A case for a PH Green Deal
THE “Green New Deal” proposed by a group of Democratic politicians in the US is an interesting plan, and probably worthy of emulation here in the Philippines and elsewhere. Not because it’s a good plan — it isn’t, it’s an unrealistic, sophomoric mess — but because it represents a good way to kick-start a policy debate.
Every country needs a climate change management plan. Ideally, the entire world should have one, but the reality of divergent political and economic goals makes that a practical impossibility. Efforts like the Paris Climate Accord, while well-meaning, are a waste of time because of how quickly they can be derailed.
Nations still need to protect themselves, however, and in doing so meet their responsibility to the rest of the world to reduce their individual contributions to global climate damage. The “Green New Deal,” as I said, is not a practical model in its details, but the approach is useful.
What the Green New Deal does is express an ideal climate management framework, or a best-case scenario from the zero climate impact point of view. In other words, it paints a picture of what a climate-neutral US would like if other niggling concerns such as jobs, stable utility supplies, a functioning economy, efficient and cost-effective transportation, and
healthy diets were completely ignored.
The plan is almost entirely impractical, economically impossible, and would severely curtail individual freedoms, but it is completely accurate in the sense that “this is what the US would have to look like in order for the country not to cause any further harm to the environment.” That makes it a useful starting point: Working backwards from that ideal, policymakers should be able to arrive at a point where climate mitigation is economically and socially productive.
The Philippines can and should do exactly the same thing: Develop a “Philippine Green Deal,” a plan that describes an ideal national model for zero climate impact without respect to any other priorities. From that, the “ideal” can be gradually diluted until it describes a plan that is both cost-effective and socially tolerable. Approaching the problem from this “top down” direction would result in more effective climate mitigation, because it still maintains the climate mitigation as a priority; the policy solution will be less heterodox and more coordinated, and therefore more effective.
To determine what should be included in the “Philippine Green Deal,” its authors should follow the recommendations laid out in a recent insightful commentary entitled, “Triaging climate change” published by the RAND Corporation last month. In it, the authors suggest separating national priorities into three categories: