Time to recall Schumacher’s ‘Buddhist economics’
WITH the COP28 climate change summit set to begin next week, 195 countries will go into a huddle in Dubai to take stock of the goals which were set out in the Paris climate summit of 2015 — reducing greenhouse gas emissions; transiting to clean energy sources; and making rich countries help the poor ones with financial and technological assistance to make the transition to green economy. A new argument that has entered the climate change debate is that the private sector should play a more active role in climate action as well as in climate deliberations, and it should contribute to the funds needed to manage it all.
It is an important aspect of managing climate change and keeping the world this side of the apocalypse. But there is another aspect: the stress and strain on the health of the people, triggered by extreme weather events — the rise in temperatures, heatwaves, floods and droughts. Experts have also been warning of how pandemics of the coronavirus kind can become a common occurrence. These warnings might appear alarmist, but it would be a folly to ignore the alarm bells ringing as the climate parameters deteriorate.
The 2023 Lancet Countdown report on global health and climate change shows that the two segments of the population at the extreme ends of the scale — those below a year old and those above 65 — are the most vulnerable to the rise in temperatures. Compared with the last decade of the previous century (1990-99), the deaths due to extreme heat for those above 65 rose by 85 per cent, while the increase would have been 38 per cent if the climate had remained unchanged. It is interesting that the mortality levels would have risen anyway, but not to the same catastrophic degree. To call this a steep rise would be an understatement. The report also shows that the rise in temperatures affects livelihoods because of the impact of heat on food production and work conditions. The drought-prone area was 18 per cent globally in 1951-60 and it stood at 43 per cent in 2013-22. In 2021, 127 million people experienced food insecurity, with concomitant malnutrition, due to heatwaves and drought. The economic losses due to extreme weather events were estimated to increase by 23 per cent between 2010-14 and 2018-22. The economic losses due to the rise in temperatures in 2022 alone were found to be $264 billion and the income losses were as high as $863 billion.
The figures are astounding, but they do not seem to have impacted the thinking of those at the helm, whether they are in the government or the industry. At international meetings, the participants express a sense of urgency and concern, but once the meetings are over, they get back to their routine, where for leaders in the government it is the GDP and growth rate that hold their attention, and for those in the industry it is profit and loss. They do not seem to realise that once there is an irreversible inflection in the temperatures and it goes beyond the 1.5°C barrier, the human and economic prospects would get bleaker. At the current rate of increase in temperature, the 1.5°C barrier will be crossed by 2035, and it could increase by 2.5°C by 2100, according to a United Nations panel assessment.
Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, the United Arab Emirates Minister for Industry and Advanced Technology and President-designate of COP28, is hopeful that it is possible to achieve the Paris climate summit goals while maintaining sustainable economic growth through an action plan which involves governments and the private sector. That is an optimistic outlook, and the Dubai COP28 could push the member countries towards concerted action. But there is a need for a rethink on the part of society. People would have to evaluate whether they need to change their way of life, which is based on certain consumer patterns. They will have to assess how much they can rationalise their electricity and water consumption in cities and their commute expenditure, which would involve buying less number of vehicles.
In 1973, EF Schumacher, German-British economist and statistician, wrote a book, Small is Beautiful, explaining that there is no such thing as infinite economic growth because there are not enough resources for providing plenty to all. He mooted the idea of ‘Buddhist economics’, where you need to consume less rationally. This is an idea that goes against the spirit of the modern times. He did not speak about climate crisis but about the disaster that follows human greed. But it is perhaps time to get back to Schumacher’s philosophy of ‘Buddhist economics’, where consumption is reined in, and that could put the brakes on unending production of goods and services, which need energy to keep them going. This is not going to be easy.
It would not be a bad idea if macro reports can be generated on how climate change can be better controlled if people lead a simpler life with lesser needs. This would hugely cut down the economic growth rates and the profits that the private sector can generate. This appears to be a utopian goal. But it is the lone remedy that can help halt the climate catastrophe. It is not easy to scale down the lifestyle which millions have and which billions aspire to. What does a healthy living mean? And if the goals of a healthy living can be achieved, it could bring down the levels of pollution. The mathematics of millions adopting a healthy lifestyle would mean the closure of many industries and businesses. As the numbers remain absolute — and they are huge — industries and businesses can adapt to cater to their needs and still be in business. But extravagance and waste would be reduced greatly. It is time for alternative lifestyles to come into play, even as green technologies are tried out to keep climate change from turning into a catastrophe.
