The natural world has a lot to teach us. Above all, it teaches us about systems and cycles; that altering one component of a system, however small, can have wider implications within and beyond a given cycle. Human society, the planet and the economy are all systems and are all bound together in intricate relationships. Only when we begin to understand this bigger picture can we tackle the systemic problems facing us. Here we take a short journey through planetary science to grasp some of the dimensions of those relationships, and posit a series of solutions for affecting the kind of systemic transformation that we urgently need to ensure the health of the planet and of people.
Economic theory (and common sense) tells us that when something is valuable, and it is free, its use tends to infinity – this explains why trees, biodiversity, freshwater and atmospheric space for carbon are all being used ‘like there is no tomorrow’. It also assumes that when something is exhausted (or too expensive), a substitute is almost certain to be found.
Three different sets of approaches to understanding behaviour with respect to sustainable tourism mobility and consumption are identified in this paper: the utilitarian, social/psychological and the systems of provision/institutional approach. Each is based on different sets of assumptions on the factors that affect consumer sustainability behaviour. These assumptions not only affect the selection of policy tools to change behaviours but are also related to different modes of governance. Assumptions with respect to human behaviour and behavioural change and modes of intervention and governance are interrelated and mutually reinforcing and act as policy paradigms. Failure to recognise the importance of social structures in affecting behaviour has created a path dependency in which solutions to sustainable tourism mobility are only accepted within the dominant governance and behavioural paradigm. Other policy options and academic research that identify structures and institutions in systems of provision as a sustainability problem that requires non-market intervention and/or significant system change are regarded as marginal to the policy process or are ignored.
This paper assesses some welfare consequences of climate change mitigation policies. In the same vein as Becker, Philipson and Soares (2005), a simple index of economic progress weighs in the monetary cost induced by mitigation policies as well as the health benefits arising from the reduction in local air pollution. The shadow price of pollution is calculated indirectly through its impact on life expectancy. Taking into account the health benefits of mitigation policies significantly reduces their monetary cost in China and India, as well as in countries with large fossil-based energy-producing sectors (Australia, Canada and the United States).