An internet search of "green economy and UN" leads to the following definition in Wikipedia:
-
“Green Economy The green economy is defined as economy that aims at reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities, and that aims for sustainable development without degrading the environment. It is closely related with ecological economics, but has a more politically applied focus. The 2011 UNEP Green Economy Report argues "that to be green, an economy must not only be efficient, but also fair. Fairness implies recognizing global and country level equity dimensions, particularly in assuring a just transition to an economy that is low-carbon, resource efficient, and socially inclusive."
-
If green economies work through green markets, which aim at making pollution/carbon reduction a profitable exercise for firms/the economy through green market pricing, then a green economy is a world where green producers and green consumers respond to green market price signals to clear the market.
-
This seems to be inconsistent with the UN view above of green economy. Therefore, I think the UN is using a definition of green economy inconsistent with the nature of green markets, What do you think?
Definitions can be changed so not wrong but old definitions may be used
I think green economy is an approach. It isnt a single concept. Green economy has principles. But it has no system or theory in deep.
Seda, good day. Thank you for writing.
The question relates to whether the UN is using a definition that is inconsistent with the nature of the green economy.
Think carefully....
Do you think that the definition of Green Economy the UN is using is the right one? If yes, why do you think so?. If not, why do you think so?.
Respectfully yours;
Lucio
Hello Lucio,
I'm with Seda as a green economy is an approach towards achieving SDG goals. The definition itself can be adapted with the context. I thin UNEP definition is not the wrong just way of using in practice is the things. I also used the UNEP definition in my research.
All the best
Good day Sony, thank you for writing
Think about it, the traditional economy is an approach to pure capitalistic goals, and it is supported by the traditional market theory; and therefore, this market is cleared by traditional market prices. It is a socially and environmentally unfriendly economy approach.
-
The green economy is an approach to green capitalism, and it is supposed to be supported by green market theory; and therefore, this new market is cleared by green market prices. It is a socially unfriendly, environmentally friendly economy approach.
-
If the green economy definition, and therefore, the approach to achieve the SD goals the UN is using is not consistent by green markets and green market pricing thinking, then you have a DWARF green economy approach, not a green economy approach to eco-economic issues, pointing to a serious violation of the theory-practice consistency principle...trying to solve green market issues using non-green market thinking...
-
Just think about it....
-
You can find some good food for thoughts in the following article:
The Flipping of Traditional Economic Thinking: Contrasting the Working of Dwarf Green Market Thinking with that of Green Market Thinking to Highlight Main Differences and Implications
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334535200_The_Flipping_of_Traditional_Economic_Thinking_Contrasting_the_Working_of_Dwarf_Green_Market_Thinking_with_that_of_Green_Market_Thinking_to_Highlight_Main_Differences_and_Implications
-
It is Thanksgiving Day in Canada, my best wishes to all!.
To me, I think that the UN used the definition of GE not as a methodology to ensure the interactions between humans. That's my personal opinion. Anyway, this is an interesting question.
Good day Abdelnaser, thank you for taking the time to write.
To me it is strange to see the UN researchers using a definition of green economy with an embedded theory-practice inconsistency that can easily be pointed out......,
that definition of green markets they provide there is more like a definition of an environmental management based economy or market......,
if that the case, why they just do that,,,and called that definition environmental management based markets....,,,.How can you measure a concept with the wrong definitition?....How can you measure green market performance using environmental management market tools....two different markets.....it is puzzling to me....
Have a nice day!
An interesting issue. Central, key, international organizations should use appropriate, i.e. scientifically consistent definitions of concepts that relate to the main issues and problems that these institutions deal with.
Greetings,
Dariusz Prokopowicz
You are right Dariusz, clear concepts not just allow for easy communiction of results from programs, they also allow for the clearity needed to establish evaluation and monitoring systems...Talking about green markets when they are actually talking about dwarf green markets or non-green markets is not just a problem, it is a violation of the theory-practice consistency principle....
Have a nice day!
Dear friends, you may find the following article full of food for thoughts so I am sharing it here for you to check when you have time:
Sustainability thoughts 130: Can green economies and green growth exist without green markets? If not, why not? What is the current main development implication of this?
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346438700_Sustainability_thoughts_130_Can_green_economies_and_green_growth_exist_without_green_markets_If_not_why_not_What_is_the_current_main_development_implication_of_this
I recently came across a continuum related to regenerative development. The author suggested that there is a fairly 'smooth' gradation between:
Conventional, Green (doing less harm), Sustainable (doing no harm), Restorative (putting things back to the way they were), Regenerative. They were specifically speaking of 'development' but it has been shown to apply for other concepts, too. I wonder if it can be applied to 'economics' effectively? In which case, when you, Lucio, are speaking of 'green', is you speaking about a different point on that continuum? Are you talking about a regenerative economy?
Dear Douglas, thank you for taking the time to write, but you did not try to answer the question so I can have an idea of the nature of your thinking.....
The question is about whether or not the concept of green economy being used by UN agencies is the right one; and the reason I asked it is simply because it is a fact that there can not be green economies without green markets, and that definition is based on non-green markets.... If we assume that they took that definition in 2012 because of the green market paradigm shift knowledge gap created when we shift from perfect traditional market thinking to perfect green market thinking, then it is understandable and okay to start with the wrong foot.... but now 2020 we know.....From my point of view, calling non-green economies green or calling non-green growth green or calling non-green market green is equivalent to creating "alternative academic facts" as assuming that non-green components are green violates the theory-practice consistency principle in development theory and market theory...
Green markets support a green economy when you make more money as you pollute less as less pollution content in products and services means lower green market prices, which means higher production and consumption with less pollution content...this trayectory leads in the end to a transition from green markets to clean markets....
Anyway, given your comment, I can say that there was only one traditional market model and all industries and all consumers fit that model....You make money by producing more and more at the lowest traditional market cost possible while generating more and more social and environmental externalities in the process...this market only cares about economic goals...
By the same token, there is only one green market model and all green industries and all green consumers fit that model....you make money by producing more and more at the lowest green market cost possible while generating less and less environmental externalities in the process....this market cares about both the economy and the environment....
If there is a traditional market there is a traditional economy, if there is a green market, there is a green economy; otherwise those economies do not exist.....
That gradation is not based on perfect market thinking,....
Green companies have an incentive to go the extra mile in reducing or eliminating pollutions as then they will have lower green prices so they can enhance their green image, some of them then harming less, others doing no harm , other investing in restoration or regeneration....If you add other economic incentives you can nurture real green market behavior...
You will find the coming paper interesting:
Sustainability thoughts 130: Can green economies and green growth exist without green markets? If not, why not? What is the current main development implication of this?
Article Sustainability thoughts 130: Can green economies and green g...
If you would like to provide your view on the question, whether you agree with me or not, please do it so we can go back to the question at hand.
Have a nice day
Excellent question. These scientific contributions of the current year 2020 and contained in the Scopus academic directory, will allow you to establish your own opinion criteria. I hope this information is useful to you. Thanks for your excellent question, Lucio Muñoz
- Green economy, degradation narratives, and land-use conflicts in Tanzania
- Is Green Chemistry a feasible tool for the implementation of a circular economy?
- A green delivery-pickup problem for home hemodialysis machines; sharing economy in distributing scarce resources
- Economic complexity and the green economy
- How do environmental technologies affect green growth? Evidence from BRICS economies
- Spatial planning dysfunction in East Kalimantan to support green economy
- Implementation of green chemistry principles in circular economy system towards sustainable development goals: Challenges and perspectives
- Modeling the role of environmental regulations in regional green economy efficiency of China: Empirical evidence from super efficiency DEA-Tobit model
- Improving sustainable development and firm performance in emerging economies by implementing green supply chain activities
- Badges
- Science topic