nav-icons nav-icons
Progress in Political Economy (PPE) Progress in Political Economy (PPE)
LOGIN REGISTER
LOGIN
REGISTER
linklink
  • Home
  • About
  • Manchester University Press Book Series
  • Past & Present Reading Group
  • A Political Economy of Australian Capitalism
  • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • JAPE Issues
    • JAPE Submission Guidelines
    • JAPE Young Scholar Award
  • Australian IPE Network (AIPEN)
  • Forums
    • Forums
    • Debating Anatomies of Revolution
    • Debating Debtfare States
    • Debating Economic Ideas in Political Time
    • Debating Mass Strikes and Social Movements in Brazil and India
    • Debating Social Movements in Latin America
    • Debating The Making of Modern Finance
    • Debating War and Social Change in Modern Europe
    • Feminist Global “Secureconomy”
    • Gendered Circuits of Labour and Violence in Global Crises
    • Scandalous Economics
    • The Military Roots of Neoliberal Governance
    • Politicising artistic pedagogies
  • Literary Geographies of Political Economy
  • Pedagogy
    • Five Minute Honours Theses
    • Piketty Forum
    • Radical Economics Pedagogy
    • Unconventional Wisdom
    • Journal Club
    • Marxism Reading Group
  • Wheelwright Lecture
  • Events
  • Contributors
  • Links
    • Political Economy At Sydney
    • PHD in Political Economy
    • Master of Political Economy
    • Centre for Future Work
    • Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ)
    • Climate Justice Research Centre (UTS)
Resisting capitalism in the digital era
Previous
Call for Nominations for the 2021 Australian International Political Economy Network (AIPEN) Journal Article Prize
Next

Global Green New Deal Needs a Global South Perspective

by An Li on August 10, 2021

Global Green New Deal Needs a Global South Perspective

An Li and Ying Chen | August 10, 2021

Tags: China climate change economic and labour relations review green new deal
China, climate change, economic and labour relations review, green new deal
| 0 593

Climate change caused by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) has risen to the top global threat of the 21st century. Although developed countries contributed the most to historical emissions, since the mid-2000s developing countries have overtaken developed countries as the main producers of greenhouse gases. Nowadays, many climate change discussions focus on developing countries, especially those who burn fossil fuels to support economic development and poverty alleviation. And any serious proposals seeking to significantly reduce global GHG emissions must pay attention to the economic, social and political situations of developing countries.

One such proposal supported by many progressive thinkers and policy makers is the Global Green New Deal (GGND). Following the 2007-2008 financial crisis, the UN Environment Programme commissioned a report that was aimed at remaking the post-recession economy in a way that would achieve not only economic prosperity but also environmental sustainability and poverty eradication. The proposals contained in the report as a whole become known as the GGND. A crucial component of the GGND is its policy proposals geared towards the Global South. It calls for large-scale foreign investments in low-carbon and clean energy technologies in the Global South and international transfers of technologies to facilitate the development of a domestic low-carbon economy in the Global South.

Finance and technology are definitely key for implementing the GND in Global South countries, but the orthodox version of the GGND overlooks the external and internal structural factors that countries in the Global South are facing. In our latest Economic and Labour Relations Review article, we argue that failure to pay attention to these structural factors may lead to consequences that contradict the GGND’s original intentions of creating decent jobs, reducing emissions and ending poverty.

To begin with, the GGND takes a North-centric perspective. When it calls for more foreign investments in renewable energies in the Global South and more transfer of technologies to the Global South, it implicitly assumes that countries in the North have better, greener and more sustainable modern technologies that the South should accept and adopt. By making this assumption, it dismisses Southern production and consumption practices or values that are cleaner and more sustainable than competing ones in the North.

Ultimately what lacks is an analysis of the historical processes that underpin today’s unsustainable and unequal global economic system. Due to the long history of colonialism and imperialism, many Southern countries still specialize in producing and exporting extractive resources, which generate lower economic benefits but higher levels of environmental degradation. Without empowering workers in the Global South, the GGND will contribute to the perpetuation of this ecologically and economically unequal international economic structure. Recently, the global push for expanding wind energy capacity has caused an ecological disaster in Ecuador, as legal and illegal logging of balsa wood used in manufacturing wind turbine blades almost tripled between 2019 and 2020. And Kyoto Protocol Annex B countries consistently have higher consumption-based carbon emissions than production-based emissions.

Moreover, despite the GGND’s emphasis on the amount of job creation in Southern countries, it nevertheless fails to pay enough attention to the quality of these jobs. An important shared characteristic of countries in the Global South is the existence of a large informal sector. An ILO estimate shows that informal employment is 85.8% of total employment in African countries, 71.4% in the Asia and Pacific region, 68.6% in the Arab states, and 53.8% in the Americas. The jobs that the GGND creates could be largely concentrated in the informal sector, where workers are not protected by labor laws, lack social welfare and employment benefits, are underpaid and overworked, and have less job security.  Indeed, our estimation shows that in both solar and wind energy sectors, informal employment can take about 55% of all the generated employment!

Last but not least, a fundamental contradiction of current GGND proposals is that they do not challenge the logic of capital accumulation and the commodification of nature and labour. A main feature of most GGND proposals is that they would create green jobs in the economy through investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy. However, having a large number of green jobs does not necessarily mean that these jobs are good jobs for a sustainable society. Recent studies show that although the amounts of energy and emission required to create each dollar of output have declined (i.e. today’s technologies are more efficient), the growth of the global economy has completely wiped out the efficiency gains. The end result is increasing, not decreasing global GHG emissions. Besides, although the GGND is likely to generate a short-run economic boom, decades of global neoliberalism shows that the distribution of the economic benefits can be highly unequal, and the financial sector may extract too much value from the green economy. This is especially relevant for the Global South since it is usually the place where such contradiction manifests itself.

Compared with the inadequate – or even complete lack of – actions from major carbon-emitting countries, the GGND proposals are progressive in that it calls for immediate actions before the climate emergency becomes disastrous. However, its success will depend on how well it tackles these structural factors in Southern countries.

Share this post

  • Tweet
  • Share Post:

Author: An Li

An Li is John A. Hill Chair in Economic Analysis Assistant Professor at Sarah Lawrence College in New York. His current research interests include the political economy of the environment, environmental justice, property right regimes and the environment, the global outsourcing of pollution-generating activities and the interaction between economic inequality and the environment.

Author: Ying Chen

Ying Chen is Assistant Professor of Economics at the New School in New York, USA. She works on political economy, economic development and climate change with a special focus on China.

Related Posts

 

The Clash of Theory and Practice in China’s Belt and Road Initiative

China’s Belt and Road is not an infrastructure project. With the external industrial policy International Capacity Cooperation being now unwound and Belt and Road floundering as ...

 

Spaces of Capital: Full steam ahead for the Belt and Road Initiative in Laos

As discussed in part one, situating China’s Belt and Road Initiative historically and conjuncturally within the global capitalist system provides an alternative understanding...

 

Spaces of Capital: Uneven Geographical Development and China’s Belt and Road Initiative

‘A high-stakes geopolitical game plan to augment and fortify Chinese power.’ – Will Doig, journalist.

‘China’s predatory approach to investment.’ – ...

 

Two to tango: Cambodia and Chinese aid and investment

The debate about China’s rapidly growing global investment and development financing footprint has focused on deciphering Chinese intentions—whether China aims to revise or...

Comments

Leave a Response Cancel reply


Join our mailing list

© Progress in Political Economy (PPE)

Privacy | Designed by Nucleo | Terms and Conditions

  • Home
  • About
  • Manchester University Press Book Series
  • Past & Present Reading Group
  • A Political Economy of Australian Capitalism
  • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • Journal of Australian Political Economy (JAPE)
    • JAPE Issues
    • JAPE Submission Guidelines
    • JAPE Young Scholar Award
  • Australian IPE Network (AIPEN)
  • Forums
    • Forums
    • Debating Anatomies of Revolution
    • Debating Debtfare States
    • Debating Economic Ideas in Political Time
    • Debating Mass Strikes and Social Movements in Brazil and India
    • Debating Social Movements in Latin America
    • Debating The Making of Modern Finance
    • Debating War and Social Change in Modern Europe
    • Feminist Global “Secureconomy”
    • Gendered Circuits of Labour and Violence in Global Crises
    • Scandalous Economics
    • The Military Roots of Neoliberal Governance
    • Politicising artistic pedagogies
  • Literary Geographies of Political Economy
  • Pedagogy
    • Five Minute Honours Theses
    • Piketty Forum
    • Radical Economics Pedagogy
    • Unconventional Wisdom
    • Journal Club
    • Marxism Reading Group
  • Wheelwright Lecture
  • Events
  • Contributors
  • Links
    • Political Economy At Sydney
    • PHD in Political Economy
    • Master of Political Economy
    • Centre for Future Work
    • Centre for the Study of Social and Global Justice (CSSGJ)
    • Climate Justice Research Centre (UTS)
 

Loading Comments...