• Like
  • Save
Pavan Sukhdev
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Pavan Sukhdev

on

  • 574 views

Conferência Ethos 2012

Conferência Ethos 2012

Statistics

Views

Total Views
574
Views on SlideShare
574
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Pavan Sukhdev Pavan Sukhdev Presentation Transcript

    • Green Economy & Poverty Eradication Pavan Sukhdev McKluskey Fellow 2011, Yale University Founder-CEO, GIST Advisory
    • Green Economy : Definition “A Green Economy is defined as one that results in improved human well- being and social equity, whilst significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities.” UNEP, Feb 2011 Green Economy and Sustainable Development: Green Economy is the best economic vehicle to achieve sustainable development goals.Source: UNEP Green Economy Initiative
    • “Towards a Green Economy” (UNEP) FOCUS STRATEGY• Design and drive • Establish “Enabling Conditions” transformation in key (regulations, subsidies, taxes sectors critical / highly and related reforms) material for “greening” • Promote public and private the global economy investment KEY SECTORS• Agriculture, Freshwater, Forests, Fisheries, Energy, Transportation, Manufacturing, Waste, Buildings, Cities, Tourism SCENARIO ANALYSIS• “T-21” model, includes Natural Capital , to forecast outcomes on Capital stock, GDP growth, EmploymentSource: UNEP Green Economy Initiative – GREEN ECONOMY INITIATIVE UNEP
    • Agriculture : Importance of Small Farms• Approximately 2.6 billion • 10 percent increase in farm people rely on agricultural yields -> 7 % reduction in production systems for their poverty in Africa, more than livelihood. (FAO, 2009) 5 % in Asia• 525 million small farms world wide, 404 million less • Green farming practices have than two hectares of land increased yields, especially on (Nagayets, 2005), Small small farms, between 79 % farms cultivate 60 % of (Pretty et al, 2006) and 180 %. arable land (Herren et al. 2010) An increase in overall GDP coming from agricultural labor productivity is on average 2.5 times more effective in raising the incomes of the poorest quintile in developing countries than an equivalent increase in GDP coming from non-agricultural labor productivity. UNEP – GREEN ECONOMY INITIATIVE UNEP – GREEN ECONOMY INITIATIVE
    • Agriculture in Uganda OA Growth in Uganda Environmental Impact 48-68% lower carbon emissions 296,203 ha/ Carbon Sequestration 206,803 Low fertilizer use 60%/ 359% farmers increase (2008) 185,000 ha, 45,000 farmers (2004) OA Exports in Uganda Business Opportunity Organic food & drink market US$ 22.8 mil (2007/8) 97% revenue in OECD US$ 6.2 mil (2004/5) countries US$ 3.7 mil (2003/4) 80% producers in developing countriesSource: UNEP Green Economy Initiative (Developing Countries Success Stories)
    • Solar PV in Bangladesh Innovative Business Model Grameen Shakti (GS)
    • Solar Heaters in China China is world’s largest market Implementation Plan on for Solar Water Heaters Promoting Solar Thermal • 2/3rd of global capacity Utilization in 2007 (under 11th • 10% of population Five-Year Plan for New and • 4o mil SWH systems Renewable Energy) Economic Environmental Social Benefits Benefits Benefits Reduce risk of CO Industry/ Highly Reduce fossil fuel poisoning, Rheumatoid profitable consumption arthritis Household/ save fuel Save 348,000 t SCE of 600,000 employed costs (342 – 3321 yuan) fossil energy/ yearSource: UNEP Green Economy Initiative (Developing Countries Success Stories)
    • Rural Ecological Infrastructure in India National Rural Employment Guarantee Act 2005 (NREGA) Objectives Guarantee wage and employment; Strengthen rural natural resource Key Benefits and Impacts management Improved rural livelihoods &inclusive growth Strategy -Work for 30 mln. families per year - Labor-intensive implementation in - Wage increases of 25 % in 3 years 615 rural districts Improved rural ecological infrastructure - 850,000 water conservation works Ecosystem Initiatives under NREGA completed from 2006 2006-08Financing for rural works addressing - Estimated 5 mln. liters of watercauses of drought, deforestation and conserved (in Uttar Pradesh,)soil erosion - Increased crop yields and ground water replenishment (in Andhra Pradesh)Source: UNEP Green Economy Initiative (Developing Countries Success Stories)
    • Forest Management in Nepal 1.9% rate of forest decrease 1.35% annual increase 1990s: Before 2000-05: With community forestry community forestry Community Forest User Groups(CFUGs) manage 25% of forest area Economic Environmental Social Benefits Benefits Benefits Develop their Set own harvesting Employment & Increased Community operational rules income for forest area & acceptance & plans density local users goodwill Decide Sustainable Enhanced soil Set rates for surplus wood fuel & water products income sources management distribution Source: UNEP Green Economy Initiative (Developing Countries Success Stories)
    • Goals of Sustainable DevelopmentFour key and broad goals of Sustainable Development are :-1. Improved human well-being : Better health, education, & wealth for all ; high employment to ensure dignity of life and labour2. Increased social equity : Ending persistent poverty ; improving the income of the poor farmer and city dweller; ensuring inclusion at every level – social, economic, financial3. Reduced environmental risks : Concerted efforts to reduce damages from Climate Change, Ocean Acidification, Hazardous chemicals, Pollutants, & excessive or mis-managed Waste4. Reduced ecological scarcities : Freshwater availability (exported foodgrain means imported water shortage), Soil fertility (ecosystem degradation & excessive fertilizer use are root causes of lost soil fertility), Land availibility (for crops & livestock), Coastal & Coral seas (for fish)
    • Historical Trends of Human Development and Ecological Footprint for Select 12 Countries (1975-2008) Australia Threshold for high human development 10 8 1975 U.S.A.Ecological Footprint 6 Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development per person, high development World average biocapacity available per person, ignoring needs of wild species Japan 4 Brazil Meets minimum criteria for 2 sustainability Indonesia China India Within biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development 0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 Human Development IndexSource: Global Footprint Network and UNDP
    • Historical Trends of Human Development and Ecological Footprint for Select 12 Countries (1975-2008) Australia Threshold for high human development 10 8 1980 U.S.A.Ecological Footprint 6 Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development per person, high development World average biocapacity available per person, ignoring needs of wild species Japan 4 Brazil 2 Meets minimum criteria for Indonesia China sustainability India Within biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development 0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 Human Development IndexSource: Global Footprint Network and UNDP
    • Historical Trends of Human Development and Ecological Footprint for Select 12 Countries (1975-2008) Australia Threshold for high human development 10 8 1985 U.S.A.Ecological Footprint 6 Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development per person, high development Japan 4 World average biocapacity available per person, ignoring needs of wild species Brazil 2 Meets minimum criteria for India Indonesia China sustainability Within biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development 0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 Human Development IndexSource: Global Footprint Network and UNDP
    • Historical Trends of Human Development and Ecological Footprint for Select 12 Countries (1975-2008) Australia Threshold for high human development 10 8 1990 U.S.A.Ecological Footprint 6 Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development per person, high development Japan 4 World average biocapacity available per person, ignoring needs of wild species Brazil 2 Indonesia China Meets minimum criteria for India sustainability Within biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development 0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 Human Development IndexSource: Global Footprint Network and UNDP
    • Historical Trends of Human Development and Ecological Footprint for Select 12 Countries (1975-2008) Australia Threshold for high human development 10 8 1995 U.S.A.Ecological Footprint 6 Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity p Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity er person, low development per person, high development Japan 4 World average biocapacity available per person, ignoring needs of wild species Brazil 2 Indonesia China Meets minimum criteria for India sustainability Within biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development 0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 Human Development IndexSource: Global Footprint Network and UNDP
    • Historical Trends of Human Development and Ecological Footprint for Select 12 Countries (1975-2008) Australia Threshold for high human development 10 8 2000 U.S.A.Ecological Footprint 6 Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development per person, high development Japan 4 Brazil World average biocapacity available per person, ignoring needs of wild species 2 Indonesia China Meets minimum criteria for India sustainability Within biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development 0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 Human Development IndexSource: Global Footprint Network and UNDP
    • Historical Trends of Human Development and Ecological Footprint for Select 12 Countries (1975-2008) Australia Threshold for high human development 10 8 2005 U.S.A.Ecological Footprint 6 Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development per person, high development Japan 4 Brazil World average biocapacity available per person, ignoring needs of wild species 2 Cuba Indonesia China India Meets minimum criteria for sustainability Within biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development 0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 Human Development IndexSource: Global Footprint Network and UNDP
    • Historical Trends of Human Development and Ecological Footprint for Select 12 Countries (1975-2008) Australia Threshold for high human development 10 8 2008 U.S.A.Ecological Footprint 6 Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development per person, high development Japan 4 Brazil 2 World average biocapacity available per person, ignoring needs of wild species Cuba Indonesia China India Meets minimum criteria for Within biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development sustainability 0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0 Human Development IndexSource: Global Footprint Network and UNDP
    • Human Development and Ecological Footprint for ALL Countries (2008) 12 Threshold for high human development Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity 10 per person, high development Kuwait UAE 8 U.S.A.Ecological Footprint Australia Canada 6 Russia Korea Rep 4 Japan Brazil Mexico South Africa China 2 World average biocapacity available per person, ignoring needs of wild species Cuba Nigeria IndiaIndonesia Meets minimum criteria for s Afghanistan Within biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development ustainability 0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0Source: Global Footprint Network and UNDP
    • Human Development and Ecological Footprint for ALL Countries (2008) 12 Threshold for high human development Meeting the Goals of Sustainable Development Exceeds biosphere’s average capacity 10 with “Common but Differentiated Responsibilities” per person, high development Kuwait means: UAE 8  Green Development in developing countries U.S.A.Ecological Footprint  Reducing Footprint in developed countries Canada Australia 6 Russia Korea Rep 4 Japan Brazil Mexico South Africa China 2 World average biocapacity available per person, ignoring needs of wild species Cuba Nigeria IndiaIndonesia Meets minimum criteria for s Afghanistan Within biosphere’s average capacity per person, low development ustainability 0 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1,0Source: Global Footprint Network and UNDP
    • Thank You!www.unep.org/greeneconomy www.gistadvisory.com