World-leading economist Professor Sir Partha Dasgupta, yesterday described the prime minister’s rowing back on green commitments as “reprehensible”.
The Cambridge Academic, and author of the influential The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review – commissioned by HM Treasury – was at the Wigtown Book Festival where he delivered the second annual James Mirrlees Lecture.
The review called for changes in how we think, act and measure economic success to protect and enhance our prosperity and the natural world.
One of his major concerns is finding ways to encourage countries with tropical rainforests to halt their destruction and also to better protect the world’s oceans.
Asked his views on Rishi Sunak’s recent statement on changes in green policies he said: “I want to point to two of the less obvious reasons as to why it's so reprehensible. One is that in the world of manufacturing, the world of business and in the world of production, you need lead time.
“It was really interesting that the earliest criticisms came from producers, saying ‘how can we plan the transition to clean energy when we have to billions of dollars of investment if the entire time horizon shifts?’
“I think that's well worth bearing in mind because this is not a left right issue.
“The second reason why it's reprehensible relates to biodiversity and how we can negotiate and persuade poor countries to better manage their natural capital, for example to protect the rainforest.
“They'll be saying ‘well, in Europe as soon as you feel the pinch, the first cut is to Mother Nature’. It means that our moral status and our position in negotiations in weakened.”
Sir Partha Dasgupta is now the Frank Ramsey Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Cambridge and Fellow of St John's College, Cambridge.
His most recent publication was The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review, commissioned by the UK Treasury.
He believes that conventional approaches to measuring economic performance are fundamentally flawed because they do not take account of the growing depreciation of the Earth’s natural resources and the harm done to environmental systems we depend on.
He argues for a new approach that sets loss and replenishment of natural resources and the environment alongside measures such as GDP, and that the world needs to act to ensure that everyone should pay for what they use.
He likens our current approach to economics as being like a football team that only counts the goals it scores and not the ones it concedes. Superficially it can appear like everything is going well, when in fact it’s losing every game.
After the Dasgupta Review was published in 2021 the Government outlined its response including “the ways in which the government will go further in light of many of the Review’s conclusions”.
Mr Sunak was this week accused of an "unforgivable" U-turn on efforts to tackle the climate crisis after rowing back on the UK Government’s key climate pledges.
The Prime Minister stressed the UK’s 2050 legal net zero target will remain intact, but he confirmed a raft of environmental policies for England and the UK will be watered down or abandoned.
The rethink means the proposed 2030 ban on new petrol and diesel cars has been pushed back to 2035.
And despite complaining about “short-term thinking” on net zero, the Prime Minister’s change of tune could mean more drastic action will be needed in future years to ensure the UK meets its 2050 legal aim.
Mr Sunak's decision to push forward the ban on new petrol and diesel cars has resulted in a backlash from Ford over its current investment towards the 2030 target.
Wigtown Book Festival runs until 1 October.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel