Perpetuating the environmental relegation, negative impact on diversity and affect on climate or public health These are some of the threats that entail for the planet, the various help and subsidies that are provided to sectors such as agriculture, the fishmining or fossil fuels.
All this follows from a report prepared by the Institute of Environmental Science and Technology of the Autonomous University of Barcelona (ICTA-UAB) indicates that They receive between $ 1.7 and $ 3.2 billion annually in public subsidiesThe environmental damage that generates indirect effects on the planet is estimated between $ 10.5 and 22.6 billion a year.
A deterioration of the environment that, as is in the same study, is already Consequences in economic affairs and in this case they are the least significant.
The negative impact on the environment of the aid that important sectors of the economy
Subsidies to important economic sectors such as agriculture, fossil fuels, fish and mining They permanently perpetuate the environment, with a negative impact on biodiversity, climate and public health, according to new research of the Institute of Environmental Science and Technology of the Autonomous University of Barcelona (ICTA-UAB).
Nature is essential for human life and good: it makes food production possible, regulates the climate, maintains the cycles of water and carbon and contributes directly to health. More than half of the world economy depends to a greater or lesser extent on the services provided by nature. However, Human actions cause an accelerated and general deterioration of the planet and of all the forms of life that inhabited.
A study led by the ICTA-UB Victoria Reyes García Researcher, recently published in the magazine Ambio public aid analyzed Admitted to six important economic sectors (Agriculture, fossil fuels, forestry, infrastructure, fishing and aquaculture and mining) and the indirect effects of their activity. Recent data indicate that these sectors receive between $ 1.7 and $ 3.2 billion a year in public subsidies, while the environmental damage they generate as indirect effects on the planet are estimated between $ 10.5 and 22.6 billion a year.
The study indicates that the deterioration of the environment they generate already has significant economic consequences. The World Bank warns that Loss of essential services of natureSuch as pollination, sea fishing or the provision of wood, GDP of the world could reduce $ 2.7 billion in 2030. Only in the United Kingdom is it estimated that the impact of loss of biodiversity can cause a decrease in GDP between 6 and 12 % in the same period.
Research analyzes More critical sectors Via a broad documentary assessment:
- Fossil fuels: In 2022, help to this sector reached $ 7 billion. The elimination of these subsidies could reduce worldwide emissions by 43 % and can prevent up to 1.6 million premature deaths per year due to the improvement of air quality.
- Agriculture: Its effects include the emissions of greenhouse gases, soil and surface and underground water pollution.
- Festive: In 2024, forest activities received $ 175 billion in subsidies. However, the gross deforestation in 2023 was 6.37 million hectares. This contributes to not meeting the climatic objectives that have been set worldwide.
- Infrastructure: The construction of infrastructure, such as roads or irrigation systems, contributes to the loss of natural habitats and a non -durable use of water. In 2015, this sector received $ 2.3 billion in global subsidies.
- Fishing and aquaculture: Subsidies in this sector reached $ 55 billion in 2023. Many of them promote untenable practices, such as overfishing and illegal fishing, which threaten the biodiversity of marine.
- Mining: This sector received at least 40 billion dollars in subsidies, although many of them are not reported transparently. In addition, 80 % of the metallurgical mining is carried out in regions of the planet with great wealth of biodiversity, which causes deep ecological effects.
«One of the most important reports of the research is that there is no system that allows you to check how many subsidies are given, which industry or to support which activities. That information is difficult to achieve, and this study argues for one greater transparency of governments to provide that information», Victoria Reyes García explains.
This lack of information becomes even more disturbing if it is considered the size of the subsidies for the various economic sectors and their indirect effects that stimulate the deterioration of the environment. That is why ICTA-UB research shows that the current economic model You need an urgent transformation.
Fortunately, there are already positive examples. New Zealand has eliminated and replaced fishing subsidies with incentives with sustainability criteria, diverted agricultural subsidies to practices that are respectful for climate and biodiversity, and England has implemented a system of payments for ecosystem services in the agricultural sector.
These experiences show that it is possible to divert public resources to development models They protect biodiversity and guarantee the drawing of current and future generations.