An additional question I'd have asked in Rebecca Henderson's interview following the section about developing countries is "what's your take on allowing developing nations more leniency on using carbon intensive forms of energy (coal, natural gas) to help them "catch up" to developed nations?" I was prompted to think about this question when Professor Henderson mentioned how China is "building a coal plant a week" and how India was on a similar path, and how she found both to be "very problematic". While from a pure environmentalist perspective China and India expanding their use of coal when it's in everyone's best interest to reduce global carbon emissions is a bad thing, is it really fair to hold developing nations to the same carbon standard as places like the United States? The United States reached its place of prominence through heavy use of fossil fuels while it was developing, and only now can it consider moving towards cleaner alternatives. It seems like it'd be much more difficult for a developing nation to grow without access to the same cheap sources of fuel that current developed nations took advantage of.
top of page
bottom of page
That's a very interesting question that has a lot of global political and economic implications. I agree that while ultimately we need to reduce carbon emissions, it is patently unfair to cripple the economies of developing nations in the process. Maybe the answer lies in setting goals for carbon reduction that are sympathetic to these countries' growth while also aiming toward lower emissions in the long term. I also think that providing financial incentives to reduce emissions would be another potentially viable approach. Innovation could also play a role here as technological advances could make green energy more affordable over time. My guess is that a multifaceted approach would be best to address this issue, and I am curious as to what Professor Henderson would have to say about carbon footprints in developing countries.