The case for the European Green Deal has emerged from the COVID crisis stronger than ever, argues Janez Potočnik. That’s partly because environmental protection and economic growth are being recognised as complementary parts of resilient societies.
This week the European Commission announced a combined COVID recovery package and European Green Deal. Centred on a €750-billion recovery plan, referred to as ‘Next Generation EU’, it promises an immediate economic response. But it’s also a major direction-setter, one which stays committed to the Union’s “twin transitions to a green and digital Europe”.
The Green Deal had aimed to transform the EU into ‘a modern, resource-efficient and competitive economy where there are no net emissions of greenhouse gases in 2050 and where economic growth is decoupled from resource use’. When the pandemic hit, many feared for its future. But this week’s announcement confirms Vice-President Frans Timmermans’ view of the Green Deal as “our lifeline out of this crisis”.
Janez Potočnik is a SYSTEMIQ Partner and the Co-chair of the UN International Resource Panel; he’s also a former European Commissioner for Science and Research and for the Environment. We asked for his first reactions to the announcement.
You have described the COVID recovery and the Green Deal as two sides of the same coin. How big a mindset shift is that for the Commission?
“The first major game-changer was a single sentence in the European Green Deal: ‘a new growth strategy’. Protecting the environment was always seen in contradiction to economic interests and as an additional cost, while now the understanding is switching: if we do not protect the environment, this will limit the potential of our economic development, not only in the future, but in the present. That’s a totally different logic.”
“The economic system that we would need, the one consistent with the Sustainable Development Goals that every member state has signed up to, is not the one we’re currently living in – and it needs to fundamentally change.”
To this narrative of resource management and environmental protection has been added the idea of competitiveness. This week’s announcement promises that investing in a more circular economy has the potential to create at least 700,000 new jobs by 2030.(1)
“In short, better management of natural resources is vital for maintaining and improving EU competitiveness, and strategically strengthening its preparedness and resilience. The circular economy is the best way to manage and lower EU resource dependency, lower our environmental and climate impacts and provide opportunities for new local jobs.”
‘Cohesion’ is a recurring theme in the document. At one level, the Commission’s first concern is how to keep the European Union together. But its centrepiece Recovery and Resilience Facility looks to strengthen social bonds and resilience, including on ‘employment, skills, education, research and innovation and health’. You’ve mentioned the idea of ‘inter-generational solidarity’ before – do you see some of that thinking in the announcement?
“The most significant thing about the announcement was that the Commission clearly showed that they well understand how serious a challenge this is for the European Union, that they showed the right level of solidarity with those who are disproportionately hit by the COVID crisis, but insisted that it should be consistent with the logic of the transformation in the European Green Deal.
“They are proposing some things that were, in the past, not much supported by some member states – for example having a common debt and implicitly expressing a clear belief in the future of the European Union. But, like always, the devil is in the detail, and without clear conditionality we will have to see how the European Green Deal goals will be delivered in reality. Anyway, the title ‘Europe’s Moment: Repair and Prepare for The Next Generation’ clearly expresses the Commission’s aim.
“Through the COVID crisis, younger people have shown high levels of inter-generational solidarity. But the billions of euros and dollars in COVID responses mean additional debt, which will fall also on their shoulders. And one of the main reasons we need a European Green Deal is that – over the past decades, as GDP has risen – we have been indebting future generations by depleting the world’s natural capital. We cannot leave them all the debts, financial and environmental, without a promise of a better world than the one we are currently providing them.
The commission pledges to ‘press fast-forward on the twin green and digital transitions’. Where does this leave carbon-intensive companies and others that are rooted in the old economy?
“A lot of people have in the past invested in good faith – decades ago, they were not really aware of the side-effects of their activities, as they are seen clearly today. Logically, they want their investment to bear fruit for as long as possible. But, whenever you try to get them to better understand the importance of the transition, the most effective strategy is to explain that it is actually unavoidable, and that the only question is how and when it will happen. It is about their future and if they actively engage in transition, they have even every right to expect public support and help. I used to say, killing an industry with kindness will not actually help them. Everyone deserves the truth about the importance and necessity of the transition to a more sustainable, just economy and society.”
“While nobody is denying the importance and urgency of delivering necessary help, it is also essential that it is provided with a system-thinking approach, and not following a conventional sector approach – for example, helping only the car industry without taking into consideration the whole investment required to shift the entire mobility system to a more sustainable one.”
Talking to a former Commissioner for Science and Research, we have to ask about the global COVID response, and the role of science in decision making more generally.
“The voice of science needs to be better heard in public debates, in media and in particular in future policy making. Being a Co-Chair of the International Resource Panel, a science-policy interface, I’m more than aware of the difficult task ahead of us all.
“Unfortunately, I know that policy makers like to use that part of science that fits into their logic and interests. You can see that also in the COVID crisis, and how different leaders have read the scientific truth in a different way.
“That’s why I like those UN initiatives, like IPCC, IPBES or IRP, that are trying to put all this knowledge under one roof and creating a critical mass, which can hardly be disregarded.
“If something is really clear in the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak, it is the fact that a lot is still unknown and unpredictable. We have to invest more in science. We need it to help us better understand the many societal challenges we face, and to design the best ways to prepare, avoid and manage them.”
What do you make of the speed at which COVID crisis funds have been mobilised?
“Responding to COVID-19 and its economic impact is obviously vital. But the reaction is also clearly revealing that while we accepted the need to fight against climate change, we have never considered it with the same urgency. Nor are the financial efforts behind the Paris Agreement on climate sufficient. We have never deployed or promised the same amount of financial support to greening the economy and tackling climate change.”
And can we maintain that pace of change for good?
“If you are part of policy-making, you learn that everything needs time; everything happens when there is enough support and enough understanding that something is necessary. One of the lessons I learned, in my only training during the time in the Commission, from a BBC communication expert, was: ‘Repeat, repeat, repeat – and when you are fed up of repetition … repeat it again.’ That’s creating the necessary understanding and building the potential for changes to happen.
“You have to be optimistic, even if you know many things are working in a different direction. But the ultimate reason that a person needs to be an optimist is that optimists simply live longer and better!”
Endnote: (1) ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’, COM 456, p7
