Japan Fpcusの論稿はやはり手堅い！以下の論稿は半分カットしないとＵＰできなかった。直にサイトに飛んでほしい。アジア地域での二酸化炭素の消費が増えていること。富のアンバランスが高いことが見えてくる。分配の不公平への解決の提案もなされている。ちょっと完璧に文書が反映されていないので、直接Ｊａｐａｎ Ｆｏｃｕｓサイトに飛んでほしい。めまいするほどの格差が凄い！環境問題と格差の論文はデーターがわかりいい。ＪＡＰＡＮ ＦＯＣＵＳはお奨めです！直接そちらへ飛んでください！マメに読めないのですが、論としての展開が優れている秀逸な論稿が並んでいますねOvercoming Environmental Degradation and Wealth Inequality in the Asia-Pacific RegionThe Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 13, Issue. 44, No. 1, November 16, 2015Edward B. BarbierPope Francis’s encyclical Laudato Si (Praise Be to You) has created headlines worldwide for identifying environmental destruction and global inequality as the “two evils” afflicting humanity today. My latest book, Nature and Wealth: Overcoming Environmental Scarcity and Inequality , similarly argues that the world economy today is facing two major threats:
Drawing on historical and contemporary evidence, I argue that these two threats are symptomatic of a growing structural imbalance in all economies, which is how nature is exploited to create wealth and how it is shared among the population. The root of this imbalance is that natural capital is under-priced, and hence overly exploited, whereas human capital is insufficient to meet demand, thus encouraging relatively higher wages for skilled labor and resulting wealth inequality. Our economic wealth consists of three main assets: reproducible capital, human capital and natural capital, which also includes ecological capital. Along with financial assets, economic wealth comprises the overall wealth of countries, which is often referred to as national wealth. In recent decades, financial capital has become the dominant form of wealth, and more of the income and wealth of the rich is from the financial sector. Moreover, its unchecked expansion has led to greater financial risk and instability, increasing concentration of wealth and global imbalances. Reproducible capital continues to be overly resource- and energy-intensive, and is the main conduit for skill-biased technological change. As a result, accumulation of reproducible capital encourages more use of natural capital and rising demand for relatively skilled labor. However, human capital accumulation in modern economies, that is the development of a skilled labor force, is failing to keep pace with this demand, which has caused the wage gap between highly skilled and less-skilled workers to grow. The outcome globally is increasing wealth inequality, pockets of poverty, structural unemployment, and increased social polarization.1 Finally, the under-pricing of natural capital has led to increasing over-use and severe environmental degradation. The result is increasing pressure on ecological and natural resources, signaling the emergence of global environmental problems such as climate change and declining freshwater availability. One reason for this imbalance is that the current structure of production in the world economy has been mainly determined by the second phase of innovations of the Industrial Revolution. These innovations occurred from 1870 to 1900, and were based largely on electricity and the internal combustion engine, which were in turn made possible by the new hydrocarbons oil and gas, along with coal. Harnessing these technological and economic changes eventually led to the rise of the United States as the leader in 20th century industrialization. As industrialization spread worldwide, fostered by trade in energy and resources, there was a large boost to global productivity, which lasted until the1970s. This second phase of the Industrial Revolution was also an outcome of the fossil fuel era. Since the 1890s, coal, oil and gas have accounted for at least half of global energy consumption. And, despite the rise in renewable energy and nuclear power, fossil fuels still account for 80% of energy use worldwide. In addition, as economies became more energy-intensive during the second phase, they also increased non-renewable material use, such as minerals and ores, construction materials and nonrenewable organics, which currently comprise 95% of material consumption. Two long-term trends that accompanied the second phase of industrialization have occurred since the early 20th century: skill-biased technological change and increased resource and energy use. Both trends are fundamental to understanding the structural imbalance that has arisen since the 1970s. Moreover, economies today are exacerbating this imbalance. We hide the rising costs of increasing environmental scarcity by continuing to under price natural and ecological capital. And, rather than investing in sufficient human capital to keep pace with skill-biased technological change, we allow skilled labor to become scarce and thus attract excessive wages. It seems that we are prepared to accept the economic and social consequences of excessive environmental degradation and rising wealth inequality.環境破壊と富の格差が手をつないでいる。 This argument is especially relevant to Asian economies. A few examples illustrate these problems across the region. 略 The Concentration of Wealth Much attention in recent years has focused on the highly concentrated distribution of wealth in many economies, and especially among the so-called “one percent” of the population that is super-rich, i.e. the wealthiest 1% of all adults, and still more the top 0.1%. Most analysts agree that, although data on long-run trends are available for only a handful of countries, the wealth of the super-rich has been increasing since the early 1970s for some economies and since 1980 for others.10 More importantly, worldwide:
For example, just over 3 billion people in the world, nearly 70% of the world’s population, have wealth of less than US$10,000.12 Among this group, 90% are located in Africa and Asia. In comparison, people who are millionaires or richer comprise less than 1% of the population yet they own 44% of global assets. Within this group, 128,200 individuals have wealth of more than US$50 million, 45,200 have over US$ 100 million, and 4,300 have assets above US$500 million. Of these wealthy individuals, 90% live in Europe, North America and the Asia-Pacific (excluding China and India). Thus, the division between the very wealthy and the very poor is affecting every region, including within and among economies in the Asia-Pacific. However, it is the recent rise in wealth inequality – and its spread throughout the world economy and especially throughout Asia – that is the most significant trend. Table 3 depicts the level of inequality in 46 major economies, and also indicates whether the level has been rising or falling from 2000 to 2014. Table 3. Trends in Wealth Inequality across Countries, 2000-2014
The top decile is the wealthiest 10% of all adults. 46 countries, with the Group of 20 (G20) countries indicated in italics. The members of the G20 include 19 countries (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the UK and the US), plus the European Union. Source: Markus Stierli, Anthony Shorrocks, Jim Davies, Rodrigo Lluberas and Antonios Koutsoukis. 2014. Global Wealth Report 2014. Credit Suisse Research Institute, Zurich, Table 1, p. 30 and Table 2, p. 33.
Wealth inequality is high or very high in 30 of these countries. Moreover, since 2000, nine countries have experienced a rapid rise in inequality, five have seen a rise, and three a slight rise. Among these countries are several from the Asia-Pacific: Indonesia, Hong Kong, India, China, South Korea and Taiwan. What is more, with the exception of Japan, all Asia-Pacific countries listed in Table 3 display medium, high or very high inequality.日本はまだいい方で他のアジア地域の格差は凄まじい。 A Parable from Beijing The example of Beijing’s air pollution – and the stark contrast between how the rich and poor are able to respond to this problem – illustrate how environmental degradation and economic inequality are becoming increasingly entwined in Asian economies. Beijing is one of the largest and fastest growing cities in the world. Its current population is more than 20 million, and the population is expected to exceed 25 million by 2020 and possibly 50 million by 2050.13 Beijing’s extraordinary growth, together with that of other such megacities as Shanghai and Chongqing, has been accompanied by industrial development, greater reliance on coal-fired power plants, increased automobile traffic and congestion, urban sprawl, and as a consequence, notoriously high levels of air pollution. Over a six-year period, from April 2008 to March 2014, there were 1,812 days where air quality in Beijing reached unhealthy levels, and only two days where air quality exceeded healthy levels.14 Pollution exposure in Beijing and other urban areas in China is linked to cardio-respiratory illnesses and premature deaths, in particular from heart disease, stroke and lung cancer.15 In January 2015, the city’s mayor made global headlines by announcing that, because of its noxious smog, “Beijing is not a livable city.”16 But there is a great difference in how the rich and poor residents of Beijing are able to cope with its air pollution. In Beijing and other major Chinese cities, it is the disadvantaged groups – the poor, ethnic minorities and rural migrants – that are most exposed to air pollution and the resulting health effects.17 These disadvantaged groups are confined to the most polluted urban neighborhoods, which also suffer from high crime rates, inadequate infrastructure and services, and poor living conditions, from which they commute long distances for work. Moving closer to work is not an option; 48% of all jobs in Beijing are located within three miles of the city center, yet only the rich that can afford to live downtown.18 In addition, the rich have other options for coping with Beijing’s air pollution and other health and social problems.19 They can afford to move to cleaner urban neighborhoods, which also have better jobs and high-quality public services, such as good schools and hospitals. The very wealthy can also afford extraordinary measures to protect themselves from air pollution. For example, elite private schools in Beijing are building gigantic inflatable air-conditioned domes to protect their students from air pollution hazards as they play sports and attend classes. As one school official explains: “A non-toxic learning environment is perhaps the least parents might expect, when they’re paying £20,000-a-year fees.”20 Moreover, increasingly many of Beijing’s wealthy send their children overseas to school, not least to protect their health. A Balanced Wealth Strategy As I argue in my book, Nature and Wealth, to address the current structural imbalance we must tackle these twin problems of excessive environmental degradation and insufficient human capital, which I call a Balanced Wealth Strategy. This strategy also needs to include policies aimed directly at benefiting the large number of resource-dependent economies and ending the significant pockets of poverty found worldwide. In addition, global market failures – climate change, loss of ecosystems and declining availability of water – need to be addressed as well. Consequently, the four key elements of the Balanced Wealth Strategy are:
The Balanced Wealth Strategy is clearly not costless, and will require substantial commitments by all economies. But unless such a strategy is pursued, and the world economy makes the transition to a new era of innovation and environmentally and socially sound growth, the current global threats of environmental scarcity and inequality will continue to worsen. In the case of Asia’s dynamic economies, such a strategy offers the opportunity to transition to green innovation and growth.21 現況の悪化から緑の革命と革新へ！人類の知恵がどこでもいつでも試されている！ In sum, we face two possible visions of the future, one in which the second phase malaise persists versus one in which the world economy enters a third phase of innovation, sustainable growth and economic prosperity. Making the transition will not be easy, but the consequences for the majority of the world’s population of the current pattern of depleting nature to accumulate wealth could be bleak, if not catastrophic. The Asia-Pacific region in particular must confront this choice sooner rather than later. A good place to start doing so would be at the forthcoming climate change negotiations at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change meetings in Paris in early December.←フランスで12月初期はありえるか？すべてキャンセルか？ Recommended citation: Edward B. Barbier, "Overcoming Environmental Degradation and Wealth Inequality in the Asia-Pacific Region", The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 13, Issue 44, No. 1, November 16, 2015. Edward B. Barbier is the John S Bugas Professor of Economics, Department of Economics and Finance, University of Wyoming. His main expertise is natural resource and development economics as well as the interface between economics and ecology. He has served as a consultant and policy analyst for a variety of national, international and non-governmental agencies, including many UN organizations, the World Bank and the OECD. He has authored over 200 peer-reviewed journal articles and book chapters, written or edited 22 books and published in popular journals. His latest book is Nature and Wealth: Overcoming Environmental Scarcity and Inequality, published by Palgrave Macmillan, London. Related articles • Andrew DeWit, Japan’s Bid to Become a World Leader in Renewable Energy • John Mathews and Hao Tan, A ‘Great Reversal’ in China? Coal continues to decline with enforcement of environmental laws • John A. Mathews and Hao Tan, The Greening of China's Black Electric Power System? Insights from 2014 Data • John A. Mathews and Hao Tan, “China’s Continuing Renewable Energy Revolution: Global Implications” • John A. Mathews and Hao Tan, “Jousting with James Hansen: China building a renewables powerhouse” • John A. Mathews, The Asian Super Grid • Andrew DeWit, Japan’s Energy Policy at a Crossroads: A Renewable Energy Future? • Sun-Jin YUN, Myung-Rae Cho and David von Hippel, The Current Status of Green Growth in Korea: Energy and Urban Security Notes略
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Comments
