Green growth or ecological commodification: debating the green economy in the global south

Abstract

This article examines recent institutional thinking on the green economy and the implications of official understandings and structuration of a green economy for the global South. Assertions about the transformative potential of a green economy by many international actors conceals a complexity of problems, including the degree to which the green economy is still based on old fossil economies and technical fixes, and the processes through which the green economy ideation remains subject to Northern economic and technical dominance. The article places the intellectual roots of the green economy within a broader historical context and suggests some ways the strategic economic and ideological interests of the global North remain key drivers of green‐economy thinking. The analysis is substantiated through two illustrative Latin American examples: the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor and green economy initiatives in Brazil. These suggest that, if the green economy is to address global challenges effectively, it must be conceptualized as more than a bolt‐on to existing globalizing capitalism and encompass more critical understandings of the complex socio‐economic processes through which poverty is produced and reproduced and through which the global environment is being transformed, a critique which also applies to mainstream discourses of sustainable development.

The green economy and post‐growth regimes: opportunities and challenges for economic geography

“…Brown et al (2014) argue that current conceptualizations of the green economy have done little to challenge uneven political and economic relations between the global North and South or to meet the basic needs of the world's poor. Based on analyses of the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor and initiatives in Brazil, they contend that green growth strategies have been dominated by technological fixes and the reproduction of Northern strategic economic and ideological interests.…”

Politics of the green economy in Russia's European North

“…In a green economy, growth in income and employment are driven by public and private investments that reduce carbon emissions and pollution, enhance energy and resource efficiency, and prevent the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. (UNEP 2011: 16) Even though the concept has been in circulation for a few decades, its current ubiquity results from being chosen as a central theme for the United Nations' 2012 Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20), "as a means for catalyzing renewed national policy development and international cooperation and support for sustainable development" (Caprotti and Bailey 2014: 195;Allen and Clouth 2012: 5;Brown et al 2014).…”

“…The belief that a green industrial revolution is on the way (Jänicke and Jacob 2009;Stern and Rydge 2012) and a global technocratic policy propaganda that argues environmental and social problems are amenable to technological fixes, have been described as naïve, overlooking the complexity of social processes that trigger inequality and ecological crises (Brown et al 2014;Caprotti 2012;Death 2014;KnoxHayes and Hayes 2014). The impacts of neoliberal environmental governance and nature conservation strategies that the green economy reinforces, have been condemned as deepening unequal power relations through maldistribution of access to resources (Arsel and Büscher 2012;Brockington and Duffy 2010;Brown et al 2014: 248;Castree 2008;Fletcher 2010Fletcher , 2012Himley 2008;McAfee 2012).…”

Making sense of the green economy

“…As Brown et al (2014) argue in this issue, the construction of the green economy in the context of neoliberal visions of sustainable development needs to be critically interrogated by considering the consequences of these trajectories for energy poverty and marginalization among citizens of the global South. Furthermore, and in light of the emergence of middle-income countries such as Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (the BRICS) and Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria and Turkey (the MINTs), a key question facing geographical enquiries into the green economy is not just its construction across the global North and global South, but its articulation in a rapidly changing and diversifying global economic landscape.…”

“…Considering the geographically variegated nature of the green economy is, thus, an essential starting point for critical enquiry, and geographers are well placed to interrogate the mechanisms of power and geopolitical influence which often go hand-in-hand with the creation of asymmetrical green economy-focused policies in the global South, the emergence of new inequalities associated with the new economy, and the perpetuation and reproduction of existing disparities (Tandon 2012). As Brown et al (2014) argue in this issue, the construction of the green economy in the context of neoliberal visions of sustainable development needs to be critically interrogated by considering the consequences of these trajectories for energy poverty and marginalization among citizens of the global South. Furthermore, and in light of the emergence of middle-income countries such as Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (the BRICS) and Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria and Turkey (the MINTs), a key question facing geographical enquiries into the green economy is not just its construction across the global North and global South, but its articulation in a rapidly changing and diversifying global economic landscape.…”