Today, globally, air-pollution causes at least 4 million new cases of chronic bronchitis and contributes to half million premature deaths a year, and these health effects are long term. As one inhales the polluted air, one is forced to reflect at the nature of economic policy based on "dirty" technologies that use non-renewable fossil fuels and sprout carbons in the air. Carbons are the major source of global warming which is now recognized as a very serious problem by a large number of scientists, signatories to the International Panel on Climate Change (IIPC). The gravity of global warming, and the need to at least reduce its impacts, is driving government leaders to meet next month in Kyoto, Japan, to take major action; many believe it is already too late. Accordingly, the US president is prepared to make a commitment at the Kyoto conference to reduce gas emissions in the US by 2010 to 1990 levels; environmentalists and European governments consider these targets too low. "Developing countries need economic growth even at the cost of further global warming". Some representatives of the developed countries may accept this proposition. There lies the rub. Contrary to prevalent ideas, such acceptance is not in India's national interest because it: (A) maintains status quo and promotes vested s interests, (B) further leads India to be a technology follower, and (C) drastically reduces the quality of life of its people. If India does not agree to reduce its carbon emissions, the Kyoto meet will end up exporting dirty and cheap labour industries to India and similar countries making them more polluted - remember Singrauli - and thereby making quality of life poorer.

The US President acknowledges that global warning is a "strategic threat". He should. After all it is his own vice-president, Al Gore, who in his best seller -- Earth in The Balance: Ecology and The Human Spirit -- states that the civilisation is on the brink of a catastrophe.

The reason for this collision and catastrophe is the nature of the economic growth which is based son carbon producing fossil fuels. In fact, it is stated, axiomatically, that this is the only from of economic growth. There is no alternative. There is therefore a major conflict between jobs and economic growth on the one hand and environment degradation on the other. That there is this conflict and no alternative has now become the conventional wisdom so that no one questions it. The US Corporations, concerned with economic growth and profits therefrom are spending millions, persuading the public and pressurising members of congress and senators that (A) global warning is not serious, (B) such US action will reduce economic growth leading to the laying off of 1.8 million people, and (C) US should insist that the "developing" - an euphemism for the colonised - countries also reduce their fuel emissions.

In fact, the international agencies like United Nations Development Program and World Bank, WB, have promoted such growth. WB alone has poured billions of dollars into the building of roads, coal mines, refineries, coal fired power plants and other fossil fuel based capital projects. Though Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), that provides political risk insurance for commercial loans, also encourages private multinational investments in such "dirty" industries. In fact, WB is world's largest financier of oil wells, refineries, coal mines, power stations, road buildings releases carbons in the atmosphere in large quantities. Since Rio Earth Summit in 1992 ,World Bank financed fossil fuel projects that will put 10 billion tons of carbon into the atmosphere compared to the current global annual emissions of 6 billion tons. It is a heavy promoter of road building pressuring the governments to pursue an automobile - and - truck model of transport. These policies depend on heavy subsidies.

The author is a professor of economics at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, New York

Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.