‘Laying more tarmac isn’t a solution by itself’

Said economist Lord Nicholas Stern, who was in the city to participate in the panel discussion on Climate Change Action Plan for Karnataka.

His much-talked about review ‘The Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change’, that came out in 2006, mentions that, “…climate change is the greatest and widest-ranging market failure ever seen, presenting a unique challenge for economics ..”

Lord Stern, speaking to DNA made, suggestions that can be considered by the state to cut down on carbon emissions - directly or indirectly.

“Some kind of pricing, taxing of heavy emissions, introduction of tax on production of coal, the state could think about that. There could be state-level taxation. There are various ways in which one can bring about pricing which are either directly or indirectly related to emission. Bangalore is a place with such technological expertise that congestion charges on roads will make a big difference,” he said.

“I’ve been coming to Bangalore for 30 years now, the change is enormous. You have built lots of roads, but of course they are much more congested than they used to be. You cannot get out of congestion simply with tarmac,” he added.

“You need road management as well as roads. Tarmac by itself is not the answer to congestion. Those are the kind of policies which also raise revenue. When you raise revenue, you can use it to protect poor people if they are affected, to promote new technologies, to help fund adaptations, as they cause increasing frequencies of disparity. Adaptations bear heavy social costs, and you need resources. Why not raise resources which discourage things that are contributing to the problem?” he asked.

“It is not too difficult now with modern technology to build into cars systems in which you pay if you use your car in a congested place. That technology is with us. People would complain but it
will be much better for everybody and you will make money you can spend on other things,” he opined.

“That’s the kind of thing (congestion charging) which will help promote public transport. It means buses will run faster. You can also afford to subsidise bus fares because you have raised the money from congestion charges. So actually, people would get around better. Some may complain, though.

“In times, you have to get energy efficient and low on carbon everywhere: transport, buildings, agriculture. The giving away of electricity is terribly wasteful and then people leave the tube well on, they don’t know when the electricity will come on and electricity surges. Tube wells burn out or the tube well is on and the farmer is asleep, it floods the farm. It is so wasteful, incubating to these kind of problems. Hence, adaptations are going to be so important over the next 20-30 years to manage big problems.
There would be a need for resources.

For instance, floods could dispose people who would have to be rehabilitated and doing that would require resources. “And maybe you raise those resources in a way that reduces those things that are much more manageable,” he said.

He went on to say that if India sets a greener example, it can pressurise the rich world to follow its footsteps. “It could also help bring in some funds. But, part of the funding will follow the action rather than the other way round,” he added.