Jaggi Vasudev Quotes

What we've proven is that you can protect the environment, use it wisely and grow the economy and that there is no conflict between the two.

If our economies are to flourish, if global poverty is to be banished, and if the wellbeing of the world's people enhanced - not just in this generation but in succeeding generations - we must make sure we take care of the natural environment and resources on which our economic activity depends.

We will invest heavily in safety and security... preserve the environment... make progress on biodiversity and economic progress.

Economic growth tends to require the taking of resources from the Earth. So something has to change on a debt-based economy.

We have an economy that tells us it is cheaper to destroy earth in real time rather than renew, restore, and sustain it. You can print money to bail out a bank but you can't print life to bail out a planet.

Changing an economic system that is bent on uncontrolled and poorly measured economic growth and depends on fossil energy for its main objectives, is much more difficult than changing how nuclear energy is used for military purposes. Some think it may be impossible.

You should issue demerits for tree cutting or the destruction of humus.

I believe the accepted model of capitalism that demands endless growth deserves the blame for the destruction of nature, and it should be displaced. Failing that, I try to work with those companies and help them change the way they think about our resources.

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.

If nature were a bank, they would have already rescued it.

There's a general culture in this country to cut all the trees. It makes me so angry because everyone is cutting and no one is planting.

I wouldn't want anyone to destroy the earth.

My role is not to choose between safeguarding the economy and protecting the environment - it's about doing both.

Business is a subset of the environment, not the other way around. You can't have a healthy economy, you can't have a healthy anything in a degraded environment.

We need to become good citizens in the global village, instead of competing. What are we competing for - to drive more cars, eat more steaks? That will destroy the world.

We must preserve our planet and grow our economy simultaneously. We cannot become more prosperous without the living systems upon which our prosperity depends.

Civilization can never be sustainable.

The idea of a non-growing economy may be an anathema to an economist. But the idea of a continually growing economy is an anathema to an ecologist.

The premise is simple: One economy and one environment, and they're interdependent.

To waste, to destroy, our natural resources, to skin and exhaust the land instead of using it so as to increase its usefulness, will result in undermining in the days of our children the very prosperity which we ought by right to hand down to them amplified and developed.

For too long, the world has been focused on short-term growth and development at the expense of our long-term survival as we have depleted our natural resources at historically reckless rates.

There can be no lasting prosperity for our people, if we do not protect our planet.

Only people who lack wisdom would say that a project should be pursued even if it leads to wanton destruction of forests.

I agree on the need for environmental sustainability. It is no good raising gross national income while at the same time destroying natural assets.

Squeezing the lives of people is now being proposed as the saviour of the planet. Through the green economy an attempt is being made to technologise, financialise, privatise and commodify all of the earth’s resources and living processes.