Constructing Meanings of a Green Economy: Investigation of an Argument for Africa’s Transition towards the Green Economy

Shaping Definitions of the Green Economy 
It is at this juncture of acknowledged failure that disciplines such as that of green economics 
came into being. The departure point for action however was the same: there need not be a 
trade-off between environmental sustainability and economic progress. An addition to this con-
viction predicts the gradual independence of large economic activities on ecological resources, as 
innovation in green technology evolves through research and development (UNEP 2011). 
Early ideas in green economics blamed past undervaluation of environmental resources and 
ecosystems in markets for the global environmental crisis which in turn hampered the prospects 
of enduring economic progress (Barbier et al. 2013, Jacobs 1993, Pearce et al. 1989). Such over-
sight needed to be corrected in a new economic model: urgent policy progress was to be made 
towards valuation and accounting of natural resources and the creation of incentives that would 
encourage their sustainable use by economic actors (Pearce et al. 1989). 
Then and now (Barbier et al. 2013) , this advice remains relevant and has inspired the ap-
proach taken by the Global Green New Deal’s (GGND) (Barbier 2009, UNDESA 2009) foun-
dations for transitions to greener economies ; a ‘building block’ for the UNEP Report. At a time 
when the 2008 global financial crisis provided an opportunity for stimulus money to be redi-
rected, the GGND’s proposal was to invest intensively in efficient green technologies that placed 
little demand on natural resources and in their deployment (Barbier 2009, UNDESA 2009). The 
combination of the premises laid above led to the emergence of mostly market-related feats such 
as the creation of national environmental accounts, carbon markets, payments for ecosystem 
services schemes or investment in sustainable energy, agriculture and water technology. Such ex-
amples are the result of the growing imperative that better environmental management practices 
be adopted. 
These premises also laid the foundation for a contemporary – and at this time most com-
prehensive – proposal for a Green Economy. In 2011 UNEP released its proposal for a Green 
Economy through a report, Towards a Green Economy: Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty 
Eradication. The report, centred on the belief that achieving the overarching goal of sustainable 
development rests entirely on “getting the economy right” (UNEP 2011). The report sealed 
UNEP’s position as contemporary Green Economy ‘champion’, flanked by other institutions 
including the World Bank, OECD, WWF, IUCN, numerous other UN agencies or alliances such 
as the Green Economy Coalition (GEC). 
A Green Economy, as defined by UNEP, is one that would “[result] in improved human 
well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scar-
cities” (UNEP 2010: 5), or in a simpler form, one that is “low-carbon, resource efficient and so-
cially inclusive” (UNEP 2011a: 16). Given the similarities to sustainable development, there was 
early confusion about whether the concept was being replaced by the Green Economy. Clarifica-
tion on the matter has since been enunciated and requirement to refer to “the Green Economy 
in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication” (UNCSD 2012). It is in this 
context that the term is used throughout this paper. 
UNEP’s definition makes explicit the commitment to the social facet of sustainable devel-
opment d as well as the commitment to fighting climate change with low carbon dependence, 
thereby integrating areas of focus outside the traditional economic sphere. Others contribute to 
this integration in varying degrees. For instance, the GEC states a Green Economy should 
“[generate] a better quality of life for all within the ecological limits of the planet” (Green Econ-
omy Coalition 2012). The ICC views it as a mutually reinforcing and responsible relationship be-
tween economic growth and environmental stewardship that supports social development (In-

---

 8 
ternational Chamber of Commerce 2011) while the Danish 92 Group defines it as a dynamic, 
evolving process of transformation which “cannot be Green without being Equitable” (The 
Danish 92 Group 2012). 
Still, like sustainable development before it (Redclift 2006), Green Economy’s definition is 
considered vague and incoherent due to its assumption that a trade-off between environmental 
health and economic growth in the current neoliberal economic model is not necessary (Brand 
2012). Others utterly refute it and its foundations (Lander 2011, People's Summit 2012). Expect-
edly, the range of (dis)approval and interpretations makes is difficult to clearly identify a Green 
Economy and rally international, national or local stakeholders around one clear vision. Given its 
widespread use in international policy spaces such as the UN and related texts, this paper will 
follow suit and use UNEP’s definition as a reference for discussion.