"Up to $5.7 Trillion in Annual Damage"...The 'Environmental Bill' Facing the World's Top 10% of Consumers
Oxford and Leiden University Research Team
"Top 10% Cause up to $5.7 Trillion in Damage Annually"
83–93% of Costs Attributed to Biodiversity Loss and Climate Change
A study has found that the top 10% of consumers worldwide cause up to $5.7 trillion (approximately 7,800 trillion won as of 2017) in environmental damage each year.
According to Yonhap News, a joint research team from the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom and Leiden University in the Netherlands announced in the international journal Communications Sustainability, published by the Nature group on the 18th, that the environmental damage caused by the top 10% of global consumers was calculated in monetary terms and reached this amount.
This study analyzed six countries: Brazil, China, Egypt, Germany, India, and the United States. The "top 10%" was defined as individuals whose annual post-tax consumption—excluding investments, mortgage payments, and savings—exceeds $27,000. The researchers combined consumption-based environmental footprint data with environmental cost estimates from the Environmental Pricing Handbook 2024 to calculate the damage costs caused by the top 10%.
The analysis found that the annual environmental damage caused by this group ranged from $1.7 trillion to $5.7 trillion (as of 2017), which amounts to $2,300 to $7,500 per person. Even the minimum estimate of $1.7 trillion is equivalent to the combined value of the UN’s 2035 climate finance target and the 2030 biodiversity funding gap, meaning it could offset or exceed the resources needed to address climate change and biodiversity crises.
Over 60% of the top 10% resided in the United States and the European Union (EU), and the environmental burden was also concentrated in these regions. In the United States, more than half of the population belonged to the high-consumption group, while in the EU, it was 40–45%. Notably, among the top 10% in the United States, the annual per capita environmental damage cost reached $19,000 to $63,000, which corresponded to 6–20% of their income and 0.8–3% of their assets.
The largest share of the damage cost was attributed to "biodiversity loss," accounting for 47–56% of the total. This was followed by climate change (36–45%) and nitrogen pollution (6–8%), while freshwater use and phosphorus pollution each accounted for less than 2%. The research team emphasized that biodiversity loss and climate change together accounted for 83–93%, highlighting the need to address these issues not as separate challenges, but in an integrated manner.
Inge Stehryber, the lead author of the paper and a researcher at Leiden University, stated, "The true value of nature cannot be measured in money, but presenting the environmental damage as a cost can demonstrate the scale of responsibility held by the top 10% of consumers. If these costs are actually used to solve environmental problems according to the polluter pays principle, it could bring about significant change."
Co-author Paul Behrens, a professor at the University of Oxford, added, "The top 10% not only cause the greatest environmental damage, but also have the greatest potential to reduce it. As investors, employers, drivers of social trends, and market shapers, they have the power to transform consumption and production patterns across society."
Hot Picks Today
"Let's Hit It Big in Korea"... Foreigners Flock to 'This Place' [Weekend Money]
- “What Now for Samsung and SK hynix?” ... Could News from China Rattle the KOSPI? Shareholders Anxious
- "I Had Just Lain Down to Sleep..." Woman in Her 30s Sets Fire to Songpa Villa Parking Lot, Destroying 3 Cars
- Life Sprouts from the Ashes... Gounsa Temple in Uiseong Reconnects Its Thousand-Year-Old Forest
- 'Little BoA,' They Said... Apology Over Unpaid Wages Fails to Quell Fury: "Do They Have Money to Debut Their Daughter?"
The research team suggested that environmental taxes or regulations targeting high-consumption groups could help reduce emissions and pollution, secure the resources needed for a sustainable transition, and improve social equity at the same time. However, they also noted that this analysis included only four out of the nine planetary boundaries that define the safe operating space for the Earth system—climate change, biodiversity loss, nutrient pollution, and freshwater use—so the damage estimates are conservative.
© The Asia Business Daily. All rights reserved. Unauthorized AI training and use prohibited.