Nature vs Economy

It's rare that I meet somebody who actively opposes tackling deforestation, pollution, or reducing our dependency on fossil fuel. I notice that young people tend to be particularly aware of such issues, and Ipsos Mori's latest Issues facing Britain today survey finds highest concern for the environment amongst the 18-24 group, to which I just about belong. Nevertheless, with only 2% of Britons considering it to be the most important issue, it's clear that the environment is not at the forefront of most people's minds. This would probably come as less of a surprise to me if I spent more time socialising outside the Geography bubble. Economy, on the other hand, has always ranked at or near the top of these polls over the last decade. Talking to students outside of my department, a recurrent idea put forward is that tackling environmental issues is admirable pursuit but, ultimately, an economically costly one. For many, being green is a luxury that the UK can't really afford right now.

Can nature boost a county's economy? is an interesting piece from the BBC which shows how nations can harness their "natural resources"*, with a focus on renewable energy production. This runs counter the narrative described above, as you can see from this extract of a discussion with a UCL professor:

"What we have to get away from is thinking that somehow environment is opposed to economic activity, and [instead] recognise that environment contributes enormously to human life, and find ways of integrating those things in our minds.

Check out the article, have a listen to the associated radio broadcast, and let me know what you think of the idea that caring for the environment comes at a financial cost.

*I've put this term in scare quotes because I find it to be a rather jarring concept. This is is a feeling that I'm not quite equipped to expound right now, but I promise to get back to it in later posts.