Difference between revisions of "Copenhagen Consensus"

From SourceWatch
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (tidy formatting)
m (oops format fix)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
The '''Copenhagen Consensus''' is a flagship attempt by [[Bjorn Lomborg]]'s [[Environmental Assessment Institute]] to redefine global priorities in line with his attacks on the Kyoto agreement, which he claims is costly, politically untenable, and of dubious benefit.
 
The '''Copenhagen Consensus''' is a flagship attempt by [[Bjorn Lomborg]]'s [[Environmental Assessment Institute]] to redefine global priorities in line with his attacks on the Kyoto agreement, which he claims is costly, politically untenable, and of dubious benefit.
  
−
=== History ==
+
=== History ===
 +
 
 
In early March 2004, Lomborg held a media briefing in London announcing the conference. "The world faces a number of serious problems such as pollution, hunger and disease. Which problem should be addressed first? There are 800 million people starving, 2.5 billion people lacking sewerage, and billions affected by climate change. We all wish that there were money enough to solve all problems. But our means are limited. Therefore policy-makers prioritize every day, but not always on the best basis. Copenhagen Consensus will provide a framework to allow us to make better prioritizations," Lomborg wrote in a media statement.
 
In early March 2004, Lomborg held a media briefing in London announcing the conference. "The world faces a number of serious problems such as pollution, hunger and disease. Which problem should be addressed first? There are 800 million people starving, 2.5 billion people lacking sewerage, and billions affected by climate change. We all wish that there were money enough to solve all problems. But our means are limited. Therefore policy-makers prioritize every day, but not always on the best basis. Copenhagen Consensus will provide a framework to allow us to make better prioritizations," Lomborg wrote in a media statement.
  

Revision as of 00:32, 28 March 2004

The Copenhagen Consensus is a flagship attempt by Bjorn Lomborg's Environmental Assessment Institute to redefine global priorities in line with his attacks on the Kyoto agreement, which he claims is costly, politically untenable, and of dubious benefit.

History

In early March 2004, Lomborg held a media briefing in London announcing the conference. "The world faces a number of serious problems such as pollution, hunger and disease. Which problem should be addressed first? There are 800 million people starving, 2.5 billion people lacking sewerage, and billions affected by climate change. We all wish that there were money enough to solve all problems. But our means are limited. Therefore policy-makers prioritize every day, but not always on the best basis. Copenhagen Consensus will provide a framework to allow us to make better prioritizations," Lomborg wrote in a media statement.

Due to take place over May 24-28 2004 - with the support of The Economist magazine, it will take the form of a meeting of a selection of nine eminent, Western, generally right-wing economists. These economists will consider a set of ten "challenge papers" on subjects such as education and climate change, and prioritise economic solutions to these problems. The ten challenge papers will be published as a collection by Cambridge University Press, which published the English language version of Lomborg's The Sceptical Environmentalist.

Since the conference was first announced, five of the seven board members of the EAI have resigned: two for personal reasons, and three in protest at the conference, which they say goes far beyond the EAI's original remit by considering subjects such as financial instability, corrupt governance and infectious diseases. [1], [2]

It has been strongly criticised by NGOs such as Oxfam for drawing attention away from the existing consensus built up over several years and codified in the United Nations Millennium Development Goals.

It has also attracted criticism for an approach which tries to define development goals without involving any representatives from developing countries.

Finally, it has been questioned if a panel of exclusively free-market thinkers, several of whom have published views sceptical of the Kyoto consensus, can produce what is supposedly a neutral output on the issue.

As Australian economist and blogger, John Quiggan, wrote: "What can we say about this list? The Nobel prizewinners are obviously eminent, but they're not the names that spring to the front of my mind when I think about a question like setting global priorities for development and the environment. Heckman is a micro-econometrician, Smith is an experimenter, focusing on micro issues, and Fogel and North are economic historians (North's ideas are relevant to the big-picture issues of growth and development, so he's a partial exception, but only a partial one)," he wrote.

"The problem becomes clearer when I consider the names of those Nobelists who would be obvious candidates, including Kenneth Arrow, Joseph Stiglitz, James Mirrlees, Robert Solow and Amartya Sen. All of these economists have made extensive contributions to the theory of economic growth and development, and all have been keenly interested in environmental issues. Unfortunately for Lomborg, though, all except Mirrlees1 are strong supporters of action to mitigate global warming. Having looked at the absentees, I look back at the list of inclusions and note that the one thing they have in common is that they are all generally regarded as right-wing," he wrote. [3].

At the March press conference the deputy editor of The Economist, Clive Crook, was keen to hustle what he hoped would be the international significane of the event. "We hope that the meeting in Copenhagen will have global implications both academically and politically. Copenhagen Consensus is an outstanding, visionary idea and deserves global coverage," he wrote in a media statement. [4]

Lomborg told BBC Online that his expectation was that the conference would provide direction on funding priorities. "The world faces a series of serious problems such as pollution, hunger and disease. Which problem should be addressed first? … We all wish there was enough money to solve every problem. But there is a limit to how much money we have. Therefore politicians prioritise every day, but not always on the best basis. Copenhagen Consensus will provide a framework to allow us to prioritise sensibly," he told BBC Online. [5]

However, Lomborg has made abundantly clear that allocating resources to combatting climate change would be at a cost of what he points to as more important issues such as access to clean drinking water.[6]

"I'm not saying that this [climate change] is a question of me saying, "oh, it's going to be a little problem", I'm saying all of the models have looked at, what will be the costs and benefits. We should do something else. We can actually do a lot more good elsewhere," Lomborg said in one interview. [7]

The experts will discuss the 10 essential problems selected by Lomborg: climate change, communicable diseases, conflicts, education, financial instability, governance and corruption, malnutrition and hunger, migration, sanitation and water, and subsidies and trade barriers.

Panel of Experts

Challenge Paper authors

Contact information

Director Bjorn Lomborg
Ph 45 7226 5800
Project Manager Henrik Meyer
Phone: 45 7226 5820
www.copenhagenconsensus.com

External links

Retrieved from "https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Copenhagen_Consensus&oldid=27995"