A bailout for the planet

Governments have leapt to intervene in the economy – so isn’t it time they did the same for ecosystems, whose own recession will have a far greater impact, asks Dax Lovegrove.

We know all too well that we’re entering an economic downturn. What’s less widely understood is that we’re also suffering from a serious ecological recession – whose consequences will dwarf any economic turmoil for decades to come.

WWF’s most recent Living Planet Report highlights a loss of about one third of the world’s natural capital over the last 35 years. It warns that many countries have become ecological debtors, consuming far more of this capital than they can ever hope to replenish from their own resources.

At the core of this toxic debt is climate change. Despite unprecedented levels of awareness, and increasingly harsh warnings from scientists, there is still stupefying inaction among high polluting countries and companies. A host of factors contribute to this: the blocking of climate change measures by the Bush administration, carbon-intensive oil production in Canada, the scramble for control of Arctic fossil fuel reserves and the reliance on oil revenues by much of the Middle East.

Influential energy-intensive industries in Europe and elsewhere are kicking against stronger climate policies and tighter cap and trade schemes. They cite current financial pressures, the need to remain competitive and the danger of ‘carbon leakage’ (where polluting businesses move to regions with laxer controls) as reasons to block progressive moves to tackle climate change.

It’s easy to be distracted by the economic downturn and so be lured into such ‘race to the bottom’ arguments. However, the credit crunch could provide a real opportunity for governments to look at new rules for preventing future overstretching of both financial and natural capital. They could start by putting a real value on ecosystem services. A recent study led by Pavan Sukhdev at Deutsche Bank revealed that between £2 trillion and £5 trillion worth of irreplaceable natural capital is lost every year due to deforestation alone.

Sukhdev is among those who point out that there’s not enough metal in the ground to manufacture laptops, televisions and vehicles to meet increasing demand from the emerging economies in the East – and that our climate couldn’t handle it if there were.

We cannot go on draining the world’s natural capital in this way; we need to stop racking up this massive ecological debt. That means we need to completely rethink – and dematerialise – the way in which we provide light, heat, mobility and other services to consumers across the globe. And we need to face up to the fact that time is not on our side.

But change may be in the air. This year provides us with an opportunity to set the environmental agenda for decades to come. In December, heads of government from across the world will gather in Copenhagen for the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The importance of this conference cannot be overstated: its task is nothing less than to set the path for the successor to the Kyoto Protocol’s targets in 2012 – the new ‘global deal on climate change’.

These negotiations will require real leadership, particularly from the UK and Europe, to break the deadlock of inaction. The Climate Change Act, which provides for progress towards an 80% carbon reduction by 2050, gives Britain the chance to show world leadership – especially if it emphasises domestic action as the key means of reaching the target, rather than relying on accessing carbon credits overseas.

While mining and manufacturing lobbyists are solely intent on protecting their industries, leading companies in other sectors are gearing up to dematerialise the goods and services they offer and embrace low-carbon business strategies. They include key players in information and communication technology, in ESCOs (energy services companies), in cleantech enterprises and all kinds of other service industries that are well placed to win in a low-carbon future. They can only benefit from the backing of sound post-Kyoto policies.

Our future lies in what’s decided in the ‘global deal’ and in the extent of other interventions to protect vital ecosystem services. Allowing energy-intensive industry interests to drag down negotiations would threaten both our climate and our future prosperity and security. So we must all hope that the Copenhagen talks are based on the science, rather than such unenlightened, short-term agendas.

Dax Lovegrove is head of business and industry relations at WWF-UK.

WWF-UK is a Forum for the Future partner.

13 February 2009

Dax Lovegrove

Add new comment