Our economic well-being relies on indefinite growth in a finite system, raising sustainability concerns. But, if we dared to ask: What would the world lose if your company disappeared? Companies might find themselves in a totally novel position on how to justify their existence: Through assessments of their overall impact on society and the planet, or indeed having to advocate how their business case positively contribute to all facets of life.
Pricing the ton of carbon is a key matter – more so as an increasing number of companies aim at publicly claiming carbon neutrality. Carbon hence has a price – and this raises the much discussed question: What is a fair (or better: ‘correct’) price for carbon?
In this post I present a glimpse of some of the challenges and realities related to the topic.
It leaves us with the question: What went wrong in the current system that fundamentally asks us to choose between having to monetarily price natural and societal resources, and a fair, equitable access to these resources specifically for hard hit communities?
The question alone should not be even asked.
And yet it seems that’s what we’re left with given the current time and age.
As I write this, it is late April.
And our lessons from the last few weeks in Corona lock down and the impact of the pandemic on our communities and societies, all over the world, have thrown an even harsher light onto some of the realities we either assumed as a given, or worked hard to change for years already.
And the lessons have been truly tough medicine.
Doughnut Economics = An economic system that respects the planetary boundaries as well as the societal attributes of welfare. To create an economic system that works for the humans and the environment around us.