““The ‘environment’ is where we live; and development is what we all do in attempting to improve our lot
within that abode. The two are inseparable.” - Our Common Future, the Brundtland Report1. The statement very rightly puts forth the existing situation, where traditional measurements of performance, such as gross domestic product (GDP), account only for the economic development and do not accurately reflect environmental well-being. GDP does not consider many important goods and services that are derived from nature; the reason being its restricted scope which is completely dependent on the market. Hence, even though it holds the foremost position in economic analysis and public policy, GDP has lately been criticized quite a bit.
Considering the above mentioned factors, measures have been taken to protect the environment and adopt green technologies and policies, but with no visible results. It is majorly the growth that is considered without much concern for the environment. The objective is to access a country’s growth which is in sync with the environment. The measurement of this green GDP can also be called “Gross Environmental Product” (GEP). One of the major attempts to implement this concept was taken by China. China adopted this concept in the year 2004 and released its first green GDP in 2006. It showed significant losses incurred by the economy because of taking the environment into consideration.
Following China’s footsteps both the developing and the developed countries are taking into account the green GDP. India has also taken this initiative in 2010 and is expected to release its first green GDP by 20153; but the question is to what effect?
Our study focuses on the changes encountered in the past two decades in the various sectors like
Agriculture, Energy & Power, Industry & Services, Infrastructure and Banking, followed by a comparative study with China.” ~ GreenTree
|
