I like thousands of others await this time of the year with nervous anticipation - Wimbledon is almost upon us and yes it's that time to dream again of British success. For most Brits it's a hard task to name the last winner (Fred Perry 1939) but who cares for in Andy Murray we have a real chance. As a brilliant tactician who no one likes to play, like all great sportsmen and women he has that ability to visualise the match, his opponent’s weaknesses and critically his own strengths. It’s this visualisation that many sports psychologists argue gives true champions their inner strength.
By coincidence, this ability to visualise a winning game was something mentioned at a conference I attended a week or so ago entitled ‘The politics of climate change'.
The conference, organised by the Policy Network an international think-tank dedicated to promoting progressive policies and the renewal of social democracy, attracted an array of excellent speakers from Tony Blair, Peter Mandelson, Adair Turner, Terry Leahy, Richard Lambert, Roger Liddle, Tony Giddens (author of the book ‘The politics of climate change’) to name but a few.
Perhaps the most critical issue raised was the urgent need for politicians and others to create a positive picture of what a zero carbon economy (zero seems the latest informed target for 2050) can offer, focused on the benefits and opportunities that will flow to the man on the street. Strong views were expressed that to approach the agenda through fear and uncertainty would not win the day, would not change behaviours. As one speaker put it, Martin Luther King did not say "I had a nightmare".
Tony Blair expressed his view that the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen would prove to be successful and would be seen as a defining moment in the process of creating a new form of global politics, the benefits of which he could see spilling over into other areas beyond those of climate change. The strong consensus emerging from the conference was the need for each country to develop a clear long term policy framework around climate change. Put simply, business can plan and make investment decisions when there is some certainty. Create the opposite and business will become cautious and at worst may look for alternative locations in which to operate.
You won't be surprised to know that carbon measurement and reporting was also on the agenda. This is one area crying out for a global solution, a consistent basis of measurement that all can rally round. But the release in the UK of three forms of guidance in recent weeks - from CDSB, the CBI and DEFRA, reflects the challenge we face. While they are largely consistent, the fact that three different documents have been published is confusing. While this is to be expected, it is a worrying sign given that most other countries are also working on their own solutions.
For those of us who have grappled with the convergence of international financial accounting standards, let's not repeat the mistakes of the past. The answer is not easy but making visible what's going on around the world is a good starting point. It would also be helpful if those at Copenhagen could turn their thoughts to the practical challenge of creating a consistent sovereign carbon measurement system that aligns with the needs of business.
As always I am pleased to hear your views and comments on the postings, and to take questions about corporate reporting.
David
Dear David,
I am pleased to read your interesting comments of world changes.
In your latest comment re impact of IFRS on Global Crisis you was stated:"The answer is not easy but making visible what's going on around the world is a good starting point."
Can you please share your thoughts of response what PwC can take to change or predict such crisises in the future?
Posted by: Alexei Blagirev | 18 June 2009 at 06:53
for an excellent scoping of the things that could be done to reach zero carbon, I thoroughly recommend David MacKay's book on the subject, which can be downloaded at www.withouthotair.com
the simlifying (but not simplistic) back-of-envelope calculations are quite enlightening
Posted by: Martin Perrie | 17 June 2009 at 17:53