ABSTRACT
Green economics is fast emerging as the economics story. The European Business Summit in February 2008 told industry leaders, including leaders of Shell and Lufthansa, that the only hope for the European economy is to go green. In October 2008, green economics made the front cover of Newsweek. In the UK, government officials were told that mainstream economics is so fragile that it should be considered radical – and that the only way forward from now on was to use green economics, the only robust methodology. Ban Ki-moon, leader of the United Nations, declared “we are in an age of global transformation – an age of green economics” (Dickey and McNicoll 2008). More and more people are cognizant that human kind is at a crossroads: we can either save or destroy ourselves and the planet. Either way, the choice is ours. Unfortunately, economics has long been out of balance with the environment, and the hegemony of orthodox economics remains a formidable stumbling block: the two are on a collision course (Anderson 1999). If disaster is to be avoided, they have to become mutually compatible – the voice of the earth has to be heard. Voice comes through diversity, but at present we only have, thanks again to the hegemony of orthodoxy, “monocultures of the mind” which alienate people by precluding other voices from being heard, in turn depleting the strength of the whole. Green economics, on the other hand, has a strong subjective element and is more concerned with life narratives and outcomes than theoretical prescriptions, monoculture or grand narratives. It respects and empowers diversity and other voices. Green economics combines earth voices, green issues, and a practical, real approach characterized by fairness and respect for the environment; it is economics with access for all. Green economics is by its nature multi-, inter-, and trans-disciplinary:
We build on ideas of ecologism, conservation, socialism, feminism, political economy, civil society and counter hegemony, as well as all aspects and limits of natural science. These areas are indivisible – not one of them can be simply a social or positivist science. They are an indivisible unit, which must now be explored in a holistic manner.
