Major problems
of our time are all interconnected
http://www.indiatogether.org/major-problems-of-our-time-are-all-interconnected-environment
ENVIRONMENT /
ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
Recently
Darryl D’Monte interviewed the famous physicist Fritjof Capra at the annual
meet of Greenaccord international environmental journalists in Italy. Here he
reports on Capra’s separate remarks about the environment, along with quotes
from his books and blogs.
13 December 2017 -
At the
annual Greenaccord meeting of international environmental journalists in
Florence and near it in Tuscany, Italy from November 2-5, Fritjof Capra was a
major speaker on the theme: “Economy and Finance in a Carbon-Free Era”. He is
renowned for his 1975 book, The Tao of Physics, which has
sold over 1 million copies. In it, he as a physicist, likened the clash of
subatomic particles to the dance of Shiva and drew a connection between
Buddhism, Hinduism and modern physics. He is now Director of the Centre
of Ecoliteracy in Berkeley, California.
“The major
problems of our time – energy, environment, rising income inequality and so on
– cannot be understood in isolation,” he told the conference. “They are
systemic issues, which means that they are all interconnected. Correspondingly,
they need systemic solutions.
“As Pope
Francis puts it [in his Encyclical, Laudato Si’, issued before
the UN Paris climate meet in December 2015] our common home is falling into
serious disrepair. This is evident from large-scale natural disasters, as well
as social and even financial crises, cannot be handled in isolation. It cannot
be emphasised enough that everything is interconnected.
“The
fundamental dilemma underlying our global problems seems to be the illusion,
embraced by our corporate and political leaders, that unlimited growth is
possible on the planet. This has been underlined in several presentations at
this conference in the first two days.”
Indeed, the
US ecological economist Robert Costanza, now at the Australian National
University, spoke on “Decarbonising Finance” and the need to curb the world’s
“addiction to GDP growth” at the inauguration of the five-day conference. This
could prove fatal, which isn’t far-fetched if one considers how the excessive
exploitation of natural resources led to the collapse of the Mayan and Roman
empires.
“Measure
what we treasure” and not vice versa was his prescription. The era of
neo-liberal economics began with the Regan-Thatcher Anglo-US regimes. Herman
Daly, the well-known ecological economist, advocated therapy for GDP addiction,
like one would for any other mental affliction. Three curatives are the
implementation of the UN’s sustainable development goals; a redesign of several
systems, not excluding the most toxic of all – financial; and an overhaul of
the political process.
Mark
Campanale, Founder and Executive Director of the Carbon Tracker Initiative,
highlighted the risk of investing or, rather, staying invested, in the fossil
fuel industry. To limit global warming to 2 degrees above pre-industrial
levels, as the UN prescribes, it was necessary to limit CO₂ concentrations to 450 ppm.
By 2040,
coal demand needs to be 45 per cent below business as usual (BAU) levels, while
oil and gas need to be 30 percent below BAU. If one called a halt to the
burning of fossil fuels to keep the world from experiencing cataclysmic climate
change, what would happen to those entities that are invested in it? They would
simply be stranded.
By plotting
the amount of fossil fuel reserves against investments in a country’s bourses,
the stock exchanges of London, Sao Paulo, Moscow, Australia and Toronto all
have an estimated 20-30 percent of their market capitalisation connected to
fossil fuels. The New York exchange had 156 gigatonnes (Gt) of CO₂ invested in it, of which oil comprised 112 Gt.
London would account for 106 Gt, with oil comprising half. Russia was far and
away the world’s fossil fuel behemoth with 253 Gt, of which coal accounted for
161 Gt. China had 67 Gt, mainly in coal, while India was a small blip with gas.
Bill
McGibben, the environmentalist and founder of the movement 350.org headlined an
article in Rolling Stone magazine five years ago:
“Unburnable Carbon: are the Financial Markets Carrying a Carbon Bubble?”
He writes: “an easy and powerful bit of arithmetical analysis first
published by financial analysts in the U.K. has been making the rounds...(it)
up-ends most of the conventional political thinking about climate
change. And it allows us to understand our precarious position with
.... simple numbers”.
As the Financial
Times observed: “Of all the recent ideas climate change
campaigners have come up with to convince the world to do more to curb global
warming, none has been as potent as stranded fossil fuel assets”. Even the
conservative Daily Telegraph in the UK stated that “in
the fight against global warming, the real warriors wear suits and ties”,
referring to stock exchange operators. It went on to say: “Environmentalists
may not like it, but hard-headed businesses and banks are now our best bet
against runaway climate change.”
Are fossil
fuel companies betting on an uncertain future, asks Carbon Tracker?:
- BP is projecting a
24% increase in fossil fuel use by 2035
- Exxon expects a 27%
increase by 2040
- Shell’s ‘Current
Outlook’ is 37% to 2040
- OPEC is clinging
valiantly to 54% to 2040
Yet
companies are overstating energy demand, underestimating an increasing role for
renewables and ignoring looming changes in energy.
Regulators
are taking increasing notice of the risk. Mark Carney, Governor of the Bank of
England notes that the carbon budget of the globe, which allocates the
remaining emissions space to countries, renders the “vast majority of
reserves ‘stranded’ – oil, gas and coal that will be literally
unburnable.” The abrupt transition to a low-carbon future is a “financial stability
risk”.
Capra made a
plea to distinguish between real and virtual wealth and not to measure
well-being in millions of dollars. If one was worth $9.5 billion but was sick,
alcoholic, with an obsession or addiction to power, that was far from a
satisfactory situation.
As Ian
Dunlop of the Climate Change Take Force in Australia cited, fossil fuels still
comprised 85 percent of global energy consumption in 2016. Oil contributed 33
per cent, coal 28, gas 24, hydro 6.9, nuclear 4.5, and renewables a mere 3.8,
so there is a very long way to go, despite all the euphoria about solar and, to
a lesser extent, wind.
On December
7 it was reported that
despite commitments to help address the climate crisis, the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) awarded fossil fuel projects €4.05
billion between 2010 and 2016 – more than double its support for renewable
energy during the same period.
According to
Bankwatch’s analysis, fossil fuel projects accounted for the largest share, 41
percent, of the EBRD’s €9.96 billion energy and natural resources portfolio in
2010-2016.
Capra
referred to the irrational belief in perpetual growth as the clash
between linear thinking and non-linear thinking in the biosphere, which
constitutes the web of life. Excessive growth is fuelled by excessive
consumption in a throw-away economy, generating waste and pollution and
depleting the earth’s natural resources. These global problems are exacerbated
by climate change caused by our reliance on fossil fuel energy.
In an
article in September in the International Journal of Social Economics,
Capra and Ove Jakobsen from the Centre for Ecological Economics and Ethics,
Nordland University, Norway, write: “We suggest a new conceptual framework for
economic theory and practice based on systemic principles of life. We refer to
ecological economics using two meanings of the term ‘ecological’.
“Ecological
economics refers to an economic system that is consistent with and honours the
basic principles of ecology which, ultimately, are identical with what we call
the systemic principles of life. In a broader sense ecological economics refers
to economic theory and practice that see the economy as operating within,
rather than dominating, the spheres of nature, society, and culture.”
They discuss
“how these principles can be applied to design an ecological economic system
that is life-enhancing at individual, social and ecological levels. We argue
that ecological economics should give priority to activities that maximize the
wellbeing of human and non-human beings, as well as of entire ecosystems, and
that its central purpose should be to serve the life processes in social and
ecological systems”.
Materialism
and human greed are the defining motivations of global capitalism. Anthony
Giddens argued 26 years ago that we had to look for an alternative worldview to
the existing one, which pursues a course of self-destruction. As an example he
claimed that “the pursuit of capitalist accumulation could not be carried out
indefinitely since it is not self-sustaining in terms of resources”.
The two
authors cite Alfred North Whitehead, the British philosopher best known for his
work in the philosophy of science, and a co-author with Bertrand Russell, as
saying that “a civilized society should exhibit the five qualities of truth,
beauty, adventure, art, and peace”.
They discuss
“how these principles can be applied to design an ecological economic system
that is life-enhancing rather than life-destroying. The corresponding economic
practices will differ depending on cultural and natural conditions, just as
ecosystems are different depending on environmental conditions. However, the
underlying principles are the same; they are universal systemic principles of
life.”
“We should
emphasize that the recognition of these principles is not restricted to
science. Similar ideas can be found, in various schools of Buddhism, and in
numerous indigenous cultures. Hence, the systems view of life and the
philosophy of organism are unifying visions, uniting East and West, North and
South.”
Darryl D'Monte
13 December 2017
13 December 2017
Darryl D'Monte, former Resident Editor of The
Times of India in Mumbai, is Chairperson of the Forum of Environmental
Journalists of India and founder President of the International Federation of
Environmental Journalists.
No comments:
Post a Comment