22 January 2008

CLIMATE CHANGE and ECOLOGICAL SPACE: The rich are damaging the poor!

UCLA have provided evidence of another universally accepted truth - that the rich have larger eco-feet. Is this more numbers or re-packaged numbers to confuse the consumer and baffle the policy-makers? Historically, there is strong evidence that the richer countries have "environmentally damaged" other [usually poorer] countries through their actions. Here, some eco-economists quantify this. Evidence on CC is that "Greenhouse emissions from low-income countries have imposed $740 billion of damage on rich countries, while in return rich countries have imposed $2.3 trillion of damage." It strikes me as odd that a cost-benefit study looks only at costs. The policy action from such figures is unclear [OK, I should have google-d the original paper and read it]. Is the net damage of $3 trillion efficient? Expect more silo-ed studies like this putting numbers to CC. Probably a [life]raft of Willingness to Pay studies aswell. It all points to a empty "so what?". Or does it, my willingness to be proved wrong, remains high. If there is a transfer of funds as hoped for: "This is an accounting tool that allows you to say how much the high-income world owes the low-income world for the environmental externalities we impose on them,"], then let's hope it doesnt get spent on Mercedes and Gucci ...

Source: Guardian (UK)

The environmental damage caused to developing nations by the world's richest countries amounts to more than the entire third world debt of $1.8 trillion, according to the first systematic global analysis of the ecological damage imposed by rich countries.
Using data from the World Bank and the UN's Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the researchers examined so-called "environmental externalities" or costs that are not included in the prices paid for goods but which cover ecological damage linked to their consumption. They focused on six areas: greenhouse gas emissions, ozone layer depletion, agriculture, deforestation, overfishing and converting mangrove swamps into shrimp farms.
Greenhouse emissions from low-income countries have imposed $740 billion of damage on rich countries, while in return rich countries have imposed $2.3 trillion of damage. This damage includes, for example, flooding from more severe storms as a result of climate change.
Likewise, CFC emissions from rich countries have inflicted between $25 billion and £57 billion of damage to the poorest countries. Increased ultraviolet levels from the ozone hole have led to higher healthcare costs from skin cancer and eye problems. The converse figure is between $0.58 and $1.3 billion.
"We know already that climate change is a huge injustice inflicted on the poor," said Dr Neil Adger at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research in Norwich, who was not involved in the research, "This paper is actually the first systematic quantification to produce a map of that ecological debt. Not only for climate change but also for these other areas."
"This is an accounting tool that allows you to say how much the high-income world owes the low-income world for the environmental externalities we impose on them," he said.
More here.

No comments: