Johan Rockstrom Quotes

Economic growth and environmental protection are not at odds. They're opposite sides of the same coin if you're looking at longer-term prosperity.

Good environmental policy is good economic policy.

We learned that economic growth and environmental protection can and should go hand in hand.

It would be a mistake to believe that environmental protection and economic growth are mutually exclusive.

In tough times, some of us see protecting the climate as a luxury, but that's an outdated 20th-century worldview from a time when we thought industrialization was the end goal, waste was growth, and wealth meant a thick haze of air pollution.

If Canada could simply apply the basic principles of sustainable development, such as the internalization of costs and 'polluters pay,' it would have long-term beneficial effects, both environmental and economic.

We don't have to sacrifice a strong economy for a healthy environment.

I have never believed we had to choose between either a clean and safe environment or a growing economy. Protecting the health and safety of all Americans doesn’t have to come at the expense of our economy’s bottom line. And creating thriving companies and new jobs doesn’t have to come at the expense of the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat, or the natural landscape in which we live. We can, and indeed must, have both.

We, as a country, have always used innovative technology to advance environmental stewardship, reduction of those pollutants, but also grown our economy at the same time.

Building a 'Green Gabon' has always been a central pillar of my government, and in 2014, I introduced a new legal framework that puts environmental protection and sustainable development firmly at the heart of our future economic growth.

Green-tech could be the largest economic opportunity of the 21st Century.

Indeed, the economy and the environment need not be seen in opposition.

In the end, I think the majority of Romanian society will understand that if we respect environmental protection standards, if we have benefits in taxes, royalties, jobs, we should do what all the modern countries in Europe and beyond are doing to take advantage of their natural resources.

Environmental spending creates jobs in engineering, manufacturing, construction, materials, operations and maintenance.

We need to promote development that does not destroy our environment.

Environmental agencies in China are hamstrung by local officials who put economic growth ahead of environmental protection; even the courts are beholden to local officials, and they are not open to environmental litigation.

Every time we try to do something to improve the environment someone predicts that it will ruin the economy.

… work [jobs] and the environment should not be played off against each other.

I've long believed the environmental issue is an economic issue and a political issue. The three are entwined. You can't build prosperity on any basis other than a long-term basis, and you can't do that if you don't have a healthy environment.

We can be pro-growth, pro-jobs, and pro-environment.

I will end the lawlessness that's destroying our environment. I will take polluters to court, not to lunch.

Technology is vital. We have to have development in new technology if we're going to solve these environmental problems without throwing humanity back in poverty.

We're saying environmental stewardship and jobs in the economy. We can do both together.

We should not have to choose between supporting jobs and supporting the environment.

I do not believe that we have to destroy our economy in order to protect our environment. And especially what these programs are asking us to pass that will do nothing to help the environment, but will be devastating for our economy.