Economic development is a fundamental right of all Countries recognized by international law. However, international agreements like the Paris Agreement set binding targets for countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to address climate change. How can countries balance economic growth and environmental conservation to meet climate change requisites?
Countries can balance economic growth and environmental conservation by investing in renewable energy, adopting sustainable industrial practices, implementing carbon pricing, fostering public-private partnerships, and developing green infrastructure. International collaboration and climate financing can support developing nations in a just transition. These strategies enable economic prosperity while meeting climate commitments.
Implementing policies that promote sustainable development can help ensure that economic growth does not come at the expense of the environment. This includes integrating environmental considerations into economic planning and decision-making. Governments can support research and development of renewable energy sources, energy efficiency technologies, and sustainable agricultural practices. Investing in green technologies can create new industries and job opportunities while reducing environmental impact. Preserving and restoring natural ecosystems can provide long-term economic benefits. Investments in forests, wetlands, and biodiversity can enhance resilience to climate change while providing goods and services that contribute to the economy. Governments and businesses should employ Ibrar Ahmad adaptive management practices that allow for flexibility in resource use and management based on changing environmental conditions and scientific knowledge.
Ibrar, do not you think that that international law should have been updated since 2012 Rio + 20 to say "GREEN ECONOMIC development is a fundamental right of all Countries recognized by international law.?
Then the Paris agreement may not have been needed then in that form as sustainable development thinking would have been left behind since the tendency to maximize green profit in green markets would have made climate change policies good profit making opportunity via the drive to produce at the lowest green market cost and therefore lowest green market price possible. Without green markets, we can pretend to balance traditional economic growth and conservation to meet climate change goals but knowing that we should expect to get nowhere as you will still be making traditional money at the expense of the environment due to environmental cost externalization while working on conservation as the environmental cost associated with growth is not accounted for in its pricing mechanism.
Have you ever thought about thinking beyond traditional market growth as the WCED 1987 indicated we should do?
Balancing economic growth with environmental obligations under international law requires adopting a model of sustainable development, as affirmed in Principle 3 of the Rio Declaration (1992). Instruments like the Paris Agreement promote “common but differentiated responsibilities” (CBDR), recognizing the right to development while urging climate action. Countries can achieve this balance through green technologies, climate finance mechanisms, and inclusive policy frameworks that decouple GDP growth from carbon emissions (UNEP, 2021). The challenge lies not in choosing between growth and conservation, but in integrating them.
Ibrar Ahmad "Paris Agreement set binding targets"
Kind of. Those targets (like staying well below 2C warming) don't seem to be even officially taken especially seriously anymore:
https://climate.copernicus.eu/why-do-we-keep-talking-about-15degc-and-2degc-above-pre-industrial-era
"How can countries balance economic growth and environmental conservation to meet climate change requisites?"
Realistically? Some combination of renewables, nuclear and energy storage + improved energy efficiency + cleaner transport, like electric cars
Yes, I know already this combination sounds somewhat expensive and does not achieve net zero, but at least appear a bit more realistic.
Economic development fails in the face of climate "requisites."
Net zero Europe is deindustrialising while China burns coal
https://www.yahoo.com/news/net-zero-europe-deindustrialising-while-212713603.html
Environmental virtue signaling that will accomplish nothing for the environment is the equivalent of self-flagellants during the black death.
https://psychologyandeducation.net/pae/index.php/pae/article/view/9589
Economic development must integrate climate change goals by investing in green infrastructure, adopting clean energy, and aligning policies with global climate commitments while ensuring equity.
Hachemi Brikel, in linked article: "Additionally, challenging climate conditions increase weather-related illnesses, such as respiratory diseases, resulting in higher absenteeism rates."
To be precise respiratory infections are primarily modulated by lower temperatures, so warming of local climate means slightly lower rates of those infections and related absenteeism, thus mentioning them next to threats of climate warming may appear a bit confusing.
CC: Phil Geis
Economic development requires aligning growth with climate goals by promoting green infrastructure, renewable energy, and sustainable industrialization; climate finance, technology transfer, and international cooperation are essential requisites for balancing development and climate action.
Economic development and climate change requisites must be balanced through sustainable policies like green infrastructure investment, carbon pricing, climate-resilient agriculture, and clean energy transition, ensuring that growth does not come at the expense of ecological stability or long-term planetary health.
Please be aware - there is no such thing as "international law". there is a loose network of treaties, casual commitments/agreements (ala Paris) and international courts (recognized by few nations).
Economic development is a fundamental right? Please elaborate.
Few are complying with Paris so it as not a problem for economic growth.
Green, sustainable, ecofriendly, etc. are marketing terms and have no real substance.
Phil Geis Ah, so "international law" is just a bunch of loosely tied strings and casual handshakes—I guess we’re all just one big happy family of treaties and unspoken promises. If only we could send out some "Please RSVP" invitations for those international courts! 🎉
As for "economic development being a fundamental right"—well, I guess you could say it’s like the pizza of rights: it’s essential, everyone wants a slice, and sometimes it’s delivered cold. 🍕 But hey, if Paris isn’t a problem for economic growth, I’m sure global warming will be just as friendly! 😎
And marketing terms like "green," "sustainable," and "eco-friendly"? Absolutely, they’re just buzzwords we all use to sell electric cars and compostable coffee cups. Totally empty, right? Next, we’ll be calling them "just trends" that’ll blow over like the "fidget spinner" craze. 🙃
Thanks for the fun chat—I’ll be sure to take these "casual commitments" with a side of eco-friendly irony. 🌎
- Badges
- Science topic