| United Nations | E/CN.17/1996/36 |
Economic and Social Council
Distr. GENERAL
23 April 1996
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
COMMISSION ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Fourth session
New York, 18 April-3 May 1996
Agenda item 3
CROSS-SECTORAL ISSUES, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE
TO THE CRITICAL ELEMENT OF SUSTAINABILITY
Letter dated 19 April 1996 from the Minister of Environment
of Norway addressed to the Secretary-General
As a follow-up to the Norwegian initiative on sustainable
production and consumption, and as a consequence of the decisions
taken by the Commission in 1995, Norway has supported the work of the
Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in this
field.
To facilitate the Commission's work with this issue at the 1996
session, Norway would appreciate that the OECD report from the
Rosendal meeting that Norway hosted would be available as an official
document.*
I will refer to this report in my speech to the Commission, and I
would very much appreciate that it is available to delegations.
(Signed) Thorbjorn BERNTSEN
Minister of Environment
Government of Norway
(* The report of the meeting is being made available in the language
of submission only.)
Annex
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................ 3
1.1 THE OECD WORK PROGRAMME ........................... 3
1.2 THE ROSENDAL WORKSHOP ............................. 3
2. WORKSHOP REPORT ......................................... 5
2.1 CLARlFYlNG THE CONCEPTS ........................... 5
2.2 MOVING FROM CONCEPTS TO POLICY DEVELOPMENT ........ 10
2.3 POLICY MEASURES: SOME PRACTICAL PROPOSALS ......... 15
2.4 CONCLUSIONS ....................................... 15
ANNEX A: WORKSHOP BACKGROUND PAPER .......................... 23
ANNEX B: WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS .............................. 75
I INTRODUCTI0N
1.1 THE OECD WORK PROGRAMME ON SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION AND PRODUCTION
In June 1993, the OECD Ministerial Council requested the OECD to
examine the relationship between consumption and production patterns
and sustainable development. The Environment Directorate has
concentrated its efforts on the development of an OECD Work Programme
for l995-96, and on contributing to the development of an
international work programme on sustainable consumption and
production, under the aegis of the UN Commission on Sustainable
Development. Recent activities include the organisation of an Experts
Seminar at MIT, Boston, USA (December 1994), supporting the Oslo
Ministerial Roundtable on Sustainable Consumption (February 1995), the
facilitation of information exchange through the OECD Informal Contact
Group on sustainable consumption and the Rosendal Workshop which is
reported on in this paper.
The OECD Work Programme involves three elements:
- Clarifying the Conceptual Framework;
- Identifying Policy Options and Tools;
- Monitoring and Evaluating Progress.
1. 2 THE ROSENDAL WORKSHOP
The Rosendal workshop, "Sustainable Consumption and Production:
Clarifying the Concepts" was organised by the OECD and hosted by the
Environment Ministry of Norway, from 2-4 July 1995. It was intended to
make a major contribution to the first element of the OECD Work
Programme by providing for detailed discussion among some 25 policy
makers and other experts who attended the event.
The workshop had three key objectives:
- to identify and examine broad concepts that have been advocated
within the international community to effect changes in levels and
patterns of consumption and production;
- to assess the potential utility of these concepts for policy
development and implementation, thereby highlighting those which
appear most promising;
- to clarify boundaries between 'sustainable development' and
'sustainable consumption and production'
More broadly, the workshop aimed at improving the conceptual basis for
policy development in OECD countries and helping to focus the efforts
of other international organisations on the most promising conceptual
approaches to developing policies for more sustainable patterns of
production and consumption.
1.2.1 Workshop Discussion Paper
The starting point for workshop discussions was a background paper
Sustainable Consumption and Production: Clarifying the Concepts,
presented in Annex A of this report.
The purpose of the paper was to expand and sharpen debate among
experts attending the workshop. It was prepared for the OECD by
Environmental Resources Management (ERM) UK: its views are those of
the consultants and do not necessarily reflect those of the OECD or
workshop participants.
The paper describes a series of concepts and analyses them in terms of
their potential usefulness to policy makers who are interested in
developing and implementing measures to achieve more sustainable
consumption and production patterns .
The concepts were selected by the OECD Environment Directorate to
represent the lines of argument that are most often raised in the
current discussion about sustainable consumption and production. They
are:
- carrying capacity (a defined environment's maximum persistently
supportable load, usually expressed in terms of population numbers of
a defined species);
- the steady state economy (a human economy characterised by constant
population, capital stocks and rate of material/energy throughput);
- environmental utilisation space or ecospace. (the capacity of the
biosphere's environmental functions to support human economic
activities, sometimes defined at a national or per capita level
according to a 'global fair shares' principle);
- ecological footprint (the area of land functionally required to
support a community which lies beyond the land occupied by that
community 'appropriated carrying capacity');
- ecological rucksack (the total mass of material flow 'carried by' an
stem of consumption in the course of its life cycle);
- natural resource accounting and green GDP (alternative systems of
national accounting and performance measures, which incorporate
ecological and human welfare considerations);
- eco-efficiency (more efficient use of materials and energy in order
to reduce economic costs and environmental impacts - 'more from
less').
2 WORKSHOP REPORT
2.1 CLARIFYING THE CONCEPTS
Day l of the workshop opened with a plenary session which reviewed the
series of concepts set out in the background paper. In the course of
discussion the following key points were raised.
- The background paper was felt to provide a good and reasonably
comprehensive point of departure for discussions. The additional
concepts of industrial ecology and environmental debt were noted as
requiring further attention.
- The concepts under discussion operate at different levels. Carrying
capacity was identified as a science-based 'foundation' concept and
guiding principle. Ecospace, ecological footprints and rucksacks and
the steady state economy serve as metaphors for social change and
offer quantitative approaches to assist in objective setting.
Eco-efficiency is a broad strategy, applicable at micro or
macro-level, while green accounting and green GDP are tools for
action.
- With the possible exception of eco-efficiency, the concepts rest on
the premise that there are biophysical limits to current economic
growth. However, they do not all imply that economic growth cannot
continue two key options for 'expanding' economies were mentioned:
- society can pursue qualitative economic development, in which
the quality of goods and services is improved through resource
efficient processes and social organisation but output, in terms
of physical volume, does not increase; and
- society can pursue selective quantitative economic growth, which
remains viable if, for example, certain sectors expand but their
growth is offset by greater resource efficiency (leading to
reduced inputs) and/or contraction in other economic activities.
- There exist assumptions within concepts (particularly ecological
footprints and ecological rucksacks) about the damaging effects of
international trade and the likely benefits of achieving new (reduced
or more efficient) patterns of consumption and production. Two main
points were made in relation to this:
- a simplistic view of developing countries supplying the
industrialised world with raw materials and receiving finished
goods in return is no longer accurate. Patterns of world trade
are complex and changing rapidly as manufacturing and service
industries relocate at a global level. It is therefore important
to recognise the reciprocal nature of consumption patterns
within and between countries. Policies for more sustainable
consumption/production patterns should focus on creating an
'environmental balance of trade' rather than achieving regional
self-sufficiency. The phenomenon of 'appropriated carrying
capacity' may be best addressed by an open trading system which
is managed to bring mutual benefits environmentally and
economically.
- It is currently unclear what the consequences for world trade
might be of any major shift in consumption patterns by develoPed
countries.
- Sustainable consumption and production, by definition, concern
audiences outside the world of policy making. Whatever the merits of
sophisticated new concepts, it should be remembered that politicians
and the public have an intuitive understanding of carrying capacity
and thresholds and the notion of 'living within our means'. This is an
important foundation for policy making.
- Concepts such as ecological footprints and ecospace have particular
value as descriptive ideas. They can be used as a means of picturing
the nature and extent of environmental damage and the forces causing
it. They particularly highlight the current inequity of consumption
levels within countries and between rich and poor nations: they can
serve to inspire the kind of changes needed in industrialised
countries.
- The implications which flow from the various concepts should never
be regarded as prescriptive. In seeking to realise their objectives,
policy makers should beware of creating a 'sustainable' society in
which people do not wish to live.
2.1.1 Discussion Groups
Following the plenary discussion, participants split into a number of
break-out discussion groups and addressed the questions:
- whether greater clarification of concepts is needed;
- whether additional concepts are needed;
- what policies to encourage more sustainable consumption and prod~ion
could be pursued now (even in the absence of consensus on the
definition and scope of sustainable consumption and production)?
The outcome of the group discussions is summarised below.
Is there a Need for Greater Clarification of Concepts?
Concepts are inherently 'fuzzy': their function is to provide a
mobilising vision as much as to analyse and explain. It is not always
helpful to seek to turn them into scientific theories
It is useful to identify the interlinkages between concepts - despite
their different starting points and philosophies there are many common
elements which can serve as a basis for policy thinking.
It is important to recognise explicitly the subjective judgements and
assumptions underpinning concepts, and the objectives they are seeking
to achieve.
An important issue requiring further exploration in some concepts is
the notion of social choice. Scientific assessment of the earth's
capacity to sustain human activities influences, but does not
determine, policy making. Establishing critical loads, for example,
involves normative judgements as well as scientific study. Concepts
can be most helpful when they explicitly recognise the need for
environmental/economic/social trade-offs and build their 'future
visions' around this political process.
Is there a Need for Additional Concepts?
It was noted by workshop participants that industrial ecology might
serve as a unifying concept, linking the ideas of carrying capacity,
ecospace, ecoeffficiency and cleaner production. Industrial ecology is
far-reaching in its use of the metaphor of metabolism to analyse
production and consumption by industry, government, organisations and
consumers, and the interactions between them. However, the concept was
generally felt to be of greatest interest to business; it remains
unclear how industrial ecology can be applied in demand side measures,
especially at individual or household level.
The concept of Foodmiles, or the distance travelled from production to
market by agricultural products, was noted as another indicator of the
international environmental impacts of rich consumer lifestyles. A
report by the UK-based SAFE Alliance, which developed the concept,
shows that UK food imports by air more than doubled during the 198()s,
leading to increased energy consumption and air pollution.
Environmental debt - defined in Sweden as the cost of repairing all
environmental damage in the country that is capable of being repaired
- was agreed to be a concept of great potential value. Environmental
debt has already been operationalised in the sense that the Swedish
government has made a commitment that the national environmental debt
will not be permitted to rise any further.
Interest was also expressed in whether researchers or policy makers in
developing or newly industrialising countries have proposed concepts
relating to sustainable consumption and production which might differ
significantly from those under consideration at the workshop.
What Policies Could be Pursued Now?
There was agreement that correcting distorted pricing systems, which
currently send the wrong signals to producers and consumers, still
represents the most effective course of government action.
- Eco-taxes on products and materials remain difficult to implement,
though it was suggested that some industries are becoming more
receptive to such measures, if they are introduced with due care for
fiscal neutrality and maintaining national competitiveness.
- Reduction/removal of subsidies, especially in the energy,
agriculture and transport sectors, was felt to be under-explored as a
policy option in most OECD countries. Much information relating to the
extent and distribution of national subsidies is lacking, and too
little is known of the costs and benefits which might follow from
their removal. Research in this area is urgently needed.
In the short term, increasing information to producers and consumers
is as a 'no regrets' option. Measures include:
- more product information;
- practical guidance (sustainability 'tips') to individuals and
households;
- indicators to broadcast the state of the environment and progress
towards targets.
Demonstration projects to pilot and publicise alternative products,
services and lifestyles were felt to be a useful and cost efficient
way to learn lessons and encourage change.
2.2 MOVING FROM CONCEPTS TO POLICY DEVELOPMENT
The second session of the workshop identified a number of concepts as
being especially promising for policy development in that they
provide:
- a quantitative basis for decision making (carrying capacity);
- a quantitative basis for, and moral guide to, objective setting
(ecospace):
- a set of practical ideas to improve economic and environmental
performance (eco-efficiency).
Participants divided into two discussion groups to consider various
issues involved in translating these concepts into policies for more
sustainable consumption and production:
- the use of targets and objectives;
- allocation issues;
- appropriate scale of action; and
- scope of government influence.
2.2.1 Carrying Capacity and Ecospace
Carrying capacity is most easily defined at a local level; for
practical policy making, the notion of global carrying capacity is
almost meaningless. Carrying capacity was agreed to be an essential
starting point for discussions about sustainable consumption but it
contains inherent problems relating to implementation. These include:
- scientific uncertainty, which is a major constraint on setting and
defending long term goals and targets for reducing resource
use/pollution;
- the 'ideological baggage' of the limits-to-growth controversy dating
from the l960s, which remains a political problem.
Target setting can only be handled as an ongoing process, subject to
revision in the light of new knowledge, technical innovation and
changing values.
Critical loads represent society's choices about limits; they are
based on scientific estimates of carrying capacity and value
judgements about what is important and what
environmental/economic/social trade-offs are acceptable. Critical
loads~ not carrying capacity, are the real operational substance of
political/ environmental debate. The concept of ecospace could be
helpful in this debate, for example, in negotiations over access to
resources and to the right to pollute. Such debates and negotiations
are already in evidence, for example, over whether/how much the
developed world should pay poorer countries to undertake biodiversity
protection measures.
The concept of 'environmental capacity', or development thresholds
defined in terms of environmental critical loads and social
perceptions of acceptable limits, was felt to be especially useful in
guiding planning policy (eg land use and facility developments) at
local and regional level. Demand side measures to control visitor
numbers to tourist attractions have been introduced following
environmental capacity studies of National Parks in the USA and
historic cities such as Venice.
The core issue relating to policy development based on scientifically
and/or socially determined 'limits' is that of allocation of access to
environmental goods and services. This is necessarily a political
judgement. Key factors include: relative strength of interested
parties in the decision making process, willingness to pay,
traditional ownership ('grandfathering rights') and equity
considerations. Ecospace was felt to offer useful guidance in the form
of:
- illustrating present inequities of distribution;
- suggesting long term goals for greater equity;
- providing quantitative indicators of sustainable resource use and
waste generation.
Participants expressed doubts about the ability of carrying capacity
or critical loads to provide the guiding principle of policies for
sustainable consumption and production. While a scientific basis for
action is necessary, science clearly needs reinforcing by social,
economic, quality of life or other arguments which:
- focus on evident problems; and
- encourage agreement that action is necessary.
Some speakers agreed that the concept of ecospace is well suited to
describing environmental impacts and social inequities but contested
the idea that it could be helpful in pragmatic allocation decisions,
especially at international level. A key objection is that 'global
fair shares' is not in fact equitable because it is unlikely to allow
sufficient 'space' for developing countries to achieve the growth
levels they need for real poverty alleviation and social improvement.
2.2.2 Eco-Efficiency
Eco-efficiency is subject to different interpretations. Business tends
to regard it as a strategy for achieving growth more efficiently ie
with lower financial and environmental costs. NGOs tend to see it as a
more fundamental means to reduce absolute levels of energy and
material consumption. There is therefore some confusion over goals and
targets.
To date, business and some governments have set targets in terms of
improved unit efficiency. For example, many Dutch industry sectors
have committed to achieving 20 Per cent energy efficiency improvements
but no absolute reduction in energy use is implied. By contrast, some
environmental experts have suggested targets which utilise efficiency
measures in order to achieve dramatic cuts in consumption levels: the
"Factor 10 Club" has proposed an average tenfold increase in current
levels of resource productivity over the next 30 50 years in order to
reduce by half current global flows of non-renewable materials.
Key problems were identified in relation to both approaches:
- progress on efficiency targets set at enterprise level is hard to
verify, both in terms of company performance and environmental
outcomes;
- targets requiring absolute reductions in consumption levels are hard
to justify: many resources are not currently perceived to be in short
supply and there is no certainty that reduced consumption will result
in 'sustainability'.
Despite these obstacles, eco-efficiency was felt to represent a
flexible and pragmatic approach, suitable for translating into action
at national, regional and local level, by governments, industry,
organisations and households.
Government was felt to have a steering role in:
- defining problems;
- researching and communicating the techniques for, and implications
of, major efficiency improvements;
- creating appropriate incentive frameworks;
- developing public sector infrastructure to enable efficient
behaviour;
- promoting and implementing international agreements;
- setting an example eg through implementing 'in-house' efficiency
programmes (greening of government);
- monitoring and reporting progress in all sectors.
Steps in the right direction were agreed to be more important than
consensus on long term goals.
Encouraging eco-efficiency was generally supported as a pragmatic
strategy with potential political and economic appeal. Short to medium
term efficiency targets are likely to encourage 'win-win' management
and planning choices. Ambitious, long-term goals, such as the ten-fold
increase in resource productivity proposed by the Factor l0 Club, were
felt to represent a very challenging target.
Eco-efficiency was also felt to be applicable to demand side measures
aimed at, or undertaken by, households. However, the term
'eco-efficiency' was felt to be too obscure for popular communication;
a more meaningful phrase is required .
As with carrying capacity, the concept of eco-efficiency was felt to
be insufficient on its own as a basis for policy making. Wider
understanding of interlinkages between economic activities and
environmental damage, driving forces of change and the
psychological/ethical motives of producer and consumer behaviour will
be essential to achieving efficiency gains in consumption and
production levels or patterns which will have a measurable impact.
2.3 POLICY MEASURES: SOME PRACTICAL PROPOSALS
The second day of the workshop also involved a brainstorming session
during which participants listed possible policy measures which could
take forward the concepts of carrying capacity/critical loads and eco-
efficiency into practical action. These measures are summarised in
Box 2.3a.
Box 2.3 a Approaches to encouraging sustainable consumption and
production suggested by workshop participants
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Instruments - Incremental tax shift from labour to resource
use and policies
- Progressive reduction of environmentally
damaging subsidies
- Zero VAT rating for the top 10 per cent of
energy efficient appliances
- Road pricing, congestion charges and petrol
price increases above the rate of inflation
- Tax incentives for small cars
Regulation - Building regulations to require dual piping
systems for domestic water supplies
- EIA required for government procurement
- Environmental specification bands to be drawn up
for government procurement (e.g. allowing
lowest cost purchase within bands)
- Empowerment of consumer organizations through
increased scope of action and funding
- Explicit requirements for technology sharing to
widen choice of environmentally benign
consumer products
- Promotion of life cycle analysis within
eco-labelling framework
- Use electronic information systems to
inform/promote environmentally beneficial
behaviour
- Environmental education in pre-school education
system
Social Instruments - Reference was made to the wide range of
infrastructural and lifestyle changes proposed
in the report of the workshop "Facilities for
a Sustainable Household", hosted by the
Ministry of Environment of the Netherlands,
Zeist, the Netherlands, January 1995
- Local infrastructure and facilities to enable
more sustainable behaviour, coupled with
public awareness campaigns utilising
advertising, icons, symbolism
- Environmental product/service information
targeted at procurement agents of government
and companies/organizations
Research and - Incentives for industry to undertake market
development research on the psychology of consumer
purchasing behaviour
- Trend analysis of most successful best practice
in industry
- Introduction of comparative ranking of multi-
nationals' eco-audits
- Local demonstration projects of "sustainable"
lifestyles to understand preconditions for
successful behaviour change
- Promote and develop opportunities for
environmental job creation
International - Stronger internalisation of environmental
cooperation costs should be pursued in international trade
negotiations
- Globally compatible eco-labelling scheme,
covering environmental inputs and outputs, for
products and services
- Promote use of ISO 14000 and develop version for
SMEs
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2.4 CONCLUSIONS
On the second day of the workshop, participants re-examined the full
array of concepts under discussion and reached consensus on a number
of conclusions. One conclusions highlighted the importance of
international cooperation in working towards more sustainable
consumption and production patterns. In response, a number of
participants outlined relevant work programmes: these are summarised
at the end of this section.
Conclusion l
In pursuit of a conceptual framework for work on sustainable
consumption and production, there appears to be a hierarchical
relationship flowing from a core concept, carrying capacity (and
related ideas such as critical loads, ecospace and ecological
footprints), through strategic approaches, notably eco-efficiency, to
tools for action (including green accounting, ecological tax/price
reform, design for environment).
Conclusion 2
Encouraging eco-efficiency is currently seen as the most promising
strategy, not only for business, but also for Governments and
households. It has significant potential as a basis for addressing a
wide range of environmental problems. The value of an eco-efficiency
strategy could be further enhanced by setting targets. Carrying
capacity and ecospace can provide a foundation from which to derive
such targets.
Conclusion 3
It was recognised that, in addition to their value for target setting,
concepts such as carrying capacity and critical loads probably have
the most intuitive meaning for politicians and the public.
Conclusion 4
Ecospace, ecological footprints and ecological rucksacks have value as
descriptive concepts that can be used to illustrate environmental
damage and the relationships between economy and environment. They all
embrace the notion of ecological limits. It was recognised that the
distributional issues raised by the use of these concepts are
politically very sensitive and that their value for setting normative
objectives needs further exploration.
Conclusion 5
There is a need to develop more effective parameters, in particular
environmental indicators and green accounting systems, which are
better able to define, measure and integrate environmental/economic
problems and to measure the effectiveness of policy implementation.
Conclusion 6
A common position regarding the nature, context and size of
environmental problems to be addressed is a precondition for the
effective introduction of policy tools. Even where scientific
uncertainty exists, this should not prevent planning, policy and
implementation initiatives for more sustainable consumption and
production.
Conclusion 7
The discussions on concepts indicated a need for rethinking the
relationship between 'North' and 'South'. This is especially relevant
for trade and international negotiations. For example, reduced
consumption in the 'North' will not automatically lead to increased
consumption in the 'South'. More needs to be done to clarify global
interlinkages.
Conclusion 8
Sustainable consumption and production objectives, and policies to
achieve them, should focus on the reduction of energy and material
flows and their harmful impacts. These policies should take into
account their potential impacts in the wider economic and social
sphere, both within and beyond OECD countries.
Conclusion 9
International cooperation will be essential in developing policies to
encourage more sustainable consumption and production. Reflecting the
need for continued international initiatives, representatives from the
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the UN
Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD), the United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) and the World Business Council for
Sustainable Development (WBCSD) then outlined their work programmes
and forthcoming events which will take forward work on sustainable
consumption and production.
2.4.1 OECD
The OECD Work Programme on Sustainable Consumption and Production,
1995-96, has been developed in response to the high priority accorded
the subject by the UN CSD and within the OECD's Environment Policy
Committee. The Programme is led by the Environment Directorate but
involves other OECD Directorates and affiliated agencies. The three
elements of the Programme involve:
- clarifying the conceptual framework;
- identifying policy options and tools; and
- monitoring and evaluating progress.
It is expected that the second element will begin with a study of the
transport sector, to determine environmental, economic and social
impacts of current sectoral activity, identify driving forces and
trends and to identify potentially efficient and effective mixes of
policy instruments to influence consumption and production patterns in
the sector.
Interim results of the Work Programme as a whole will be presented to
the CSD before the 1996 meeting and a final synthesis report is
scheduled for late 1996, in time for the five-year review of Agenda
21.
2.4.2 UN CSD
The third session of the Commission on Sustainable Development (April
1995) adopted a work programme on changing consumption and production
patterns. The CSD Secretariat is now building on inputs received from
a number of countries and organisations, attempting to synthesise
ideas and coordinate implementing national actions. The work programme
involves five elements:
- development of long term projections (time horizon of 40 years) to
illustrate the consequences of social and economic development trends
on consumption and production patterns and their associated
environmental impacts. This element is a synthesis of existing
studies;
- comparison of social, economic and regulatory policy instruments and
packages for achieving change. This element is based on case studies
undertaken in developed and developing countries; forthcoming
workshops in Korea and Brazil will also provide information;
- further study of the impacts of changes in consumption and
production in industrialised countries on development in poorer
countries. The focus will be on trade implications of eg
eco-labelling;
- work with national governments to secure commitments to action on
sustainable consumption and production, including quantified
objectives and agreements on monitoring;
- revise UN guidelines for consumer protection to incorporate
sustainability considerations.
Sustainable consumption and production is a key area in the CSD's
overall work programme and is expected to become a central policy
issue in l996.
2.4.3 WBCSD
The World Business Council for Sustainable Development has established
a working group on Sustainable Production and Consumption, which will
shortly merge with a WBCSD working group on eco-efficiency. The
working group's programme aims at (1):
- moving the debate from one which may present barriers and pressure
for business to one of opportunities for commercial enterprises;
- identifying strategies and frameworks that satisfy consumer demand
and societal needs while promoting environmental quality;
- guiding the agenda so as to avoid stifling competition, economic
growth and technological innovation - all necessary components in the
achievement of sustainable production and consumption;
- highlighting business accomplishments in moving towards sustainable
production and consumption, thereby providing a vehicle for the
business community to shape the policy direction of changes in
production and consumption patterns.
The WBCSD has adopted a 'platform strategy' to forward this agenda:
key events over the next year include:
- an eco-efficiency workshop, hosted by Dow Chemical in Washington DC;
- a workshop on the role of marketing and advertising in promoting
more sustainable consumption patterns (Oslo, August 1995);
- a workshop on sustainable consumption and eco-efficiency (Davos
1996);
- the fourth CSD meeting (New York, April 1996); and
- the Summit of the Americas, where WBCSD will chair one of the
events.
2.4.4 UNEP
UNEP Industry and Environment launched its Cleaner Production
Programme in 1990 with the goal of encouraging countries to move away
from end-of-pipe solutions and towards a preventive approach to
reducing industry's impact on the environment. The Programme shares
many of the concerns and objectives of the sustainable consumption and
production agenda; for example, a UNEP working group is currently
studying and disseminating information on sustainable product
development. Significant UNEP Industry and Environment programmes and
events include:
- ongoing establishment of National Cleaner Production Centres (NCPCs)
in a joint venture with UNIDO;
- production of a primer on LCA;
- environmental impact assessments of major technology related
decisions eg the transfer of hazardous wastes;
- preparation of a training kit on environmental management systems
for SMEs to help them implement ISO 14000;
- seminar on the inclusion of environmental issues in the curricula of
business schools (September 1995);
- cleaner production seminars in cooperation with the Wuppertal and
Stockholm Institutes:
- seminar to evaluate progress on the Cleaner Production Programme
(Oxford. September l996).
The European Regional Office of UNEP is providing a platform for
policy discussion in cooperation with Friends of the Earth Europe. A
seminar will be held in September, 1995 to discuss the report Towards
Sustainable Europe, produced by the Wuppertal Institute and FoE, and
to examine the role of various social actors in achieving change.
Note
1/ WBCSD, "Sustainable Production and Consumption: Phase I:
Definition and Boundaries," draft document, May 1995.
Annex A
OECD Workshop
Sustainable Consumption and Production:
Clarifying the Concepts
2-4 July, Rosendal, Norway
Background Paper
CONTENTS
3 INTRODUCTION ......................................... 25
3.1 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: SOME OBSERVATIONS ...... 26
3.2 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABLE
CONSUMPTION: DRAWING PRELIMINARY BOUNDARIES ..... 28
4 ANALYSIS OF THE KEY CONCEPTS ......................... 32
4.1 CARRYING CAPACITY .............................. 32
4.2 THE STEADY STATE ECONOMY ....................... 36
4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL UTILISATION SPACE (ECOSPACE) ...... 39
4.4 ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINTS AND ECOLOGICAL RUCKSACKS .. 42
4.5 NATURAL RESOURCE ACCOUNTING ..................... 47
4.6 ECO-EFFICIENCY ................................. 51
4.7 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF KEY CONCEPTS ............ 59
5 SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION CONCEPTS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS 62
5.1 WHAT IS 'UNSUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION'? ............ 62
5.2 WHAT BROAD CHANGES ARE REQUIRED AND WHO NEEDS
TO ACT? ......................................... 63
5.3 WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE IMPLICATIONS OF
SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION? ........................ 64
5.4 POLICY STARTING POINTS: WHAT IS THE ROLE
OF GOVERNMENT? .................................. 65
5.5 CONCEPTS AND POLICY IDEAS ....................... 67
6 CONCLUSIONS AND ISSUES FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION ..... 71
ENDNOTES ............................................. 72
3 INTRODUCTION
Sustainable consumption was launched as a serious policy issue at the
Rio Earth Summit. Agenda 21 stated that "the major cause of the
continued deterioration of the global environment is the unsustainable
pattern of consumption and production, particularly in industrialised
countries... " "' and called on developed countries to take the lead
in promoting and achieving more sustainable consumption patterns.
The OECD has responded to the challenge of Agenda 21, and subsequent
calls for action by the Commission on Sustainable Development, by
undertaking a work programme on Sustainable Production and
Consumption. The programme will stress management of the demand side
of economic activity, rather than control over production processes
which has predominated in environmental policy to date. The term
sustainable consumption, as used in this paper, embraces both end-use
consumers and producers in their role as consumers of energy, raw
materials, land and biodiversity.
The first element of the OECD work programme, "Clarifying the
Concepts", aims to contribute to debate on the subject by examining
concepts which propose future visions of more sustainable consumption
patterns and suggest means of achieving them.
This paper has been prepared on the basis of a literature review of a
number of concepts, identified by the OECD secretariat as those which,
to date, have most often been introduced into the debate surrounding
the need to modify consumption patterns. The paper also draws on
interviews with experts associated with the development of the
concepts or related ideas on sustainable consumption. Concepts
reviewed are:
- carrying capacity;
- environmental utilisation space or ecospace;
- the steady state economy;
- ecological 'footprints' and ecological 'rucksacks';
- green accounting (including green GDP and indicators);
- eco-efficiency (including the utilisation-focused economy).
The purpose of this paper is to analyse these concepts in terms of
their potential utility in the development and implementation of
policies for sustainable consumption. A key objective is to offer
guidance on 'drawing the boundaries' between sustainable development
and sustainable consumption as a policy area.
A further objective is to expand and sharpen the debate by encouraging
international experts in discussion of the various concepts, with a
focus on how they might lead to promising policy approaches which may
be of value to the OECD's work programme.
It is important to note that concepts are overarching intellectual
frameworks which shape ideas but cannot tell us what to do. A
fundamental problem in seeking to translate any of the concepts into
operational form is that OECD countries have not yet agreed on what
are priority 'unsustainable consumption patterns'.
3.I SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: SOME OBSERVATIONS
The policy and academic debate surrounding sustainable development at
global level revolves essentially around three key issues which have
significant implications for environmental policy:
- Population Growth. Global population has more than doubled since
1950 and is projected to grow from the present 5.5 billion to about
8.5 billion by 2025. Growth is occurring disproportionately fast in
the developing countries where institutional/economic/social systems
are currently less able to provide for their population's well-being.
The world's population is urbanising faster than it is growing:
between now and 2025, the world's urban population is likely to triple
(2).
- Economic Growth. Global economic output has increased five-fold
since 1950. World commercial energy consumption rose by 45 per cent
between 1971 and 1991. Total world consumption of metals, a good
indicator of materials demand, rose sharply between 1977 and 1991:
aluminium (20%), nickel (37%), zinc (21%)(1). Improvements in energy
and materials efficiency have been more than offset by increases in
volume output.
- Poverty and Global Inequity. There is an enormous wealth and income
disparity between developed and developing countries. Average 1991 GDP
per capita was $18,988 in OECD countries, compared with $2,377 for
developing countries. Disparities within countries can be equally
great, creating social tension and encouraging dissatisfaction with
(sometimes adequate) living standards. Despite faster percentage
economic growth in the developing countries over recent decades, the
global wealth gap has continued to grow. The share of global income
going to the richest 20% of the world's people rose from 70 per cent
in 1960 to 83 per cent in 1989 (3).
Projected increases in human population numbers and levels of economic
output are often identified as the key unsustainable trends in modern
society; they Constitute the driving forces behind increased load on
the environment. Within these broad trends there is little clarity
over precisely what is, and is not, sustainable. Opinion also divides
sharply over the capacity of technological advance and the operation
of the market to overcome pollution problems and perceived resource
scarcities.
Poverty and the wealth gap are similarly identified as one of the key
drivers of unsustainable environmental degradation. According to the
Worldwatch Institute, "people at either end of the income spectrum are
far more likely than those in the middle to damage the earth's
ecological health - the rich because of their high consumption of
energy, raw materials and manufactured goods, and the poor because
they must often cut trees, grow crops, or graze cattle in ways harmful
to the earth merely to survive from one day to the next". (4)
The current sustainable development policy 'package', as discussed in
fora such as the CSD and IUCN/IIED, is based on pursuing objectives
which integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order
to:
- avoid and repair environmental damage;
- promote economic development; and
- reduce poverty and inequity at national and global level.
These aims are summarised in Table 1.la. The table indicates the
complex interlinkages between problems and policy responses. Two
further factors are noted:
- the bulk of national and international policy making, outside the
environmental sphere, aims to promote, not contain, economic growth;
- key 'megatrends' in global society such as technological advance and
the spread of Western consumer culture, profoundly affect (both
positively and negatively) the nature and extent of population and
economic growth, consequent environmental impacts and the options
available to tackle them. Yet they remain largely beyond the reach (or
consideration) of current policy making in any government department.
3.2 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION: DRAWING
PRELIMINARY BOUNDARIES
A sustainable world may be defined as one in which human activities do
not undermine the long term productivity of natural systems. It is
generally accepted that some loss of natural capital (resources and
environmental services) can be sustainably substituted by human made
capital (knowledge, technology). It is also widely, though not
universally, accepted that some natural resources and services cannot
be wholly substituted: topsoil, fresh water, operation of the major
nutrient cycles.
Consumption and production is the essence of economic activity; it
involves the utilisation of natural resources, their transformation
into products and services and their ultimate disposal or dissipation
into the environment as wastes. Traditionally, as economies expand,
overall levels of resource use and waste generation rise.
Sustainable consumpbon, as an issue in the 1970s, centred around the
belief that economic growth was inherently limited by the finite
nature of fossil fuel energy, minerals and other non-renewable
resources. This 'no-growth' position has since been largely
discredited on the grounds that it failed to give due weight to the
ability of markets to stimulate technological substitutes as
scarcities emerge.
Concern has now shifted to other potentially limiting factors,
notably:
- the degradation of renewable resources, particularly agricultural
land;
- the accelerating rate of species loss;
- the accumulation of emissions and wastes in the environment whose
effects, particularly in combination, represent a largely unknown risk
(eg toxification, climate change).
Much research and policy thinking on sustainable consumption and
production therefore centres on utilising renewable (and
non-renewable) resources more efficiently and developing 'closed loop'
production/consumption systems which prevent the escape of wastes into
the environment. Efficiency and closed loop systems play a key role in
some of the concepts reviewed in this paper.
This essentially environmental perspective has been supplemented by
concerns over the inequitable social consequences of modern industrial
consumption and production patterns and the desire for a fundamental
change in the value systems which underlie 'Western' consumer culture.
These concerns have been promoted largely by the development community
and environmental pressure groups respectively.
As the ecological, social and ethical elements of the sustainability
debate have developed, certain assumptions about what constitutes
sustainable development, or the conditions obtaining in a sustainable
world, have emerged in recent years. Some of these assumptions now
exert a pervasive influence in many discussions about sustainable
consumption and production and they are evident in a number of the
concepts discussed in this paper. Assumptions include the following:
1) A sustainable world is a world in a state of, or approaching,
equilibrium. Many of the concepts examined in this paper favour the
pursuit of equilibrium, either literally (achieving the technical
state of dynamic equilibrium between natural and economic systems) or,
more figuratively, through 'restoring lost balance'. The support of
some NGOs, in particular, for achieving sustainable, equilibrium
levels of consumption appears to be based partly on the perceived
attractions of slowing the pace of change and living a simpler life.
2) A sustainable world is likely to involve reduced levels of
production and consumption in the industrialised world. The change is
seen variously as requiring an absolute reduction in resource use and
a return to simpler lifestyles (deep ecology), a maintenance of
present standards of living, achieved through greatly increased energy
and materials efficiency (eco-efficiency), and/or a rethinking of the
notion of 'quality of life' to emphasise less materialistic goals.
3) A sustainable world will be a more equitable world. Present
inequities are not only unjust and morally offensive, they are
unsustainable because continued poverty will lead to ecological
catastrophe, social unrest and the loss of the resource base and
export markets on which the comfortable North depends (5). An allied
assumption is that reduced consumpbon in the North will lead to
increased development in the South.
These assumptions are especially strong in much NGO thinking on
sustainable consumpbon and can also be detected in recent statements
arising out of international government/NGO meetings (see Box l.2a).
Achieving more sustainable levels and/or patterns of consumption and
production is clearly a vital component of the broader sustainable
development agenda. However, if sustainable consumpbon and production
is to be successfully pursued as a distinct policy area, it would seem
necessary to draw clear boundaries around the subject, in order to
clarify objectives and develop appropriate policy tools.
This paper takes the position that sustainable consumption should be
approached from the ecological perspective; issues and assumptions
about levels and patterns of energy use, material throughput and use
of available land area should be central to the sustainable consumpbon
debate. The policy focus should be to minimise the risk of
irretrievable damage to the earth's life-support functions. This
approach is in line with the environmental policy perspective of the
OECD's work programme and is pragmatic in that 'sustainability' as a
policy issue is still largely the province of environmental agencies.
There are additional reasons for taking this position:
- The goal of biophysical equilibrium (assumption 1) is problematic
from a governmental point of view. Equilibrium states can never be
defined (or agreed) and are too long-term for practical policy making.
In addition, economic and ecological systems are so complex that it is
hardly sensible to imagine they can be controlled by human
institutions.
- The equation of sustainability and equity (assumption 3) is
logically dubious. An equitable world is desirable for its own sake.
It is likely that a sustainable world cannot be achieved without a
greater degree of equity. But a more equitable world would not
necessarily be more sustainable. Therefore, it seems important to draw
a distinction between the distributional consequences (equity) of
policies for more sustainable consumpbon, which must be taken into
account, and the pursuit of equity as a key objective and necessary
condition of these policies.
The analysis presented in Section 2 will demonstrate that the essence
of all the concepts under review, in their relation to sustainable
consumpbon, may be crudely summarised as "do more with less". The
principal task is seen as being the reduction of quantitative levels
of energy and material consumption in rich countries and the richer
sections of developing nations.
From this perspective, the paper explores what the concepts have to
offer in terms of visions, policy starting points and practical tools
for implementation. The next step, to be undertaken in later stages of
the OECD work programme, will be to address the policy questions:
- what specifically are the objectives of sustainable consumption
policies ?
- what mechanisms can best encourage various forms of "doing more with
less" ?
- who are likely to be the winners and losers in the process ?
- how can he pain and disruption of change best be mitigated ?
Box 1.2a: Sustainable Consumption:
the expanding policy agenda
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agenda 21 did not define sustainable consumption patterns but clearly
indicated the need to focus policy attention on "the demand for
natural resources ... and ... the efficient use of those resources
consistent with the goal of minimizing depletion and reducing
pollution." The Rio process discussed two key driving forces of
unsustainability: population growth,. occurring mainly in developing
countries, and "overconsumption" on the part of the industrialized
world. Agenda 21 established all countries' common responsibility for
sustainability but pointed out that responsibilities were
differentiated. The rich world was given lead responsibility for
examining its own levels of consumption. The issue of global inequity
was introduced by Agenda 21's statement that "Measures to be
undertaken at the international level for the protection and
enhancement of the environment must take fully into account the
current imbalances in the global patterns of consumption and
production". (Emphasis added). Thus, a link between unsustainable
consumption patterns and current inequities in global resource use and
pollution was established.
The first Oslo Symposium on Sustainable Consumption restated the
biological basis of consumption patterns: "Current material flows
induce pollution, resource depletion, energy consumption and
biodiversity and landscape destruction [which] appear unsustainable by
any standard". However, the working definition of sustainable
consumption proposed at the Symposium also emphasized inter-
generational equity and introduced the notion of quality of life,
presumably as a pragmatic response to the infeasibility of policy
measures which might appear to threaten western consumers with a
reduced standard of living: "[Sustainable consumption is] the use of
services and related products which respond to basic needs and bring a
better quality of life while minimizing the use of natural resources
and toxic materials as well as the emissions of waste and pollutants
over the life cycle of the service of product so as not to jeopardize
the needs of future generations". (6) (Emphasis added)
The burgeoning policy agenda was confirmed at the second Oslo meeting
where the key working document stated that "sustainable consumption is
an umbrella term, that brings together a number of key issues, such as
meeting needs, enhancing the quality of life, improving resource
efficiency, minimizing waste, taking a life cycle perspective and
taking into account the equity dimension. Integrating these component
parts is the central question of how to provide the same or better
services to meet the basic requirements of life and the aspirations
for improvement for both current and future generations:. (7)
(Emphasis added).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
4 ANALYSIS OF THE KEY CONCEPTS
This section of the report describes the key characteristics of each
of the concepts under review and provides a summary analysis in
tabular format. The concepts are then briefly evaluated from the
perspective of their potential utility to policy makers. Possibilities
for more specific application in policy making are assessed in Section
3.
4.1 CARRYING CAPACITY
Biologists define carrying capacity as the maximum population of a
given species that can be supported indefinitely by a defined habit.
It has traditionally been used as a measure in the management of
wildlife, game or agricultural livestock. The notion of limits is
fundamental to carrying capacity: when the maximum population level is
exceeded, the resource base declines and - at some later date - so
will the population.
The human "population explosion" of the last two centuries, and the
concurrent growth in industrial output, has not led to consensus
regarding human pressure on the earth's carrying capacity: the earth
is an undefined habitat and its capacity to support human numbers at a
global level is unknown. Pessimists, from Thomas Malthus to Paul
Ehrlich, have argued that unchecked population growth will overwhelm
the earth's life support functions, leading to environmental, social
and economic disaster. Optimists, such as Julian Simon, and many
mainstream economists, believe that technological progress and human
ingenuity will always overcome biological 'limits'.
A fundamental problem is presented by the uncertainties surrounding
the carrying capacity of ecosystems, even at national or regional
level; we do not understand the operation of complex, non-linear
systems and we cannot measure or predict the point at which population
overload (in the sense of significant failure of biological
life-support functions) might occur.
Opposing interpretations of carrying capacity in relation to human
activities have led to four essentially different approaches to
sustainable development and environmental policy making:
- the notion of limits is irrelevant: continued economic growth under
free market conditions, technological innovation and human ingenuity
will be capable of overcoming all problems relating to resource
scarcity or pollution;
- there are economic, environmental and social benefits to cleaner and
more efficient use of resources, but reference to limits and targets
is not necessary;
- economic development should be based on the concept of maintenance
of stocks whereby the total capital base of our economy
(environmental, physical and human) is preserved by substitution
between different forms of capital is possible ('weak
sustainability');
- in addition to maintaining the overall capital base, economic
development should preserve substantial parts of environmental capital
intact; such capital should be regarded as 'critical' and non-
substitutable ('strong sustainability').
Table 2.1a Carrying Capacity
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic Comment
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Intellectual The intellectual heritage of the idea as
Origins applied to human beings on the earth can be
traced from the Ancient Greeks and the Bible.
The modern argument centres on the dilemma of
satisfying the objectives of eco-system
preservation and economic growth (especially in
developing countries), given current
projections of population growth and
energy/material intensive
production/consumption patterns (8).
Key Factors Carrying capacity is a quantitative concept:
key factors include population numbers and
density, affluence and technology
(Impact = Population x Affluence x Technology).
Concerns focus on depletion rates of renewable
and non-renewable resources and the build-up of
hazardous wastes in the environment. The point
at which depletion or waste accumulation might
provoke catastrophic break-down in any of the
earth's like supporting functions remains largely
unknown.
Underlying Natural ecosystems and human economic systems
Assumptions are inextricably linked and neither can be
understood in isolation from the other.
There exist definable, though often undefined,
limits to the capacity of natural ecosystems
to support continued economic growth, which
increases human "load" on the earth. Load is a
function of population numbers and per capita
consumption levels; it embraces both resource
consumption and pollution.
Linkage with A belief in limits to growth has been the
Sustainable driving force behind the development of
environmental economics, pioneered by
economists such as Boulding, Daly, Pearce,
Repetto, El Serafy and Maler. Recent years
have seen a major research effort to develop
more systemic (bolistic) models which can
identify and measure the relationships between
the natural environment and the economy. Key
objectives of environmental economics include:
- development replaces growth as primary
economic goal;
- natural capital and ecosystem services valued
and incorporated into economic accounting;
- adjustment of current future discounting
techniques;
- adjustment of national performance measure
(GDP) to account for resource depletion and
pollution;
- use of integrated ecological/economic models
to predict effects of human behaviour;
- use of marked based incentives to internalise
environmental costs.
The work of environmental economists has been
important in translating the largely
unquantified concept of limits into techniques
available to governments and enterprise.
Formidable methodological problems and
disagreements remain, for example over
valuation techniques and substitutability
between stocks.
Measures/ The basic measure of carrying capacity is
Indicators population numbers per unit area. In
ecological growth models, carrying capacity is
a constant that expresses the environmental
limit by which a population is constrained.
In complex eco-systems, this measure involves
complicated inter-relationships between
mutually dependent species. A common criticism
of carrying capacity as applied to humans, is
that it fails to take account of the different
resource requirements of humans at different
levels of economic development or of human
capacity to 'expand' carrying capacity through
technology. (See Ecospace and Ecological
Footprints for conflicting ideas on this
point).
Economic The concept of carrying capacity does not make
Implications recommendations or imply specific changes in
(e.g.wealth, production and consumption patterns. Is guiding
production/ principle is that we operate 'within the earth's
consumption limits'. Determining limits, and means of
patterns, staying within them, is left to the political
competitiveness, process.
employment)
Trade and Some environmental economists argue that
Development international trade is an inefficient means of
exploiting the earth's productive capacity and
the quest for export led growth (or the need to
earn foreign currency to service debt
requirements) often ;leads to, for example,
environmentally damaging agricultural
practices, inappropriate industrial development
and high energy use and pollution associate
with transportation.
Technology No specific recommendations.
Appropriate Scale Carrying capacity is most easily
of Action operationalised at local level, where
'critical loads' can be determined for
specified environments, for example acid
deposition levels that can be tolerated by
individual heathers. Critical loads are thus
determined by science and value judgements
about what should be protected. The
international nature of threats such as climate
change has stimulated efforts to agree (nominal)
global critical loads for e.g. emissions of C02
and ozone deleting substances.
Proposed Policy Carrying capacity, the most purely scientific of
Approaches the concepts under discussion, offers the least
guidance on 'what we should do'. It is a
concept without a firm political or moral
context. Carrying capacity as a metaphor for
limits and thresholds of change has nonetheless
exerted a strong influence on policy makers,
stimulating the use of risk assessment and the
precautionary principle, action on substance
controls and interest in clean technology and
financial instruments. Scepticism over the
reality of limits, however, has tended to
undermine implementation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
4.1.1 The Scope for Government Action
Carrying capacity is undoubtedly the most influential of the concepts
under discussion in environmental policy development. First
generation environmental laws (substance bans and process controls to
protect human health), land use planning (to protect valued habitats
and scenery), performance standards and ambient quality objectives are
all based, however vaguely, on the notion that out social and economic
activities must be controlled in the interests of health, safety and
quality of life.
National policy objectives based on stricter calculations of critical
loads are rate; a notable exception being the environmental targets
established in the National Environmental Policy Plan of the
Netherlands. The report "Concern for Tomorrow" (RIVM, 1988) set out
environmental quality objectives for the Netherlands, based on
critical load analysis, and estimated the load reduction (expressed as
percentages of polluting emissions) necessary to achieve them.
Despite this scientific origin, the 'sustainable level' of pollution,
i.e. the Netherlands' carrying capacity for economic activity, was
ultimately determined through the political process. Environmental
quality and pollution reduction targets were agreed only after intense
political negotiation and calculation of the likely impact of
environmental policies on economic performance (the environmental
goals of the NEPP are intended to be achieved in the context of a
doubling of GNP).
Another significant development of recent years has been the signing
of International Agreements which recognise limits to global carrying
capacity for key pollutants. (These limits are not absolute but
represent thresholds beyond which current human activities would
probably be severely disrupted). For example, the Montreal Protocol
(most recently amended in 1992) aims to eliminate emissions of most
ozone-depleting substances - the 'sustainable level' of emissions is
not known and carrying capacity has effectively been agreed to be
zero. The Climate Change Convention (1992) commits signatory countries
to stabilise their emissions of CO2 at 1990 levels; again sustainable
emission limits are not known but stabilisation would represent an
important first step.
A key lesson of these agreements appears to be that precise knowledge
of carrying capacity is less important than the perceived need for
action and the ability to agree on goals that can demonstrate progress
in the right direction. As scientific understanding and technical
possibilities advance, these political agreements on carrying capacity
will be continually redefined.
4.2 THE STEADY STATE ECONOMY
The concept of the steady state economy (SSE) was developed as a
paradigm of sustainable development by Herman Daly (see BOX 2.2a). The
SSE is defined by four characteristics:
- a constant population of human bodies;
- a constant population or stock of artifacts (exosomatic capital or
extensions of human bodies);
- the levels at which the two populations are held constant are
sufficient for a good life and sustainable for a long future;
- the rate of throughput of matter-energy by which the two stocks are
maintained is reduced to the lowest feasible level. For the
population, this means that birth rates are equal to death rates at
low levels so that life expectancy is high. For artifacts, it means
that production equals deprecation at low levels so that artifacts are
long lasting, and depletion and pollution are kept low.
The SSE assumes that the stock of humans and artifacts remains
constant while the elements of 'cultural capital' - information.
wisdom, distribution of wealth and income, product mix etc - can
change.
More recently, Daly has introduced the metaphor of the 'Plimsoll Line'
for the environment. Samuel Plimsoll was a British Member of
Parliament who, in 1875, proposed that a line be painted on the hulls
of ships, indicating the depth to which they could safely be loaded.
An environmental Plimsoll line would therefore indicate the 'level' to
which the environment can be burdened by economic activity without
unacceptable consequences. The level of the mark is an overall
constraint within which different economic activities (equivalent to
different elements of ship's cargo) can be increased, decreased or
moved around. A steady state economy should operate at, or below, the
Plimsoll line.
Table 2.2a The Steady State Economy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic Comment
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intellectual The concept as applied to sustainable development owes most
Origin to the American environmental economist Herman Daly who set
out his ideas in 1977 in "Steady State Economics" (9). He
notes that the concept is not new (citing John Stuart Mill's
chapter in "Principles of Political Economy") and reminds us
that the notion of growth as the norm is relatively new in
Western thinking.
Key Factors Daly's work rests on the premise that the human made economy
is "an open sub-system of the earth ecosystem, which is
finite, non-growing and materially closed". As the economy
grows, it incorporates an increasing proportion of the total
ecosystem; it must reach a limit at 100% if not before.
Sustainable economic growth is therefore, in Daly's view,
"an impossibility theorem".
A distinction between economic growth, conceived and
measured in quantitative terms, and economic development,
conceived in qualitative terms and measured in terms of
efficiency ratios.
Underlying The steady state economy is a non-growth economy in bio-
Assumptions physical equilibrium with natural systems. A dynamic
element is allowed for in terms of human culture but the
objective of cultural dynamism is to maintain ecological
equilibrium.
The steady state economy is achievable only through "moral
growth" of human society, in which consensus on "objective
values" takes precedence over technical determinism and
enables society consciously to choose a new direction.
Linkage with Ecological viability: The steady state economy depends on
Sustainable the adoption of socio-economic behaviour patterns where
Development a) stocks are satisficed or maintained at a level sufficient
for an abundant life for the present generation and
ecologically sustainable for a long (but not indefinite)
future; b) service is maximised, given the constant stock;
and c) throughput is minimised. The overall goal is
sustainable equilibrium between economic and natural systems
within the earth's carrying capacity.
Equity: Daly summarises the right rules of action as that
which pursues a sufficient per capita income for the
greatest number of people over time: "the basic needs of all
present people take priority over future numbers, but the
existence of more future people takes priority over the
trivial wants of the present". Daly notes the difficulty of
defining "sufficient" (though not "trivial").
Quality of life: Daly assumes that beyond some level of
sufficiency, further increase in per capita goods does not
increase quality of life and may diminish it. Despite the
social and economic control required in the SSE, the point
is made that freedom is to some extent a function of slack,
or the distance between maximum carrying capacity and actual
load. A system operating at its carrying capacity has no
room for error or the freedom that permits error.
Measures/ Key macro-level measures identified in "Steady State
Indicators Economics" are:
- service efficiency, measured in terms of allocative
efficiency ("does the stock consist of artifacts that
people most want to use and are they allocated to the most
important uses?") and distributive efficiency ("is the
distribution of the stock among alternative people such
that the trivial wants of some people do not take
precedence over the basic needs of others?")
- maintenance efficiency, measured in terms of durability
(lifetime of an individual artifact) and replaceability
(how easily can the artifact be replaced ?).
Economic Impli- The concept of SSE is independent of GDP. Alternative
cations (e.g. social accounts proposed are to measure the value of service
wealth, (benefit) and the value of throughput (cost). Economic
production/ development is defined in terms of an increase in efficiency
consumption ratios, with stock constant, or as an increase in service,
patterns, with throughput constant. Daly argues that the likely
competitive- market effects of minimum and maximum income levels, maximum
ness, wealth limits and resource depletion quotas (see "Proposed
employment) Policy Approaches" later in this table) would be the
legitimation of private property and the free market and the
removal of incentives for monopolistic behaviour by
enterprise, for unionised labour and for distorting
subsidies by government. His exposition is too detailed to
be adequately summarised in this paper.
Trade and Resource depletion quotas are also proposed for imported
Development raw materials (but not finished goods), enabling control
over the 'footprint' effect (see Section 2.4). Raw material
exporting countries would suffer from reduced export
opportunities but are expected to benefit from long-term
enforced improvement in the management of their own
resources. Population control and environmental protection
policies are foreseen as possible preconditions for
membership of new free-trade blocs.
Technology A fixed rate of resource depletion (achieved via quotas) is
expected to focus technology development on solar energy and
renewables.
Appropriate National, to be followed by internationally coordinated
Scale of action.
Action
Proposed Policy Daly proposed a centralised 'Distribution Institution' to:
Approaches
- set upper limits to wealth and income and minimum limits
to income (though not to wealth);
- allocate transferable birth licences to achieve population
stability (an idea first proposed by Kenneth Boulding in
1964);
- establish depletion quotas to control resource use.
The allocation of depletion quotas and distribution of
income within upper and lower limits would be governed by the
market. Distribution of birth licences to be on the basis
of equity (one person, one licence) but reallocation via
market exchange would be allowed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.2.l The Scope for Government Action
The steady state economy is proposed as an alternative to the conventional
growth-oriented economic model in which exchange value, abstracted from
physical energy and material flows, circulates between firms and households in
a closed loop. It is a non-growth economy, maintained at some desired,
sufficient level by low rates of maintenance throughput. The concept is
intended to reshape our notions of economic growth and, more fundamentally, of
what constitutes human progress.
The steady state economy presents a moral and intellectual framework - a new
paradigm which will attract the interest of policy makers to the extent that
it reflects their own beliefs, values and preferences. The concept's value
lies in its possible influence on decision makers at a personal, ethical
level. It is clearly not capable of direct translation into policy in any
conceivable near term political economy. In particular, achieving and
maintaining the steady state economy would require an improbably high level of
centralised and consistent control. Apart from the implications for civil
liberties, it seems likely that economic and ecological systems are too
complex to be managed in this way by human institutions.
However, a key element of the concept is that the final benefit of all
economic activity is service ie "the satisfaction experienced when wants are
satisfied". This is the essence of the 'end-user approach' which seeks to
identify and meet consumer demands through providing more sustainable goods
and services. This issue is discussed in more detail in Section 2.6.2: The
Utilisation-Focused Economy.
4.3 ENVIRONMENTAL UTILISATION SPACE (ECOSPACE)
Environmental utilisation involves the use of resources from and discharge of
wastes into the environment. The environment responds by regenerating
(renewable) resources and absorbing wastes: this capacity is the available
'space', the boundaries of which are determined by the patterns and levels of
economic activity (utilisation). As environmental degradation increases,
reducing regenerative and absorptive capacity, the environmental utilisation
space decreases.
Environmental utilisation space (also known as EUS or ecospace) is described
by Hans Opschoor, one of the foremost thinkers on the subject, as a metaphor
to capture the notion of limits and the need for redistribution of access to
resources. Academic researchers and NGOs have developed the concept very much
with a view to developing thinking on sustainable consumption. A key objective
in the development of ecospace has been to extend the notion of carrying
capacity by using human economic activities (not population) as the measure of
critical loads and, particularly, by linking regenerative and waste absorptive
processes to one another in order to demonstrate environmental/economic
interlinkages.
Environmental utilisation space refines the concept of carrying capacity in
other respects:
- It is a dynamic concept; societies can exist at different intensities of
environmental utilisation. They can live beyond their ecospace by accepting
environmental degradation (but this will reduce the ecospace available to
future generations unless the damage can be repaired), and they can expand
their ecospace through efficient technologies and restructured
production/consumption patterns.
- It is not purely science based. The concept favours 'strong' sustainability
(preservation of renewable stocks at levels sufficient to sustain income;
quality of regenerative systems maintained at beyond minimum safe standards).
However, it accepts that societies must determine their own feasible level of
environmental utilisation which, while it must not undermine life support
functions, may be less than optimal environmentally (eg acceptance of some
species loss).
- It relates environmental limits to the energy and material demands of
economic processes (who needs, produces and consumes what). The limits can be
effectively expanded where new technologies/behaviour Patterns enable more
economic value or utility to be derived from given environmental inputs with
less pollution and waste. The implication is that economic rowth per se is no
constrained by national or global ecospace.
Table 2.3a Environmental Utilisation Space (Ecospace)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic Comment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intellectual The term EUS was first used by Horst Siebert in 1982 (10).
Origin The concept has been applied to sustainable development and
developed in some detail by Opschoor et al (11), with
particular emphasis on understanding the dynamic interaction
between physical limits and human demands on the
environment. The ecospace concept has been adopted with
enthusiasm by NGOs, notably Friends of the Earth, who see
it as a basis for achieving more equitable distribution of
access to global environmental services (use of resources
and the 'right to pollute').
Key Factors Quantitative limits (carrying capacity and critical loads)
set on the basis of scientific analysis and political
evaluation of the risks associated with exceeding such
limits. Some analysts add a distributional element, and try
to allocate established ecospace at a national, regional or
per capita level (global 'fair shares').
Underlying A complete picture of limits to growth can never be known
Assumptions and, in any case, limits will be subject to constant change.
Determining ecospace and related policy objectives, will be
a continuous, political process.
Greater global equity is necessary for sustainability. The
current example set by the affluent North creates an
irresistible political/social demand in developing countries
to achieve, not simply an equivalent level of comfort, but
the same lifestyle.
Linkage with EUS is defined by the interaction of environmental services
Sustainable (sources and sinks) and human activities; unlike carrying
Development capacity, it has no meaning as a purely biophysical concept.
The concept therefore leads itself to development as a
politically pragmatic tool for thinking about sustainable
development.
Ecospace highlights the interlinkages between human demands
and impacts on environmental services. For example,
industrial pollution of the North Sea affects the fertility
of fish, therefore fishing quotas need to take account of
industrial activity. Trade-offs between environmental costs
and economic benefits are thus made more explicit.
On the issue of equity, ecospace provides a rationale for
dividing (hypothetical) rights to consume and pollute.
Division on a per capita basis is not assumed to be a wholly
workable goal but it provides (a) a yardstick for broad
assessment of current inequities and (b) a starting point
for allocation of rights in any future extension of
marketable rights (e.g. tradeable permits) to global
commons.
Measures/ Measures of environmental utilisation space must somehow
Indicators incorporate its dynamic element - the fact that human
demands and impacts on the environment change over time. A
measure suggested by Musters et al (12) is that of
'functional unit' which measures the size of a resource,
modified according to the (competing) demands made on it and
the quality required accordingly. Environmental performance
indicators based on EUS are under development (13).
Friends of the Earth Europe chose to calculate Europe's EUS
not according to resource availability but on the basis of
environmental impacts of resource use. They propose a set
of indicators based on key resource input levels (which take
account of both resource depletion and pollution levels).
Economic Impli- Opschoor proposes a flexible ecospace, determined by science
cations (e.g. and value judgements, which allows for economic growth
wealth, subject to a precautionary approach to environmental
production/ exploitation. Friends of the Earth interpret ecospace as a
consumption more physical ceiling to economic growth and suggest a
patterns, non-growth economy managed within defined matter-energy
competitive- throughput limits. Certain sectors of the economy may
ness, continue to grow if others shrink correspondingly. However,
employment) FoE emphasise the potential for maintaining comfortable
lifestyles within these limits. Alongside technological
change (see below) FoE propose a 'new model of wealth' that
redefines well-being in less product and service oriented
ways.
FoE see wealth distribution is a critical factor; the North
must accept a much reduced ecospace in order that the South
can achieve acceptable standards of socio-economic
development. FoE propose the overall consumption levels in
the presently industrialised world should be reduced by a
factor of 10. (See also Table 2.6a and endnote 35).
Trade and The ecospace concept presents no serious objections to
Development international trade in principle. Global 'fair shares'
implies that more ecospace (resource and sink capacity) will
be made available for use in developing countries, rather
than being exported to the rich North.
Technology Technology is key to allowing continued economic growth
(Opschoor) by expanding the available ecopace. It is also
critical in FoE's scenario of a sustainable Europe:
increased resource efficiency, reduced material input,
optimised products, new eco-efficient services are proposed
in order to achieve their target input reductions.
Appropriate The appropriate scale is largely a function of time.
Scale of Global calculations of ecospace and agreement on global
Action fair shares would be a continuing process into the
foreseeable future. The concept arguably could have more
immediate application at regional or local level. The
global equity element might be downplayed but national
calculations of ecospace could provide useful guidance in
deciding between development options (for example, more
energy consumption v more land lost).
Proposed Policy An explicit attempt to build a policy approach around
Approaches ecospace has been made by Friends of the Earth (FoE), in
their scenarios for a 'sustainable Netherlands' (14) and
'sustainable Europe' (15). FoE calculated the ecospace of
the Netherlands and of Europe by estimating global or
continental environmental resources and services and
'sharing' them globally on an equal per capita basis. If
calculated national ecospace is regarded as a national
'budget', the political process then becomes one of
determining 'how much the nation can spend' and policy
objectives should be framed in terms of inputs.
This approach represents a departure from traditional
environmental policy which tends to focus on outputs, i.e.
pollution levels. The FoE studies suggested input reduction
targets for energy ad key raw materials. Input targets, FoE
argue, offer the possibility of controlling resource use,
limiting pollution and stimulating efficiency. They also
provide a measure of the 'sustainability gap', i.e. the
difference between our present input (consumption) levels
and sustainable levels.
FoE regards ecological tax reform as crucial. Tradeable
permits are viewed by both Opschoor and FoE as a key
mechanism for making input targets and quotas operational.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.3.1 The Scope for Government Action
Environmental utilisation space has generated intense interest among NGOs; 29
national Friends of the Earth organisations are participating in a joint
programme to develop concrete proposals for sustainability based on the
concept. Interest at government level appears to be largely confined to the
Netherlands, encouraged perhaps by the country's highly visible environmental
pressures, the intellectual framework of the NEPP, and a cultural tradition of
shared responsibility.
Ecospace, as defined by Opschoor, offers an ethical point of departure and a
framework for policy making, which explicitly addresses the need for
scientific measurement, subjective judgements on risk and uncertainty and
political dialogue on 'fair shares'. Risk assessment is envisaged as playing a
major role in decisions on how much ecospace to utilise. Since attitudes to
risk become more stringent with increasing wealth, disputes between North and
South on the physical boundaries of development are to be expected. Opschoor
foresees a long political process in which risks and standards are constantly
redrawn, with a gradual convergence between countries (in the manner that
standards regarding social and labour conditions are still converging).
Critics of distributional interpretations of ecospace argue that the
calculation of global 'fair shares' is an unnecessary complication.
International agreements on distributional issues are negotiated in a complex
web of political and economic clout, existing rights of use (grandfathering)
and current understanding of technical feasibility, costs and perceived risks.
However, it is fair to say that current international debate regarding, for
example, national 'rights' to emit carbon dioxide or to use the genetic
resources of tropical rainforests, represent precisely the blend of science
and political negotiation described above.
A disadvantage of ecospace, especially as espoused by FoE, is that 'living
within the ecospace' has overtones of rationing; a difficult message to sell
where most consumers/producers do not recognise resource scarcity (eg oil)
and/or the link between consumption and ecological damage is not immediately
apparent (e.g. species loss).
4.4 ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINTS AND ECOLOGICAL Rucksacks
The concepts of ecological footprints and ecological rucksacks have been
developed in an attempt to estimate the environmental capital requirements of
an economy, based on an interpretation of carrying capacity that takes into
account the impacts of technological advance and trade.
The concept of ecological footprints redefines carrying capacity as the area
of productive land and water required to support a defined economy or
population at a specified standard of living, wherever that land may be
located. In the context of industrialised economies, thriving on imported
energy, materials, food and animal feedstocks, a large part of their
ecological footprint is remote ie felt in other countries. As population
numbers, and/or standards of living in rich countries increase, the remote
land area required to support their economies rises. This phenomenon is
described as 'appropriated carrying capacity'.
Ecological rucksacks are concerned with the total weight of material flows
involved in the production of a particular good. Thus, the real ecological
weight of eg a motor car includes the weight of its constituent materials
(metals, glass, plastic etc) plus the weight of soil, rock and wastes removed
or created during the extraction and processing of those materials. The
materials extraction phase often occurs outside the consuming country;
ecological rucksacks, like footprints, are concerned with displaced
environmental impacts.
Urbanisation, technology and global trade have enabled rich communities to
expand far beyond their local carrying capacities. In a well-known study of
environmental footprints, Rees indicates that the Vancouver-Lower Fraser
Valley region of Canada 'appropriates' the ecological production (food,
timber, energy etc) of an area 22 times larger than the valley itself. At
national level, another study by the same author suggests that the people of
the Netherlands require a land area 14 times larger than their country to
support their current consumption levels of food, wood and energy (16).
Researchers working on environmental rucksacks at the Wuppertal Institute have
estimated that more than half the material flows induced by the German economy
occur outside the country's borders (17).
Some analysts argue that the industrial rise of developed countries was
achieved through exploitation of the natural resources in the developing world
and that this 'accumulated ecological footprint' amounts to an ecological debt
owed by the rich to the poor (18).
While the environmental footprint concept is principally concerned with the
psychological distancing and environmentally damaging effects of trade,
ecological rucksacks take a more technical standpoint, focusing on the need to
monitor and reduce the volume of material flows by means of eco-efficient
measures (particularly dematerialisation and materials reuse) and lifestyle
change.
Table 2.4a Ecological Footprints (EF) and Ecological Rucksacks (ER)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic Comment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intellectual The ecological footprint concept is most associated with
Origin work by William Rees of the University of British Columbia.
The ecological rucksacks idea has ben developed by
researchers at the Wuppertal Institute in Germany. Both
concepts' emphasis on fair distribution of production owe
something to the anti-trade and self-sufficiency ideals of
Distribution (19).
Key Factors Ecological footprints and rucksacks are measures of
consumption that reflect a population's level of affluence
and technological development. As wealth and consumption
power increase, the area of productive land (EF) and
throughput of material (ER) required to support every
individual rise.
Underlying Industrial economies currently survive through importing
Assumptions the 'surplus' carrying capacity of developing countries.
This pattern of consumption activity implies a) that
developing countries are restricted in their own development
(insufficient carrying capacity available) and b) that
developing countries' desire to emulate western living
standards cannot be fulfilled since there is insufficient
global carrying capacity: the Northern footprint already
covers the earth.
A key assumption in both concepts is that technology and
trade do not expand the earth's carrying capacity in the
long term, only displace the effects of increased
consumption levels.
Linkage with EF is essentially a static concept, seeking to stabilise net
Sustainable global consumption within total aggregate production
Development levels, calculated on the basis of current input-output
ratios. ER is more concerned with 'ecological
modernisation' to reduce material flows. EF goes beyond a
bio-physical rationale and emphasises the moral and ethical
consequences of conventional development patterns. By
focusing on the 'appropriation' of global carrying capacity
by the rich countries, the concept seeks to force rich
consumers to confront the distant economic, ecological and
social consequences of their consumption levels and to
highlight the need for international agreement on sharing
the earth's capacity more equally.
Measures/ The EF comprises a population's demand for domestic food,
Indicators forest products and fossil energy consumption, converted
into the required area of eco-productive (agricultural and
forested) land. Rees contrasts the global total of
eco-productive land available per capita (declining with
rising population from 5 to 1.7 ha between 1900 and 1990)
with the per capital land demand (appropriation) of rich
countries (rising from 1 to 4.6 ha over the same period).
The EF thus provides an area-based indicator of the physical
limits to material growth. The difference between global
per capita land available and a population's actual land
demand is that population's 'sustainability gap'.
A key indicator used in ER analysis is Total Material
Consumption (TMC) per capita (per capital material flows
caused by economic activities of a given region, within and
beyond that region). The ecological rucksack itself is
calculated with Material Input per Service (MIPS), an
indicator based on the (input) material flow related aspect
of sustainable development, modified by the number of
utilisations (services) provided. High longevity or reuse
thus reduces materials intensity.
Economic Impli- Rees argues that appropriation of carrying capacity
cations (e.g. is the root cause of extreme poverty, social instability and
wealth, environmental degradation in much of the developing world.
production/ Production of 'luxury' export crops in poorer countries
consumption encourages rural displacement, social dislocation,
patterns, urbanisation and unsustainable cultivation of marginal
competitive- lands. Ecological decline, desertification, deforestation
ness, and the poverty and public health problems of megacities in
employment) the developing world are seen as the result of exploitation
by the rich: "Colonial rule, with its direct appropriation
of extra-territorial carrying capacity may have ended, but
many of the same resource flows continue today in the form
of commercial trade". (20).
The assumption behind this argument is that shrinking the
North's ecological footprint would permit the developing
world to utilise its resources more efficiently, to the
benefit of local populations. The short to medium term
implications of dramatically falling Northern demand for
Southern products are not pursued. Arguments promoting
ecological rucksacks appear more concerned with reducing
resource inefficiencies and reorienting economic activity
to less material intensive ends.
Trade and Rees argues that the dependencies created by international
Development trade are likely to aggravate geopolitical tensions caused
by resource depletion and environmental degradation.
Existing trading relationships cannot be stable in an era of
global change. Where inter-dependency is likely to threaten
security, we should pursue 'bio-regionalism', a policy
comprising regional economic diversity, independence and
self-reliance. Trade should be restricted to the exchange
of true ecological surpluses.
Technology Technology is held to increase efficiency of resource use
but not carrying capacity. While increased efficiency
enables a defined environment to support either increased
population numbers or increased material standards of living
(but not both), total load still cannot exceed environmental
limits. Increased technological sophistication is therefore
not seen as a solution to appropriated carrying capacity.
Appropriate As an analytical tool EF can be used as a measure at
Scale of community, regional or national level, in order to estimate
Action imported carrying capacity and the gap between actual and
'sustainable' consumption levels, based on per capita land
demand and global per capita land available.
In practice, ER may provide a starting point for
international debate/negotiations relating to the
distribution of global resources (for example, joint
implementation agreements for C02 emission reductions are
based - loosely - on the idea of industrialised countries
paying for the right to use less developed countries' share
of the earth's capacity as a C02 sink).
Proposed Policy By implication, EF supports equity-oriented measures such
Approaches as debt relief, technology transfer and development rights.
It also implies the need for internalisation of
environmental costs in resource pricing. Policy approaches
to reducing/transforming trade flows are not proposed.
ER promotes 'ecological modernisation' to reduce inputs or
primary resources in industrialised economies. Strategies
include inceased efficiency, green design, increased use of
services, intensive recycling and price reform to raise the
price of raw materials.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.4.1 The Scope for Government Action
Like the steady state economy, the concept of ecological footprints provides a
strong moral context for the ecological limits to growth thesis. Where Daly is
concerned with the need for generalised 'moral growth' in society, Rees
focuses more specifically on the unjust distributional aspects of current
consumption patterns. EF runs counter to important current assumptions about
economic development, holding that free trade is, on balance, a 'bad' which
works against the interests of developing countries. The concept's moral force
also depends on acceptance of the idea that Northern markets are a
neo-colonial trap for Southern exporters; sustainable development through
environmentally responsible trade is not seen as a realistic option.
Given this starting point, implementation at government level is problematic.
There would seem to he two entry points for policy makers interested in the
concept:
- EF as an analytical tool to help assess, for example, the 'sustainability'
of trade in particular goods or services (especially imports of scarce
resources and exports of hazardous wastes). At a more strategic level, EF
analysis could, for example, highlight a country's dependence on ecologically
threatened imports (and consequent exposure to instability of supply).
- EF as an element in environmental foreign policy. The concept could
influence aid and trade agreements or help to inform future international
debates on eg tradeable permits or joint implementation schemes. The notion of
EF had some influence in the 'sustainable trade agreements' signed by the
Netherlands and a number of developing countries (21),
The ecological rucksack has also been developed as a means of highlighting and
quantifying 'unsustainable' levels of consumption by (largely) Northern
consumers. Like EF, the concept has potential as a moral framework for debate
and a possible analytical tool.
Two problems should be mentioned in relation to policy development and
implementation based on these concepts.
- Striking a balance between the current trend towards trade liberalisation
and restrictions aimed at more sustainable consumption patterns will be
immensely complex. The Uruguay round of the GATT negotiations tended towards
the removal of restrictions on 'unsustainable' trade in eg tropical timber.
GATT argued that environmentally motivated restrictions on trade could become
a protectionist device used by industrialised countries against each other
and, particularly, against developing nations. This argument is largely
supported by lower income countries who (perhaps ironically) are likely to
ally with their Northern trading partners to oppose sustainable consumption
policies which would affect current trade flows.
- The very basis of the notion of 'over-consumption' in developed countries
requires more careful analysis. It is rooted in some high visibility examples
of conspicuous consumption and Northern concern and guilt over the plight of
millions in the developing world. However:
- many quoted examples of Northern extravagance (for example, Canadian
energy consumption) have little direct link with environmental
degradation or social well-being in poorer countries;
- analysis of consumer expenditure in rich countries demonstrates that
the cost of meeting core needs (housing, food, health care, education
etc) has risen in real terms over recent decades. Rising income and
expenditure has thus become a necessity to meet these needs. Only the
top quintile of the US population, for example, appears to have scope
for reducing 'overconsumption' of non-essentials (22)
It may be argued that consumer behaviour relating to core need expenditure
such as food has become more environmentally damaging in some ways, for
example, more exotic foods are imported by air than was the case ten years
ago. However, this should not automatically be characterised as 'excessive' or
'luxury' consumption.
It follows that, for most of the population of rich countries, 'unsustainable
consumption patterns' are more a function of socio-economic structure (eg
property prices/distance between home and work/need for second car) and a
restricted choice of environmentally benign products than of the 'material
cravings...search for reward...self-elevation' attacked by many
environmentalists (23).
4.5 NATURAL RESOURCE ACCOUNTING
For nearly thirty years, countries have been calculating their national income
according to guidelines, issued by the United Nations Statistical Office in
1968, generally known as the System of National Accounts (SNA). Gross Domestic
Product (GDP), the measure of monetary transactions in an economy over a given
period, is usually regarded as the key aggregate and indicator of national
wealth for comparative Purposes.
Environmental economists have long believed that the UN guidelines suffer from
a number of critical shortcomings:
- they do not take account of the impacts of natural resource depletion and
environmental degradation on the economic wellbeing of the population or
future generations;
- they regard much and-pollution expenditure ('defensive expenditure') as
final consumption which counts towards national income;
- they regard natural resources as free goods;
- they fail to distinguish between value added by factors of production and
sale of natural assets.
In response to these perceived failures, new approaches to measuring and
valuing national performance and environmental quality have been actively
researched and developed in recent years. These approaches stress the
interlinkages between human activities and environmental outcomes, and attempt
to integrate economic, environmental and, sometimes, social considerations .
Natural resource accounts are seen as a means of demonstrating linkages
between the environment and the economy and for modifying national accounts to
overcome the weaknesses listed above. They are collections of environmental
and natural resource data in an accounting framework. Data are organised in
the form of stocks and flows, or as inputs and outputs in order to produce a
materials balance: for example, in their simplest form, a resource account for
a mineral deposit would include the stock (ie total reserves), at the
beginning and end of the year, and would account for changes during the year
due to resource extraction. new discoveries etc.
Green GDP/Welfare indices are being developed in response to the perceived
inadequacy of traditional GDP as a measure of national wealth or social
wellbeing and its distorting effect on our concept of progress. Key
alternative indices are described in Table 2.5a.
Indicators are parameters, or values derived from parameters, which provide
information about an issue/area with a significance that extends beyond the
properties directly associated with the parameter. They reduce the number of
measurements required to provide an 'exact' picture of a situation and
provide, instead, highly concentrated or aggregated information, the
significance of which can be readily grasped. Indicators therefore simplify
the process by which scientific/economic data is provided to decision makers
or the public. Environmental indicators have been developed by a number of
countries and organisations (notably the OECD, see Box 2.5a) with the aims of:
- reporting on environmental quality and trends;
- integrating environmental concerns in sectoral policies;
- measuring environmental performance at national and international level.
A key element to note in relation to natural resource accounting, 'green'
economic indices and indicators is their potential to reshape the assumptions
and objectives of economic behaviour. What we choose to measure largely shapes
what we strive to achieve. Thus, an economy that measured its performance on
the basis of the Human Development Index (HDI) would, in time, adopt a
different perception of what constitutes social and economic development. This
in turn would begin to affect investment priorities and lifestyle choices.
Table 2.5a Green Accounting/Green GDP
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic Comment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intellectual Pearce (24) traces efforts to take account of environmental
Origin issues in accounting system back to Nordhaus and Tobin
(1972) in the United States, who attempted to incorporate
environmental considerations into existing national accounts
(25), and the establishment of the Department of Natural
Resources by the Norwegian Government (1974) which developed
a separate physical accounting framework to track natural
and environmental resources.
Key Factors Green accounting systems are intended to provide a
consistent and comparable data set relating to the
availability and use of natural and environmental resources.
Such information enables policy makers to understand more
completely the implications of economic decision making for
the national wealth base.
Green GDP measures are a quantitative indicator of national
performance which attempt to incorporate qualitative
judgements as to what constitutes welfare.
Environmental indicators are intended to illustrate casual
relationships between economic activities, environmental
outcomes and change over time.
Underlying The failure of traditional accounting systems to reflect
Assumptions stress on the environment distorts decision making in
government and business and sends misleading signals to
actors about national 'growth' and 'welfare'. The dominance
of the standard GDP measure of economic growth undermines
all other efforts to shift towards more sustainable patterns
of production and consumption.
Linkage with Because of their potential for measuring 'total' national
Sustainable wealth (i.e. economic, social and environmental well-being),
Development natural resource accounts and green indicators have been
promoted as practicable measures for progress towards
sustainable development. For example, work in Canada is
currently underway to develop indicators to measure the
implementation of Agenda 21 in concrete terms (26).
Measures/ The UN Development Programme's Human Development Reports
Indicators explore the idea that there can be a substantial difference
between economic and human development. Since 1990, the
reports have presented a quality of life index as an
alternative and corrective to conventional macro-economic
indicators. The Human Development Index (HDI) establishes
minimum and maximum (expected) levels for average longevity,
education and standards of living and integrates these
measures as a national 'score' between 1 and 10. Its
principal application has been in developing countries,
though a number of OECD countries have been assessed and
received unexpectedly low international rankings.
The Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW)
is based, like GNP, on a measure of personal consumption in
the economy, but it takes into account a number of factors
left out, including spending to offset social and
environmental costs, longer term cost estimates of
environmental damage and the depreciation of natural
capital, net formation of man-made capital, changes in the
distribution of income and value for household labour. This
index is internationally applicable and has already been
applied by NGOs to a number of developed countries (for
example, a UK version of the ISEW (27) highlights the
difference between per capita GNP growth in the UK (2.3
times greater in 1990 than in 1950) and the ISEW (virtually
no growth over the same period).
The OECD has developed a core set of environmental
indicators within a 'Pressure-State-Response' (PSR)
framework. The PSR framework is based on the idea of
causality: human activities exert pressures on the
environment and change its state - the quality and the
quantity of natural resources. Society responds to these
changes through environmental, general economic and
sectoral policies which form a feedback loop to human
activities. Selected and/or aggregated indicators of
environmental pressures, conditions, and social responses
are currently being used by the OECD as the basis for a
series of Environmental Performance Reviews of OECD
countries.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.5.l The Scope for Government Action
There is a growing body of theory on natural resource accounting and a number
of experimental uses, particularly in developing countries. However, there is
widespread disagreement over the approaches that should be used.
Several projects sponsored by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the
World Bank have measured the value of natural resource depletion for resource
dependent countries including Indonesia and Costa Rica. The main methodology
used, that of Robert Repetto of the WRI, has been the subject of considerable
criticism particularly from Salah El Sarafy of the World Bank who has
advocated an alternative approach. The argument centres on the method used to
place a monetary value on the resources extracted.
The valuation problem is more pronounced for the development of natural
resource accounts in industrialised countries where the major environmental
problems are related to pollution rather than resource depletion. Generally,
there are no market prices for valuing these environmental losses and
considerable uncertainty over whether valuations using other methods such as
survey based techniques (eg willingness-to-pay) would be acceptable to
national accountants. Developments remain very much at the level of theory.
An alternative and less ambitious approach has involved the development of
natural resource accounts which have not tried to place monetary value on
changes in stocks and flows. The physical approach develops accounts for
natural and environmental resources in a separate physical accounting
framework. Non-monetarised natural resource accounts have been developed by
governments including Norway, France and Canada and have met with some success
as practical decision tools. For example, Norway uses a set of stock and flow
accounts for energy resources and associated air pollution in combination with
macro-economic models used for economic planning. These account-model
combinations are used in policy analysis, for example, providing pollution
forecasts associated with different levels of economic growth.
The Swedish Government has introduced the concept of "Environmental Debt" as a
means of accounting for environmental problems in economic policy m~g. The
environmental debt is defined as the cost of restoring environmental damage,
where it is capable of being restored; it represents the environmental and
economic burden passed from one generation to the next. In Sweden, the
environmental debt has been estimated at nearly $US40 billion. It is part of
the Swedish Government's economic policy that this debt must, at the least,
not increase.
Substantial problems still remain regarding the means for valuing natural
resource depletion and environmental damage. Until these difficulties,
relating to acceptability and robustness of results, plus high costs of data
collection, are resolved there is unlikely to be widespread acceptance of
natural resource accounting methodologies or major impacts on decision makers.
4.6 ECO-EFFICIENCY
One proposed working definition of eco-efficiency is "the delivery of
competitively priced goods and services that satisfy human needs and bring
quality of life, while progressively reducing ecological impacts and resource
intensity throughout the life cycle, to a level at least in line with the
Earth's estimated carrying capacity". (28) Eco-efficiency is primarily a
technical/managerial concept, concerned with maximising the productivity of
energy and material inputs in order to reduce resource consumption and
pollution/waste per unit output. Eco-efficiency appears to be interpreted at
two levels:
- As a management tool to achieve pollution prevention, waste minimisation
(the Total Environmental Quality Management agenda), and generate efficiency
improvements, cost savings and competitive advantage. These dual objectives
constitute the so-called 'win-win' development path. Proponents of this
position believe that economic output may rise on the basis of constant or
reduced resource inputs.
- As a means of achieving a more profound reorientation of the goals and
assumptions that drive corporate activities, leading to changes in business
culture, organisation and daily practices. This is the paradigm shift called
for by environmental economists and many NGOs, and which underlies many of the
concepts under review. Proponents of this position tend to believe that
economic output should be held constant or decreased and that resource input
levels should be dramatically reduced.
These interpretations are not mutually exclusive. The win-win development path
is championed by companies with active environmental programmes (for example
Dow Chemical and 3M) but is also supported by more radical reformers who see
this form of eco-efficiency as a stepping stone to a nongrowth, zero-emission
economy. Eco-efficiency embraces a number of 'subconcepts' or strategies which
propose complementary - and overlapping - routes to increased resource
productivity. They are listed in Box 2.6a.
Box 2.6a
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial ecology examines the material and energy flows through a facility
or organisation and its interactions with natural ecosystems and other
economic entities. The operational focus is on achieving 'closed loop
systems' in which wastes from one part of the industrial system are reused or
become raw materials for other parts.
Integrated Life-Cycle Management adopts a life cycle approach to products and
processes, attempting to minimise their environmental impacts at every stage
from "cradle to grave".
Reduced Energy Use is achieved through the use of less energy intensive
materials, efficient processes, integrated energy systems, etc.
Reduced Material Use (Dematerialisation) is achieved through miniaturisation,
lightweighting, use of recycled materials and components and extended product
life (via repair, component upgrade, reuse).
Green Design (Eco-design) adopts a life cycle approach to product design in
order to develop products which are (more) energy and material efficient in
manufacture and use, free of hazardous substances, durable, repairable,
recyclable and capable of safe final disposal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A major debate exists over whether eco-efficiency is enough to deliver genuine
progress towards sustainable production and consumption patterns. Optimists
cite the fact that technological advance and market forces have led to a
steady decline in the energy/GNP ratio in developed countries. Past experience
also indicates that industrialising countries are likely to stabilise at
'lower peaks' of energy demand than countries which industrialised earlier.
Greater efficiencies are possible and business is already pushing in the right
direction.
However, the task may be too great for technology and market forces to
achieve. Ayres (29) calculates that, given the projected global increase in
population and the increase in industrial GNP per capita required to alleviate
poverty and environmental degradation in the developing world, industrial load
per unit GDP will need to decrease by about 80 per cent by 2050 to achieve any
reduction on today's environmental burden. The ecospace calculations of FoE
Europe indicate that the EU countries should reduce their consumption of
energy and non-renewables by 80-90% over a similar period.
Table 2.6a Eco-Efficiency
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic Comment
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intellectual The term eco-efficiency was coined by the Business Council
Origin for Sustainable Development (BCSD) in "changing Course", its
report to the United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development in Rio (30). The concept has been embraced by
environmentalist groups who stress the ecological necessity
of reduced throughput more than the economic benefits of
efficiency.
Key Factors A quantitative approach using input-output measures to
determine the ecological efficiency of economic activities.
Stresses the output limitations to current
production/consumption patterns (the environment as a sink
for wastes) rather than resource scarcities.
Underlying Existing opportunities for energy and material efficiency
Assumptions gains are vast and should be exploited (31). They represent
the obvious 'first step' in moving towards sustainable
production and consumption patterns (though attitude and
behaviour changes will also be required).
There is an applied assumption in some expert analysis that
technical efficiency will automatically lead to reduced
consumption and waste. The opposite may be the case since
increased efficiency can reduce costs, encouraging expansion
of capacity and/or generation of additional income and
expenditure on more goods (the rebound effect). (32)
Linkage with Eco-efficiency offers one means of translating
Sustainable 'sustainability' goals into operational targets. For
Development example, the Dutch Advisory Council for Research on Nature
and the Environment (RMNO) has estimated key reductions in
resource use and polluting emissions required by 2040 if the
global economy is to stay within the earth's (currently
estimated) ecospace. (33) These reductions have been
estimated as equivalent to production efficiency
improvements of between five and fifty times, or an average
20-fold improvement on 1990 levels. (34)
Measures/ Global level eco-efficiency targets have been proposed, for
Indicators example by the "Factor 10 Club" (35) who suggest, over the
next 50 years, a 50% reduction in global flows of
non-renewable resources, achievable through a 10-fold
increase in average resource productivity of (presently)
industrialised countries.
A national measure of eco-efficiency exists: energy
intensity (energy consumption per unit GNP). Materials
intensity (and tracking) measures are highly recommended
(e.g. by Ayres) but current mass balance data are not
adequate for the purpose. Some progress is being made with
establishing eco-efficiency targets, measures and indicators
at organisation and plant level.
Economic Impli- Eco-efficiency, as promoted by its business advocates,
cations (e.g. offers the best chance of maintaining economic growth and
wealth, competitiveness while achieving improved environmental
production/ quality. Arguments include:
consumption
patterns, - pollution prevention can save money through avoiding waste
competitive- disposal costs and end-of-pipe remediation;
ness,
employment) - acting voluntarily can minimise future risks and possible
environmental liabilities;
- moving ahead of the field can bring competitive advantage;
- 'green' products can increase a company's consumer appeal
and open new markets;
- a 'green' image is good for corporate morale and
recruitment.
Many environmental economists argue that, despite
significant energy/waste efficiency improvements in recent
decades, agricultural, industrial and consumer activity is
still almost entirely dependent on fossil fuel consumption
and on dissipative use of toxic chemicals and heavy metals.
This pattern is clearly incompatible with long term
sustainability.
In addition, Ayres, for example, argues that a politically
feasible win-win development path would have to involve very
few or no losers and that each incremental socio-economic
change must leave every interested party better off - or at
least no worse off. To date, serious attempts to reverse
some of the 'wrong trends' (e.g. energy taxes) have been
resisted on the grounds that continued growth and prosperity
absolutely depend on the continuation of current patterns
of energy supply. His conclusion is that the win-win path
development trajectory (no pain) may not exist (36).
Trade and Achievement of eco-efficient economies in the North would
Development have major implications including:
- probable establishment of product criteria relating to
constituent materials and energy consumption in production
and use. These could constitute a trade barrier;
- stable or reduced level of demand in the North for
commodities and finished goods;
- an increase in the 'wealth gap' if significant economic
activity is transferred from processing/manufacture of
materials/products (exported from the South) to
recycling/repair of materials and products (within closed
loop Northern economies). Efficiency considerations are
likely to militate against repair/recycling of exported
products in their country of origin.
Technology Key elements in eco-efficient technologies include:
- energy and materials efficiency throughout process and
product life cycle. Encompasses reduced volume and
toxicity of materials, energy saving, product quality;
- shift from linear to circular production/consumption
systems (closing the loop);
- (longer-term) shift from fossil to renewable energy
technologies.
A recent major study (37) has concluded that we must
recognise limitations to even the most innovative
technologies. Improving eco-efficiency might not halt
degradation of some key renewable resources e.g. topsoil,
biodiversity, clean air and water (the non-substitutables);
and might exacerbate world-wide inequities and human
suffering (if the North maintains its economic and technical
dominance).
Appropriate Scale Indicators and macro-measures will be most useful at
of Action national and global level. Measurable actions are already
being started by national and local government, enterprise
and households (e.g. the Global Action Plan initiative).
Proposed Policy Approaches recommended include price reform (shifting tax
Approaches burden towards pollution and resource use; internalising
externalities), energy transition (fossil fuels to
renewables) demand side management (especially through
supply of function by services in place of products),
regulatory frameworks (e.g. extended producer
responsibility, recycling targets), efficiency standards,
accounting innovation (new measures of industry/national
performance) and information (technology sharing, product
labelling).
The technology forcing role of substance bans/phase-out
requirements should not be overlooked, though the
transition costs can be high (see Section 3.5.1. and note).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.6.1 The Scope for Government Action
The scale of efficiency improvements called for by eg Friends of the Earth and
the Factor 10 Club are unlikely to be willingly undertaken by most
governments. (Though Weizsacker (3ø points out that, for example, quadrupling
energy productivity could be achieved by a three per cent annual productivity
increase sustained over 45 years).
Politically, eco-efficiency has a number of shorter-term attractions. Clean
technology is regarded as a central plank in achieving the 'double dividend'
of economic growth and improved environmental performance '39'. The experience
of Germany and Japan is often quoted as evidence of the export earnings
potential when companies take a lead in developing clean technologies. Not
least, most policy makers are sensitive to the dangers of promoting
sustainable development as a social goal involving reduced levels of
consumption and, by implication, standards of living. Eco-efficiency, at least
in the short term, offers the possibility of pursuing environmental objectives
while maintaining or improving people's quality of life by delivering quality
products, improved services and a cleaner environment.
Government initiatives to improve energy and materials efficiency are numerous
(significant examples being the Swedish Ecocycle Bill, the German Closed Cycle
Economy Law, the Japanese Basic Environmental Plan and the Dutch energy
efficiency covenants with industry sectors). Many large companies have also
embarked on efficiency and waste reduction programmes (40).
It would seem that a firm basis exists for further development of the
ecoefficiency concept at policy and operational level.
Against this, clean technologies and technology transfer have been advocated
for many years by environment and development agencies, to relatively little
effect. Three decades of technical environmental policy have focused on
pollution abatement and clean up, where a market has been created by
legislative requirements. Policies aimed at fostering and diffusing
eco-efficient technologies are still relatively new. Policy makers have
addressed themselves to:
- identifying promising technologies (information exchange);
- stimulating appropriate R&D (subsidies, research grants);
- encouraging industry to implement change (environmental management
certification schemes, BAT requirements, tax incentives);
- encouraging public demand for change (eco-labelling, reporting requirements
on industry).
Government's ability to influence investment in new technologies must be
limited, given that state spending on R&D in the OECD countries represents
only about 5 % of the total. It may be the case that government efforts should
focus not on technologies themselves but on creating market conditions in
which investment in clean technologies is perceived as a requirement, rather
than an option, for competitive industrial performance.
4.6.2 The Utilisation-Focused Economy
A concept or strategy closely related to eco-efficiency, which appears to be
increasingly proposed at academic level, involves encouraging economic
development based on maximising the service obtained from each unit of
resource. The utilisation-focused economy stresses:
- more intensive use of more durable products; and
- greater reliance on service in place of products.
The strategy is treated at some length here, due to its particular relevance
to end-use consumption patterns.
Resource-saving strategies in OECD countries are currently focused on the
producition and disposal phases of product life:
- clean production policies focus on eg energy saving, clean process
technologies, waste reduction or reuse):
- disposal policies include secondary recycling of materials, landfill
controls/bans, producer take back requirements etc.
However, the utilisation phase of product life ie a product's properties and
performance in use has traditionally received less attention. This is now
changing with the introduction of ideas proposed in a utilisation based
economy. They include eco-design (design for long-life, reusable or repairable
products), product life extension schemes (repair and maintenance, updating
technology, upgrading quality) and more intensive use of goods and systems (eg
via leasing and hiring services). This area of product policy is now the
subject of policy attention, especially in the Netherlands, Germany, Norway
and Sweden.
The replacement of products by services which perform the same function (eg
widespread use of 'mobility' services instead of car ownership, use of laundry
services instead of washing machine ownership) is currently beset by
infrastructural, pricing and perceptual problems involved in making the
transition.
The utilisation-focused economy appears to offer significant potential
advantages over the manufacturing-focused economy. Stahel (41' argues that:
- Reuse of products results in a slowdown of materials flow through the
production cycle. This is not the case with materials recycling which closes
loops but does not always reduce demand for virgin materials since it tends to
result in a degradation of the use value of the material recycled.
- Product life extension involves, in many cases, a substitution of labour for
energy. Small, localised service workshops displace large globalised
manufacturing and recycling loops. Product repair requires (skilled) labour
and low energy input; materials recycling requires (largely unskilled) labour
and high energy input.
Increased use of product life extension services therefore seems not only to
offer environmental advantages but to be in accord with the social
infrastructure and employment goals set out in the recent European Commission
White paper (42).
The transition towards more intensive product use and greater use of services
would require both technological and competitive strategies. Technological
adaptations include durable, low maintenance product design, standardisation
of components and 'self-curing spares'. Of equal or greater importance are
socioeconomic strategies including training, information systems (enabling
access to product design/repair systems), liability provisions (selling only
the use of goods implies an unlimited product liability for the manufacturer
and/or repairer) and reorientation of consumer perceptions.
4.6.3 The Scope for Government Action
The rise of service industries, relative to manufacturing, is already a clear
trend in developed economies and can be expected to increase. Services,
especially the financial, entertainment, tourism and leisure sectors, are an
area which the North is likely to exploit in order to maintain competitiveness
in the face of the manufacturing expertise and cost advantages of Asian
economies. Fiscal policies to encourage the growth of these sectors are
already well developed in many OECD countries (eg tax breaks accorded to the
film industries in the US and France).
A notable trend is that some governments are now (indirectly) promoting the
service sector as they scale down welfare provisions in the face of
demographic change (ageing populations in many western countries will result
in a shortfall between tax receipts from the working population and demands
for spending on health care, sheltered housing etc). Changing employment
patterns caused partly by deregulation (the decline in 'jobs for life') also
play a role. Personal pension plans, private health care, private education
fees and personal accident insurance are among the fastest growing areas of
consumer expenditure in the UK, with an observable decline in spending on some
categories of durable goods (43).
4.7 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF KEY CONCEPTS
The concepts under review are interlinked in many ways: most start from tbe
premise that ecological limits exist to tbe earth's capacity to support human
activities and that economic growth must be controlled in some way to stay
within those limits. Consumption levels, to date, have risen in line with
economic encpansion; only eco-efficiency and (to a lesser extent) ecospace,
pursue the idea of decoupling economic and consumption growth.
A significant point of divergence betsveen the concepis lies in the
prescriptiveness of what they are trying to achieve: concepts range along a
spectrum from the elaborate vision of a steady state economy to the
generalised shift of direction implied by the use of green accounting systems.
Table 2.7a briefly compares the concepts, highlighting factors of relevance to
policy making.
Table 2.7a Comparative Summary of Concepts: The Policy Perspective
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Objective/Timescale
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
Human activities compatible with continuity of earth's life support
functions. Time horizons depend on scientific understanding of each
problem and political urgency of action.
Steady State Economy
Non-growth economy in biophysical equilibrium. Open timeframe.
Ecospace
Human activities compatible with life support systems. Some analysts
derive from this the need for 'fair shares' access to ecospace.
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
Global fair shares and bio-regionalism (EF). Reduced energy and
material flows between and within economies (ER). Long term.
Green GDP
Short term: establishment of new measures and indicators. Long term:
reorientation of social and economic goals.
Eco-efficiency
Short to medium-term: win-win development path of economic growth and
environmental quality (WBCSD). Long-term: achievement of major
reduction in energy/material throughput (possibly limiting economic
growth).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Political Feasibility (key actors, decision making
processes, role of government)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
High when environmental damage already in evidence. Uncertainty over
critical thresholds implies actions implementable only via political
debate.
Steady State Economy
Global command and control approach. Role of government supreme.
Ecospace
Requires strong government framework (to establish limits) and major
lifestyle change (green consciousness).
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
Moral leadership role required of government. International trade
agreements only existing forum for implementation.
Green GDP
Government and business interest in indicators and performance measures
a starting point for negotiation on new economic and social measures.
Eco-Efficiency
Enterprises key to implementation. Some progress already with 'greening
of industry', partnership initiatives between
government/industry/NGOs/local groups. Government key to setting
incentive framework.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Communication/Appeal
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
Scarcity scares somewhat discredited; public and business more receptive
to idea of 'pollution overload'.
Steady State Economy
Abstract concept of great intellectual interest but little popular
appeal.
Ecospace
Strong potential appeal to environmentally active, socially conscious.
As currently 'popularised', the overtones of rationing may be offputting
to mass consumers.
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
As ecospace.
Green GDP
Potentially high. Growing public awareness that environment
'undervalued' and growth not delivering well-being (loss of 'feel good
factor').
Eco-Efficiency
Potential appeal to both business (profit and social approval) and
public (tax shift, new employment opportunities).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Operationalising Principles/Instruments
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
Precautionary principle. Risk assessment, critical load analysis,
emission/discharge limits, substance bans and controls.
Steady State Economy
Equilibrium and greater equity. Centralised institutions for global
management of population, wealth and resource use.
Ecospace
Equity. Creation of markets, quotas, input limits (FoE) tradeable
permits (FoE and Opschoor). Lifestyle change.
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
Equity (EF and ER). Material flow accounts, eco-efficient technologies,
lifestyle change (ER) Reform of aid and trade regimes (EF).
Green GDP
'Real cost' accounting. Internalisation of externalities, new
indicators, pursuit of (qualitative) economic development not
(quantitative) growth.
Eco-Efficiency
Increased resource productivity. Economic instruments, BAT, standards,
targets, substance controls, consumer information.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Key Economic/Technological Considerations
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
Decisions currently governed by economic/social/technical feasibility of
alternatives to present activities.
Steady State Economy
Non-growth economy, minimum throughput technologies.
Ecospace
Eco-efficient technologies in non-growth economy (FoE) Eco-efficiency
might permit growth (Opschoor).
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
Northern economies are in a state of "over-consumption". Eco-efficiency
(dematerialisation) key to change.
Green GDP
Economic "growth" is a false goal, increasingly divorced from human
welfare.
Eco-Efficiency
Improved resource efficiency key to environmentally sustainable economic
growth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Trade Implications
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
None specific. International commitments (e.g. on emission targets) may
have growing impact on trade in clean technologies and intellectual
property rights.
Steady State Economy
Discourage trade above minimum necessary for 'sufficient' (maintenance)
living standards.
Ecospace
Implies changes in trade flows but nature of change uncertain.
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
Trade reduced to true 'ecological surpluses' (EF). Dematerialisation
implies reduced flow of raw materials to industrialised countries (ER).
Green GDP
Revaluation of traded materials (e.g. tropical hardwoods) would create
both trade barriers and opportunities.
Eco-Efficiency
Slowed or declining demand for energy/materials would impact exporters.
Efficient technologies would generate new export markets. Probable
North-South imbalance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Scope for Further Government Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
High, as scientific element of economic/environmental/social/trade-off
decisions, e.g. in international agreements.
Steady State Economy
Very limited.
Ecospace
Limited. Possible starting point for public debate; likely to feature
as bargaining element in international negotiations.
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
Very limited. But potentially valuable as a strategic analytical tool -
degree of national dependence on imported environmental capital.
Green GDP
High. Methodologies, indicators and institutions already exist and
national accounting is the province of government.
Eco-Efficiency
Medium-high. Government sets the ground rules by which business
operates.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Operationalising Principles/Instruments
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
Precautionary principle. Risk assessment, critical load analysis,
emission/discharge limits, substance bans and controls.
Steady State Economy
Equilibrium and greater equity. Centralised institutions for global
management of population, wealth and resource use.
Ecospace
Equity. Creation of markets, quotas, input limits (FoE) tradeable
permits (FoE and Opschoor). Lifestyle change.
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
Equity (EF and ER). Material flow accounts, eco-efficient technologies,
lifestyle change (ER). Reform of aid and trade regimes (EF).
Green GDP
'Real cost' accounting. Internationalisation of externalities, new
indicators, pursuit of (qualitative) economic development not
(quantitative) growth.
Eco-Efficiency
Increased resource productivity. Economic instruments, BAT, standards,
targets, substance controls, consumer information.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Key Economic/Technological Considerations
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
Decisions currently governed by economic/social/technical feasibility of
alternatives to present activities.
Steady State Economy
Non-growth economy, minimum throughput technologies.
Ecospace
Eco-efficient technologies in non-growth economy (FoE). Eco-efficiency
might permit growth (Opschoor).
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
Northern economies are in a state of "over-consumption". Eco-efficiency
(dematerialisation) key to change.
Green GDP
Economic "growth" is a false goal, increasingly divorced from human
welfare.
Eco-Efficiency
Improved resource efficiency key to environmentally sustainable economic
growth.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Trade Implications
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
None specific. International commitments (e.g. on emission targets) may
have growing impact on trade in clean technologies and intellectual
property rights.
Steady State Economy
Discourages trade above minimum necessary for 'sufficient' (maintenance)
living standards.
Ecospace
Implies changes in trade flows but nature of change uncertain.
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
Trade reduced to true 'ecological surpluses' (EF). Dematerialisation
implies reduced flow of raw materials to industrialised countries (ER).
Green GDP
Revaluation of traded materials (e.g. tropical hardwoods) would create
both trade barriers and opportunities.
Eco-Efficiency
Slowed or declining demand for energy/materials would impact exporters.
Efficient technologies would generate new export markets. Probable
North-South imbalance.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Characteristic: Scope for further Government Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carrying Capacity
High, as scientific element of economic/environmental/social trade-off
decisions, e.g. in international agreements.
Steady State Economy
Very limited.
Ecospace
Limited. Possible starting point for public debate; likely to feature
as bargaining element in international negotiations.
Ecological Footprints/Rucksacks
Very limited. But potentially valuable as a strategic analytical tool -
degree of national dependence on imported environmental capital.
Green GDP
High. Methodologies, indicators and institutions already exist and
national accounting is the province of government.
Eco-Efficiency
Medium-high. Government sets the ground rules by which business
operates.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
5 SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION CONCEPTS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS
This section draws on the analyses developed in Sections I and 2 in order to
assess the potential utility of the concepts under review in developing and
implementing future policies for sustainable production and consumption.
A practical framework for developing such policies may be defined by a number
of key questions, outlined below. This section examines where and how tlie
concepts might help to shape the answers. Where appropriate, it also draws on
other work by researchers in the field of sustainable consumption.
5.1 WHAT IS 'UNSUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION'?
At present, no clear guidelines exist for determining what is "unsustainable".
Carrying capacity is clearly a fundamental concept in assessing issues of
resource exploitation (eg defined fishing stocks) or pollution (eg local acid
deposition) but more is needed to answer the question wdoes it really
matter?".
Concepts with a stronger moral imperative (eg ecological footprints) can help
define priorities over what we really care about but value-based criteria will
be difficult to agree at global (or even national) level. Eco-space as defined
by Opschoor is explicit in its acknowledgement that agreement on 'limits' and
criteria for action must allow for input from a wider audience than policy
makers. Political debate and participatory mechanisms are likely to required
to make decisions on trade-offs that cannot be decided on technical or other
expert grounds.
The limits-to-growth premise of all the concepts (with the exception of
eco-efficiency) suggests that ecological viability is the yardsticl:: many
environmental economists start from the presumption that key unsustainable
trends relate not so much to eventual exhaustion of natural resources, many of
which may be substitutable, but to the continued accumulation of wastes in the
environment (whose imDacts cannot be predicted or controlled).
Beyond this, the concepts offer little guidance on priorities, being more
concerned with the delivery of a range of broad objectives. It would seem that
there is an urgent need to establish criteria for determining which issues are
critical to sustainability (which have the capacity to undermine our prospects
of continued survival with a tolerable quality of life) and indicators to tell
us whether we are moving in a more or less sustainable direction.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Relevant Ideas
Weterings and Opschoor (44) suggest three dimensions of ecospace which help to
set boundaries for decision making on what constitutes an acceptable level of
impact on the environment: pollution of natural systems, depletion of
renewable and non-renewable resources and loss of naturalness (integrity,
diversity, absence of disturbance). They suggest a practical sustainability
criterion for non-renewables:
- residual stocks must be kept at (or raised to) a level sufficient for
use over a period of at least 50 years; consumption should be reduced
to be compatible with this.
The problem of defining rigorous but usable criteria for decision making is
being tackled as part of the "Sustainable US" project, currently underway at
the World Resources Institute. A set of future states are being defined for
key sectors of the US economy. These scenarios are broadly "more sustainable
than the present" but near term i.e. achievable within existing political
institutions and known technologies. The idea is to identify recurrent themes
in the scenarios (e.g. concern for future generations) and from these, to
identify the criteria that appear necessary to steering decision making in
each of the economic sectors in the right direction. Examples are:
- irreversibility: on this basis climate change takes greater priority
than e.g. traffic congestion which, however, unpleasant, can be
'fixed';
- substainability: which natural stocks are essential to human life and
currently appear incapable of substitution?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.2 WHAT BROAD CHANGES ARE REQUIRED AND WHO NEEDS TO ACT?
Two broad categories of change are identified by all the concepts:
- Technical/infrastuctural changes that lead to greatly increased energy and
material efficiency and reduced use/emissions of hazardous substances.
This is variously interpreted as (1) maintaining economic growth without
increasing energy/material throughput (eco-efficiency) and (2) containing
economic growth and reducing energy/material throughput while preserving
quality of life through different consumption patterns (eg eco-space, service
economy).
- Social/institutional changes that constitute a 'paradigm shift' - a major
reorientation of our beliefs, values and standard practices.
The moral starting point is essential to some concepts, whether stemming from
a desire for greater justice and equity (eco-space, ecological footprints) or
a wider re-examination of what constitutes human welfare and 'right' behaviour
(eg steady state economy).
From an ecological point of view we are all consumers. The concepts
acknowledge this but place different stress on the roles of different actors:
- Industry is seen as the leader in achieving eco-efficieocy. The concept is
inherently attractive to business since its principles do not run counter to
prevailing political or market doctrines. However, the obstacles presented by
the need for new investment and management practices are formidable and
government action to create the right incentive framework is also key.
- Consumers are the ultimate managers of economic activity and changes in
individual behaviour and lifestyle choices are central to the objectives of
the steady state economy, ecospace, ecological footprints/rucksaclcs. These
concepts place great emphasis on government action to control consumer
behaviour or reshape consumer demand; they also presuppose a kind of moral
revolution in consumer culture.
- Government is assigned a key institutional role in establishing the
mechanisms for green accounting (changing measuring systems) and ecological
footprints (changing trade regimes). It has an all powerful distributive role
in the steady state economy. Other concepts focus more modestly on the need
for governments to introduce new legislation (eg stricter technical and
quality standards) and fiscal reforms and to provide information to other
actors. The role of government is discussed in more detail in Section 3.4.
5.3 WHAT ARE THE POSSIBLE IMPLICATIONS OF "SUSTAINABLE CONSUMPTION" ?
The implications of stabilising, or reducing, energy and materials consumption
in the North have not been fully analysed but scenarios proposed, or implied,
by the concepts would seem to entail some or all of the following changes:
Globally ...
- a stable or declining demand in the North for imports of industrial raw
materials, agricultural commodities and some finished goods.
- the incorporation of energy/material efficiency standards, or 'conditions of
production' standards, into international product standards. This might be
voluntary (eg via eco-labelling schemes) or mandatory;
- an increased dependence on international institutions and procedures to
secure agreement on actions (eg substance controls) and compensation (ea over
distributional effects);
- increased use of monitoring and inspection agencies (both public and private
sector) to validate product/service claims to sustainability.
- a further rise in the relative importance of the service sector in
industrialised economies, leading to a requirement for different educational
and training skills.
Nationally ...
- significant changes in land use patterns to reduce energy inefficiencies in
distribution and transportation;
- greatly increased use of financial instruments to guide purchasing and
behavioural decisions by business and individuals. This would probably involve
the extension of market mechanisms to novel and unpopular areas eg access to
countryside and road space;
- increased importance of local economies and communities, which will provide
their inhabitants with more of their material, employment, recreational and
social needs than is currently the case (for example, in countries where
increased mobility has led to the rise of 'dormitory towns' which lack many
social facilities). This may have implications for the authority of central
governments;
- an emphasis on high-cost, high-quality products (durable, repairable) at the
expense of low-end, short-lived products. This will have consequences for
lower income groups in society;
- a probable shift in employment patterns, with growth in the service sectors.
5.4 POLICY STARTING POINTS: WHAT IS THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT?
Traditionally, government has acted to control pollution from economic
activities via regulation and a system of economic incentives and penalties
(for example user and waste disposal charges). This is accepted because the
market does not always lead to the best environmental outcomes for society
(there is market failure). It is now clear that achieving more sustainable
consumption patterns will depend on both:
- the regulation of supply side processes (directly via standards and controls
and indirectly via targets and economic incentives); and
- reshaping current patterns of demand, in particular, demands made by
individual consumers.
A key question concerns the extent to which policy making should emphasise
reshaping (managing) demand from the bottom up (eg using product information)
or from the top down (eg by redrawing market 'ground rules' in a way that
necessarily changes demand).
Those of the concepts based on redistribution of ecqlogical assets (global
fair shares) tend to blur this point, calling for a widespread culture change
(bottom up) but placing great emphasis on policy makers distinguishing between
basic human needs, which must be supplied, and 'luxury' consumption, which is
'unjustified'. Luxury consumption (defined by whom?) must, according to the
authors of the concepts, be managed, for example, by redirecting human
aspirations to non-material enjoyment (sustainable Europe as defined by FoE)
or rationed (in a steady state economy). Such approaches are not currently to
be found on the agendas of OECD countries.
Despite these difficulties, policy makers are expressing considerable interest
in the 'end user' approach which applies the techniques of demand side
management to consumption patterns (45). The end user approach does not seek
to distinguish between basic and luxury needs, or to re-channel material
consumer aspirations in more spiritual directions. It does provide a useful
basis for rethinking what consumers actually want when they buy a product.
Often, consumers are purchasingJimction, for example warmth or hot water in
the home, which can be supplied by other means than the product of
electricity. Demand management in this area has been pursued with success by
many US power utilities who are selling insulation and energy efficiency
programmes instead of investing in new capacity: some Californian companies
now expect to generate the bulk of their profits from demand side management
schemes rather than increased electricity sales.
It remains the case that governments have very limited control over most of
the important factors of change in modern society (population growth and
distribution, cultural beliefs, values and aspirations; the pace of
technological change; the workings of international markets). Nor have they
much direct control over social and economic behaviour (investment and
purchasing decisions, lifestyle choices). In addition, most governments would
interpret the need for lifestyle change as a matter of individual
responsibility which may be informed, but not coerced, by government
initiatives.
Considerable debate therefore surrounds, the efficiency - and legitimacy - of
government intervention to reshape demand. One argument runs that it will be
simpler, and more effective, to apply the end user concept in reforming market
parameters ie the rules under which enterprise supplies the customer. It is
not necessary for government to target consumers directly because enterprise
itself will 'market' sustainable goods and services if those are what it is
required to produce.
The counter-argument is that instruments which specifically encourage
individual actions and lifestyle change are necessary because they foster the
climate of opinion in which more sweeping measures (such as energy taxes or
abolition of subsidies) can be accepted.
5.5 CONCEPTS AND POLICY IDEAS
The concepts under review vary in the extent to which they are concerned with
the realities of implementation. In general, they appear to favour government
action in three broad policy areas: administrative and regulatory frameworks,
pricing reform and opinion forming. This section analyses the extent to which
the concepts offer new insights or indicate a clear direction for future
policy development. Where relevant, international research projects helpful to
thinking on sustainable consumption are also cited.
5.5.1 Administrative/Regulatory Frarneworks
Most concepts agree on the importance of introducing alternative national
accounting systems and performance measures. They are seen as key to reshaping
economic goals and more fundamental perceptions of social well-being.
Regulatory regimes (emission/discharge limits, substance and process controls,
standards and targets) are assumed to be an essential starting point of
sustainable consumption policies. Concepts with a strong technical component
stress the importance of government action to promote the development and
dissemination of clean technologies, and to contain the problem of 'free
rider' companies. A key difficulty relates to the relative lack of influence
of government spending on technology R&D. This problem is not directly
addressed by the concepts.
Bans and phase-out programmes for hazardous and toxic substance are much
advocated by NGOs promoting sustainable consumption. For example, recent years
have seen recurrent calls by Greenpeace for a ban on chlorine. Bans have a
technology forcing role and demonstrate government and/or industry commitment
to action and for this reason are favoured by Friends of the Earth in their
policy approach to implementing the ideas of the ecospace concept.
However, the economic and social implications of sweeping bans are potentially
serious and FoE acknowledge the need for prior evaluation in terms of economic
costs, technical feasibility and the trade offs involved, for example between
environmental protection and human health.
The greening of government procurement policies is urged in more politically
oriented concepts (eg ecospace as promoted by FoE). Action in this area has
been on the agenda for some years but there appears to be little recognition
in the concepts of why it is difficult to put into practice. Many government
departments, for example, are legally bound to lowest price bidders in many
procurement areas, which may exclude environmentally beneficial suppliers. The
missing element is political will: there are few signs that green procurement
has genuine and unequivocal backing at the highest political level.
The need to reform current trade regimes is explicitly addressed by ecological
footprints and implied in other concepts concerned with equity issues.
However, these concepts do not engage with existing trade doctrines in the way
that, for example, environmental economists have tackled the orthodoxies of
neo-classical economics. The limited integration of environmental concerns
into the GATT and NAFTA negotiations represents the summit of achievement to
date. There would appear to be a need for greater dialogue in future and
research to develop economically feasible theories for ecologically
sustainable trade patterns.
5.5.2 Pricing Reform
Many concepts strongly advocate ecological tas reform ie a tax shift from
labour to use of environmental resources and pollution. Numerous studies have
tried to estimate the ecological and social/employment benefits that might
result. 'Getting the prices right' has emerged as a core strategy of most
industrialised countries' policy approach to correcting market failure.
However, the OECD correctly notes that "there is neither popular support nor
national leadership to implement such pricing policies. Intermediary steps are
needed" (46).
A particular problem relates to the reluctance of finance ministries to risk
financing government expenditures from an uncertain (and intentionally
declining) revenue base. The primary purpose of taxation is seen as revenue
raising, not behavioural change. Some proponents of ecospace and ecoeff1ciency
have tackled this problem by suggesting a slow, incremental tax shift that
would permit annual adjustments between resource prices, subsidies and labour
taxes to maintain revenue neutrality (47).
The ecospace concept (FoE) suggests creating markets and tradeable permit
systems for emissions, in combination with input reduction targets, as a means
of controlling resource use.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial Ecology and Pricing Reform
Industrial ecology involves tracking energy and material flows through a
plant, region or national/global economy. The Environmental Futures Unit of
the United States Environmental Protection Agency has extended this technique
to financial flows associated with key resources such as energy and water.
The Unit has prepared 'maps' illustrating, to scale, the size of energy flows
(fuel type, end user, wastage) through the US economy, the size of Federal R&D
funding (in different energy sub-sectors) and the size of Federal subsidies
(to primary energy sources and end use sectors, including hidden subsidies in
the form of externalities not borne by end users). The maps present a
striking visual representation of e.g. the gap between expenditures on new
technologies and nuclear power, and of areas of energy waste. They are
intended to highlight key intervention points; areas where government action
would have the greatest effect (48).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.5.3 Opinion Forming
All the concepts agree (even the relatively 'technocratic' eco-efficiency)
that achieving sustainable consumption will require a change in social culture
- our values and aspirations - and look to government to stimulate its
development. A key objection is that government agencies do not possess
sufficient knowledge or moral authority to define this new paradigm; if they
try, they will be competing for attention with many other opinion formers such
as the advertising industry, the media, educational institutions and 'business
cultures'. More modestly, the concepts urge much greater government effort to
provide information to consumers (public and enterprise) on:
- the environmental impacts of their behaviour and product choices;
- the potential environmental (and social/economic where appropriate) benefits
of alternative consumption patterns;
- examples of progress with government and independent actions already
undertaken.
Considerable attention is paid by FoE in their vision of a sustainable Europe
to the means by which people might be encouraged to shift to lower material
consumption levels. Their report demonstrates a tension between, on the one
hand, faith in the potential for voluntary action; some people will apparently
welcome spiritual liberation from the tyranny of excessive dependence on
material possessions and 'addictive buying'. On the other hand, there is
recognition of the need for a more coercive incentive framework, mostly
Dricing. to generate real momentum.
Experience to date indicates that good environmental information, product
information and provision of the necessary infrastructure, can induce
behaviour change where financial, inconvenience and social costs are perceived
to be low. For example, high recycling rates have been achieved over recent
years in may OECD countries. Behaviour changes involving high perceived costs,
noUbly the use of public transport instead of private cars, are proving almost
entirely resistant to opinion forming measures (49).
6 CONCLUSIONS AND ISSUES FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION
Concepts are intellectual constructs which need translating into more
operational mesbaiisms if they are to have any implementation value. They are
essentially qualitative ideas, contributing to a vision of a desirable end
point.
With this qualification, a number of useful conclusions and propositions may
be drawn *om tbe concepts reviewed in this paper.
- The changes required in our present consumption patterns involve orders of
magnitude increases in the productivity of energy and material resources,
reduced/eliminated use of toxics and creation of loop-closing systems. This is
broadly the agenda of eco-efficiency.
- Economic instruments are believed to be key to implementation but there are
ideological and practical obstacles to widespread adoption of eco-taxes.
- The importance of global cooperation is recognised but new 'supra-national'
bodies may not be a realistic short-term option. International agreements have
proved to be an instrument of (perhaps unexpected) effectiveness. The UN ECE
Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution, the Rhine Action Plan,
the Sofia and Montreal Protocols, have all delivered siQnificant emission
reductions.
- The implications for international trade of shifting to consumption patterns
which involve reduced material flows in developed countries are potentially
serious. In such a scenario, demand for many materials might stabilise or
decline.
- Much current academic and NGO thinking on sustainable consumption is taking
place in a closed world; it takes as a given the need for dramatic change in
Northern levels and patterns of consumption. If this is correct, there is a
need for greatly improved communication: in the 'outside world', the case for
sustainable consumption in most areas has yet to be made.
- Sustainability measures proposed in the concepts (and implemented by
governments to date) are still mostly in the form of constraints. 'Positive'
measures are somewhat unclear, having to do with moral shifts in society.
Historically, major social changes (comparable to the scale of change required
to restructure Northern consumption patterns) have occurred in response to
perceived opportunities. The post-war transformation of settlement patterns
and social relations was a dramatic, unforeseen - but probably predictable -
consequence of people enthusiastically purchasing motor cars. Current policy
making devotes little effort to analysing social trends with a view to
identifying 'revolutions in the making' and influencing their early
development.
End Notes
(1) United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Agenda 21,
Chapter 4.3.
(2) World Resources 1994-95, WRI, 1994.
(3) United Nations Development Programme, "Human Development Report 1992",
New York: Oxford University Press, 1992. Quoted in the Worldwatch
Institute, "State of the World 1994".
(4) The Worldwatch Institute, "State of the World 1994", Earthscan
Publications, London, 1994.
(5) The term 'North', as used in this paper, refers to both OECD countries
and the richer sections of the industrialising world where high-
consumption lifestyles are clearly emerging as a development model.
(6) "Summary of Issues Raised at the Symposium on Sustainable Consumption",
19-20 January, 1994, Oslo, Norway.
(7) Oslo Ministerial Roundtable Conference on Sustainable Production and
Consumption, "Elements for an International Work Programme on
Sustainable Production and Consumption", February 6-10, 1995.
(8) An extensive literature surrounds the debate: key works include:
Ehrlich Paul, "Population Bomb", Ballantine, New York, 1968. Meadows D
et al, "The Limits to Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome's Project on
the Predicament of Mankind", Universe Books, New York, 1972. Meadows D
et al, "Beyond the Limits: Confronting Global Collapse and Envisioning
a Sustainable Future", Post Mills, Vt: Chelsea Green Publishing Company,
1992. World Commission on Environment and Development, "Our Common
Future", Oxford University Press, 1987. Relevant updating publications
include the "State of the World Reports", produced by the Worldwatch
Institute and "World Resources: A Guide to the Global Environment",
published by the World Resources Institute.
(9) Daly, Herman, "Steady State Economics: the Economics of Biophysical
Equilibrium and Moral Growth", W.H. Freeman, 1977, with subsequent
revisions and additions by the author, 1979, 1992.
(10) Siebert H., "Nature as a life support system: renewable resources and
environmental disruption" in "Journal of Economics 42 No.2, pp.133-142",
192.
(11) A good summary of current academic thinking on ecospace and sustainable
development is provided in "Netherlands Journal of Environmental
Sciences" (Special Issue: Environmental Utilisation Space). Volume 9,
1994/5.
(12) Musters CJM, de Graaf HJ, Noordervliet MAW and ter Keurs WJ, "Measuring
Environmental Utilisation Space: Can it be Done?" in "Netherlands
Journal of Environmental Sciences, Volume 9", 1994/5.
(13) Advisory Council for Research on Nature and Environment (RMNO), "Towards
Environmental Performance Indicators Based on the Notion of
Environmental Space", RMNO Publication No.6, 1994. Also, Weterings R
and Opschoor JB, "Environmental Utilisation Space and Reference Values
for Performance Evaluation" in "Netherlands Journal of Environmental
Sciences, Volume 9", 1994/5.
(14) Milieudefensie, "Action Plan: Sustainable Netherlands", Amsterdam, 1992
(Dutch) 1993 (English translation).
(15) Friends of the Earth Europe, "Towards Sustainable Europe: The Study",
Friends of the Earth, Brussels, 1995.
(16) Rees W and Wackernagel M, "Ecological Footprints and Appropriated
Carrying Capacity: Measuring the Natural Capital Requirements of the
Human Economy", in "Investing in Natural Capital: The Ecological
Economics Approach to sustainability", A-M Jansson, M Hammer, C Folke
and R Costanza, eds. Washington Island Press, 1994.
(17) Friends of the Earth Europe, "Towards Sustainable Europe: The Study",
Friends of the Earth, Brussels, 1995. pp.45 (english edition).
(18) This point was made in the preparatory report to UNCED of the Latin
American and Caribbean Commission on Development and Environment.
Quoted in IIED, "Citizen Action to Lighten Britain's Ecological
Footprints", February 1995.
(19) The intellectual heritage of these ideas is traced in Bramwell A,
"Ecology in the 20th Century: A History", Yale University Press, 1989.
(20) Rees WE, "Ecological Footprints and Appropriated Carrying Capacity:
Measuring the Natural Capital Requirements of the Human Economy", in
"Investing in Natural Capital: The Ecological Approach to
sustainability", (A-M Jansson, M Hammer, C Folke and R Costanza, eds.
Washington Island Press, 1994, p.380.
(21) Bilateral Memoranda of Understanding on sustainable trade and other
actions have been signed between the Netherlands and Benin, Bhutan
and Costa Rica.
(22) This important argument is presented in more detail in, Sefal, Jerome M,
"Consumer Expenditures and the Growth of Need-Required Income", Paper
presented at the conference "Consumption, Global Stewardship and the
Good Life", Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy, University of
Maryland, September 19-October 2, 1994.
(23) An example of the standard attack on psychologically obsessive over-
consumption in the North can be found in FoE Europe, "Towards
Sustainable Europe: The Report", pp. 194-5.
(24) Pearce D, Markandya A, Barbier E, "Blueprint for a Green Economy",
Earthscan Publications, London, 1999989.
(25) Nordhaus WD and Tobin J, "Is Growth Obsolete" in "National Bureau of
Economic Research", General Series 96, New York and London: Columbia
University Press, 1972.
(26) Centre for Sustainable Regional Development of the University of
Victoria, "Sustainability in British Columbia: The Calculation of an
Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare", 1995.
(27) New Economics Foundation and Stockholm Environmental Institute,
"Measuring Economic Welfare - A Pilot Index". London, 1994.
(28) Business Council for Sustainable Development, in association with UNEP,
IEO, and CEC, "Getting Eco-Efficient: Report of the First Antwerp Eco-
Efficiency Workshop", November 1993.
(29) Ayres, Robert U. "Eco-Restructuring: the Transition to an Ecologically
Sustainable Economy". Paper prepared for the INSEAD, 1993.
(30) Schmidheiny S, "Changing Course: A Global business Perspective on
Development and the Environment, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. London,
England, 1992.
(31) See, for example, World Resources Institute "Transforming Technology: An
Agenda for Environmentally Sustainable Growth in the 21st Century", WRI,
1991 which argues that technology is the most easily manipulated
variable of the equation I = P x A x T. "Missing Links: Technology and
Environmental Improvement in the Industrialising World" (WRI, 1994)
highlights the role of "environmentally superior technologies' in the
developing world.
(32) See Jevons W, "The Coal Question", Reprint of the Third Edition (1906),
New York: Augustus M Kelly, 1965. Quoted in Rees WE, "Sustainability,
Growth and Employment", paper prepared for the IISD Employment and
Sustainable Development Project, June 1994.
(33) RMNO, "The Ecocapacity as a Challenge to Technological Development",
Rijawijk, The Netherlands, 1992.
(34) Jansen LM, "Towards a Sustainable Oikos: En Route with Technology",
CLTM, the Netherlands, 1993. Quoted in "Getting Eco-Efficient" op cit.
(35) Factor 10 Club, "Carnoules Declaration", Wuppertal Institute, 1994.
(36) For criticism of win-win 'ideology' see Walley N and Whitehead B, "It's
Not Easy Being Green" in "Harvard Business Review", May-June 1994.
(37) US Environmental Protection Agency and World Resources Institute, the
"Environmental Futures Project", 1992. A summary of key findings is
presented in the report "Challenges Ahead for the US EPA in the 21st
Century", December 1, 1992.
(38) Weizacker Ulrich von, "Sustainable Technological Progress".
Presentation to the Oslo Roundtable Conference on sustainable Production
and Consumption, Oslo 6-10 February, 1995.
(39) See for example, Commission of the European Communities (1993), "Towards
Sustainability: A European Community Programme of Policy and Action in
Relation to the Environment and Sustainable Development". Also CEC
(1994), "Growth, Competitiveness, Employment: The Challenges and Ways
Forward into the 21st Century", White Paper, ECSC-EC-EAEC, Brussels
Luxembourg.
(40) See, for example, the industry case studies in "Changing Course",
op.cit.
(41) Stahel, Walter R. "The Utilisation-Focused Service Economy: Resource
Efficiency and Product Life Cycle Extension". Extension in "The
Greening of Industrial Ecosystems", National Academy Press, Washington
DC, 1994, pp. 178-190
(42) European Commission, "Growth, Competitiveness, Employment: The
Challenges and Ways Forward into the 21st Century". White Paper, ESCS-
EC-EAEC, Brussels Luxembourg, 1994
(43) Mintel, "British Lifestyles 1995". Quoted in "The Financial Times",
18 January, 1995.
(44) Weterings R and Opschoor JB, "EUS and Reference Values for Performance
Evaluation" in "Netherlands Journal of Environmental Sciences", Volume
9, 1994/5.
(45) End use consumption is the point of departure for the "OECD work
programme on sustainable Production and Consumption", draft copy, OECD,
3 March 1995.
(46) OECD, International Experts Seminar on sustainable Production and
Consumption, held at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 18-20
December, 1994, "Final Report", OECD. (Forthcoming).
(47) See, for example, Weisacher v, Ernst Ulrich "Sustainable Technological
Progress", Paper presented to the Oslo Roundtable Conference on
Sustainable Production and Consumption, Oslo 6-10 February, 1995. p.8.
(48) More information on the sectoral maps can be obtained from the US EPA,
Office of Strategic Planning and Environmental Data, Future Studies
Unit, 401 M Street SW, Washington DC 20460, USA. Tel. +1 202 260
6523/6514. Fax +1 202 260 4903/2704.
(49) The current failure of the Netherlands to meets its NO2 reduction
targets is largely due to the persistent increase in traffic volumes,
despite intensive government efforts to encourage the use of public
transport, bicycles and footpaths.
Annex B
Workshop Participants
Mme. Jacqueline Aloisi de Larderel
Director
UNEP Industry and Environment
39-43 Quai Andre-Citroen
75739 Paris
France
Tel: +33 1 44 37 14 41
Fax: +33 1 44 37 14 74
e-mail: j.aloisi@unep.fn
Mr. Erik Brandsma
Environment Directorate
OECD
2, rue Andre Pascal
75016 Paris
France
Tel: +33 1 45 24 16 86
Fax: +33 1 45 24 78 76
e-mail: erik.brandsma@oecd.org
Prof. Nazli Choucri
Associate Director
Technology and Development Programme
Massachussetts Institute of Technology
Suite E53-493
Cambridge, MA 02139
USA
Tel: +1 617 253 6198
Fax: +1 617 258 7989
e-mail: nchoucri@mit.e.du
Mr. Raekwon Chung
Counsellor
Korean Embassy
2, Rue Louis David
75016 Paris
France
Tel: +33 1 44 05 20 50/52
Fax: +33 1 47 55 86 70
Mr. Jeremy Eppel
Counsellor, Environment Directorate
OECD
2, rue Andre Pascal
75016 Paris
France
Tel: +33 1 45 24 79 13
Fax: +33 1 45 24 78 76
e-mail: jeremy.eppel@oecd.org
Ms. Margaret Flaherty
Project Manager
World Business Council for Sustainable Development
160, route de Florissant
CH-1231 Conches-Geneva
Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 839 3100
Fax: +41 22 839 3131
Mr. Claude Fussler
VP Environment, Health & Safety
DOW Europe S.A.
Bachtobelstrasse 3, P.O. Box
CH-8810 Horgen
Switzerland
Tel: +41 1 728 2403
Fax: +41 1 728 2097
Mr. Arthur J Hanson
President & CEO
International Institute for Sustainable Development
161 Portage Avenue East, Winnipeg
Canada R3B OY4
Tel: +1 204 958 7707
Fax: +1 204 958 7710
e-mail: reception@iisdpost.iisd.cd
Mr. Paul Hofseth
Special Advisor
Ministry of Environment
P.O.Box 8013 DEP
N-0030 Oslo
Norway
Tel: +47 22 34 59 60
Fax: +47 22 34 95 61
e-mail: Paul.Hofseth@mdpost.mddep.telemax.no
Mr. Robert Hull
Advisor, Directorate General XI
Commission of the European Communities
Rue de la Loi - 200
B-1049 Brussels
Belgium
Tel: +32 2 299 2264
Fax: +32 2 299 0895
Mr. Paul de Jongh (Chairman)
Deputy Director General for Environment
Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment
P.O.Box 30945
2500 GX The Hague
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 70 339 4678
Fax: +31 70 339 1308
Mr. Terje Kronen
Assistant Director General
Norwegian Pollution Control Authority
PO Box 8100 DEP
N-0032 Oslo
Norway
Tel: +47 22 57 34 00
Fax: +47 22 67 67 06
Mr. Bas de Leeuw
Target Group Coordinator
Consumers and Retail Trade/650
MInistry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment
PO Box 30945
2500 GX The Hague
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 70 339 4203
Fax: +31 70 339 1293
e-mail: deleeuw@dibpc.dgm.minvrom.nl
Mr. Bill L. Long
Director, Environment Directorate
OECD
2, rue Andre Pascal
75016 Paris
France
Tel: +33 1 45 24 93 00
Fax: +33 1 45 24 78 76
Ms. Andrea Matte-Baker
Senior Programme Officer
Regional Office for Europe
United Nations Environment Programme
15, Chemin des Anemones
CH 1219 Chatelaine - Geneva
Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 979 9296
Fax: +41 22 797 3420
e-mail: a.matte-baker@unep.ch
Ms. Emily Matthews
Senior Consultant
Environmental Resources Management
Eaton House, Wallbrook Court
North Hinksey Lane
Oxford, OX2 OQS
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 1865 204994
Fax: +44 1865 204982
Prof. Hans Opschoor
Chairman
Council for Environment and Nature Research
P.O.Box 5306
2280 HH Rijswijk
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 70 336 4300
Fax: +31 70 336 4310
e-mail: jopschoor@econ.vu.nl
Mr. Stephen Reeves
Environment Protection Central Division
Department of the Environment
Romney House
43 Marsham Street
London SW1P 3PY
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 171 276 8440
Fax: +44 171 276 8430
Mr. Nick Robins
European Programme Coordinator
International Institute for Environment and Development
3, Endsleigh Street
London WC1H 0DD
Tel: +44 171 388 2117
Fax: +44 171 388 2826
e-mail: iiedeu@gn.apc.org
Mr. Robert Slater
Senior Assistant Deputy Minister
Environmental Conservation Service
Environment Canada
351 St.-Joseph Blvd.
Ottawa K1A OH3
Canada
Tel: +1 819 997 2161
Fax: +1 819 997 1541
Mr. Jan Thompson
Director General
Ministry of the Environment
P.O.Box 8013 DEP
0030 Oslo
Norway
Tel: +47 22 34 59 80
Fax: +47 22 34 27 55
Ms. Joke Waller-Hunter
Director
Division for Sustainable Development
United Nations
New York, NY 10017
USA
Tel: +1 212 963 0902
Fax: +1 212 963 4260
e-mail: waller-hunter@un.org
This document has been posted online by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA). Reproduction and dissemination of the document - in electronic and/or printed format - is encouraged, provided acknowledgement is made of the role of the United Nations in making it available.
Date last posted: 3 December 1999 10:25:35
Comments and suggestions: DESA/DSD