Elizabeth II, Queen of Great Britain, served for more than seven decades. She died in Scotland on Thursday, September 8, at the age of 96. Her son, Charles III, who chose his throne name himself, is poised to be proclaimed king in the days following her passing. Formal accession ceremonies were scheduled, and the new king was expected to hold his first audience with the prime minister, marking a careful transition in a constitutional system that blends tradition with modern governance.
The relationship between government and the monarchy in Britain rests on long-standing tradition: the monarch stands above politics and the economy. Yet Charles earned a reputation as a prince who offered opinions beyond his constitutional remit, earning comments that he sometimes waded into issues beyond royal duties.
Elena Ananyeva, head of the Center for British Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences, noted that Charles had voiced many ideas, including economic perspectives, which some described as a prince who interjected into matters of state.
10 steps to a sustainable economy
At Davos in 2020, Prince Charles outlined a framework for advancing a sustainable economy. He argued that the COVID-19 crisis presented an opportunity to reset the global economy toward sustainable development, with a goal of rebuilding without further harming the planet. The framework proposed ten concrete steps to guide this transition.
The first priority was safeguarding nature and natural capital. A second essential aim was achieving a zero carbon footprint. The third step called for reimagining industries through the lens of sustainable markets. The plan emphasized identifying breakthrough technologies that could accelerate progress, while removing barriers that hinder change. It urged eliminating subsidies that distort markets, while shaping tax policy and regulations to stimulate sustainable activity.
Another focus was investing in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, along with research and development, to bring new technologies to market. It also highlighted investing in nature as a driver of economic growth and the need to establish common indicators for environmental, social and governance (ESG) standards to ensure transparency throughout supply chains.
The ninth step involved making it easier for consumers to discern which products are ethical and safe. The final step urged reshaping investments so they support sustainable development, directing large-scale capital, including pension funds and government wealth funds, toward environmentally sound projects that offer long-term value and returns.
Charles stated in 2021 that the crisis triggered by the coronavirus pandemic provided a chance to transition from a fossil-fuel-based economy to a nature-based, circular bio-economy.
In 2022 the government reaffirmed plans to promote growth while funding sustainable investments in infrastructure and utilities, supported by responsible public finance, debt relief, and tax reform aimed at sustainability.
“Very nice words”
Experts from the Russian Academy of Sciences remain skeptical about the likelihood of Charles III turning these ideas into action from the throne. They emphasized that the English monarchy is constitutional, meaning the monarch does not intervene in daily governance and typically approves measures proposed by the prime minister. As such, the king would not be able to implement bioeconomic concepts unilaterally, even if he personally supports them.
The monarch’s role is to approve all laws passed by Parliament, though he can remove a bill from consideration on the prime minister’s recommendation. The system rests on unwritten conventions and a framework of tradition that governs how the crown interacts with government decisions. Ananyeva noted that, historically, monarchs have been restrained from participating in party politics or policy debates, even when constitutional provisions exist for broader influence.
As an example, Boris Johnson became prime minister during a complex period in recent history. The sovereign at times approved government actions that later faced legal or political scrutiny. This underscores the delicate balance between ceremonial authority and the democratic process, a balance that shapes how the monarchy is perceived and how it functions within a modern political system.
Natalya Eremina, a professor of European studies, agreed that little would change in the monarchy’s fundamental role. She suggested that while the economy and sustainability efforts would evolve, the crown’s influence would remain ceremonial rather than executive. The trust placed in political leaders would continue to determine how policies unfold, and the throne would not—by itself—become a driver of policy. If Charles eventually abdicates in favor of his heir, the institutional framework would persist with similar limits on royal influence.
Some observers foresee a transition period followed by continued constancy. The likelihood of a seamless shift, they argue, rests on preserving the monarch’s nonpartisan stance while allowing the country to pursue ambitious sustainability goals within a parliamentary framework that values accountability and transparency.