The Economics of Enough_ How to Run the Economy as if the Future Matters - Diane Coyle [27]
This is a conclusion that will be rejected by environmentalists, many of whom have eagerly embraced the idea that the economy doesn’t need to grow to make people happier. If not growing—or even shrinking—the economy could be better managed, the environmental pressure of the world’s nearly 7 billion inhabitants on the planet could clearly be reduced, and everyone would be happier.
So the fact that the economy does need to grow to improve society’s well-being puts human happiness back on a collision course with environmental sustainability. There is no win-win outcome of being able to abandon economic growth and make voters happier at the same time. With those 7 billion people all wanting their own share of GDP to rise, how can their wishes possibly be satisfied without destroying the climate and denuding the Earth of other resources? Some campaigners believe climate change is already causing more extreme weather phenomena—floods, droughts, hurricanes—and changing the normal seasonal patterns around which the production of food for the growing number of people has been shaped. Many countries have already recently experienced unusual weather patterns, which could be interpreted as frightening omens of the impact of global warming on everyday life, and on the structure and potential of the economy. Not all of these events have affected distant countries—unusually severe or unpredictable weather has been experienced in a number of Western countries. Many environmentalists believe this is related to anthropogenic climate change, although there are strong differences of opinion on this question. If temperatures are likely to rise enough to cause upheavals in the climate in most countries, destroying lives, homes, and livelihoods, should people be made to settle for less now in order that there is an economic future, even if it makes them unhappier?
This chapter explores the environmental question, which has become one of the most widely discussed but also increasingly contentious areas of public policy today. Do we need sustainable growth, which will help prevent environmental degradation and avert climate change, rather than plain old-fashioned economic growth? If so, what is it? With so many books and research papers written about environmental sustainability, I will be picking out some key issues for the questions about social welfare.
The issues will prove to be similar when I look at sustainability from some different perspectives in the following chapters—because growth needs to be financially, politically, and socially sustainable as well as environmentally sustainable. But this chapter starts with the environmental questions, which many people would consider to be the most urgent. It is certainly the context in which the policy dilemmas seem most acute and the arguments have become increasingly ill-tempered. On the one hand, for many people the threat of catastrophic climate change is the most serious risk to our way of life, or possibly life itself—and most Western governments are already implementing policies to address and mitigate the threat. On the other hand, the political and social imperative to continue delivering economic growth makes it difficult to achieve large reductions in adverse environmental effects—and the political opposition to environmental policies is vigorous. Not surprisingly, the debate is highly charged because a lot is at stake, and the political divisions are hardening—both between rich and poor countries and in domestic politics between those who would halt growth and those who do not believe the environmental threat is so serious that such drastic action is needed.
What’s the best way to navigate through such a sharp difference of opinion? Especially for what I suspect is the silent majority who don’t have strong views about climate science, who are vaguely worried that it might be true, but not to the extent of wanting to make large material sacrifices? I argue here that the route out of the dilemma is to lengthen the time frame we consider when making