Publish : 10 Jan 2022, 04:46 PMUpdate : 10 Jan 2022, 04:46 PM
I read Tim Worstall’s article, “What the Kuznets curve means for Bangladesh,” with great interest.
Incidentally, it makes a few points that relate to some of the issues raised in my article published a few days earlier, “Is Bangladesh Ready?”
Therefore, I thought there was some room for conversations.
The argument that the environment gets better once people become rich was debunked long time ago through what environmental economists call "Jevon's Paradox", which suggests that the cleaner environment that follow economic prosperity (hypothetically) creates more efficiency in production and consequently put more pressure on natural resources and the environment.
Besides, well-known environmental problems associated with industrialization, like the stinks and smog in London, did not disappear after Londoners got rich.
Situation improved because of many environmental legislations and their implementation.
That the British suffered environmentally for centuries does not mean that that history has to be repeated elsewhere.
In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith, for example, noted that pre-colonial Bangladesh was rich because of its environment, not because of the environmental destruction that preceded that prosperity.
The most pressing issue here is that we are in a planetary boat and there are hundreds of cities like Dhaka and rural areas across the world, in both developed and developing countries, that are suffering from environmental problems while contributing to climate change because of anthropogenic interventions.
These demand urgent actions, not procrastination of the kind we saw in Adam McKay’s new film “Don’t Look Up”.
A clean and sustainable environment is not a luxury item, it is existential—not only for future generations, but also for us too, now and here.
The “invisible hand” of the market can do many miracles, but can hardly heal the deep wound that the unscrupulous capitalism has caused to the planet.
I am unable to judge if the argument based on“Kuznets curve” is Trumpian in trivializing the current and coming environmental dangers, or whether it is Marxian in anticipating capitalist climax before socialist utopia.
In either case, these 19th century approaches to the 21st century environmental challenges are hilarious, to say the least.
The author is associate professor in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences of the Universiti Brunei Darussalam
In response to Tim Worstall’s ‘What the Kuznets curve means for Bangladesh’
I thought there was some room for conversations
I read Tim Worstall’s article, “What the Kuznets curve means for Bangladesh,” with great interest.
Incidentally, it makes a few points that relate to some of the issues raised in my article published a few days earlier, “Is Bangladesh Ready?”
Therefore, I thought there was some room for conversations.
The argument that the environment gets better once people become rich was debunked long time ago through what environmental economists call "Jevon's Paradox", which suggests that the cleaner environment that follow economic prosperity (hypothetically) creates more efficiency in production and consequently put more pressure on natural resources and the environment.
Besides, well-known environmental problems associated with industrialization, like the stinks and smog in London, did not disappear after Londoners got rich.
Situation improved because of many environmental legislations and their implementation.
That the British suffered environmentally for centuries does not mean that that history has to be repeated elsewhere.
In The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith, for example, noted that pre-colonial Bangladesh was rich because of its environment, not because of the environmental destruction that preceded that prosperity.
The most pressing issue here is that we are in a planetary boat and there are hundreds of cities like Dhaka and rural areas across the world, in both developed and developing countries, that are suffering from environmental problems while contributing to climate change because of anthropogenic interventions.
These demand urgent actions, not procrastination of the kind we saw in Adam McKay’s new film “Don’t Look Up”.
A clean and sustainable environment is not a luxury item, it is existential—not only for future generations, but also for us too, now and here.
The “invisible hand” of the market can do many miracles, but can hardly heal the deep wound that the unscrupulous capitalism has caused to the planet.
I am unable to judge if the argument based on“Kuznets curve” is Trumpian in trivializing the current and coming environmental dangers, or whether it is Marxian in anticipating capitalist climax before socialist utopia.
In either case, these 19th century approaches to the 21st century environmental challenges are hilarious, to say the least.
The author is associate professor in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences of the Universiti Brunei Darussalam