Creating Opportunity: Low carbon jobs in an interconnected world
Article
If governments are bold and ambitious in developing markets for low-carbon technologies, then they will maximise the economic benefits and stand a greater chance of creating more jobs.
Early findings from the study - presented in this interim report - suggest that creating markets for low-carbon technologies will in turn create new job opportunities and that these will be greater than the number of jobs lost in carbon-intensive sectors. The study also finds that the creation of markets for low-carbon technologies in one country will lead to greater opportunities in others. Interconnectedness means policy coordination is required.
Extensive reviews of literature and data analysis that are being carried out by the GCN's nine member think tanks point to the need for bold government policy. The GCN's analysis also suggests politicians should adopt a guarded approach to predictions of job numbers and targets and focus on measures to stimulate low-carbon technology markets. All such data is highly uncertain and is based on sets of assumptions that, as technologies and technology markets mature, may prove errant.
Experience from other technology sectors, such as information and communication technologies, teaches us that the dynamism of technology is inherently unpredictable and that numbers of jobs created by prioritising technology could be many times greater than current predictions are likely to suggest. This is an ongoing study; we therefore welcome comments on the interim briefing and accompanying literature review (pdf).
Related items

Partner to scale: How international collaboration can enable the green transition
Scaling clean industrial technologies requires a shift from fragmented national strategies to targeted, durable international cooperation.
The Europe agenda: Trade and integration
This briefing note explores the options for the UK to deepen the trading relationship and sets out a proposed path forward.
Brexit 10 years on: Time the North took back control through devolution
Why does 'take back control' not extend to devolution?