page 1
page 2
page 3
page 4
page 5
page 6
page 7
page 8
page 9
page 10
page 11
page 12
page 13
page 14
page 15
page 16
page 17
page 18
page 19
page 20
page 21
page 22
page 23
page 24
page 25
page 26
page 27
page 28
page 29
page 30
page 31
page 32
page 33
page 34
page 35
page 36
page 37
page 38
page 39
page 40
page 41
page 42
page 43
page 44
page 45
page 46
page 47
page 48
page 49
page 50
page 51
page 52
page 53
page 54
page 55
page 56
page 57
page 58
page 59
page 60
page 61
page 62
page 63
page 64
page 65
page 66
page 67
page 68
page 69
page 70
page 71
page 72
page 73
page 74
page 75
page 76
page 77
page 78
page 79
page 80
page 81
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
page 92
page 93
page 94
page 95
page 96
page 97
page 98
page 99
page 100
page 101
page 102
page 103
page 104
page 105
page 106
page 107
page 108
page 109
page 110
page 111
page 112
page 113
page 114
page 115
page 116
page 117
page 118
page 119
page 120
page 121
page 122
page 123
page 124

ddressing the challenge' was at the"heart of many climate debates beforeand during the UN Climate ChangeConference last December inCopenhagen. In the event, even if the conferenceaddressed a lot of the challenges, it met very few of them. The reasons were various: the intrinsic political,economic and legal difficulties in reaching a bindinginternational agreement to cope with climate change;the coincidence of a major economic and financialcrisis worldwide; the UN rules of procedure which gaveall 193 participating governments the right of veto;and the practical shortcomings of the wholenegotiating process as it emerged before and atCopenhagen.Yet the conference was not a disaster, more perhaps awarning of disasters to come if something could not beachieved soon. The final non-binding [Copenhagen]Accord laid out general principles for an eventualagreement, and specific targets for reducing globalcarbon emissions by 2020. By now over 110 countries and the European Union, producing more than 80 per cent of emissions, have responded to the UN ClimateSecretariat to state their targets. There was realprogress in coping with the related question ofdeforestation. Even if climate change sceptics, particularly in theUnited States, have continued their noisy campaigns,more governments, and behind them business andindustry, have shown awareness of the vulnerability oftheir countries to climate change, and the need torethink policies on energy, development, theenvironment (in particular biodiversity) and thewidening gap between rich and poor.HOW DO THE G8 COUNTRIES FIT INTOTHIS PICTURE? One of the most important lessons of Copenhagen wasthe need to go for pluralities of agreement, in otherwords, 'agreements', between groups of countrieswhich can agree on specific aims or measures betweenthemselves, and later try to fit them into a globalframework. Such has long been the tradition of the G8,and before that the G7. In the early days of the G7, I was a so-called sherpa forthe European Union, or one of those responsible forproducing a draft text for the participating countries todiscuss and agree on. I was therefore the witness of thesheer scope as well as the quality of the debates andactions to follow (I even produced a paper on climatechange for my sherpa colleagues on one occasion). Since then the G7 has become the G8, and then theG8 plus 5, and the influence this group has exercisedon many issues has been real and positive. It has madesuccessive commitments to reduce carbon emissionsand supported the launch of 20 large-scale carboncapture and sequestration demonstration projects. Nodoubt, climate change will be high on the agenda atHuntsville from 25 to 26 June too. The complexities remain as great as ever: how tomitigate the effects of climate change and even moreadapt to them; how to establish equitablearrangements between industrial and other countries;how to develop the right alternative technologies forenergy generation; and how to verify and police anyTop: Leadinginternationalenvironmentalist SirCrispin Tickell, hoping forprogress in CancunMain Picture: Protectingthe planet's futureremains paramount yetcountries still struggle tofind accordFOREWORDMORE GOVERNMENTS,AND BEHINDTHEM BUSINESSAND INDUSTRY,HAVE SHOWNAWARENESS OF THE VULNERABILITYOF THEIR COUNTRIES TOCLIMATE CHANGE"010THE NEW ECONOMY'ASIR CRISPIN TICKELL, DIRECTOR OF THE POLICY FORESIGHT PROGRAMME, THE JAMES MARTINSCHOOL FOR THE 21ST CENTURY, OXFORD UNIVERSITY

THE NEW ECONOMY011rational systems of measurement, and here the G8could make a real difference. All governments face amajor responsibility in getting rid of perversesubsidies, determining the right incentives anddisincentives, and of course, working as far as possiblein a coordinated global framework.The G8 meeting will be followed by a meeting of theG20. In some ways the formation of the G20 reflectsthe widening of economic power and politicalinfluence in the world today. Whatever the G8 will do atHuntsville will affect the work of the G20. According to an article in the magazine 'Nature' of 8April, the G20 now account for two-thirds of the worldpopulation, 90 per cent of global economic activity,and at least 75 per cent of global greenhouse gasemissions. The G20 has already discussed proposalsfor a Global Green New Deal, originally put forward bythe United Nations Environment Programme. Thisbrings out many of the practical implications of pointson the G8 agenda. We would be wise to go for pluralityof agreements on this as on other occasions.The next step will be Cancun or COP 16 in November.At present, expectations for a comprehensive globalagreement on climate change are low. Excessiveoptimism at Copenhagen should not be matched byexcessive pessimism at Cancun. Perhaps we will beagreeably surprised. In all respects the contributions of the G8 and then theG20 will be critical to the success of Cancun, and thesuccessive meetings which will surely follow. The world is ours for the making and mending, and wecannot afford to fail. nBIOGRAPHYSir Crispin Tickell is a leading internationalenvironmentalist and independent environmentaladvisor to successive British Prime Ministers. SirCrispin spent most of his life in the DiplomaticService: as Chef de Cabinet to the President of theEuropean Commission (1977-80), Ambassador toMexico (1981-83), Permanent Secretary of theOverseas Development Administration (1984-87),and British Permanent Representative to the UnitedNations (1987-90). His book 'Climate Change AndWorld Affairs', first published in 1977, was amongthe first to establish the connection between climatechange and politics.Sir Crispin is also a contributor to many publicationson world-wide environmental issues. FormerChancellor of University of Kent and Warden ofGreen College, Oxford, he is presently Director of thePolicy Foresight Programme at the James MartinSchool for the 21st Century at Oxford University.agreements which may be made. Some people thinkthat a comprehensive agreement would be a kind ofmiracle in international affairs. Certainly it would be astep in a new direction.Climate change touches on almost everything. Amongthe related subjects the G8 may wish to discuss, thereare obvious priorities, well brought out in the list ofthose contributing to this publication. The sub-title ofthis edition -'The New Economy' -is particularlyimportant. We have to rethink a lot of economics; howwe measure the health, wealth and welfare of thehuman condition. At present we fail to bring in externalities and truecosts in our system of measurement. As has been wellsaid, markets are marvellous at fixing prices butincapable of recognising costs. The shortcomings of"growth", GDP/GNP etc are at last being recognised,together with the artificiality of much cost benefitanalysis. New efforts are being made to establish more