OECD environment working paper #164

This paper evaluates green stimulus packages that were introduced in response to the global financial crisis (GFC) of 2007-08 and draws lessons relevant for greening the recovery from the Coronavirus (COVID-19) crisis. The paper underscores the importance of building in policy evaluation mechanisms into green stimulus measures. It also provides evidence that the implementation of sufficiently large, timely and properly designed green stimulus measures can generate economic growth, create jobs and bring about environmental benefits. However, there are also trade-offs between competing economic, environmental and social policy objectives, which underscores the importance of proper policy design.

The paper also highlights key differences between the GFC and the COVID-19 crises and how these differences might influence the green stimulus in the present context. The public health priority to prevent the COVID-19 crisis from worsening is to severely restrict many economic activities that could escalate virus transmission. In this context, green measures could initially have a “do no harm” orientation by maintaining vigilance against environmental rollbacks and ensuring that any  measures taken to address the crisis do not inadvertently exacerbate environmental impacts. Green stimulus would become more relevant as the recovery begins, but these measures would need to be adapted to current social priorities such as the environment-health nexus, concerns about a “just transition”, as well reflect shifts in social preferences. COVID-19 is also unfolding in a policy context that is very different from 2007-08. Costs of renewable energy have witnessed dramatic
declines, while new environmental issues like resource efficiency and the transition to a circular economy have risen on the policy agenda. These developments offer new impetus and opportunities for greening the recovery in the wake of the COVID-19 crisis.

Click here to read the full paper 

Sponsored Content

Leave a Comment

China ESG risk: the next unknown

China ESG risk: the next unknown

One of the most important, upcoming challenges at CalSTRS is how the fund should evaluate Chinese investments from a human capital and environmental standpoint, says Chris Ailman, chief investment officer at the giant pension fund.

Sort content by

Experts call for price on carbon, now

Last Thursday, March 12 the US Senate Democrats’ Special Committee on the Climate Crisis heard from industry experts, including Bob Litterman and Frederic Samama, on the economic risks of climate change. They all pushed for a price on carbon and for action, now.

You think sustainable investing is easy?

Click here read SIX Magazine's edition: So you think sustainable investing is easy? Think again.

Church of England’s transition index

Being passively invested shouldn’t mean being passive with regard to responsibilities says the Church of England Pension Board which has developed a new climate transition index with FTSE Russell, LSE and TPI that is the first to incorporate forward-looking climate data.

The +1.5°C asset portfolio

Designing a 1.5°C asset portfolio to mobilise capital for a sustainable future requires some big thinking and intensive collaboration, not to mention transformational change that extends way beyond the borders of the investment industry. So what role do investors play?

ABP’s climate neutral plan for 2025

The largest pension fund in Europe, the €450 billion Dutch ABP, set out its sustainability and responsible investment plan for 2025 last month. The plan sets out long-term objectives – in line with the goal of a climate-neutral economy by 2050 – as well as the short-term steps to achieve that.

Brunel’s plan for a new financial system

The UK’s £30 billion Brunel Pension Partnership is taking investing in a carbon zero future to a whole new level. It has just published a far-reaching Climate Change Policy filled with actions and deadlines linked to the goals of the Paris Agreement.

Previous