Fail to plan, plan to fail: green innovation

I was recently told, by a politician, that"if you want something done properly- don't get the government to do it". And it is true. For our society to become carbon neutral by the end of the century, the brunt of the load must be carried by the private sector. It is unrealistic to hope for anything else.

However, the simple fact of the matter is that the private sector is not changing quickly enough. While many green technologies such as solar and wind power have advanced significantly, further research is needed on these and others before the private sector will invest in them as the most economically viable and sustainable option.

Long term and high risk green innovation research and development needs to be subsidised by governments, according to the OECD, as it is simply unreasonable to expect that the private sector will make such investments.

Another question often raised when discussing climate change mitigation policies is why Australia ought to do the heavy lifting when our emissions are dwarfed by those of other countries?

Firstly, Australians have the fifth highest per capita emissions in the world, so we clearly need to make some changes. Secondly, international co-operation and collaboration will undoubtedly be an integral part of climate change minimisation. Changes and innovation will need to be undertaken as a global initiative.

Hence, it seems necessary to establish an annual forum in which leading green growth scientists, economists, policy makers, entrepreneurs and investors can gather to share, discuss, collaborate and invest in cutting edge green technologies. By doing so, new ideas can be shared and developed and introduced more quickly by both the public and private sectors.

This is simply one idea of many to stimulate the green growth industry. There are hundreds of policies that have been pitched, researched and recommended in the areas of education, research and development, foreign aid, etc. to accelerate the transition to low carbon economies.

While it may never be clear which of these will be the most economically viable, it is evident that delaying action will, in the long-run, cost billions of dollars and potentially an inconceivable number of other resources.