“.... a number of companies seek competitiveness gains through clean technology investment. Environmental action also generates new business opportunities. For instance, firms see the search for environmental performance as an opportunity to gain advantage over less technologically advanced rivals and to capture market shares.” (OECD 2011, pages 24-25) (3) “UNEP defines a green economy as one that results in „improved human well-being and social equity, while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcities‟ ..... In its simplest expression, a green economy is low carbon, resource efficient, and socially inclusive. In a green economy, growth in income and employment should be driven by public and private investments that reduce carbon emissions and pollution, enhance energy and resource efficiency, and prevent the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services. These investments need to be catalyzed and supported by targeted public expenditure, policy reforms and regulation changes. The development path should maintain, enhance and, where necessary, rebuild natural capital as a critical economic asset and as a source of public benefits. This is especially important for poor people whose livelihoods and security depend on nature. The key aim for a transition to a green economy is to eliminate the trade-offs between economic growth and investment and gains in environmental quality and social inclusiveness...the environmental and social goals of a green economy can also generate increases in income, growth, and enhanced well-being...” (UNEP 2011, page 16) The first definition is perhaps the closest of the three to the original idea of sustainability in terms of maintaining natural capital; nevertheless, the definition focuses on economic growth and development, and in so doing it draws attention to the importance of natural capital as a source of economic progress, in addition to something needing to be safeguarded. The second definition puts particular attention on the need to use a wide range of policy measures, not just traditional natural resource and environmental policies, for Green Growth; and on the political economy challenges arising from the resulting costs of change. The third definition also emphasizes natural capital, but it stresses as well the importance of addressing equity and social inclusion challenges in moving toward a green economy. In addition, it emphasizes the importance of addressing global-scale problems of natural capital depletion and degradation in its references to climate change and biodiversity.

The third definition, and to a more limited extent the second definition, further assert that appropriate sets of environmental and natural resource policies, along with complementary measures such as “green” innovation policies, can improve environmental sustainability without significant adverse impacts on economic growth, or even net gains. In particular, the third definition states that: “The key aim for a transition to a green economy is to eliminate the trade-offs between economic growth and investment and gains in environmental quality and social inclusiveness...the environmental and social goals of a green economy can also generate increases in income, growth, and enhanced well-being.” The second definition emphasizes “...fostering investment and innovation which will underpin sustained growth and give rise to new economic opportunities......,” and that “.... a number of companies seek competitiveness gains through clean technology investment. Environmental action also generates new business opportunities.” The nature of tradeoffs and synergies between measures for longer-term environmental sustainability and measures for nearer-term growth acceleration are an important focus in current debates over Green Growth.

These observations suggest two opposing interpretations of the concept of Green Growth: 4