Towards economic stagnation?
You often hear that preventing global warming means choosing economic stagnation.
The hidden message for right-wingers : we can't afford to take the necessary actions, otherwise we will provoke a major economic crisis. It's better to accept a few disadvantages of global warming, and continue business as usual.
The hidden message for left-wingers : we must abandon the capitalist model which has failed.
Each of these positions raises some questions:
- According to the scientists, we are not talking about a few minor disadvantages
- Choosing economic stagnation means asking developing countries to forfeit material goods which rich countries have enjoyed for a long time, which is not very fair.
However, recent studies propose alternative models, and say that we can prevent global warming without forfeiting economic growth:
"In this sense, the choice we face is not between “business as usual” and climate action, but between alternative pathways of growth: one that exacerbates climate risk, and another that reduces it. The evidence presented in this report suggests that the low-carbon growth path can lead to as much prosperity as the high-carbon one."
The report Energy 2050 on the energy transition in Switzerland estimates the loss of GDP at 2.7%, ie a GDP growth of 43.3% instead of 46%. That's much cheaper than the loss of growth that will occur if global warming continues as now (smaller crops, etc.)
