British Foreign Secretary David Miliband was in Sweden yesterday, a visit that I helped to set up. The Minister of course met with his Swedish opposite number, Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, and the Leader of the Opposition, Social Democrat Mona Sahlin, but he also took part in two interactive sessions, one at a local upper secondary school specialising in globalisation and sustainable development and one at Fryshuset, a social project centre.
At the upper secondary school he discussed globalisation and climate change with pupils in year 2 (17-year-olds). The whole event was webcasted and you can hear both Miliband's short introductory speech and the Q&A session between him and the students. (If you look carefully you might spot me at the back of the room towards the door!)
In his speech Miliband said that globalisation has benefited - especially countries such as Sweden and the UK - substantially. Trade has made us richer, cultural exchange has given us a much more dynamic society, and co-operation with other states makes our countries stronger and more influential.
But it has also brought a new type of uncertainty within both the economy and politics that forces states to act in a new way. Issues that belonged to domestic politics have now become "foreign policy". Environmental issues reflects this phenomenon very well. Earlier the problems were local, e.g. the smog in London caused by industrialisation. Today there are global problems that must be solved with global solutions. The environment is a very important issue also on the agenda of foreign ministers.
Miliband said - and this is one of the most interesting points - that climate change is not just or mainly an environmental problem. Environmental problems is a symptom while the problems are those of conflicts (over resources) and forced migration. These are issues that have consequences for other countries since large groups are forced to migrate. In that way climate change is strongly linked to both economic issues and foreign policy.
Another interesting point Miliband made is that it is important to see that the solutions (i.e. reducing carbon emissions) are not strictly technical. It is about ethics and values. The technology exists but the problem is who should pay, who should bear the burden.
Also, if you take it down to the individual level, Miliband said that we all have an individual responsibility to reduce our personal carbon footprint. But governments have to make it easy for people to raise their awareness and change their behaviour, for example by regulating against fossil-high cars and low-efficient lightbulbs.
I will post the link to the Fryshuset event once it is up.
Intressant. Klimat och miljöfrågor får lätt igång mig. Det där med individuellt ansvar tycker jag blir mer och mer påtagligt. Kan inte du se det i sverige också, att gemene man börjar ta mer ansvar. Tidigare tycker jag man hörde mycket "men vad spelar det för roll om jag sorterar eller cyklar istället för att ta bilen när alla x antal miljoner inte gör det".
ReplyDeleteHär var det tidigare en diskussion om företagens roll, alla industrier. De försöker ju mer och mer (får jag känslan av) t.ex. som att inte dela ut engångsvattenflaskor åt de anställda utan istället återvinningsbara påfyllnadsflaskor. Men på samma gång kan jag också förstå dem när de säger att det handlar om ekonomi, de bedriver en busniess som ska generara pengar och de ska vinna över konkurrenterna så finns det inga tydliga incitament (ekonomiska vinster) att göra för stora förändringar vad t.ex. gäller tillverkning, fabriker, produktioner, utsläpp, handel med utvecklingsländer osv så tar de inga beslut. Så klart. Stora indusitrier är ju inga sociala inrättningar som ger allmosor.
Min personliga åsikt är att det måste komma uppifrån, alltså statliga lagar/krav/morötter/belöningar för de företag som anpassar sig och sin industri.