The article in the url below is an interview with Jonathan Porritt, former Director of Friends of the Earth and “chief environmental adviser to the UK prime minister.” He left his position last July:
“Porritt, for nine years chairman of the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC), lauded the recently published strategy to build a low-carbon economy. This aims for the UK to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 34%, from 1990 levels, and source 15% of energy from renewable, by 2020. … But at its core, he says, the government still does not get it. Sustainability continues to take a back seat to consumer-driven economic growth.”
His ideas of what a sustainable economy would look like, which he outlines in the interview, are detailed in a SDC report released in March, 2009:
““Let me be absolutely clear up front,” Porritt says, seconds into the conversation, “we do not advocate a zero growth model.” Economic growth in developed nations such as the UK should cease, he says, but it should continue in the developing world, so that billions might escape poverty. In the developed world, growth is the cornerstone of modern macroeconomics upon which politicians win and lose elections. And Porritt is advocating its overthrow.”
I am not so sure. Macro-economic policies are blunt instruments with difficult-to-predict consequences and shaping a dynamic economy to achieve zero growth (perfect balance?) is no easy task. If we are to re-consider our fundamental economic model, it seems to me that the most important step is to account adequately for externalities in pricing. In other words, the price of a product should not only include the cost of production, but also include the cost of replenishing the raw material and disposing/recycling the waste after consumption. Putting a price on carbon is an important step in this process. If all firms are forced to incorporate externalities into the price of the finished product or service, many of the cheap items in our disposable economy will become significantly more expensive and businesses will be incentivized to produce sustainable alternatives. Rather than Porritt’s ‘revolution,’ I think this ‘evolution’ is a more realistic and achievable goal—as long, of course, there is the political will to implement it. But, then again; if there is insufficient political willpower for this idea, there is certainly insufficient political willpower to implement Porritt’s more radical idea.
Take care
David
Bill Werther & David Chandler
Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility
© Sage Publications, 2006
The big interview: Jonathan Porritt – When real progress means standing still Business must see that zero growth is the future for developed economies, according to Jonathan Porritt
Eric Marx
Ethical Corporation Magazine
September 21, 2009
http://www.ethicalcorp.com/content.asp?contentid=6596
