******************************************************************
TPSIPOL FORUM: DEMOCRATIC RED (RED)
SPECIAL TO THE NETWORK DEMOCRATIC
can reconcile economic growth with sustainable development?
On a knife-edge entre climate change and the Millennium Development Goals 30/06/2008
TPSIPOL FORUM: DEMOCRATIC RED (RED)
SPECIAL TO THE NETWORK DEMOCRATIC
can reconcile economic growth with sustainable development?
On a knife-edge entre climate change and the Millennium Development Goals 30/06/2008
Http: / / groups.yahoo.com / group / choice ********* ************************************************** *******
(RED) / Geneva
Oswaldo de Rivero
http://oswaldoderivero.blogspot.com/
Arts. rels.
(1) In English: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eleccion/message/25152
(2) Sustainable Development Conference at the Institute of International Studies in Geneva http://eadi. org/gc2008 /
(3) http://community.eldis.org/.5995c74a
(4) http://www.gc2008.net/blog/
original English Translation
INSTITUTE OF SENIOR
AND DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA
Conference Ambassador Oswaldo de Rivero
CAN ECONOMIC reconciled with the growing
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT? 06/26/1908
I do not think that economic growth may be sustainable today. I hope so, but it is not. Very easy to use the term sustainable development, but what we're using, there is nothing that an oxymoron. Sustainable development does not exist for the simple reason that almost all production of goods and services in the global economy is made with non-renewable fossil fuels and pollutants, which are very far from being replaced.
Over 75% of energy used globally is composed of fossil fuels, oil, coal and gas, our civilization is far from overcome these polluting energy. The most one can do now is more radically reducing their emissions. Renewable energies that would enable sustainable growth of GDP are not just around the corner. Today oil is the king and are not renewable energy heir to any successor to his throne. There
enthusiastically about hydrogen but this element is not a power in itself to put it directly into the gas tank of the car because it is always mixed with oxygen in the water. To remove it take a lot of fossil energy. Another possibility is fusion energy hydrogen plasma, this energy would be like find the Holy Grail and start producing energy from the sun in the Earth itself, but not so easy, it is still very expensive but it takes many years of research and billions of dollars.
solar energy and wind have been developed considerably in recent years in industrialized countries but the problem that both of them is still the cost, the size of their facilities and especially the storage of surplus energy for days without sun or wind . The biofuel are is another possible alternative, but this proved that using food for cars has not been a good idea and also that this energy can replace oil would require doubling available agricultural land which would be ethically and politically unacceptable.
Today there is still no single renewable energy capable of replacing the nearly 90 million barrels of oil needed to generate 320 billion kilowatt-hours annually to produce 54 trillion dollars in goods and services in the global economy .
Fossil fuels will only be replaced only in part, by a combination of renewable energy is cheaper and can be stored as hydrocarbons, but to get there still requires many years of research, billions of dollars and especially political will Governments with more advanced science because there are market forces alone which will replace the oil alone. Experience has shown that the recent technological revolution achieved with satellite communications, integrated circuits, computers and the Internet were products of state policies during the military competition of the Cold War.
Today a global economy driven by the intensive use of polluting fossil fuels to heat up the planet has made our civilization in one of the most serious dilemmas I have ever experienced. In fact, low per capita consumption of fossil fuels leads to the economic infeasibility of an nation, but a high per capita consumption by all nations leads to the impossibility of our civilization. For the first time, the energy dilemma has put ecology at the center of the target, not only of countries but of all mankind.
Indeed, today to find out where our civilization will need to know more ecology than economy. Economic science was a civilization that dominated the production of smoke that began 200 years ago and today is ecologically dead. Now ecology science is becoming a sustainable civilization, yet far, which tells us that not only need new renewable energy to survive but, above all, we need to change our consumption patterns.
Today, the global consumption pattern is what I call in my book The Myth of Development, "California model." It's an unsustainable urban expansion on agricultural land, which consumes more water, food and energy, whose main economic activity is "shopping" and where the private car is king. A model that produces an enormous amount of emissions of carbon dioxide heats the planet and unsustainable mountain of garbage and toxic waste.
California global replica model has exceeded our urban civilization, the imprint of the human species on the planet. This should be a maximum of 1.8 hectares of use of nonrenewable resources per person on Earth is now, of 2.2 hectares. And 25% are overdrawn on the sustainable use of the planet.
What if we gave them 5 billion credit cards to all inhabitants of poor countries to consume as the 1000 million people in rich countries. According to Professor Jarred Diamond inhabitants of rich countries use 32 times more than those of poor countries so if they consume as the inhabitants of rich countries, it would be ecologically world population of 72 billion, something the planet can not hold, we would have to buy another.
If we want sustainable development, not only have to change the pattern of energy but also have to change our consumption patterns. This change should be done mostly in affluent societies the consumption of industrialized countries are those that are now transmitting the California model unsustainable, through advertising and global trade, hundreds of millions of people around the world.
However, changing consumption patterns of the California model is extremely difficult, because the poor aspire to live like the rich who already live like Californians. Change the aspirations of the poor and lifestyle of the rich is not easy because it involves, rather than a socio-political revolution, an ethical revolution that will allow us to exercise self-control over our ego's desire to possess and consume the material objects that have other and new creating relentless advertising and marketing.
may begin to change our consumption patterns as a result of significant increase in the coming decades, energy prices, water, food and forced to the great ecological disasters, droughts, famines, hurricanes, mega -forest fires, loss of glaciers and rising sea levels as a result of global warming the planet. In any case, history teaches us that homo sapiens only change ethically as a result of great suffering and tragedy.
According to the study of the organization "Evaluation of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, conducted by 1,300 experts from 95 countries, reveals that 60% of the ecosystems that support life on Earth are being degraded because they are used in a non- sustainable. This study concludes that in the last 50 years the GDP growth to keep consumption patterns, particularly in developed consumer societies has deteriorated ecosystems more rapidly and deeper than at any other time in history. The GNP is growing but the planet is not growing.
can not continue with fiction to interpret an annual growth of GNP, which prey on non-renewable natural resources and using the environment as a raw material increased the wealth of nations. However, the World Bank, IMF and United Nations itself and most economists and politicians revere this growth as the indicator of the progress and happiness. This veneration of the destruction of the habitat itself is as illogical as thinking venerate the growth of cancer cells, which grow also destroying their own bodies Perhaps future generations in the next millennium, when considering the way we produce and consume of our civilization, classified GNP as the measure of our barbarity.
Despite this reality, for example, now comes to China for its high growth of GNP, as an example of development for all countries. Today, most international news only describe the Chinese economic miracle but say almost nothing of the unprecedented ecological disaster that submerged China.
The reality behind the miracle is that China's urban population is growing at an incredible rate of around 30 million a year within a habitat, where a third of the land suffers from erosion and is disabled for agriculture, where 75% of rivers and lakes contaminated, with 90% of underground sources of water is contaminated. Today there are 400 Chinese cities are short of water and almost all of them also suffer from one of the worst air pollution and water in the world that causes almost 400 000 premature deaths annually, according to the World Bank. The mega-
environmental devastation produced by the Chinese miracle is over the fulminate to be hundreds of thousands of unexpected social protest. Concerned about the increasing protests, the Chinese Communist Party drew up a "Green GDP" which after deduction of growth, the cost of nonrenewable resources. This green growth rate came not apply because if had been made, would have had to admit that the average growth of GDP of China, during the last 20 years (1985-2005) had not been about 10%, because he would have had to discount, according to World Bank , 5.8% for ecological costs. It would then only an annual average of 4.2%. Fortunately today there
researchers seeking other than the GDP calculation. Within this new approach to the wealth of nations teachers Daly and Cobb, created in 1980, the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare GNP discounting air pollution, destruction of agricultural land and deterioration of the ozone layer. This index applied to economic growth United States showed that the per-capita income of Americans had fallen 10% since 1976. Other U.S. non-governmental group created a new indicator called Genuine Wealth Indicator (IRG). This measure also discounted, the external costs caused by the destruction of nonrenewable resources such as air pollution, energy waste by automobile traffic congestion and the costs of crime. Under this new indicator, the GNP of the States, according to statistics, grew by 56% between 1982-2002, would have grown only 2% in reality.
The idea of \u200b\u200breplacing the unsustainable rate of GDP this progress. More groups of experts are working on it, but it is necessary that the academic centers involved in development also have a critical attitude on the unsustainable growth of GNP. Recently, President Nicolas Sarkozy has set up an Expert Committee with the cooperation of the Nobel Prize-winning economists Joseph Stiglitz and Amartya Sen, to change the way it calculates the GDP of France. The purpose is to include factors on the quality of life.
As for Millennium Development Goals, I think that their goal principial is not really a development goal for halving the number of people living on Earth in extreme poverty, with dollar a day is not doing development, but to control the damage caused by global poverty. Making poor spend more than $ 2 per day earning is not development because they are still very poor who get 2, dollars, including those earning today 3, 4 and even $ 5 a day, now that food has risen and energy.
When we reviewed these goals of the millennium I was as Ambassador to the United Nations, the review coincided with the publication of my book The Myth of Development in New York that the UN was seen as an iconoclastic work by some and other realistic . I argued during the review of the goals of the Millennium goals were not addressed or even to create the foundations for a sustainable development process because it contained a coherent strategy to destroy the imbalance that exists today among the growing urban populations in poor countries and the availability of water, food and energy.
technocrats who designed the so-called Millennium Development Goals did not realize that since the dawn of humanity, the fundamental balance for a civilization to survive is that the population does not exceed the availability of resources critical to life as water , food and energy. This balance is what we call, in Myth of Development: Balancing Social and Physical. " All civilizations have depended on having enough food, water and energy for people, when they did it collapsed. However, the technocracy forgot this and let the invisible hand of market deal of physical and social imbalance. Today we see the consequences with the global food and energy crisis
Today the greatest threat to international stability was the physical and social imbalance that is forming in the world between the expansion of the global urban population in poor countries and the availability water, food and energy. In 2020, the population of poor countries reached about 6 600 million and is almost entirely urban. Unless there is a fall brutal and unprecedented birth rate and especially rural migration and an increase also unprecedented availability of food, water and energy, much of the world's population will live in urban physical and social imbalance in chaotic and mega cities with millions of poor and unemployed, malnourished, surrounded by pollution, socio-political turmoil and violence.
At the beginning of XXI century, the physical and social growing imbalance between food, energy, water and urban population is a socio-political fault line may cause a series of tremors and after the cataclysm of national disintegration. However, physical and social imbalance was ignored in the national agendas of underdeveloped states. In most of the governments of these countries has been a total disregard for the urban population growth and future water availability, food and energy. During the past 20 years burdened by debt were devoted more to obey the settings that are dictated by the IMF and World Bank to meet the growing physical and social imbalance that could now return viable nation states.
The technocrats also national and international non-viability never discuss national issues and problems of survival of the so-called developing countries. These issues are a kind of national and international taboo because they still live under the influence of more than half a century the myth of development, according to which all states underdeveloped nations will be a day nation states developed, prosperous societies of consumption and instant gratification to the image and likeness of industrialized societies and societies of mass consumption.
The truth is that, after more than fifty years of theory and policy development, real per capita income in more than seventy countries developing misnamed, is lower than they were twenty years ago. In a population of 5.5 billion in the developing world, there more than 4.000 million survive on only two or three dollars a day and more than 1.000 million less than a dollar a day. This reality invites rid of the myth of development, to abandon the quest for El Dorado and replace the elusive agenda of the wealth of nations in the urgent task of the survival of nations even more now that climate change and water shortages , food and energy are a reality. Priority today is to stabilize the urban population growth and increase the availability of water, energy and food to make urban life in poor countries will not become an inferno.
Achieving this balance physical and social is unrelated to any ideology and therefore likely to be concluded as the National Pact for Survival by all political actors in any poor country where the urban population is growing considerably and alarming symptoms of insecurity perceived water, energy and food.
The only condition for achieving Covenants Survival in poor countries is that there genuinely democratic regimes. Survival of Covenants must emerge from a large national dialogue and a great democratic consensus between governments, political parties, entrepreneurs, workers, academics and civil society in general and should work permanently so. Only with a constant exercise of this nature may help overcome the challenges the physical and social imbalances and climate change pose to the viability of many nation states subdesarrollaos. Thank
.
Copyright © Oswaldo de Rivero 2008
http://oswaldoderivero.blogspot.com/
Arts. rels.
(1) In English: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eleccion/message/25152
(2) Sustainable Development Conference at the Institute of International Studies in Geneva http://eadi. org/gc2008 /
(3) http://community.eldis.org/.5995c74a
(4) http://www.gc2008.net/blog/
original English Translation
INSTITUTE OF SENIOR
AND DEVELOPMENT INTERNATIONAL STUDIES UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA
Conference Ambassador Oswaldo de Rivero
CAN ECONOMIC reconciled with the growing
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT? 06/26/1908
I do not think that economic growth may be sustainable today. I hope so, but it is not. Very easy to use the term sustainable development, but what we're using, there is nothing that an oxymoron. Sustainable development does not exist for the simple reason that almost all production of goods and services in the global economy is made with non-renewable fossil fuels and pollutants, which are very far from being replaced.
Over 75% of energy used globally is composed of fossil fuels, oil, coal and gas, our civilization is far from overcome these polluting energy. The most one can do now is more radically reducing their emissions. Renewable energies that would enable sustainable growth of GDP are not just around the corner. Today oil is the king and are not renewable energy heir to any successor to his throne. There
enthusiastically about hydrogen but this element is not a power in itself to put it directly into the gas tank of the car because it is always mixed with oxygen in the water. To remove it take a lot of fossil energy. Another possibility is fusion energy hydrogen plasma, this energy would be like find the Holy Grail and start producing energy from the sun in the Earth itself, but not so easy, it is still very expensive but it takes many years of research and billions of dollars.
solar energy and wind have been developed considerably in recent years in industrialized countries but the problem that both of them is still the cost, the size of their facilities and especially the storage of surplus energy for days without sun or wind . The biofuel are is another possible alternative, but this proved that using food for cars has not been a good idea and also that this energy can replace oil would require doubling available agricultural land which would be ethically and politically unacceptable.
Today there is still no single renewable energy capable of replacing the nearly 90 million barrels of oil needed to generate 320 billion kilowatt-hours annually to produce 54 trillion dollars in goods and services in the global economy .
Fossil fuels will only be replaced only in part, by a combination of renewable energy is cheaper and can be stored as hydrocarbons, but to get there still requires many years of research, billions of dollars and especially political will Governments with more advanced science because there are market forces alone which will replace the oil alone. Experience has shown that the recent technological revolution achieved with satellite communications, integrated circuits, computers and the Internet were products of state policies during the military competition of the Cold War.
Today a global economy driven by the intensive use of polluting fossil fuels to heat up the planet has made our civilization in one of the most serious dilemmas I have ever experienced. In fact, low per capita consumption of fossil fuels leads to the economic infeasibility of an nation, but a high per capita consumption by all nations leads to the impossibility of our civilization. For the first time, the energy dilemma has put ecology at the center of the target, not only of countries but of all mankind.
Indeed, today to find out where our civilization will need to know more ecology than economy. Economic science was a civilization that dominated the production of smoke that began 200 years ago and today is ecologically dead. Now ecology science is becoming a sustainable civilization, yet far, which tells us that not only need new renewable energy to survive but, above all, we need to change our consumption patterns.
Today, the global consumption pattern is what I call in my book The Myth of Development, "California model." It's an unsustainable urban expansion on agricultural land, which consumes more water, food and energy, whose main economic activity is "shopping" and where the private car is king. A model that produces an enormous amount of emissions of carbon dioxide heats the planet and unsustainable mountain of garbage and toxic waste.
California global replica model has exceeded our urban civilization, the imprint of the human species on the planet. This should be a maximum of 1.8 hectares of use of nonrenewable resources per person on Earth is now, of 2.2 hectares. And 25% are overdrawn on the sustainable use of the planet.
What if we gave them 5 billion credit cards to all inhabitants of poor countries to consume as the 1000 million people in rich countries. According to Professor Jarred Diamond inhabitants of rich countries use 32 times more than those of poor countries so if they consume as the inhabitants of rich countries, it would be ecologically world population of 72 billion, something the planet can not hold, we would have to buy another.
If we want sustainable development, not only have to change the pattern of energy but also have to change our consumption patterns. This change should be done mostly in affluent societies the consumption of industrialized countries are those that are now transmitting the California model unsustainable, through advertising and global trade, hundreds of millions of people around the world.
However, changing consumption patterns of the California model is extremely difficult, because the poor aspire to live like the rich who already live like Californians. Change the aspirations of the poor and lifestyle of the rich is not easy because it involves, rather than a socio-political revolution, an ethical revolution that will allow us to exercise self-control over our ego's desire to possess and consume the material objects that have other and new creating relentless advertising and marketing.
may begin to change our consumption patterns as a result of significant increase in the coming decades, energy prices, water, food and forced to the great ecological disasters, droughts, famines, hurricanes, mega -forest fires, loss of glaciers and rising sea levels as a result of global warming the planet. In any case, history teaches us that homo sapiens only change ethically as a result of great suffering and tragedy.
According to the study of the organization "Evaluation of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, conducted by 1,300 experts from 95 countries, reveals that 60% of the ecosystems that support life on Earth are being degraded because they are used in a non- sustainable. This study concludes that in the last 50 years the GDP growth to keep consumption patterns, particularly in developed consumer societies has deteriorated ecosystems more rapidly and deeper than at any other time in history. The GNP is growing but the planet is not growing.
can not continue with fiction to interpret an annual growth of GNP, which prey on non-renewable natural resources and using the environment as a raw material increased the wealth of nations. However, the World Bank, IMF and United Nations itself and most economists and politicians revere this growth as the indicator of the progress and happiness. This veneration of the destruction of the habitat itself is as illogical as thinking venerate the growth of cancer cells, which grow also destroying their own bodies Perhaps future generations in the next millennium, when considering the way we produce and consume of our civilization, classified GNP as the measure of our barbarity.
Despite this reality, for example, now comes to China for its high growth of GNP, as an example of development for all countries. Today, most international news only describe the Chinese economic miracle but say almost nothing of the unprecedented ecological disaster that submerged China.
The reality behind the miracle is that China's urban population is growing at an incredible rate of around 30 million a year within a habitat, where a third of the land suffers from erosion and is disabled for agriculture, where 75% of rivers and lakes contaminated, with 90% of underground sources of water is contaminated. Today there are 400 Chinese cities are short of water and almost all of them also suffer from one of the worst air pollution and water in the world that causes almost 400 000 premature deaths annually, according to the World Bank. The mega-
environmental devastation produced by the Chinese miracle is over the fulminate to be hundreds of thousands of unexpected social protest. Concerned about the increasing protests, the Chinese Communist Party drew up a "Green GDP" which after deduction of growth, the cost of nonrenewable resources. This green growth rate came not apply because if had been made, would have had to admit that the average growth of GDP of China, during the last 20 years (1985-2005) had not been about 10%, because he would have had to discount, according to World Bank , 5.8% for ecological costs. It would then only an annual average of 4.2%. Fortunately today there
researchers seeking other than the GDP calculation. Within this new approach to the wealth of nations teachers Daly and Cobb, created in 1980, the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare GNP discounting air pollution, destruction of agricultural land and deterioration of the ozone layer. This index applied to economic growth United States showed that the per-capita income of Americans had fallen 10% since 1976. Other U.S. non-governmental group created a new indicator called Genuine Wealth Indicator (IRG). This measure also discounted, the external costs caused by the destruction of nonrenewable resources such as air pollution, energy waste by automobile traffic congestion and the costs of crime. Under this new indicator, the GNP of the States, according to statistics, grew by 56% between 1982-2002, would have grown only 2% in reality.
The idea of \u200b\u200breplacing the unsustainable rate of GDP this progress. More groups of experts are working on it, but it is necessary that the academic centers involved in development also have a critical attitude on the unsustainable growth of GNP. Recently, President Nicolas Sarkozy has set up an Expert Committee with the cooperation of the Nobel Prize-winning economists Joseph Stiglitz and Amartya Sen, to change the way it calculates the GDP of France. The purpose is to include factors on the quality of life.
As for Millennium Development Goals, I think that their goal principial is not really a development goal for halving the number of people living on Earth in extreme poverty, with dollar a day is not doing development, but to control the damage caused by global poverty. Making poor spend more than $ 2 per day earning is not development because they are still very poor who get 2, dollars, including those earning today 3, 4 and even $ 5 a day, now that food has risen and energy.
When we reviewed these goals of the millennium I was as Ambassador to the United Nations, the review coincided with the publication of my book The Myth of Development in New York that the UN was seen as an iconoclastic work by some and other realistic . I argued during the review of the goals of the Millennium goals were not addressed or even to create the foundations for a sustainable development process because it contained a coherent strategy to destroy the imbalance that exists today among the growing urban populations in poor countries and the availability of water, food and energy.
technocrats who designed the so-called Millennium Development Goals did not realize that since the dawn of humanity, the fundamental balance for a civilization to survive is that the population does not exceed the availability of resources critical to life as water , food and energy. This balance is what we call, in Myth of Development: Balancing Social and Physical. " All civilizations have depended on having enough food, water and energy for people, when they did it collapsed. However, the technocracy forgot this and let the invisible hand of market deal of physical and social imbalance. Today we see the consequences with the global food and energy crisis
Today the greatest threat to international stability was the physical and social imbalance that is forming in the world between the expansion of the global urban population in poor countries and the availability water, food and energy. In 2020, the population of poor countries reached about 6 600 million and is almost entirely urban. Unless there is a fall brutal and unprecedented birth rate and especially rural migration and an increase also unprecedented availability of food, water and energy, much of the world's population will live in urban physical and social imbalance in chaotic and mega cities with millions of poor and unemployed, malnourished, surrounded by pollution, socio-political turmoil and violence.
At the beginning of XXI century, the physical and social growing imbalance between food, energy, water and urban population is a socio-political fault line may cause a series of tremors and after the cataclysm of national disintegration. However, physical and social imbalance was ignored in the national agendas of underdeveloped states. In most of the governments of these countries has been a total disregard for the urban population growth and future water availability, food and energy. During the past 20 years burdened by debt were devoted more to obey the settings that are dictated by the IMF and World Bank to meet the growing physical and social imbalance that could now return viable nation states.
The technocrats also national and international non-viability never discuss national issues and problems of survival of the so-called developing countries. These issues are a kind of national and international taboo because they still live under the influence of more than half a century the myth of development, according to which all states underdeveloped nations will be a day nation states developed, prosperous societies of consumption and instant gratification to the image and likeness of industrialized societies and societies of mass consumption.
The truth is that, after more than fifty years of theory and policy development, real per capita income in more than seventy countries developing misnamed, is lower than they were twenty years ago. In a population of 5.5 billion in the developing world, there more than 4.000 million survive on only two or three dollars a day and more than 1.000 million less than a dollar a day. This reality invites rid of the myth of development, to abandon the quest for El Dorado and replace the elusive agenda of the wealth of nations in the urgent task of the survival of nations even more now that climate change and water shortages , food and energy are a reality. Priority today is to stabilize the urban population growth and increase the availability of water, energy and food to make urban life in poor countries will not become an inferno.
Achieving this balance physical and social is unrelated to any ideology and therefore likely to be concluded as the National Pact for Survival by all political actors in any poor country where the urban population is growing considerably and alarming symptoms of insecurity perceived water, energy and food.
The only condition for achieving Covenants Survival in poor countries is that there genuinely democratic regimes. Survival of Covenants must emerge from a large national dialogue and a great democratic consensus between governments, political parties, entrepreneurs, workers, academics and civil society in general and should work permanently so. Only with a constant exercise of this nature may help overcome the challenges the physical and social imbalances and climate change pose to the viability of many nation states subdesarrollaos. Thank
.
Copyright © Oswaldo de Rivero 2008
0 comments:
Post a Comment