Follow Bhutan’s Lead
Article by Jack L.
Amongst all the nations in Asia, sandwiched between the industrial giants that are India and China lies the small, relatively unknown country of Bhutan. With a population of just 784,000 and a land size of 14,824 square miles, the nation’s most impressive feature is its carbon negative status, a status it alone holds. [1]
How did they do it?
Since 1972, Bhutan has based political decisions on their Gross National Happiness (GNH) index rather than Gross Domestic Product (GDP), the total value of all produced goods and services of a nation within a given time period. Thus, all policies were created with the four pillars in mind: good governance, sustainable promotion of socioeconomic development, preservation of culture and environmental conservation instead of pure economic incentives.[2] With 75% of their land forested and a pledge to maintain at least 60% in perpetuity, a ban on logging, emphasis on hydroelectricity over fossil fuels, and the use of electric cars, the nation absorbs roughly 9 million tonnes of carbon annually while only emitting 1.5 million. No other nation absorbs more than they emit. [3]
Additionally, for the exception of visitors from India, Bangladesh, and the Maldives, tourists need a $40 visa and a $200 to $250 minimum daily package fee. Not only does this fee pay for the tourist(s)’ stay, food, equipment, and guides, it also funds education and aid to the impoverished.[4] It also helps regulate tourism, which has a negative effect on the climate.
So What?
Bhutan’s carbon-negative status is undeniably impressive, but it is also a product of unique circumstances that make it difficult for most other nations to replicate. With a small population and limited industrial activity, Bhutan operates in a context that simply does not apply to larger, more developed, or more resource-dependent countries. Their model works precisely because they have chosen a slower path to modernization, one that sacrifices certain economic and political opportunities in favor of environmental and cultural preservation. More notably, Bhutan shifted to their GNH index in 1972 and only reached carbon neutrality in 2011.[5] That is not a trade-off every country is willing to make.
Moreover, Bhutan’s strict tourism policies, while environmentally responsible, do limit their accessibility. A daily fee of $200 to $250 likely scares many potential travelers and could damage any nation’s economy who chooses to impose the same thing. Most people are not interested in their money going towards the betterment of a nation over their vacation.
Ultimately, Bhutan’s story is not a blueprint—it’s a mirror. It reflects what is possible when a country decides, unapologetically, to put the environment and well-being ahead of market-driven growth. But the alternative to that choice? A world that burns and floods.
Comparison
It is no surprise that the United States is nowhere near carbon negative despite its access to far more resources than Bhutan. The reason lies in the deeply ingrained systemic roots of the USA’s economic and legislative policies. In 2022, the nation produced 5.489 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide after accounting for carbon sinks like carbon capture systems.[6] However, that is not to say they are not making efforts to reduce that number. In fact, 5.489 billion metric tons is less emissions than what was made in 2005. [7]
The government has begun integrating climate goals into its broader economic strategy, framing clean energy investment as an environmental necessity and a path to economic growth. Legislation such as the Inflation Reduction Act and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act bring federal funding into domestic renewable energy production, electric vehicle creation, and other more clean energy options. These policies aim to decarbonize major sectors such as transportation without halting economic growth. [8]
Yet, unlike Bhutan, where environmental protection supersedes capitalist incentives, the USA operates within a market-driven framework that still centers around GDP growth and industrial expansion. As such, the road to better sustainability can be rocky and inconsistent. While the USA has committed to reducing emissions by roughly 50% by 2030 from 2005 and reaching net-zero by 2050, the reality of that goal hinges on redefining what economic progress looks like.[9] It is hard to replicate what Bhutan has done but the same goal, the same mindset is crucial for our survival.
End Notes:
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. "Bhutan summary". Encyclopedia Britannica, 2 May. 2020, https://www.britannica.com/summary/Bhutan. Accessed 20 May 2025.
“Bhutan: The World’s First Carbon-Negative Country.” Climate Action, 18 Jan. 2017, www.climateaction.org/news/bhutan_the_worlds_only_carbon_negative_country. Accessed 20 May 2025.
L, Jennifer. “How the First Carbon Negative Nation of Bhutan Did It.” Carbon Credits, 23 Sept. 2022, carboncredits.com/how-the-first-carbon-negative-nation-of-bhutan-did-it/. Accessed 20 May 2025.
Youn, Soo. “Visit the World’s Only Carbon-Negative Country.” Travel, 17 Oct. 2017, www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/article/carbon-negative-country-sustainability. Accessed 20 May 2025.
Yangka, Dorji, et al. “Carbon Neutral Bhutan: Sustaining Carbon Neutral Status under Growth Pressures - Sustainable Earth Reviews.” BioMed Central, 15 Feb. 2023, sustainableearthreviews.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s42055-023-00053-8#citeas. Accessed 20 May 2025.
“Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 15 Jan. 2025, www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks.
Ibid.
The Council of Economic Advisors. “ Achieving a Net Zero Carbon Dioxide Emissions Economy in the United States.” Economic Report of the President, pp. 171–206, bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/cea/written-materials/2025/01/10/the-2025-economic-report-of-the-president/.
Ibid.
