Although natural phenomena such as volcanic eruptions or warm ocean currents, or even the earth’s tilt, might all contribute to global warming, carbon dioxide (CO2) generated by human activity–from running homes and factories to flying planes and mowing lawns–is accepted as a major culprit.

Many earlier civilisations at some point found themselves on an economic path that was environmentally unsustainable. Some understood what was happening and were able to make the needed adjustments and survive, even flourish. Others either did not understand the gravity of their situation or, if they did, could not adjust in time. They collapsed. Our global civilisation today is also on an economic path that is environmentally unsustainable, a path that is leading us toward economic decline and collapse.

Ireland, which has been the OECD’s fastest growing economy in recent years, also produces the most municipal waste per capita in the OECD area, at some 760 kilograms per head in 2003, according to the latest OECD Factbook.

Can the Kyoto protocol, which came into force on 16 February this year, work? Although natural phenomena such as large volcanic eruptions, ocean currents, the likes of El Niño or even changes in the earth’s tilt might all be contributing factors, carbon dioxide (CO2) generated by human activity–whether running homes and factories or driving cars and lawnmowers–is cited as a major culprit in the rise of global temperatures.

The Kyoto Protocol will be implemented in mid-February, while the size of the challenge presented by climate change is becoming more daunting than expected. Yet, basic steps could be taken that will not only tackle the effects of global warming, but promote development as well.

Sweden’s good reputation for a clean environment may be deserved, but there are murky spots. True, it gained high marks in the recent OECD Environmental Performance Review of Sweden. It was one of the first OECD countries to cut its use of environmentally harmful chemicals, and is one of the few OECD countries on track to meet their commitments under the Kyoto Protocol to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

Three years after the adoption of the OECD 10-year Environmental Strategy, ministers acknowledged that they are “not on track” for implementing it by 2010 and that more ambitious action is needed. OECD and non-OECD ministers or deputy-ministers met in Paris to assess progress.

We live in a consumer society, but also a wasteful one. The EU will produce approximately 1.3 billion tonnes of waste this year. This is about 3.5 tonnes of solid waste for every man, woman and child.

OECD Observer, No 242, March 2004

Note 26 April: This article was written by Minister Cullen to set out the issues in advance of the 2004 OECD Environment Ministerial meeting which he chaired. For the chair's summary of the meeting, please click here. See end of article for other references.

Sticking to deadlines and keeping promises has never been easy for anyone, let alone politicians, for reasons we all understand. But there are some pressing matters that require urgent firm action, not because we have made promises or undertaken commitments, but because there may not be too many second chances to get them right. Some environmental challenges are of this type.

Biodiversity has struggled for front page attention in environmental policy campaigns. Perhaps it is because the word "biodiversity" has a positive connotation and so lacks the rallying edge of headline terms like pollution, global warming, hazardous wastes or ozone depletion.

Ten years have passed since the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) entered into force on 21 March 1994. It is thus most appropriate to review what has happened since then in what is an enormously complex field. One thing has become very clear, namely that climate change touches upon virtually every sphere of life, and almost every human activity either contributes to climate change or is affected by its impacts.

Remember the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development? Norway's minister of the environment, Børge Brende, chair of the UN Commission on Sustainable Development since May 2003, is determined to make sure that commitments made at Johannesburg and at other meetings are not mere souvenirs. We interviewed Mr Brende ahead of the Round Table on Sustainable Development at the OECD in March.

Does development aid help the environment? It ought to, especially as ensuring environmental sustainability is an explicit public policy aim in the Millennium Development Goals which governments reaffirmed at the Johannesburg summit on sustainable development in 2002.

Voluntary approaches in environmental policy are increasingly popular in a number of countries, but a new OECD report, Voluntary Approaches for Environmental Policy: Effectiveness, Efficiency and Usage in Policy Mixes, questions their environmental effectiveness and economic efficiency.

Transport is safer today – road deaths have been halved since the early 1970s. Transport is also faster and more reliable – just think of high-speed trains and the growing availability of low-cost air travel. Mobility has increased substantially in all areas of the transport sector. Despite these improvements, however, the transport sector is in crisis.

One way to deal with pollution is to encourage polluters to buy and sell limited rights or permits to pollute. It is a market that works, though improvements are needed.

The debate about energy mix will intensify at Johannesburg and beyond. Technological progress may generate some useful surprises in the years ahead, but for now, Professor Richter presents a cold look ahead at our energy choices.

Sustainable development is not about the environment or the economy or society. It is about striking a lasting balance between all of these.

France is a country of contradictory images when it comes to the environment. Traffic-filled cities, yet fast and extensive public transport; bucolic expanses of farmland but rural waterways seriously polluted by fertiliser runoff. In fact, France is often, though perhaps unfairly, considered to be in the slow-to-middle lane among OECD partners when it comes to some environmental standards and public attitudes to poor environmental practices. But that is changing and there are increasing signs that the environment is looming ever larger in people’s preoccupations and public debate.

Agriculture is in the spotlight. Almost every day there are reports in the press concerning food-related health and environment scares. Outbreaks of foot and mouth disease are the latest crisis in Europe, quickly following “mad cow” disease and protests over the alleged impact of genetically modified crops on food safety and the environment.

The environmental progress seen in the 1980s for most OECD countries was consolidated and further enhanced during the 1990s, from lower emissions of many air pollutants to better protection of endangered species. Moreover, the policies that led to these improvements have not in themselves posed significant economic costs, implying total expenditures in the order of only 1-2% of GDP. Nor have they created significant distortions in international trade or had negative effects on employment. On the contrary, environmental policies have often provided incentives for economic restructuring and technological innovation.

For too long, policymakers have been talking about the deterioration of the world’s environment without taking sufficient action to address the problems. It is time to move from words to action before it is too late, particularly for the industrial countries that are the source of much of the damage.

Species extinction is accelerating at an ever-increasing pace – as many as 10,000 species are now lost annually by some counts. The effects are much more serious than many people think. Harvard University scientist, Professor E. O. Wilson, is stepping up efforts to raise public awareness of this issue and wants politicians and business to listen. A speaker at OECD Forum 2001, Professor Wilson spoke to Environmental Science and Technology’s Kris Christen about the challenges.

At first glance, Internet-based shopping seems to have benefits for both the consumer and the environment. Consumers believe they are getting better prices and greater convenience. Environmentalists believe that transportation and collateral costs are reduced because there are fewer trips to shopping malls. But are they right?

Modern biotechnology is changing fast and is beginning to have a major impact on agriculture and the environment. Increasing the efficiency of safety assessment and promoting transparency in the exchange of information are among the key aims of the OECD.