The paper reviews evidence of the economic impacts of green infrastructure in fragile states. Upfront construction costs for GI were up to 8% higher than non-green infrastructure projects. Climate Finance was not adequately captured by Fragile states for GI investments, and governance issues may further hinder capability to take full advantage. GI Investments needed strong government participation as well as institutional capacities and capabilities that fragile states may not possess. Potential poverty reduction includes improved agricultural yields and higher rural electrification rates, benefits that can be transmitted to other sectors of the economy not directly linked to the GI investment. Whilst there are examples of GI investments creating new jobs in a number of sectors, it is unclear what the employment opportunities advantages are in respect to traditional infrastructure investments. The correct market conditions (i.e. labour regulations or energy demand) are also required in order to maximise employment creation opportunities. Such factors that may not be fully exploited by fragile state governments lacking the capacity to do so.
The report “Resource Productivity in the G8 and the OECD” (also available in French), responding to a request by G8 Environment Ministers at their meeting in Kobe in 2008, presents an evaluation of progress on resource productivity. It highlights key trends and main policy developments related to resource productivity in OECD countries, with a particular focus on efforts to implement sustainable materials management; and identifies the main policy challenges and opportunities and discusses the steps that need to be taken to achieve further progress.
There are currently debates in many countries on whether or not to adjust or correct the measure of gross domestic product (GDP) for deterioration of the state of the environment and depletion of natural resources. The surge in interest for developing such a "green GDP" can perhaps be traced back to the World Commission on Economy and Development's report "Our common future" (WCED, 1987) and the follow-up conference in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, (UNCED). Also the process of revising the system of national accounts (SNA) and the emergence of a "blue book" on System for Economic and Environmental Accounting (SEEA) (UN, 2003) have played an important role in motivating these debates.
This report is an effort to summarise international experiences and current status with regard to the development of a "green GDP". The context is an ongoing debate in China on how to measure performance at the national and local level in a way that not only gives incentives for economic development, but also take due notice and care of the impact on the environment and the natural resources of the unprecedented economic development taking place in parts of China.
This publication includes the latest available economic, financial, social and environmental indicators for the 48 regional members of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). It aims to present the latest key statistics on development issues concerning the economies of Asia and the Pacific to a wide audience. Part I of this issue is a special chapter on green urbanisation in Asia. This chapter tackles two growing concerns: environmental sustainability and rapid urbanisation. It argues that proper management of the urbanisation process can mitigate the environmental impacts and lead to a better life for the region's urban residents. Parts II and III comprise of brief, non-technical analyses and statistical tables on the millennium development goals (MDGs) and seven other themes. This summary was prepared by Eldis.
As France works out its plan to tackle climate change issues, questions are arising in the forest sector as to how sectoral mitigation programs such as those designed to enhance fuel wood consumption or to stimulate in-forest carbon sequestration may coincide with an inter-sectoral program such as an economy-wide carbon tax.
This paper provides insights into this question by exploring the impacts of (1) a combination of a carbon tax and a fuel wood policy, and (2) a combination of a carbon tax and a sequestration policy on (i) the economy of the forest sector, and (ii) the dynamics of the forest resource. To do this, a modified version of the French Forest Sector Model (FFSM) is used and simulations are carried out on a 2020 time horizon.