We can no longer ignore the environmental costs of our economic activity. In fact, we have overlooked this cost for far too long.
Successive governments have paid mere lip service to the ideas of sustainable development and environmental accounting.
Yes, I know we have a more well developed suite of environmental legislation than most of our neighbours; we have an Environmental Management Authority, and Environmental Commission, and many other “environmental” arms and functions in the public sector.
But we are nowhere near the level of comprehensively addressing the cross-cutting nature of environmental costs in almost every economic activity. We still have a siloed approach to incorporating and mainstreaming environmental and sustainable development concerns into our economy.
Externalising the costs of environmental damage makes economic sense only if we really don't care about future generations.
Our governments have sought and continue to seek ways to diversify our economy, generate employment opportunities, so why not start with a “waste-to-wealth” model?
Why don’t we look at wastes as resources in a circular economy? Why can’t Trinidad and Tobago become the hub for recycling in the entire Caribbean region? Send us your trash, pay us for its disposal, and we will generate revenue from the added-value products that can be made from recycling.
I have said it before and I will say it again, if we do not individually or collectively alter our production and energy consumption habits, we will run out of the very things we need for our survival: food; air; water; energy; and we will make the Earth very inhospitable to humans—think extreme weather events.
It’s very anthropocentric of us to think that we can save the planet, or even that the planet needs us to save it; it would be more honest and accurate to say that we are trying to save our place on this planet. The planet will go on long after humans make it unsuitable to support our species.
David D Ramjohn
Via email