http://tsss.ca/2016/05/top-industries-would-be-failures-if-they-paid-for-the-natural-capital-they-use/

MENU

    Channels
        Business and Sustainability
        Capitalism 2.0
        CSR Reporting
        Culture & Leadership
        Employee Engagement
        Energy, Cities and Climate Change
        ESG/Investing
        Ethics
        Food and Sustainability
        Innovation Leaders
        INSIDE THE CSR REPORT
        Marketing and Communications
        Millenials
        Retail and Supply Chain
        Social Impact
        Sustainable Education
        Waste Reduction
        Sustainability Themed Videos
    Events
        Upcoming Events
        Past Events
        Event Summaries
        Past Attendees
    Special Content
        CSR in Canada
        Global CSR News
        Women in CSR
        Canada’s Top 30 under 30
        A Journey in Search of Capitalism 2.0
        Objection Handling
        Sustainability Themed Videos
    Inside the CSR Report
        Kruger Products
    About
        Testimonials
        Strategic Advisors
        Promotional Partners
        Contact Us

Toronto Sustainability | TSSS logo
MENU
Top industries would be failures if they paid for the natural capital they use.
Grist
May 2, 2016
behaviour change, environmental impact, Social Impact
Share

curtain

The notion of “externalities” has become familiar in environmental circles. It refers to costs imposed by businesses that are not paid for by those businesses. For instance, industrial processes can put pollutants in the air that increase public health costs, but the public, not the polluting businesses, picks up the tab. In this way, businesses privatize profits and publicize costs.

While the notion is incredibly useful, especially in folding ecological concerns into economics, I’ve always had my reservations about it. Environmentalists these days love speaking in the language of economics — it makes them sound Serious — but I worry that wrapping this notion in a bloodless technical term tends to have a narcotizing effect. It brings to mind incrementalism: boost a few taxes here, tighten a regulation there, and the industrial juggernaut can keep right on chugging. However, if we take the idea seriously, not just as an accounting phenomenon but as a deep description of current human practices, its implications are positively revolutionary.

To see what I mean, check out a recent report [PDF] done by environmental consultancy Trucost on behalf of The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) program sponsored by United Nations Environmental Program. TEEB asked Trucost to tally up the total “unpriced natural capital” consumed by the world’s top industrial sectors. (“Natural capital” refers to ecological materials and services like, say, clean water or a stable atmosphere; “unpriced” means that businesses don’t pay to consume them.)

    As Paul Hawken likes to put it, we are stealing the future, selling it in the present, and calling it GDP.

It’s a huge task; obviously, doing it required a specific methodology that built in a series of assumptions. (Plenty of details in the report.) But it serves as an important signpost pointing the way to the truth about externalities.

Here’s how those costs break down:

    The majority of unpriced natural capital costs are from greenhouse gas emissions (38%), followed by water use (25%), land use (24%), air pollution (7%), land and water pollution (5%), and waste (1%).

So how much is that costing us? Trucost’s headline results are fairly stunning.

First, the total unpriced natural capital consumed by the more than 1,000 “global primary production and primary processing region-sectors” amounts to $7.3 trillion a year — 13 percent of 2009 global GDP.

(A “region-sector” is a particular industry in a particular region — say, wheat farming in East Asia.)

Second, surprising no one, coal is the enemy of the human race. Trucost compiled rankings, both of the top environmental impacts and of the top industrial culprits.

Here are the top five biggest environmental impacts and the region-sectors responsible for them:

unep-top-five-industrial-sectors-by-environmental-impactsjpg

The biggest single environmental cost? Greenhouse gases from coal burning in China. The fifth biggest? Greenhouse gases from coal burning in North America. (This also shows what an unholy nightmare deforestation in South America is.)

Now, here are the top five industrial sectors ranked by total ecological damages imposed:

unep-top-five-industrial-sectors-by-environmental-impactsjpg

It’s coal again! This time North American coal is up at number three.

Trucost’s third big finding is the coup de grace. Of the top 20 region-sectors ranked by environmental impacts, none would be profitable if environmental costs were fully integrated. Ponder that for a moment: None of the world’s top industrial sectors would be profitable if they were paying their full freight. Zero.

That amounts to an global industrial system built on sleight of hand. As Paul Hawken likes to put it, we are stealing the future, selling it in the present, and calling it GDP.

    What’s needed is not just better accounting but a new global industrial system, a new way of providing for human wellbeing, and fast. That means a revolution.

This gets back to what I was saying at the top. The notion of “externalities” is so technical, such an economist’s term. Got a few unfortunate side effects, so just move some numbers from Column A to Column B, right?

But the UNEP report makes clear that what’s going on today is more than a few accounting oversights here and there. The distance between today’s industrial systems and truly sustainable industrial systems — systems that do not spend down stored natural capital but instead integrate into current energy and material flows — is not one of degree, but one of kind. What’s needed is not just better accounting but a new global industrial system, a new way of providing for human wellbeing, and fast. That means a revolution.

This article was written by David Roberts and was originally published on Grist

climate changecorporate welfareexternalitieshidden costsTrucosttrue cost
Leading with Purpose Drives Greater Profits or as Brett Wills says: “Be Purposely Profitable”
Money is Running Scared From Fossil Fuels as Regulatory Pressure Builds
Connect

Facebook

LinkedIn

Twitter

YouTube

CSR Partners

    tsss_button_get-involved

    MScSM_Web_Button_FINAL (1)

    Bmeaningful-larger-text (1)

    CertificateCSRButton

Channels
Business and Sustainability
Capitalism 2.0
CSR Reporting
Culture and Leadership
Employee Engagement
Energy, Cities and Climate Change
ESG/Investing
Ethics
Food and Sustainability
Innovation Leaders
Marketing and Communications
Millenials
Retail and Supply Chain
Social Impact
Sustainability Themed Videos
Sustainable Education
Waste Reduction
Copyright 2016 – Toronto Sustainability Speaker Series

    Home Events Special Content Inside the CSR Report About

Advertisements