Gabriel Gerzon

Marianne Romano
MCC240—Journalism & Society
November 2nd, 2009
The Transition to the Sustainable Economy

Sustainable Economy: “an economic system that meets the needs of its current members
without compromising the prospects of future generations.”1

Surprisingly enough, insights into the shift of consciousness necessary for a

transition to a sustainable socioeconomic system can be found in a small, independent

country that rests in the mountains of the Himalayas and carries a Gross Domestic

Product (hereafter, GDP) of only one tenth the United States.2 In 2008, Bhutan became

the first country to implement an alternative socioeconomic index to GDP by adopting

the guiding principle of “Gross National Happiness” (hereafter, GNH). Its cheeky name

notwithstanding, it is no gimmick; the Bhutanese are dead serious about quantifying

happiness to improve the lives of its citizens and future generations.

Just as the U.S. sends out enumerators to collect data once a decade for the

Census, Bhutanese social workers collect data from each family using a scientific survey

designed to quantify their quality of life. The nine “dimensions” collected through the

survey are: time use, living standards, good governance, psychological well-being,

community fatality, culture, health, education and ecology. The answers provided on

survey translate into scores for these “dimensions,” which is then adapted into

quantifiable indicators of well-being.3

For all of the West’s supposed lifestyle superiority, the United States ranked only

16th in world happiness in 2008 according to the World Values Survey reported in the

Perspectives on Psychological Science. Whatever one may make of Bhutan’s system,

there is no doubt it offers an alternative to the West’s short-term, profit driven economic
system that has proved its instability and inherent deficiency with the economic collapse

of 2008. Rather than pursue the West’s impersonal and untenable concept of growth and

development, the Bhutanese government has decided to be accountable first and foremost

to the happiness of its own citizenry. One astounding short-term result of the changeover

was the abdication of the king’s throne in favor of a parliamentary democracy because

the indictors gleaned from the GNH suggested that democracy would make people

happier, and thus improve productivity.4 Bhutan has showed the developed world that

alternative, sustainable paradigms do exist.

Admittedly, it would be both economic and political suicide to adopt such an

index any time soon in the West. There are, however, real lessons to be draw from the

Bhutanese to help realize Sir Nicholas Stern’s vision for a transformation of the West’s

sociopolitical-economic system. As Albert Einstein once said, “No problem can be

solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” In a sustainable economy

then, economic well-being cannot solely be determined and reported to the public by

environmentally indifferent barometers such as GDP and the Dow Jones average. The

priority shift necessary to abate climate change is not widely disseminated though by the

media with its constrained mentality on reporting business and climate. As just one of

many examples, the major news channels hailed the Dow Jones recent climb to 10,000

points as the best of indicators the economy is recovering while the housing and job

markets continue to flounder. A veritable change in business practices and monetary

indexes would have a profound effect on how mainstream media would report on

business and the environment.

In the rest of this essay I will examine a few key progressive voices that espouse
such a radical change in the economic agenda, some dangers if we do not adopt such an

agenda, the obstacles in achieving their visions, and lastly reasons to hope these obstacles

will be overcome.

There are lesser-known, forward-thinking voices in the realms of media (Rachel

Maddow on MSNBC), politics (Henry Waxman D-CA), and economy (Nicholas Stern,

Paul Krugman) who recognize a return to business-as-usual would only postpone an even

larger collapse of the global system and endanger posterity further. These enlightened

minds, if they only reached a wider audience, could help convince the public that

mankind must elevate to the consciousness of eco-revolution and jettison the Industrial-

Revolution worldview that has impoverished the natural world for the past 150 years.

Part of initiating the changeover in consciousness from natural resources as infinite and

under man’s dominion as finite and as a symbiotic partnership is as simple as creating

alternative socioeconomic indexes that remove our old, clouded lens and insert a fresh,

transparent one that allows us to more easily and justly take into account the social and

environmental costs of doing business in the 21st century.

In the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, Mr. Stern gives

persuasive data on both the need for decisive action on climate change and what decisive

action should look like. To paraphrase, it is still worth tackling the issue of climate

change because of the indisputable disruption to life on Earth if the concentration of

carbon dioxide is not reined in from where it currently sits at 387 parts per million

(hereafter, ppm) to 350 ppm. If emissions continue unabated, double pre-Industrial

Revolution levels of carbon dioxide (550 ppm) could be reached as early as 2035.5 This

could mean a global temperature rise of two to five degrees Celsius by the end of the
century, introducing mankind to an unstable climate that has never been experienced

before. There are a plethora of frightening figures offered up by Stern and others, but

principal one among them economically speaking is that unabated climate change could

cut global GDP from 5-20%, throwing the world into socioeconomic chaos.6 This range

hinges largely on how many degrees the world heats, which is impossible to know for

sure. As Mr. Stern reminds, ““Policy on climate change is in large measure about

reducing risks. They cannot be fully eliminated, but they can be substantially reduced.” 7

We must reduce these risks to our best abilities for the well being of posterity.

If the world heats by four or more, mankind will have far greater concerns than

the economy—it is at that level severe disruptions to global food production will take

place. Each day that passes without decisive action brings mankind closer to experiencing

a climate uncomplimentary to our existence. No less than mankind’s survival may be at

stake. Here is what Mr. Stern proposes is necessary to negate such possibilities:

1. An 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by

2050 for developed countries based on quantitative emissions targets.
Developing or Third World countries would be responsible for a 50%
reduction. Emissions must peak sometime between 2020-2030. This can
be accomplished through three elements:
a. Carbon pricing- taxing the sale and emission of carbon will reverse the
practice of externalized energy costs and reveal the true cost.
b. Carbon technology- “technology policy should drive the large-scale
development and use of a range of low-carbon and high-efficiency
products.” 8
c. Energy Efficiency-“ Globally, support for energy research and
development should at least double; support for the deployment of
low-carbon technologies should be increased by up to five times.”
2. Such a reduction would entail large annual transfers to developing
countries, as much as $75 billion, through international trade in emissions
permits.9

The most urgent and immediately addressable issue is that of carbon pricing. With
uniform international cooperation, the world could establish a broadly similar carbon

price signal through taxation, trade, and/or regulation that would increase the financial

burden on businesses relying solely on unsustainable carbon. This relatively simple step

would thereby accelerate the advancement of carbon technology and energy efficiency as

the market demands them. As Jonathan Wright contends, “we have to pursue different

kinds of economic growth and convince ourselves that capping emissions of greenhouse

gases is both entirely possible and eminently affordable.”10

The ability to convince ourselves of the reality of ‘eminently affordable’ growth

has been hampered by the ruling corporate class that stands to lose billions of dollars if

the sustainable changeover occurs. As a result, the talking heads have resorted to

irrationally vilifying the tenable progressive agenda proposed by Mr. Stern. The media,

entrenched in the old paradigm of bisecting business and environmental coverage, has

failed to effectively point out that a.) in the past year some 770 companies hired over

2,000 climate change lobbyists and spent an estimated $90 million to influence federal

policy on climate change, and b.) that clearly then these manipulators of democracy do

not have the citizens’ best interests at heart. 11

It can be difficult for the layman to know whom to trust because of the warping

effect corporate connectivity has on business, politics, and media. Depending on what

network and what anchor, the media usually vacillates between passivity in the face of

brazen lies, halfhearted analysis, and outright slander themselves. For example, Glenn

Beck, a talk show host on Rupert Murdoch’s FOX news network, recently told his

viewers that a “buried” Obama administration study showed that the U.S.’s Waxman-

Markey energy bill would cost the average American family $1,787 per year. The
problem is the study Beck cites simply does not exist.12

Too many politicians and media figures denounce the economic viability of a

transition to a sustainable economy that amalgamates business with the environment

because of their close associations with big business. Though at times harder to find,

there are voices of reason and clarity that contribute the dialogue such as Nobel prize-

winning economist Paul Krugman of the New York Times. He rebukes Beck by stating in

an op-ed piece “the best available economic analyses suggest that even deep cuts in

greenhouse gas emissions would impose only modest costs on the average family. Earlier

this month, the Congressional Budget Office released an analysis of the effects of

Waxman-Markey, concluding that in 2020 the bill would cost the average family only

$160 a year, or 0.2 percent of income. That’s roughly the cost of a postage stamp a

day.”13 The problem is that Beck, a former addict, alcoholic, self-referred ‘rodeo-clown,’

and Yale dropout, reaches an exponentially greater audience than Mr. Krugman, a Yale

graduate, Princeton economic professor, and Nobel Prize winner. Our country is full of

busy, hard-working people: most simply don’t have time to research and double-check

what is misinformation and what is not. Citizens have the right to be educated on the

economic feasibility of the sustainable economy by only our most objective, capable

minds.

The detriment caused to sustainability debate by the lack of education on the

intertwined, complex issue of macro-economic environmental policy cannot be

overstated. The West’s education system needs to be overhauled to graduate young adults

instilled with the knowledge, tools, and creativity to address the global economic crisis.

Clearly reporters in the media are not receiving the environmental background they need
when seven in ten report feeling undereducated on the environment and environmental

issues. 14 Shifting the nation’s educational focus towards green awareness and technology

would be a huge step in achieving the low-carbon development Mr. Stern talks about.

There are existing institutions with educational strategies that could be adopted on a large

scale to the benefit of all.

“In Europe, the Rotterdam School of Management at Erasmus University and Oxford's
Said Business School have made climate change a required part of business school
education. Many others have a strong teaching focus on the broader areas of corporate
social responsibility [CSR] and/or sustainability. Many schools, like RSM, are also
pledging to green their own campuses. Climate must be integrated into core courses
globally. Top schools need to work together globally like their CEO counterparts. Only
then can we develop a coordinated approach to the business of climate education.”15

With better education we can expect the coming generations of reporters and

anchors to be well versed on pertinent 21st century issues on a higher level their

predecessors. The hour is late though, which is why the West must shift its focus quickly

and dramatically from fossil fuels to clean energy and from the 20th century model of

education to a modern, environmentally conscious one. If this turnabout happens, one

will see an eco-business and eco-media class emerge that calculates decisions in a more

enlightened, future-centric manner than their predecessors: “Conventional economic

analysis cannot handle the costs of pollution and of the depletion of common property

resources because common property, like climate or air quality, cannot be privatized and

thus are outside the market place.”16 By creating a sustainable, equitable system, we can

end the unnatural juxtaposition of business and the environment. With the right

incentives and regulation, businesses will take environment concerns into their business

practices not out of conscience, but because the costs of polluting are no longer

externalized.
 Business and environmental concerns have been in constant tension because of

the profit motive inherent in our system of capital that, through years of deregulation and

insufficient regulation, has discounted environmental costs. Not only is the system is

disturbing and amoral as it stands, but we are losing bright minds and lots of money in

the process—we are outsourcing new green jobs to other countries because our economy

does not have the progressive framework of countries like Germany, China, etc.

Applied Materials, a U.S. company that makes the machines that make solar

panels, has built 14 solar panel factories in the last two years, but none in the U.S. The

natural question to ask is why. Why would a successful domestic company that also

makes the chips that go into your computers not build a single one of their 14 plants on

American soil? As Thomas Friedman explains it, other “governments have put in place

the three prerequisites for growing a renewable energy industry: 1) any business or

homeowner can generate solar energy; 2) if they decide to do so, the power utility has to

connect them to the grid; and 3) the utility has to buy the power for a predictable period

at a price that is a no-brainer good deal for the family or business putting the solar panels

on their rooftop.”17 Frustratingly, there are no current economic indexes or media outlets

communicating the fundamental inadequacy of our current system as portrayed in this

anecdote. “The world is on track to add another 2.5 billion people by 2050, and many

will be aspiring to live American-like, high-energy lifestyles. In such a world, renewable

energy — where the variable cost of your fuel, sun or wind, is zero — will be in huge

demand.”18 The U.S. stands to not compete in a lucrative and potentially hegemony-

saving market because it has failed so far to implement the three prerequisites Friedman

espouses.
 As the definition of “sustainable economy” I adopted at the opening if this essay

states, such an economy does not promote socioeconomic activity that endangers future

generations. Bhutan has begun exploring one such way to do that by creating alternative

measurements of its economy and society. The West too must transition to alternative

indexes and adopt the policies proposed by Mr. Stern if we are to minimize the dangers to

posterity. The media has failed to elucidate the unsustainability of our current

socioeconomic system, but with the implementation of the ideas of Stern, Krugman, et al.

and an overhaul of the education system, media and society would grow to reflect an

enhanced understanding of the deep-seated relationship between business and

environment. Such a media and society would reward business that respect the immutable

laws of nature by harnessing clean energy, engaging in conservation, and operating

ethically. Such a media would also be responsible for calling out businesses that

overburden the environment and impoverish society. If the West can achieve such a

momentous turnaround, the future generations of the developed world may indeed enjoy

a level of happiness that even surpasses that of those in a small, isolated country that rests

in the mountains of the Himalayas.

 Notes

1. The Next Industrial Revolution. Dir. Chris Bedford. Perf. William McDonough
and Michael Braungart. Bullfrog Films, 2001. DVD.
2. "Is Bhutan on to something with Gross National Happiness?" Review. Audio blog
post. HowStuffWorks.com. Ed. Charles W. Bryant and Josh Clark. Web.
3. Bryant and Clark.
4. Bryant and Clark.
5. Cooper, Richard N. "The Global Deal: Climate Change and the Creation of a New
Era of Progress and Prosperity.(Economic, Social, and Environmental)(Brief
article)(Book review)." Foreign Affairs 88.3 (May-June 2009): 169(1).
Osborne, Hilary. "Stern report: the key points." The Guardian. 30 Oct. 2006. Web. 21
Oct. 2009. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/oct/30/economy.uk>.
6. The Stern Review on the Economic Effects of Climate Change
Population and Development Review, Vol. 32, No. 4 (Dec., 2006), pp. 793-798
Published by: Population Council
7. Osborne, Hillary.
8. Cooper, Richard N.
9. Wright, Jonathan. "Enviro-realism.(A Blueprint For A Safer Planet: How to
Manage Climate Change and Create a New Era of Progress and Prosperity)(Book
review)." Geographical 81.7 (July 2009): 61(1).
10. "Who Are The Top 10 Climate Lobbyists? | CommonDreams.org." Common
Dreams | News & Views. Web. 04 Oct. 2009.
<http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/05/20-1>.
11. Krugman, Paul. "It's Easy Being Green." The New York Times. 24 Sept. 2009.
Web. 04 Oct. 2009.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/opinion/25krugman.html>.
12. Krugman, Paul.
13. Harrabin, Roger. “Reporting Sustainable Development.” The Daily Globe-
Environmental change, the public and the media.” Earthscan Publications,
London, 2002.
14. Whiteman, Gail. "B-Schools: Make Climate Change Front and Center." Business
Week Online (April 21, 2009)
O'Keefe, Phil. The Earthscan Reader in Sustainable Development. Ed. John Kirby.
London: Earthscan Publications Ltd., 1995. Print. P.87.
Friedman, Thomas.“Have a Nice Day.” The New York Times. 15 Sept. 2009. Web. 7 Oct.
2009. <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/16/opinion/16friedman.html>.
Friedman, Thomas.
 Works Cited

Botton, Alain de. The Consolations of Philosophy. Camberwell, AU: Penguin Books,
2000. Print.

The Next Industrial Revolution. Dir. Chris Bedford. Perf. William McDonough and
Michael Braungart. Bullfrog Films, 2001. DVD.

Brown, Lester. "Could Climate Change Topple Modern Civilization?" Interview by Ira
Flatow. Audio blog post. Web.

Cooper, Richard N. "The Global Deal: Climate Change and the Creation of a New Era of
Progress and Prosperity.(Economic, Social, and Environmental)(Brief article)(Book
review)." Foreign Affairs 88.3 (May-June 2009): 169(1).

Friedman, Thomas. “Have a Nice Day.” The New York Times. 15 Sept. 2009. Web. 7 Oct.
2009. < http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/16/opinion/16friedman.html>.

The Stern Review on the Economic Effects of Climate Change

Population and Development Review, Vol. 32, No. 4 (Dec., 2006), pp. 793-798
Published by: Population Council

"Is Bhutan on to something with Gross National Happiness?" Review. Audio blog post.
HowStuffWorks.com. Ed. Charles W. Bryant and Josh Clark. Web.

Krugman, Paul. "It's Easy Being Green." The New York Times. 24 Sept. 2009. Web. 04
Oct. 2009. < http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/opinion/25krugman.html>.

O'Keefe, Phil. The Earthscan Reader in Sustainable Development. Ed. John Kirby.
London: Earthscan Publications Ltd., 1995. Print.

Osborne, Hilary. "Stern report: the key points." The Guardian. 30 Oct. 2006. Web. 21
Oct. 2009. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/oct/30/economy.uk>.

Richardson, Jill. “Norman Borlaug’s Unsustainable Green Revolution.” Common

Dreams. 5 Oct. 2009. Web. 8 Oct. 2009.
<http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/10/05-9>.

Whiteman, Gail. "B-Schools: Make Climate Change Front and Center." Business Week
Online (April 21, 2009)

Wright, Jonathan. "Enviro-realism.(A Blueprint For A Safer Planet: How to Manage

Climate Change and Create a New Era of Progress and Prosperity)(Book
review)." Geographical 81.7 (July 2009): 61(1).