Ma Kang Duo, Director of Green Citizens' Action Alliance
Lai Wei Jie, Chairman of Green Citizens' Action Alliance
In the past five years, the idea of "green economy" has been brewing out of Taiwan's major debates between expanding economic development (e.g., expansion of petrochemical industry in Kaohsiung, finishing the fourth nuclear power plant) and protecting our precious environment. However, this idea has not been well perceived in Taiwan's energy policy agenda because the government believes in the myth of GDP-first development model. This article investigated Taiwan's energy policy from the perspective of green economy. We argued that current crisis in Taiwan's environment lies in our GDP-first development model. The only pathway to drift away from this "GDP-driven" economic growth model and move toward sustainable development is to transform our "brown economy" to "green economy".
The core value of green economy lies in its expected outcomes of "improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities" (UNEP 2010). In simplified expression, green economy is low-carbon, resource efficient, and socially inclusive. In green economy, income and employment growth is driven by public and private co-investments with the goals to reduce carbon emissions and pollution, enhance energy and resource efficiency, and prevent the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. These investments need to be catalysed and supported by the targeted public expenditure, policy reforms and regulation changes. In Rio+20 2012, green economy was on the top agenda for urging the global participants to propose policies using green economy to achieve the goals of sustainable development.
Taiwan's National Council for Sustainable Development has followed the suit in September 2012 and established a Green Economy Task Force to develop green economy framework and action plans in Taiwan. In addition, the government mandated a research team, organized by Dr. Shaw, Daigee (蕭代基), to explore the operational guidelines for this task force. This team examined the possibilities of green economy through "capital method", which includes human capital, natural capital, social capital and institutional capital. This method leads to a comprehensive and alternative view in contrast to conventional economy. However, the green economy guidelines have not been well carried out as a result of the short-sightedness of Taiwanese government.
Dr. Shaw's report has argued that current sustainable development and green economy policy practices conducted by most countries are following "greener approach," which focuses on the surficial phenomena, rather than "green approach," which emphasizes the fundamental structure of the economy. For example, South Korea follows the "greener approach," which is still embracing the idea of GDP-first and invests more resources on capital investment, production, consumption, development, and growth. Unfortunately, the Taiwan government decided to follow South Korea's path. In recent President Ma's "Golden Decade National Vision," green economy was not included in the agenda. The green economy guidelines proposed by Dr. Shaw's team have been marginalized.
The key to success of green economy is to challenge the practice of brown economy and the GDP-first myth. As we can see from our current development patterns, we should direct more discussion on green economy to civil society rather than waiting for policy change from the government.
To open the possibilities of green economy, the first step is to reveal the environmental and social cost of brown economy to the public (Figure 1). For example, the environmental cost we paid in 2011 was over 3.3% of GDP and the GDP growth rate in the same year was 4.07%. In other words, the economic growth produced by brown economy was compensated significantly by external cost on our environment. Therefore, we should fully disclose the external cost brought by brown economy. Furthermore, every policy evaluation should include the external impacts in addition to GDP.
The second phase is green growth stage. In this step, we should be conscious of the GDP-first development model and ask the government to rethink economic development model. We should restructure a new economic path that cares more about the natural resources and people (e.g., environmental quality, human development, education, health, equity, happiness). Then we are able to shift to the third phase: green economy stage. In this phase, the emphasis on GDP reduced (navy blue arrows), the externality on environmental and social costs reduced (red arrows), and a wider gap between GDP and external costs represent the gain in social welfare (Figure 1).
The transition from brown economy, green growth, to green economy, requires innovative thinking and actions by people as well as the government. Breaking the myth of brown economy is the priority. The conflict of regulation and deregulation can be solved by public-private synergy by proposing an innovative approach to tackle the current gridlock in economic developmental path.
The debates between GDP-first and green economy have greatly influenced Taiwan's future. The key to success is to bring the consciousness of the public who can clearly understand the exposure of information, carefully examine the cost and benefits of different models, and continuously challenge the GDP- first development model proposed by the government.
