Greenness of Stimulus Index An assessment of COVID-19 stimulus by G20 countries and other major economies in relation to climate action and biodiversity goals Greenness New to this release of Stimulus This update of the index incorporates significant new information that has become available since Index the previous release in October, including the latest announcements on stimulus flows, deregulation and The Greenness of Stimulus Index (GSI) assesses environmental policies. It also contains two fresh the effectiveness of the COVID-19 stimulus efforts pieces of analysis that examine the job-creating by G20 countries and other major economies in potential of nature-based solutions, and that uncov- ensuring an economic recovery that takes advan- er insights by analysing stimulus based on its policy tage of sustainable growth opportunities, and type rather than its sectoral impact area. Altogether, builds resilience through the protection of the this release includes the following highlights: climate and biodiversity. • Addition of Colombia and Switzerland to the index. It provides a method to gauge the current impact • An increase in the total quantity of measured of the COVID-19 responses, to track countries’ stimulus to US$13.0 trillion, from US$12.7 trillion. progress over time, and to identify and recom- This includes increases in stimulus packages in mend measures for improving the effectiveness Canada (from US$301 billion to US$391 billion), of those responses. India (from US$276 billion to US$323 billion), Indonesia (US$46 billion to US$74 billion), the This assessment is updated regularly – please use United Kingdom (from US$628 billion to US$686 the latest version. This release is updated as of billion) and the addition of the two new countries December 2020. The previous release was (US$67 billion total). published on October 29. • Improvements to some index scores. Notably, This note is part of a series looking at economic Australia, Canada, India, South Africa and the responses to COVID-19. Other notes relate to United Kingdom have leveraged new packages corporate bailouts, international assistance flows and policies into increased scores. into developing countries and job-creating fiscal • Additional analysis on the enormous potential of stimulus. This work was undertaken by Vivid stimulus packages to create green, nature-based Economics as part of the Finance for Biodiversity jobs, with an estimated 7 million additional jobs (F4B) initiative. created globally with a nature-focused stimulus compared to more traditional forms of stimulus If you have any questions or comments, please investment. Nature-based solutions are particularly contact us at [email protected] well-suited to deliver job opportunities but are dramatically under-represented in stimulus across the countries analysed in this edition. • New analysis that takes a closer look at the policy composition of stimulus. Policies involving public sector investments have the most positive impact on the environment, driven by low carbon infra- structure projects. Unfortunately, stimulus policies that increase cash flow for businesses make up the bulk of total stimulus to date. Because the business-as-usual economy is environmentally unsustainable, and unconditional rescue support for business perpetuates the norm, this type of spend- ing exacerbates negative environmental trends. Executive summary The world’s leading economies have announced Argentina, Saudi Arabia and Turkey have made economic stimulus packages that will pump little attempt to divert stimulus towards green approximately US$4.0 trillion directly into sectors initiatives. Generally, their stimulus packages have that have a large and lasting impact on carbon underpinned existing poor environmental perfor- emissions and nature, namely agriculture, indus- mance. Targeted measures have supported pollut- try, waste, energy and transport. These flows ers in the Turkish transport sector, and non-renew- compare with a total stimulus to date of US$13.0 able energy in both Argentina and Saudi Arabia. trillion, and present an opportunity to support these sectors through the COVID-19 crisis, while The most recently added countries to the GSI – also boosting global resilience to mounting climate Colombia and Switzerland – have seen contrast- and biodiversity risks. The Greenness of Stimulus ing stimulus impacts. Colombia’s economy has Index (GSI) shows that governments to date have historically relied upon carbon-intensive sectors. largely failed to harness this opportunity, though While Colombia’s recent stimulus measures and a select few are rising to meet the challenge. national policies have targeted a green recovery, these have been too small to date to offset Announced stimulus to date will have a net nega- Colombia’s poor underlying environmental perfor- tive environmental impact in 15 of the G20 coun- mance, leading to a low GSI score. By contrast, tries and economies, and in three of the five other Switzerland’s good underlying environmental analysed countries. Among more developed performance and significant green stimulus countries, the US stimulus package stands out as the measures result in a positive GSI score. most damaging. Australia, Italy and Japan join them on the net negative side, owing largely to the In the green stimulus to date, nature and biodiversi- existing negative impacts of their environmental- ty have been particularly neglected. Where large ly-intensive sectors, and their lack of decisive action green stimulus measures have been introduced, these to use the stimulus to take specific actions to restore have largely focused on reducing carbon emissions, nature and mitigate climate change. The economies with only occasional attention to preserving and analysed comprised the G20 plus Spain, Switzer- enhancing nature and natural capital. Of the total land, Colombia, the Philippines and Singapore. quantified green stimulus to date, worth US$567 billion, only US$108 billion was related to improving Emerging economies most dependent on envi- biodiversity or preserving ecosystems. Such ronmentally-intensive sectors and without strong nature-positive funding was less than some US$219 regulatory oversight have the biggest task to billion of stimulus associated with pollution or direct turn their stimulus green, and have so far failed habitat destruction with negative expected impacts to step up. China, India and Mexico have on biodiversity.1 Given the risks associated with announced stimulus measures that will damage degraded natural capital – including the virus spillo- the environment, while stimulus funding ver risk driving the current pandemic – it is impossi- announced by South Africa and Russia largely ble to justify this scant attention paid to nature reinforces the existing damaging impacts of their protection. Only seven of the 25 economies analysed environmentally-intensive sectors. Indonesia and have invested in so-called nature-based solutions Brazil are pushing environmentally damaging (NBS), such as tree planting, forest protection and outcomes, by supporting high-carbon industry regenerative agriculture. This investment has created and energy, and unsustainable agriculture that more than 580,000 jobs, but our analysis shows that destroys biodiverse habitats. To manage the represents a tiny share of what would be possible COVID-19 crisis while protecting and rebuilding with greater stimulus focus on NBS. NBS investments nature at the same time, these countries must outperform typical stimulus investment in terms of instead hardwire environmental actions into their job creation (7% greater) and economic activity stimulus measures. creation (8% greater), while also offering large contributions toward climate and biodiversity goals, but currently remain grossly underutilised in stimulus. 1 The $567 billion quantified green stimulus to date appears is bigger than the $219 billion quantified negative stimulus associated with pollution or direct habitat destruction. But this is partly because the negative measures are coming in the form of deregulation or other unquantified measures, which have large impacts but do not have a $ value attached to them. Greenness of Stimulus 3 Index To date, the economic response to the COVID-19 The progress of European countries in improving crisis will reinforce negative environmental trends. their scores stands in stark contrast to the US, In other words, it will fail to build back better: whose score has remained stagnant. A positive US most governments have chosen not to use change may be on the way, however, if the incom- economic stimulus to enhance nature or tackle ing administration can fulfil its plans. Whereas climate change. However, there is an opportunity countries like the UK, France and Spain have seen to learn from countries that have taken the lead, their index scores climb due to substantial green and act decisively now to prevent irreversible recovery measures, the United States remains a damage to nature and to lower dramatically the laggard, with the most negative score among large cost of protecting the planet. In solving one crisis, developed economies. The incoming Biden admin- we should not ignore another. istration will be critical in shaping the future direc- tion of the massive US stimulus, and the world’s The stimulus in Western Europe, South Korea biggest economy. The next edition of the GSI will and Canada offers promise, with at least a include analysis of the administration’s plans. portion of spending