Skip to main content

Bad trade kills the planet.

One problem with the financial crisis of 2008/9 is that it focused attention on the banking system as if it could be separated from global economics.  It fostered the notion that all that was needed was to reform the banks and all would be well.  The underlying assumption was and is that global economics didn't and doesn't need fixing.  Everything works well but for the financial system.  Let's all keep calm and carry on.

Yet, the focus on a bad banking system hides an underlying economic malaise,  The economy depended on banks lending, and growth was predicated on debt, debt and more debt.  This was not simply a problem of the banking system.  It was, and remains a problem arising from the mythology of economic growth.

Politicians have long fostered the mythology of growth.  Growth became a  mantra.  Growth is good.  Good is growth.  Let's grow! Growth as and is presented as a miraculous cure.

Let's call this the first neoliberal myth.  The second neoliberal myth is that 'free', or unfettered global markets are inherently good.

It all sounds plausible. After all, without growth there would not be more jobs, and without more jobs there would be unemployment and increased poverty.  With growth we can increase the tax revenue that feeds our public services.  Growth lies at the heart of all success.

Growth.  So much so that we didn't bother to ask what kind of growth it was, and whether some kinds of growth are bad, and how we could achieve good growth.  Instead we went after any kind of growth.

If industries collapse, what does it matter as long as there is growth?  Growth is good.  Good is growth! Let's keep growing.

So all political parties go for growth.  Growth becomes a mantra, or a 'fix all'.  Growth becomes not the means to objectives, but the target, the objective itself.  Some get very rich on growth.  Yet, growth involves the exploitation of the world's resources and of its people, and how we grow matters.

We need to ask whether economic growth is sustainable, and on what it is predicated.  We need to ask who are the beneficiaries and who are the losers.  We need to consider its consequences on the environment, on habitats, on life on earth.  We need to ask what it does to our planet.

The greatest drive for man-made climate change has been growth.  Increasing output of manufactured goods and an increased food supply to feed our rapidly increasing population.   Cheap food comes with a cost.   The system doesn't work if it kills the planet.  Losing species matters.

GDP growth is directly correlated with greenhouse gas emissions.

We need to decouple growth from emissions.  This is easier said than done.  It requires political courage, and a fairer approach to trade and growth.

Our dependency on global trade is also a major factor in the impact of pollution on the planet and on people's lives. People die as a direct result of global trade.  Global trade causes an estimated 20% of premature air pollution deaths.   Growth kills. Millions of people die every year from diseases related to exposure to outdoor air pollution.   That is not good growth.   This is bad growth.

As the recent paper in Nature says:

"International trade allows production and consumption activities to be physically separated, with emissions occurring within the region where the goods are produced and related health impacts concentrated within that producing region and nearby downwind regions, all of which might be far from the regions where those goods are ultimately consumed."

So we can go on burying our heads in the sand.  Our politicians seek to maintain the status quo.  They fight to save dodgy trade deals.  The very trade arrangements that have brought about this sorry state of affairs.

This is why we need a new global deal on trade.  One that puts environmental protection at the top of the list of objectives.

Author: Ray Noble

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Palm Oil production killing the planet

Bad trade and bad products are killing our planet. We have said this before on The Thin End. There is no better example than that of palm oil. It is used ubiquitously in so many products, and its production is a major factor destroying rainforests and threatening precious species.

Demand for palm oil is 'skyrocketing worldwide'. It is used in packaging and in so much of our snack foods, cookies, crackers, chocolate products, instant noodles, cereals, and doughnuts, and the list goes on.
Bad for the planet So, why is this so bad for the planet?

The oil is extracted from the fruit of the oil palms native to Africa. It is now grown primarily in Indonesia and Malaysia, but is also expanding across Central and West Africa and Latin America.

Palm oil production is now one of the world's leading causes of rainforest destruction, and this is impacting adversely some of the world's most culturally and biologically diverse ecosystems. Irreplaceable wildlife species like t…

Nicotine exposure in pregnancy linked to cot death

Nicotine exposure during pregnancy, whether from smoking cigarettes, or nicotine patches and e-cigarettes, increases risk of sudden infant death syndrome – sometimes known as “cot death” – according to new research published in The Journal of Physiology.

Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) is the sudden and unexpected death of an infant under 12 months of age occuring typically while sleeping. Failure of auto resuscitation, the ability to recover normal heart rate and breathing following gasping caused by lack of oxygen in the brain, has been recorded in human SIDS cases.



Smoking increases risk for SIDS Over the last decade, use of cigarettes has declined significantly, however, over 10% of pregnant women still smoke during pregnancy. Over recent years nicotine replacement therapies, such as nicotine patches or e-cigarettes, have been prescribed to women who wish to quit smoking during their pregnancy. However, nicotine replacement therapies may not protect infants from SIDS. 
With inc…

Maternal depression can impact child mental and physical health

Maternal depression has been repeatedly linked with negative childhood outcomes, including increased psychopathology.  Now, a new study shows that depression in mothers may impact on their children's stress levels,  as well as their physical and mental well-being throughout life.

In the study, published in the journal  Depression & Anxiety,  the researchers followed 125 children from birth to 10 years.

At 10 years old, the mothers’ and children’s cortisol (CT) and secretory immunoglobulin (s-IgA)—markers of stress and the immune system (see below)—were measured, and mother-child interaction were observed.
Psychiatric assessment  The mothers and children also had psychiatric diagnoses, and the children's externalising and internalising symptoms were reported.



Internalising disorders include depression, withdrawal, anxiety, and loneliness. They are often how we 'feel inside', such as  anger, pain, fear or hurt, but may not show it.  In contrast, externalising symptom…