As climate disasters grow more frequent and severe, the question is no longer whether we can afford climate action, but whether we can afford not to act. While some countries argue that economic growth must take precedence over climate action, fearing that environmental regulations might hinder industrial progress, this framing is both outdated and misleading. We must reject the idea that economic prosperity and environmental responsibility are mutually exclusive. In reality, sustainable development has consistently shown that climate action can stimulate economic growth by fostering innovation, creating green jobs, and enhancing long-term resilience. Climate action is not a cost—it’s an investment in a stable, prosperous future.
First, climate action actually prevents countries from the risks of massive economic loss, under the increasing risks driven by climate change. By the time climate change gets more severe, the situation will become more unpredictable. According to the 2023 World Bank report, failure to act on climate change could reduce global GDP by up to 18% by 2050, especially in developing economies vulnerable to extreme weather and resource scarcity. This shows that climate change has substantial long-term effects on not only life but also correlated to economic aspects. This trend will also affect the incentive for investors’ behavior by considering the potential threat of climate change. Additionally, the UN Environment Programme has estimated that climate adaptation costs could rise to $300 billion annually by 2030 if mitigation is delayed. This number will only arise if we don’t take action to mitigate climate change. Countries should prioritize the current cost of climate action to save a massive future budget on climate adaptation costs. Last but not least, by the status quo around the world, hurricanes, droughts, and floods have already caused trillions in damages — climate inaction is not cheaper; it’s catastrophic. The urgency of climate action can be seen in the news reports everywhere. By acting now, countries avoid economic collapse caused by climate-induced disasters, infrastructure damage, and food insecurity, especially in economically vulnerable countries.
Second, climate action not only does not reduce economic growth, but on the contrary, it actually stimulates economic growth in a more stable, innovative way, and this sustainable investment will also be the future trend. The global trend of the green economy and ESG also prompts governments and companies to pay attention to the green economy. Green investment is not only about the national level, but also a powerful driver for corporate value and trust. A 2021 MSCI study found that companies with strong ESG scores have lower capital costs, higher profitability, and greater resilience in crises, and as of 2024, over $1.7 trillion in assets under management are ESG-labeled globally. ESG stands for environmental, social, and governance. Not only focusing on profit but also aiming to maintain long-term profit for corporations, there are good examples that show that environmental investment can cause economic growth with a good reputation, since investors and companies will be labeled as green, sustainable, and beneficial by the public. Besides, emphasize that when companies adopt climate-positive strategies (like clean energy use), they not only reduce emissions but also attract green investors and enjoy long-term growth.
Last but not least, the well-known United Nations Sustainable Development Goal is also a perfect example showing the correlation between economic growth and climate action. The Goal 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and Goal 13 (Climate Action) are mutually reinforcing. For example, investing in green infrastructure like renewable energy can directly increase working opportunities, and making policy align with global trends. Most importantly, implementing policies aligned with global consensus is the key to reaching the global leader position.
As the UN defines sustainability as “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”, popularized by the Brundtland Commission in 1987, it has shown that the point here is making the world a better place for the future. In an era where climate change poses existential threats to economies and future generations, framing economic growth and climate action as opposing forces is not only outdated—it’s dangerous. Various evidence shows that climate policies prevent catastrophic economic losses and provide long-term benefits. Therefore, climate action must not be viewed as a burden to economic growth, but as its most strategic and necessary foundation.
