economy

Global Recession Saving Globe

- Adam Clare 1 Comment

The great thing about this global recession that we’re in is that the planet has a bit of time to breath and recover from the destructive force of modern hyper-capitalism. I honestly hope that as we start to recover from this recession we’ll have realized that we need to work with the ebbs and flow of ecosystems and not just exploit what finite resources the ecosystems create.

An interesting theme has begun to emerge in Copenhagen: that the financial crisis might end up saving the world. Sure, it’s painful now, this line of thinking goes, but it gives us a chance to build a low-carbon global economy that we might not have had otherwise. And in the meantime, greenhouse-gas emissions could fall sharply as a result of depressed economic activity — factories closing, less driving, less flying, and so on.
Two influential English economists argued as much today at the International Scientific Congress on Climate Change. In a morning plenary talk, Nicholas Stern of the London School of Economics and Political Science explained the reasons why he’s more optimistic about the likelihood of a new, effective global climate agreement today than he was two years ago: the rapid advancement of low-carbon technology, the deepening of public awareness, the Obama administration’s commitment to cutting greenhouse-gas emissions to 80 percent of 1990 levels by 2050 — and the fact that the recession provides an opening for completely remaking the global energy economy. “It should be easier because we have an economic crisis,” he said. Labor is cheap, after all. That will make it cheaper to hire the workers to, for instance, rebuild the electrical grid in both the U.S. and Europe. Besides, he argued, the financial crisis offers a clear lesson. With this financial catastrophe fresh in our minds, we should realize more than ever that if we wait to address a looming crisis, it will bite us that much harder in the end.

Save the Economy by Removing Parking

- Adam Clare 2 Comments

Studies done in the last couple years disprove the myth that businesses need parking for customers or they’ll go out of business. The Spacing Wire has a post that looks at the studies and concludes that removing parking is good for business and making room for pedestrians or bike lanes improve livability.

A 2006 study of a Manhattan street (PDF) showed that, in fact, local businesses would benefit if parking was removed so that sidewalks could be widened. Last summer, on behalf of the Clean Air Partnership, Fred Sztabinski, then coordinator of the Toronto Coalition for Active Transportation (TCAT) (and sometime Spacing contributor), embarked on a similar exercise for a street in Toronto. The report, Bike Lanes, On-Street Parking and Business (PDF), has just been released. It’s a study of Bloor Street in the Annex (Huron to Palmerston), and it shows that removing parking for either bike lanes or a widened sidewalk would actually benefit local businesses in that area. The study surveyed both merchants and people walking along various parts of this stretch of Bloor during the month of July 2008.

The first part of the study shows that the majority of owners or managers of local businesses estimate that only a minority of their customers drive to their location, and also that they believe it would not harm, and might even benefit, their business if parking were removed to make space for either bikes or pedestrians.

The second part of the survey shows that the merchants are correct in their estimation of how their customers get to their store: 46% walk, 32% take transit, 12% cycle, and only 10% drive. Not surprisingly, walkers were also the most frequent visitors to the area, followed by cyclists, transit users, and finally drivers. Walkers also spent considerably more in the area than other types of customers. In other words, pedestrians were by far the best customers, followed by cyclists. Drivers, meanwhile, are the least frequent visitors and are low spenders.

Will Ethical Capitalism Arise from the Recession?

- Adam Clare

It’s always nice to see someone write what I’m thinking but do it much better than I ever can. Here’s a short piece exploring the failings of the neo-liberal economic order and how we can build a better, kinder, greener, and more efficient form of capitalism.

For me, this recession has been defined by frustrating paradoxes. Easy money, overcapacity, and reckless consumption are what got us into this mess, yet governments must react by lowering interest rates and pushing through enormous fiscal stimulus packages with the hope that the housing, retail, and investment markets won’t fall much more. Similarly, long-term sensible investments in clean energy and social welfare are hindered by falling oil prices, a lack of funding, and fresh anxiety about corporate bottom lines.
From these developments, one could conclude that the global economic system is inherently flawed, that it is unethical and doomed to destroy itself. In fact, what is critically needed is moderation, a middle ground between total freedom and principled action. The incoming Obama Administration calls it “smart policies.” The alternative is protectionism, a rolling back of the open global economy, and political if not armed conflict.

China’s Green Lining in its Stimulus Package

- Adam Clare

Lots of countries are handing out stimulus packages to try to stop economic turmoil. It’s great to see that China realizes that the future of the economy is green. China is investing in knowledge-based employment and green infrastructure.

For several years, the Chinese government has been sponsoring a shift from energy-intensive to knowledge-intensive jobs and economic activity. China’s recently-announced $586 billion stimulus package (Rmb4,000bn, £380bn) will transform its economy even faster, by promoting economic restructuring and essential green infrastructure.

The slowdown makes this transition all the more urgent, because GDP growth in China’s service sector produces more jobs than does the industrial sector. With recent GDP growth rates above 10 percent, China’s heavy industry generated enough new jobs.

But with slower growth forecasts, continuing large cohorts of high school and college graduates, and its rural population moving to non-agricultural employment, China needs to generate even more jobs from its economic investments.

Many details on China’s stimulus package have yet to be released, but what we know so far is promising. It includes 12 percent for direct energy efficiency and environmental improvements. In addition, the programs doubles—to $85 billion—investment in rail transport (a lower-carbon alternative to road and air transport), and adds $70 billion for new electricity grid infrastructure.

New, more flexible and sophisticated grid infrastructure is vital to increasing the efficient use of both traditional fuels and renewable energy sources. Furthermore, the stimulus package promises considerable investment in health, education and rural services. These sectors are both less energy intensive and strong on promoting jobs and welfare.

Big Money for Big Climate

- Adam Clare

No matter how the economy is doing, it’s always nice to see investors calling for lots of green investments.

Global institutional investors holding more than $6 trillion in assets pushed policymakers Tuesday to quickly hash out a binding agreement to cut greenhouse gas emissions and promote clean technology.

More than 130 big investors, including London Pensions Fund Authority, want countries to agree to reduce the climate- warming emissions by 50 percent to 80 percent by 2050.

Scroll To Top