Being more like the Kingdom of Bhutan

I like to look at how other countries and how they have taken on the challenge of looking after their environment.  It seems all the more important now that Britain has voted to 'stand alone' in the EU Referendum and we may have to determine our own environmental policies to protect our natural world and fight climate change as a whole. 

One of the countries I have been most interested in has been the Kingdom of Bhutan. Bhutan is a relatively small country nestled in between India and China, with a population of only around 750,000, a GDP of just 1.78 billion USD, and is still classified as a 'least developed country'. You would expect then they would be racing to catch up with the Western world (the apparent benchmark everyone aspires to), destroying all their natural resources and greatly increasing their carbon footprint in the process. But they haven't. Instead they have taken a very different route.


Firstly, one of the most obvious things is that they have chosen to rule their progress not by the western GDP (Gross Domestic Produce) but by GNH (Gross National Happiness), apparently based on the Buddhist spiritual values.  First coined in 1972, this may appear to have nothing to do with being environmentally friendly, the four pillars of GNH are:

• Sustainable development
• Preservation and promotion of cultural values
• Conservation of the natural environment
• Establishment of good governance

This not only puts sustainability and conservation at the heart of anything they do, but also removes money as the only goal to aim for.

Since then Bhutan has signed the Rio Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992 and produced a National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan which has lead to them being viewed as a model for proactive conservation initiatives.  In this strategy they have promised to maintain at least 60% of their land under forest cover, designate more than 40% territory as national parks, reserves, and other protected areas, and, most recently, identify a further 9% of land as biodiversity corridors linking these protected areas allowing migration throughout the country.  They have also implemented an insurance scheme and set up solar powered alarm fences, watchtowers and search lights to protect crops and livestock, as well as providing food and salt licks outside of human settlements to reduce conflict between humans and protected wildlife.  The Bhutan Government has made it clear that, while their natural heritage is largely intact, it cannot be taken for granted and conserving it must be one of the challenges to be addressed in years to come.

This protection of their wildlife has meant that the Kingdom of Bhutan currently has the net greenhouse gas emission of zero, with the small amount of pollution they produce being absorbed by the forests covering Bhutan.  On top of this, they have also implemented a number of (to us) progressive environmental policies, such as promoting the purchase of electric cars and ensuring that most of their energy is obtained from hydroelectric, which will ensure that their carbon footprint will always remain relatively low.

Perhaps the most striking difference between the Bhutan government's attitude to environmental conservation against the UK's is that it has not been treated as a separate sector, that is usually ignored, but has been placed at the core of the nation's development strategy and can be found as a running theme throughout all the sections of Government.

Now I'm not saying the Kingdom of Bhutan is perfect (there was the forced expulsion of the ethnic minority group of Hindu Lhotshampa), but their treatment and attitude towards the natural world is definitely something we can learn from.

Incidentally, I thought I would add another video here that will show you how measuring GDP alone will not necessarily help a nation develop into a happy, healthy, and sustainable nation.