, priorities and
interests are shaping the concept and policies of green economy, whose
knowledge counts, and how can diverse forms of livelihood and production
systems be incorporated into our search for global policy solutions.
Papers offered new thinking on issues such as the role of social policy,
regulation, participation and collective action in promoting a ‘green
and fair’ economy in different contexts. In terms of framing global
discussions, a strong case was made for legitimising a broader range of
social science knowledge within science and economics-dominated policy
debates on sustainable development. At the local and national policy
level, more inclusive and participatory processes of knowledge
generation and decision-making are needed to ensure policies reflect
local livelihood and value systems, and do not undermine existing
sustainable approaches to environmental stewardship.
Q.: What might be achieved at Rio+20?
A.: Rio+20
(together with the People’s Summit) provides the opportunity to refocus
world attention on the triple dimensions of sustainable development -
the challenges posed by economic and climate crises, as well by
increasingly unsustainable levels of inequality and rising demands for a
system that delivers social justice.
Rio+20 has strong prior statements
and principles about sustainable development, (notably Agenda 21) on
which to build. It may be unrealistic to expect a major breakthrough in
terms of consensus or commitments to implementation; but a constructive
and inclusive dialogue (including between governments and civil society)
can build the much needed political momentum - for more participatory
and consensus building processes, for the mobilisation of resources
needed for a sustainable future, and for the framing of new sustainable
development goals which reconnect issues of climate change and green
economy to rights, equity and the broader vision of sustainability.
Rio also presents an opportunity to
move beyond north-south or developed-developing dichotomies, to start
the reframing of a global agenda around shared challenges and common
goals while respecting varied needs and responsibilities of different
countries and communities, and to strengthen the global institutional
architecture. Any collective process clearly needs to grapple centrally
with diverse social, gendered and ecological contexts, and thus the
inevitably unequal consequences of any market-based approaches.
Broader civil society engagement
provides an opportunity for mobilisation to raise awareness about the
alternatives for action and policy not only at the level of states and
policy makers, but also in addressing the expectations of all of us as
individual consumers.
Interview by Laura Fano Morrissey
Sarah Cook took up the position of Director of UNRISD
in November 2009. She moved to UNRISD from the Institute of Development
Studies (IDS) at the University of Sussex, UK, where she had been a
Research Fellow since 1996. She also worked for the Ford Foundation as
Programme Officer for Governance and Public Policy from 2000-2005.
(Source UNRISD)
SOURCE-http://www.sidint.net/node/9930
Without carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere the planet temperature would be an average -18 degree C. For many centuries prior to the 1700's the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere had been reducing and in the 1700's we were entering a new ice age. The Gulf Stream had stopped and the Thames froze in London.
The 2011 and 2012 dry period however lasted for about 9 months with the result that many trees died through lack of moisture and starvation.
In our land the coconuts palms were the worst effected with many deaths and even the survivors have not recovered after 2 years. There was substantial rainfall {ie. 2012 1.5 metres (60 inches)} after the drought period. In 2013 there has been little / no production of coconuts. Other trees affected are limes, dragon fruits and ornament palm trees around the house.
The 2011 and 2012 dry period however lasted for about 9 months with the result that many trees died through lack of moisture and starvation. 
