Environmental protection and economic development are not in conflict. Environmental protection is not a burden but a source for innovation. It can increase competition, create jobs, and lifts the economy.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
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.
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.
Environmental protection doesn't happen in a vacuum. You can't separate the impact on the environment from the impact on our families and communities.
If the protection of the environment involves costs, they should be justly distributed, taking due account of the different levels of development of various countries and the need for solidarity with future generations.
I think today we recognize that economic activity needs to search for ways to protect the environment.
My role is not to choose between safeguarding the economy and protecting the environment - it's about doing both.
There are more effective ways of tackling environmental problems including global warming, proliferation of plastics, urban sprawl, and the loss of biodiversity than by treaties, top-down regulations, and other approaches offered by big governments and their dependents.
We learned that economic growth and environmental protection can and should go hand in hand.
Environmentalism opposes reckless innovation and makes conservation the central order of business.
In tough times, some of us see protecting the climate as a luxury, but that's an outdated 20th-century worldview from a time when we thought industrialization was the end goal, waste was growth, and wealth meant a thick haze of air pollution.
No opposing quotes found.