Kamath’s proposal draws inspiration from a long-standing argument made by many economists and environmentalists: to make people value nature and protect it, they must pay for the services it provides, and a nation’s progress must account for its natural capital base. While GDP remains the preferred metric, it measures production, not wealth, welfare, or well-being. However, escalating impacts of climate change can compel societies like ours to rethink material wealth and prioritise their natural resource base. Yet, putting value on ecosystem services is challenging due to their dynamic nature. But scientific understanding is steadily advancing.
Citizens clearly find the idea difficult to grasp. But linking environment to personal economics-literally the home front-could bring them on board. This is crucial because public indifference toward environmental issues is significant. The fact that air pollution gains attention only in a seasonal fashion, that bad water quality rarely sparks discussions, and solid waste management is confined to op-eds and seminars, underlines our challenge. It is only when such issues are linked to immediate personal stakes-gains or losses-that people wake up and smell the proverbial coffee.