Pavan Sukhdev: Put a value on nature!

Translator: Reviewer: Michelle Poon

I'm here to talk to you

我喺呢度同大家討論 大自然嘅無形性經濟

about the economic invisibility of nature.

The bad news

但壞消息係 大自然嘅後勤部門其實未運作

is that mother nature's back office isn't working yet,

so those invoices don't get issued.

所以仲未出發票

But we need to do something about this problem.

但我哋需要處理呢個問題

I began my life as a markets professional

我一出嚟就從事市場專業

and continued to take an interest,

一直都冇改

but most of my recent effort

不過最近我大部分精力都投放到

has been looking at the value

研究人類開採返嚟嘅自然資源嘅價值

of what comes to human beings from nature,

and which doesn't get priced by the markets.

但佢哋仍然未有所謂嘅價錢牌

A project called TEEB was started in 2007,

一個名為 TEEB 嘅計劃喺 2007 年開始

and it was launched by a group of environment ministers

由一班 G8+5 嘅環保官員成立

of the G8+5.

And their basic inspiration

佢哋嘅理念

was a stern review of Lord Stern.

源自斯特恩勳爵嘅苛刻見解

They asked themselves a question:

佢哋問咗自己一個問題：

If economics could make such a convincing case

如果經濟可以說服到人 及早對抗氣候變化

for early action on climate change,

well why can't the same be done for conservation?

咁點解唔可以說服人類做保育？

Why can't an equivalent case be made

點解同一道理唔可以套用到大自然呢？

for nature?

And the answer is: Yeah, it can.

而答案係：無錯，可以

But it's not that straightforward.

但並唔係咁直接

Biodiversity, the living fabric of this planet, is not a gas.

生物多樣性係地球上活生生嘅結構 而並非死沉沉嘅氣體

It exists in many layers,

佢存在嘅層面有

ecosystems, species and genes across many scales --

生態系統、物種同基因

規模又以國際、國內、本地、社區計

international, national, local, community --

and doing for nature

what Lord Stern and his team did for nature is not that easy.

斯特恩勳爵同佢嘅團隊 為自然界付出嘅努力殊不簡單

And yet, we began.

而我哋開始咗第一步

We began the project with an interim report,

個計劃由一份中期報告開始

which quickly pulled together

喺短時間之內綜合咗

a lot of information that had been collected on the subject

大量由研究員搜集返嚟 關於呢個課題嘅資料

by many, many researchers.

And amongst our compiled results

而喺我哋編輯嘅結果之中

was the startling revelation

有一個驚人嘅發現

that, in fact, we were losing natural capital --

就係其實我哋損失緊自然資源

the benefits that flow from nature to us.

即係從大自然畀我哋嘅恩賜縮細緊

We were losing it at an extraordinary rate --

原來我哋以驚人嘅速度消耗嘅自然資源

in fact, of the order of two to four trillion dollars-worth

價值高達 2 至 4 萬億美元

of natural capital.

This came out in 2008,

報告喺 2008 年發表

which was, of course, around the time that the banking crisis had shown

亦即係金融海嘯嘅時候

that we had lost financial capital

當時市場已經虧損達 2.5 萬億美元

of the order of two and a half trillion dollars.

So this was comparable in size to that kind of loss.

自然資源損耗嘅規模亦達到同一規模

We then have gone on since

於是我哋開始

to present for [the] international community,

為國際社會

for governments,

為各個政府

for local governments and for business

為本地政府同商界

and for people, for you and me,

為全球人類，為你同我

a whole slew of reports, which were presented at the U.N. last year,

喺去年喺聯合國

針對大自然嘅無形性經濟同解決方法 發表咗呢堆報告

which address the economic invisibility of nature

and describe what can be done to solve it.

What is this about?

究竟係咩呢？

A picture that you're familiar with --

一幅大家好熟悉嘅圖片

the Amazon rainforests.

亞馬遜雨林

It's a massive store of carbon, it's an amazing store of biodiversity,

佢係一個巨大嘅碳庫存 一個擁有生物多樣性嘅庫存

but what people don't really know

但好多人都唔知

is this also is a rain factory.

佢亦係一個雨水工廠

Because the northeastern trade winds,

因為當東北信風橫過亞馬遜嘅時候

as they go over the Amazonas,

effectively gather the water vapor.

會有效咁收集水氣

Something like 20 billion tons per day of water vapor

每日大約二百億噸水氣被東北信風吸走

is sucked up by the northeastern trade winds,

and eventually precipitates in the form of rain

慢慢冷卻成雨水

across the La Plata Basin.

落到拉普拉塔河盆

This rainfall cycle, this rainfall factory,

呢個降雨循環、呢個雨水工廠

effectively feeds an agricultural economy

有效咁孕育著

of the order of 240 billion dollars-worth

一個價值達 2,400 千億美元 位處拉丁美洲嘅農業經濟

in Latin America.

But the question arises: Okay, so how much

但有一個問題

究竟烏拉圭、巴拉圭、阿根廷

do Uruguay, Paraguay, Argentina

and indeed the state of Mato Grosso in Brazil

仲有巴西嘅馬托格羅索州

pay for that vital input to that economy

為呢個咁重要嘅經濟來源

to the state of Amazonas, which produces that rainfall?

或者為亞馬遜生產雨水畀咗幾多錢呢？

And the answer is zilch,

答案係冇

exactly zero.

係零

That's the economic invisibility of nature.

呢個就係大自然嘅無形性經濟

That can't keep going on,

呢個情況唔可以持續落去

because economic incentives and disincentives are very powerful.

因為經濟誘因同經濟不利因素好強大

Economics has become the currency of policy.

經濟已經成為政策嘅籌碼

And unless we address

除非我哋正視呢個無形性經濟

this invisibility,

we are going to get the results that we are seeing,

否則我哋會面對一如所料嘅後果

which is a gradual degradation and loss

目送珍貴嘅天然財產逐漸惡化同消失

of this valuable natural asset.

It's not just about the Amazonas, or indeed about rainforests.

呢個唔單止關係到亞馬遜同雨林

No matter what level you look at,

無論邊個層面

whether it's at the ecosystem level or at the species level or at the genetic level,

無論係生態系統、物種定係基因層面

we see the same problem again and again.

呢個問題都係存在

So rainfall cycle and water regulation by rainforests

雨林嘅雨水循環同水調節 係屬於生態系統層

at an ecosystem level.

At the species level,

喺物種層

it's been estimated that insect-based pollination,

有人估計過昆蟲傳播花粉 蜜蜂為果實授粉等等

bees pollinating fruit and so on,

is something like 190 billion dollars-worth.

價值約為 1,900 億美元

That's something like eight percent

呢個差不多相當於

of the total agricultural output globally.

全球總農產量百分之 8

It completely passes below the radar screen.

但我哋完全忽略咗呢點

But when did a bee actually ever give you an invoice?

但蜜蜂幾時有開過張發票畀我哋？

Or for that matter, if you look at the genetic level,

或者，從基因層面睇嘅話

60 percent of medicines were prospected,

六成藥物都係從雨林或暗礁中提煉出嚟

were found first as molecules in a rainforest or a reef.

Once again, most of that doesn't get paid.

同樣人類唔洗一分一毫就得到

And that brings me to another aspect of this,

呢樣帶我去問題嘅另一面

which is, to whom should this get paid?

就係應該邊個收錢？

That genetic material

呢啲基因物質如果屬於任何人嘅話

probably belonged, if it could belong to anyone,

to a local community of poor people

大概屬於貧窮社區嘅人

who parted with the knowledge that helped the researchers to find the molecule,

佢哋嘅知識幫研究員搵到化學分子

which then became the medicine.

令化學分子最終成為藥物

They were the ones that didn't get paid.

但現實佢哋一無所得

And if you look at the species level,

如果你睇下物種層次

you saw about fish.

你見到魚類

Today, the depletion of ocean fisheries is so significant

今日，海洋漁產嘅損耗非常顯著

that effectively it is effecting the ability of the poor,

迅速危及窮人、漁民嘅生計

the artisanal fisher folk

and those who fish for their own livelihoods,

to feed their families.

Something like a billion people depend on fish,

全球大約 10 億人依賴海裏邊嘅魚為生

the quantity of fish in the oceans.

A billion people depend on fish

10 億人依賴魚類 作為動物蛋白質嘅主要來源

for their main source for animal protein.

And at this rate at which we are losing fish,

目前魚類損耗速度係一個巨大嘅人禍

it is a human problem of enormous dimensions,

a health problem

會造成一個前所未有嘅健康問題

of a kind we haven't seen before.

And finally, at the ecosystem level,

最後，喺生態系統層面

whether it's flood prevention or drought control provided by the forests,

無論講緊樹林嘅防洪或者防旱功能

or whether it is the ability of poor farmers

以至貧困嘅農民外出收集枯枝落葉 供家畜家畜用

to go out and gather leaf litter

for their cattle and goats,

or whether it's the ability of their wives

或者佢哋嘅妻子去樹林執柴

to go and collect fuel wood from the forest,

it is actually the poor

到最後窮人係最依賴生態系統嘅一班人

who depend most on these ecosystem services.

We did estimates in our study

我哋研究估計

that for countries like Brazil, India and Indonesia,

喺巴西、印度、印尼等國家

even though ecosystem services --

縱使生態系統服務 呢類從大自然免費流到人類嘅資源

these benefits that flow from nature to humanity for free --

they're not very big in percentage terms of GDP --

或者佔國內生產總值百分比唔多

two, four, eight, 10, 15 percent --

由百分之 2 到 15 不等

but in these countries, if we measure how much they're worth to the poor,

但係如果呢啲國家計埋大自然資源 對貧窮人口嘅價值

the answers are more like

得出嘅數字係佔國內生產總值 百分之 45、75 甚至 90

45 percent, 75 percent, 90 percent.

That's the difference.

差異就係呢度

因為佢哋對貧窮嘅人嚟講好重要

Because these are important benefits for the poor.

And you can't really have a proper model for development

如果你破壞呢個珍貴資源

if at the same time you're destroying or allowing

亦即係生態系統

或者任由佢惡化

the degradation of the very asset, the most important asset,

你就唔可以指望有正常嘅發展模式

which is your development asset,

that is ecological infrastructure.

How bad can things get?

情況將會有幾壞？

Well here a picture of something called the mean species abundance.

呢度有張叫做平均物種豐度度嘅圖片

It's basically a measure

基本上量度老虎、蟾蜍、壁蝨 諸如此類嘅數量

of how many tigers, toads, ticks or whatever on average

of biomass of various species are around.

又或者計唔同物種嘅生物質

The green represents the percentage.

綠色部分代表百分比

If you start green, it's like 80 to 100 percent.

先睇綠色嘅話 呢度大概有百分之 80 至 100

If it's yellow, it's 40 to 60 percent.

再睇黃色，就有百分之 40 至 60

And these are percentages versus the original state, so to speak,

呢個係對比原有數量嘅百分比 即係工業化前，1750年

the pre-industrial era, 1750.

Now I'm going to show you

而家我會畀大家睇 目前情況不變會造成咩後果

how business as usual will affect this.

And just watch the change in colors

只需要留意印度、中國、歐洲

in India, China, Europe,

同非洲撒哈拉以南嘅顏色改變

sub-Saharan Africa

as we move on and consume global biomass

我哋以不可持續嘅速度消耗全球生物質

at a rate which is actually not going to be able to sustain us.

See that again.

再睇

The only places that remain green -- and that's not good news --

僅存綠色嘅地方，好遺憾 只係類似戈壁沙漠嘅地方

is, in fact, places like the Gobi Desert,

like the tundra and like the Sahara.

譬如苔原同撒哈拉

But that doesn't help because there were very few species

不過無用，因為呢啲地方物種好少

and volume of biomass there in the first place.

生物量又唔多

This is the challenge.

呢個就係挑戰所在

The reason this is happening

之所以有轉變，歸根究底 我認為係一個基本問題

boils down, in my mind, to one basic problem,

which is our inability to perceive the difference

我哋忽視咗公共利益同私人利益嘅差別

between public benefits

and private profits.

We tend to constantly ignore public wealth

我哋一向漠視公共財富

simply because it is in the common wealth,

純粹因為大家覺得係公共嘅 所以就冇理

it's common goods.

And here's an example from Thailand

泰國有一個例子

where we found that, because the value of a mangrove is not that much --

由於嗰度紅樹林價值唔高

it's about $600 over the life of nine years that this has been measured --

以佢哋九年生命大概值 600 美元

compared to its value as a shrimp farm,

相比作為養蝦場嘅價值

which is more like $9,600,

約莫係 9,600 美元

there has been a gradual trend to deplete the mangroves

啲人就將紅樹林改為養蝦場

and convert them to shrimp farms.

紅樹林就係咁逐漸絕跡

But of course, if you look at exactly what those profits are,

如果仔細睇下得出嚟 嗰 9,000 美元嘅獲利

almost 8,000 of those dollars

當中接近 8,000 美元其實都係補貼

are, in fact, subsidies.

So you compare the two sides of the coin

所以權衡利弊嘅時候

and you find that it's more like 1,200 to 600.

就會發現實際利潤分別係 1,200 美元同 600 美元

That's not that hard.

咁樣唔難明白

But on the other hand, if you start measuring,

另外

如果計算將養蝦場嘅土地恢復生產用途

how much would it actually cost

to restore the land of the shrimp farm

back to productive use?

代價將會係幾多？

Once salt deposition and chemical deposition

一旦土地裏邊嘅鹽同化學起咗作用

has had its effects,

that answer is more like $12,000 of cost.

恢復成本大概係 12,000 美元

And if you see the benefits of the mangrove

但保留紅樹林嘅好處

in terms of the storm protection and cyclone protection that you get

包括抵禦風暴、颱風同為窮人提供漁獲

and in terms of the fisheries, the fish nurseries,

that provide fish for the poor,

that answer is more like $11,000.

價值有成 11,000 美元

So now look at the different lens.

試下從另一角度去睇

If you look at the lens of public wealth

如果從公共財富出發

as against the lens of private profits,

而非私人利益

you get a completely different answer,

我哋會得到一個好唔同嘅答案︰

which is clearly conservation makes more sense,

就係好明顯，保育比破壞更加合理

and not destruction.

So is this just a story from South Thailand?

但呢個係咪只係泰國南部嘅情況？

Sorry, this is a global story.

唔係，呢個係全世界嘅狀況

And here's what the same calculation looks like,

以同一條數計……

which was done recently -- well I say recently, over the last 10 years --

過去十年有一個組織 TRUCOST 以同一條數計

by a group called TRUCOST.

And they calculated for the top 3,000 corporations,

佢哋為最頂尖 3,000 家公司 計經濟外部性

what are the externalities?

In other words, what are the costs of doing business as usual?

換句話說 如果照正常營商，成本係幾多？

This is not illegal stuff, this is basically business as usual,

呢度唔係指非法勾當

而係講一般營商會排放氣體、改變氣候

which causes climate-changing emissions, which have an economic cost.

因此一般營商會附帶著經濟成本

It causes pollutants being issued, which have an economic cost,

一般營商會放出污染物

health cost and so on.

所以附帶著經濟成本、健康成本等等

Use of freshwater.

至於淡水利用

如果你喺鄉村耕地旁邊 鑽鑿水源去煉焦炭

If you drill water to make coke near a village farm,

that's not illegal, but yes, it costs the community.

雖然無違法，但的確賠上社區

Can we stop this, and how?

我哋可以阻止嗎？點樣阻止？

I think the first point to make is that we need to recognize natural capital.

我認為第一件事係需要認識自然資源

Basically the stuff of life is natural capital,

簡單講生物就係自然資源

and we need to recognize and build that into our systems.

我哋需要認識自然資源 同埋將佢擺入我哋嘅模式入面

When we measure GDP

當量度國民生產總值 呢個作為國家經濟表現嘅指標時

as a measure of economic performance at the national level,

we don't include our biggest asset at the country level.

我哋並無包括最珍貴嘅自然界資源

When we measure corporate performances,

當我哋睇公司業績

we don't include our impacts on nature

我哋亦無包括公司對大自然嘅影響

and what our business costs society.

以及營商帶嚟嘅社會代價

That has to stop.

咁嘅計算方法一定要停用

In fact, this was what really inspired my interest in this phase.

呢個亦係我目前最有興趣嘅嘢

I began a project way back called the Green Accounting Project.

之前我搞咗一個綠色審計計劃

That was in the early 2000s

大約喺 2000 年代初

when India was going gung-ho about GDP growth

當時印度一心想 令國內生產總值呯呯聲咁上

as the means forward --

藉此推動發展

looking at China with its stellar growths of eight, nine, 10 percent

同時眼看著中國 有百分之 8 至 10 嘅增長

and wondering, why can we do the same?

佢哋問，點解我哋做唔到？

And a few friends of mine and I

我同幾個朋友都覺得成件事唔合理

decided this doesn't make sense.

This is going to create more cost to society and more losses.

認為追上國內生產總值 只會為社會帶嚟更多代價同損失

So we decided to do a massive set of calculations

於是我哋決定做大規模審計

and started producing green accounts for India and its states.

為印度同佢各個邦做綠色審計

That's how my interests began

我嘅興趣就係咁樣開始

and went to the TEEB project.

後來演變成 TEEB 計劃

Calculating this at the national level is one thing, and it has begun.

終於，可以喺國家層面 審計呢種綠色帳單！

And the World Bank has acknowledged this

而世界銀行亦確認咗呢個計畫

and they've started a project called WAVES --

開展名為 WAVES 嘅計劃

Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services.

全名叫生態系統價值審計及估值計劃

But calculating this at the next level,

但審計生態層對上嘅商界層面都重要嘅

that means at the business sector level, is important.

And actually we've done this with the TEEB project.

事實上我哋亦都喺 TEEB 計劃裏邊做過

We've done this for a very difficult case,

我哋做咗一個好棘手嘅個案︰

which was for deforestation in China.

中國嘅伐林問題

This is important, because in China in 1997,

呢個問題係重要嘅

因為中國喺 1997 年 黃河足足乾涸咗九個月

the Yellow River actually went dry for nine months

causing severe loss of agriculture output

造成農業嚴重損失

and pain and loss to society.

對社會帶嚟損失同禍害

Just a year later the Yangtze flooded,

一年後長江泛濫

causing something like 5,500 deaths.

造成差唔多 5,500 人死亡

So clearly there was a problem with deforestation.

好明顯，伐林就係問題根源

It was associated largely with the construction industry.

伐林好大程度上同建造業有關

And the Chinese government responded sensibly

之後中國政府明智作出回應

and placed a ban on felling.

禁止咗砍伐林木

A retrospective on 40 years

回顧 40 年

shows that if we had accounted for these costs --

如果當初我哋有計埋呢啲大自然成本

the cost of loss of topsoil,

包括表土流失、水道乾涸

the cost of loss of waterways,

the lost productivity, the loss to local communities

同生產力損失

因為上述原因以及伐木等等 對本地社區造成嘅損失

as a result of all these factors,

desertification and so on --

those costs are almost twice as much

呢啲成本幾乎係

as the market price of timber.

木材市價嘅兩倍

So in fact, the price of timber in the Beijing marketplace

北京市場上嘅木材價格 理應因此上漲到三倍

ought to have been three-times what it was

had it reflected the true pain and the costs

以反映中國社會付出嘅天然代價

to the society within China.

Of course, after the event one can be wise.

當然，經一事長一智

The way to do this is to do it on a company basis,

應對嘅辦法就係喺公司嘅層面做

to take leadership forward,

並且由公司帶頭做起

and to do it for as many important sectors which have a cost,

盡可能為包含自然成本嘅界別審計

and to disclose these answers.

同埋披露當中嘅自然成本

Someone once asked me, "Who is better or worse,

有人曾經問我

is it Unilever or is it P&G

若果考慮對印尼雨林嘅影響

when it comes to their impact on rainforests in Indonesia?"

聯合利華定係寶潔比較傷害低？

And I couldn't answer because neither of these companies,

我唔識答，因為呢兩家公司雖然好專業

good though they are and professional though they are,

do not calculate or disclose their externalities.

但都無計算或披露過經濟外部性

But if we look at companies like PUMA --

如果我哋睇下彪馬等嘅公司

Jochen Zeitz, their CEO and chairman,

佢哋嘅行政總裁兼董事長 Jochen Zeitz

once challenged me at a function,

曾經喺一個活動同我講

saying that he's going to implement my project before I finish it.

佢會比我更加早落實個計劃

Well I think we kind of did it at the same time, but he's done it.

我哋大概同期落實咗個計劃 而佢真係有做

He's basically worked the cost to PUMA.

佢基本上為彪馬計算自然成本

PUMA has 2.7 billion dollars of turnover,

彪馬有 27 億美元營業額

300 million dollars of profits,

有 3 億美元利潤

200 million dollars after tax,

除稅後有 2 億美元

94 million dollars of externalities, cost to business.

同埋有 9,400 萬美元 經濟外部性同營商成本

Now that's not a happy situation for them,

情况雖然不利

but they have the confidence and the courage

但佢哋有信心同勇氣講︰

to come forward and say, "Here's what we are measuring.

「我哋計緊呢樣嘢呀，

We are measuring it because we know

因為我哋深知， 唔去計永遠都管理唔到。」

that you cannot manage what you do not measure."

That's an example, I think, for us to look at

呢個例子，可以作為大家示範

and for us to draw comfort from.

亦令我哋感到安慰

If more companies did this,

如果更多公司都願意做

and if more sectors engaged this as sectors,

如果更多界別參與

you could have analysts, business analysts,

分析員、企業分析員 好似我哋咁嘅人、消費者

and you could have people like us and consumers and NGOs

actually look and compare the social performance of companies.

或者非牟利組織

去審視同比較企業嘅社會表現

Today we can't yet do that, but I think the path is laid out.

雖然未成事，但已經有例可循

This can be done.

係可以做到嘅！

And I'm delighted that the Institute of Chartered Accountants in the U.K.

我好慶幸英國特許會計師公會

has already set up a coalition to do this,

已經成立一個國際聯盟進行計算工作

an international coalition.

The other favorite, if you like, solution for me

另一個我喜歡嘅方法

is the creation of green carbon markets.

就係創造綠色碳市場

And by the way, these are my favorites --

講開又講，我真係好鐘意

externalities calculation and green carbon markets.

經濟外部性嘅計數同綠色碳市場

TEEB has more than a dozen separate groups of solutions

TEEB 有超過 12 組不同方案

including protected area evaluation

包括評估保護區、為生態系統服務結算

and payments for ecosystem services

and eco-certification and you name it, but these are the favorites.

同埋生態驗證

而上述呢三樣係我最鐘意嘅

What's green carbon?

咁咩係綠色碳？

Today what we have is basically a brown carbon marketplace.

而家我哋有嘅係啡色碳市場

It's about energy emissions.

呢個市場不斷排放二氧化碳

The European Union ETS is the main marketplace.

歐盟排放交易體系就係其中主要市場

It's not doing too well. We've over-issued.

由於發行過度，呢個體系表現唔理想

A bit like inflation: you over-issue currency,

有啲似通脹：你大量發鈔

you get what you see, declining prices.

然後一如所料，價格下降

But that's all about energy and industry.

呢啲全都同能源、工業有關

But what we're missing is also some other emissions

但我哋忽略咗其他排放

like black carbon, that is soot.

例如黑色碳，即係煤煙

What we're also missing is blue carbon,

我哋亦忽略咗藍色碳

which, by the way, is the largest store of carbon --

即係最大嘅碳庫存

more than 55 percent.

佔總碳庫存超過百分之 55

Thankfully, the flux, in other words, the flow of emissions

所謂藍色碳 係指海洋同大氣層之間嘅流動

from the ocean to the atmosphere and vice versa,

好欣慰，藍色碳差不多係收支平衡

is more or less balanced.

In fact, what's being absorbed

事實上，海洋吸收嘅

is something like 25 percent of our emissions,

大約係我哋排放嘅四分一

which then leads to acidification

吸收會導致海洋酸化

or lower alkalinity in oceans.

或者鹼度下降

More of that in a minute.

我哋稍後再講

And finally, there's deforestation,

最後，綠色碳指砍伐樹林

and there's emission of methane

仲有係來自農業嘅甲烷排放

from agriculture.

Green carbon,

綠色碳加埋藍色碳 合共佔我哋排放嘅四分一

which is the deforestation and agricultural emissions,

and blue carbon

together comprise 25 percent of our emissions.

We have the means already in our hands,

我哋其實已經有方法

through a structure, through a mechanism, called REDD Plus --

就係透過一個 REDD Plus 嘅結構 或者機制

a scheme for the reduced emissions

減少因伐林同林地惡化而造成碳排放

from deforestation and forest degradation.

And already Norway has contributed a billion dollars each

挪威為咗推行 Red Plus 計劃

towards Indonesia and Brazil

已分別投放 10 億元落印尼同巴西

to implement this Red Plus scheme.

So we actually have some movement forward.

進展係有

But the thing is to do a lot more of that.

但仍然要花好多工夫

Will this solve the problem? Will economics solve everything?

咁問題解決到嗎？經濟可以解決到嗎？

Well I'm afraid not.

未必

There is an area that is the oceans, coral reefs.

因為仲有海洋、珊瑚礁

As you can see,

你哋睇睇

they cut across the entire globe

佢哋遍佈全球

all the way from Micronesia

由密克羅西尼亞

across Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Madagascar

一直到印尼、馬來西亞 印度、馬達加斯加

and to the West of the Caribbean.

到加勒比海西面

These red dots, these red areas,

呢啲紅點、紅色區域

basically provide the food and livelihood

基本上為過五億人口提供糧食同生計

for more than half a billion people.

So that's almost an eighth of society.

即係大概佔全球八分一人口

And the sad thing is that, as these coral reefs are lost --

不幸嘅係，珊瑚礁消失緊

and scientists tell us

而科學家指出

that any level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere above 350 parts per million

大氣中嘅二氧化碳 只要超過百萬分之 350

is too dangerous for the survival of these reefs --

珊瑚礁就會有生存危險

we are not only risking the extinction

我哋唔單止危害到

of the entire coral species, the warm water corals,

整個珊瑚物種、溫水珊瑚

we're not only risking a fourth of all fish species which are in the oceans,

同埋海洋四分一魚類

but we are risking the very lives and livelihoods

仲危及超過五億人嘅生命同生計

of more than 500 million people

who live in the developing world in poor countries.

呢五億人身處發展中嘅貧窮國家

So in selecting targets of 450 parts per million

因此喺氣候和談裏邊 限制二氧化碳喺百萬分之 450

and selecting two degrees at the climate negotiations,

同埋限制氣温上升兩度

what we have done is we've made an ethical choice.

都似乎係合乎道德嘅

We've actually kind of made an ethical choice in society

而我哋社會亦似乎經過道德思考 選擇放棄珊瑚礁

to not have coral reefs.

Well what I will say to you in parting

但我想喺完結前講

is that we may have done that.

放棄珊瑚礁呢件事我哋或者已經做咗

Let's think about it and what it means,

但大家諗下後果

but please, let's not do more of that.

所以請大家唔好繼續咁做

Because mother nature only has that much

因為我哋擁有嘅生態建設 同自然資本就得咁多

in ecological infrastructure and that much natural capital.

我哋唔可再負擔合乎道德嘅錯

I don't think we can afford too much of such ethical choices.

Thank you.

多謝各位

(Applause)

（掌聲）