Since 1987 WCED "Our common future" A NO BRAINER was to find the way to close the renewable energy technology gap in order to slowly, but surely transition from the environmentally dirty economy to the environmentally clean economy so as to face the environment issues like global warming/climate change head on,..........
But this need was not the focus to my knowledge of the 1997 Kyoto protocol or the 2012 UNCSD conference or the 2015 Paris agreement or sustainable development goals, old and current or the recent COP27 or talking points of the UNFCCC. Like the word "transition" is toxic.
And this raises the question, Who benefits from blocking the transition from the environmentally dirty economy to the environmentally clean economy?
What do you think?
Please share your own views
In the long run, everyone will surely benefit much more from a clean environment because of it has less hazardous consequences on the global climate.
On the other hand, dirty environment resulting from short-term economic prosperity is the cause of the current
life-threatening climate change menace.
Harold, thank you for taking the time to comment.
I agree with your observations, but the question is: Who benefits from blocking the transition from the environmentally dirty economy to the environmentally clean economy?
What do you think?
Lucio Muñoz This is an interesting puzzle.. "who benefits from blocking the transition..." Just wanted to know before commenting: "Is there a significant opposition to the transition?". If yes, it is important to understand the dynamics of the opposition to the transition from a political economy perspective. To my mind, the opposition may come from lobbies who have made significant investments in highly polluting (toxic) industrial sectors and transition from the same is going to be highly prohibitive in nature in terms of remediation and the investments in technologies and actions that required for the same. From another standpoint, the so called blockade to such a transition may emanate from an understanding of the ethicality or legitimacy involved in such a transition, where, those (actors) opposing to the transition may think that it's not their responsibility to do so, as they may not have significantly contributed to the problems associated with the 'dirty growth'.
Dear P K, thank you for writing. Smart opposition stays behind the scene, yes lobbies are an indicator, but the problem can be easily simplified....
Just think who the losers would be if we leave the dirty economy? or think about the emission production problem as an addiction problem, who would benefit for keeping the addition going and if possible, even deeping it?
You do not see the words green markets, transition to clean markets, in all formal environmental related efforts led by UN institutions and their documents and communicates that came after WCED 1987 "Our common future". You only see MITIGATION, ADAPTATION...COMPENSATION...... which means THE DIRTY ECONOMY IS HERE TO STAY....Just look at the COP27 communicate:
COP27 Reaches Breakthrough Agreement on New “Loss and Damage” Fund for Vulnerable Countries
https://unfccc.int/news/cop27-reaches-breakthrough-agreement-on-new-loss-and-damage-fund-for-vulnerable-countries
Nothing is sad about HOW TO LEAVE THE ADDICTION, which says a lot.
With this additional backgrown you may be able to see who would benefit from keeping this addiction going so the question:
Who benefits from blocking the transition from the environmentally dirty economy to the environmentally clean economy?
What do you think?
The primary beneficiaries of blocking the transition from the environmentally dirty economy to the environmentally clean economy are those who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. This could include corporations and industries that rely heavily on fossil fuels and other non-renewable energy sources, as well as governments that are heavily invested in such industries. Additionally, those who are not ready to commit to the costly investments necessary for transitioning to a cleaner economy also benefit from delaying the process. Finally, those who are resistant to change and/or resistant to environmental regulations can also benefit from blocking the transition.
Agreed Peter, but we can make it narrow.
Those who benefit the most are the owners of fossil fuels reserves , the suppliers of fossil fuels products, and the governments that benefit from that revenue, specially those who love wars and/or non-democratic values.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Political Science
- International History and Politics
- Globalization