Tough talk needed as the doomsday climate clock nears its high noon

Such crises expose the limits of unchecked human growth. Commenting on both in Thailand recently, two Nobel Prize-winning economists stressed the need for fundamental change. Each said achieving socially just and sustainable economic development for all of humanity while addressing global climate change will not be easy. But the first step is to confront some hard truths, debunk them and reconstruct new values, alternative priorities and benchmarks to achieve a new clean and green world.

With glaciers retreating, arctic permafrost thawing and dangerous methane gas release increasing, day-in-day-out climatologists warn of a dystopian future for the planet. With little time to spare, we are nearing irreversible tipping points, they say. Potential Amazon rainforest disappearance, collapse of the Greenland ice sheet and evaporating Antarctic ice would indicate critical thresholds beyond which earth's natural systems will be unable to recover.

In a world full of threats to human security, climate change tops the list as the pre-eminent geopolitical issue of our time. The UN Inter governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says matter-of-factly that the impacts of climate change could very well be worse than scientists and the public anticipate. Unless the global temperature rise stays below 2 degrees Celsius, the IPCC foresees disastrous environmental consequences such as rising seas swamping coastal areas, severe floods and drought.

All of the above could destabilise our world in untold ways via exponentially increased conflict and migration. Both United Nations Secretary-General Ban-Ki-moon and UNEP Executive Director Achim Steiner agree that global climate change is "the defining challenge of our generation". Growing impatient with inaction ahead of Copenhagen, the UN head on September 22 convened a special summit on climate change at the United Nations for some 100 world leaders

The Asian Development Bank goes further in its language, saying, "The challenge to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions is perhaps the greatest one the world has ever faced".

It's not hyperbole. At the height of the cold war, a doomsday clock famously assessed the probability of nuclear war. Today, facing a threat no less real, the clock is now ticking on our planet and it is right to think of ourselves as living in the fifty-ninth minute.

Indeed, ever since the climate-change hour clock was set at the onset of the industrial revolution, the two-century-old synergy between economic output and technological innovation has been the most significant driver of change in the modern world. But now we understand the consequences of unbridled consumption on sustainable living. Clearly, the industrialisation of the world based on the current model is ecologically impossible. The question is not that we must modify the behaviour of the world's 6.5 billion people to promote low carbon growth, the question is: How?

Many experts believe traditional socio-economic indicators must now change to focus on people's well being, rather than simply growth. Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz is one such thinker. Speaking in Bangkok, the former chief economist of the World Bank stressed moving beyond GDP to measure performance and prosperity. "If we measure the wrong things we will strive after the wrong goals. We may achieve those goals but societal well-being may not be enhanced," he said.

Stiglitz chairs the French government-initiated Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress . In its final report, the panel recommended shifting focus from a production perspective to a more textured and multi-dimensional measurement of the quality of life, "well-being" and sustainability. Such a vision is bold and profoundly necessary. It recognises that "new political narratives are necessary to identify where our societies should go" and advocates "a shift of emphasis from a 'production-oriented' measurement system to one focused on the well-being of future generations."

The present crises offer a tremendous opportunity to construct low carbon economies. Institutions of higher learning are the ideal platform to initiate the beginnings of the change needed, and to reset thinking.

Another Nobel laureate, Muhammad Yunus, has similar designs on challenging conventional wisdom. Echoing Stiglitz's view on framing what's important to spur action, he says, "If we can imagine a world without poverty we can achieve it." The economist known as "the banker to the poor" applied the concept of microfinance for the poor to reduce poverty and in doing so turned traditional banking on its ear.

In Thailand recently to launch the Yunus Centre at the Asian Institute of Technology, Yunus wants to end global poverty and heal the planet. One key to achieving this is "social business" - a non-loss, non-dividend firm that aims to correct social problems owing to poverty and a deteriorating environment. It's the flip side of a traditional company, he says. Investors in a social business are not interested in maximising profit. Rather, they are motivated by a desire to achieve maximum well being for other people. Applying the lesson of Yunus, the question then becomes: Can we fundamentally change the way we do business around the world from a carbon-based one to a green one?

At the Climate Change Conference in December, hard negotiations will ensue. Some experts caution privately that a developed nation versus developing country tilt could lessen the chance of a real deal for a low carbon world. But such inability to find a solution for common and proportional responsibility would spell disaster for rich and poor alike.

The ADB says the burden of responsibility for the negative implications of climate change should be equally divided between developed and developing countries. No doubt, a deal in Copenhagen will be tough. As the clock is ticking closer to midnight, the time is now for common action for the well being of everyone on earth.