Print this page

Rod Oram: So what happens if we fail?

  • font size decrease font size decrease font size increase font size increase font size
  The report says there are still policy and other failures that work against compact urban forms but it doesn’t tackle how to solve them. The report says there are still policy and other failures that work against compact urban forms but it doesn’t tackle how to solve them. Photo: Lynn Grieveson

Rod Oram reviews the Productivity Commission's landmark report on moving to a carbon-neutral economy on Newsroom. He finds a wealth of insight on the task ahead, but no analysis of what happens if we fail or what a radical disruption might look like.

We will achieve a stronger economy and a healthier environment by successfully transitioning to a very low emissions economy over the next 30 years, the Productivity Commission concludes in its draft final report on the subject.

While this will entail widespread changes in the economy, technology and the culture of business and government, we’ve pulled off similar multi-decade transformations in the past, the Commission reassures us.

“Looking back through history, other examples show profound change occurring over timeframes of that order or less, with the wellbeing of communities benefitting enormously from changes that, at first, appeared to be highly disruptive and threatening.”

This time around, the emergence of new technologies and businesses will provide opportunities for employment, exports and productivity gains. Many existing businesses will benefit too if they participate in the transformation. But it warned others will fall by the wayside because their technologies will become redundant or they will fail to adapt.

To spur these changes, we need a massive revamp of our innovation system and investment drivers, starting with the immediate cessation of R&D support for high emissions industries. Currently barely 10 percent of the nation’s R&D spend is on clean technologies and climate change mitigation and adaptation.

“Innovation should have priority alongside emissions pricing, targets and [carbon] budgets, and the laws and institutions supporting them. Given the imperative to reduce emissions, the Government should devote significantly more resources to low-emissions innovation than the modest and inadequate current allocation.”

 

Continue to the full article on Newsroom   ||  April 30, 2018   |||

 

 

Run your news & updates on MSCNewsWire