Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (23) (remove)
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (23) (remove)
Language
- English (23) (remove)
At the time of the Rio Conference, it had already become clear that climate change is far from being just an ecological issue; it is also an issue of equity. In particular, climate change was identified as an issue of intergenerational equity. It became ominously clear to observers that global warming, since it modifies important parameters of the ecology of the planet, such as sea levels or weather patterns, will affect the relations between present and future generations. Today's generation, by filling up the absorptive capacity of the atmosphere, lives at the expense of tomorrow's generation. At the same time, it came to the fore that the use of fossil fuels not only affects inter-generational equity, but also intra-generational equity, i.e., the relations between nations and social groups within a generation. Who will be allowed to reap the benefits from fossil fuel combustion? Who will have to carry the burden of emission abatement? Equity within a generation has at least two dimensions (Wuppertal Institute, 2005). First, it implies the fair distribution of burdens and benefits of fossil fuel use among nations. Secondly, however, it also implies the universal protection of human dignity by securing the fundamental rights of every human person to water, food, housing, and health. The article will focus on the latter dimension; it will explore the links between human rights and climate change, without, however, losing sight of the broader framework of equity in climate politics.
Carbon capture and storage
(2009)
This chapter is an excerpt from a study commissioned by the European Parliament, which examines EU subsidies for agriculture, fisheries, transport, energy and regional development. Based on proven methodologies for the identification and assessment of environmentally harmful subsidies, the study assesses the sustainability level of the sectoral policies and makes recommendations for a reform that would contribute to the alignment of the EU budget towards a more sustainable growth. The following sections provide the main findings of one of the largest fields of expenditure within the EU budget, the structural and cohesion policy.
Enabling the great transformation : transdisciplinarity as individual and institutional challenge
(2014)
Realizing a sustainable future in the Anthropocene requires a "great transformation." The massive technological, economic, social, and cultural change this implies is based on new forms of literacy and knowledge integration. It depends on a highly transdisciplinary "transformative science," i.e., scientific knowledge production that not only focuses on "system knowledge" but also on "target" and on "transformation" knowledge, and thus integrates different disciplines and practical expertise. The existing science system is actually not fulfilling this new social contract between science and society. Frontrunner institutions like the IASS and "transdisciplinary personalities" like Klaus Töpfer are important change agents to bring forward the transformative mission of a future Earth science.
Reforming the EU VAT system to support the transition to a low-carbon and resource efficient economy
(2015)
This chapter discusses the question of ecologically differentiated value added taxes (VAT) as a tool to overcome tax-related cognitive barriers by connecting to an existing tax system. This is elaborated along several aspects: (a) The role indirect of consumption taxes for the economy, (b) the legal issues of the VAT system, (c) the EU harmonization efforts in this context, (d) the distributional implications of value added taxes. Following this, the chapter develops a proposal for a VAT reform (e). To this end, it looks at potential and existing differentiations between sectors, products and services, and product and service groups and turns to those consumption areas that are widely identified as particularly resource and carbon intensive and sets out how a harmonization of the overall system and an ecological differentiation in single consumption areas could be brought together. Potential impacts and effects are briefly discussed (f) and some conclusions are drawn (g). The subject addressed in the chapter is relevant from a policy perspective but mainly descriptive: It does not use innovative qualitative and quantitative tools.
While secondary plastics arising at the manufacturing and processing phases are recycled to the production process in large measure due to its high purity, the market share of secondary plastics remains low and recycling is often dominated by thermal recovery. Energetic recovery of plastics in waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) has been dominating for a long time. At the same time reuse of WEEE is not well developed at EU level; with few exceptions at Member State level. Against this background we want to discuss in this book chapter several policy instruments that aim to increase the reuse of WEEE as well as the use of secondary plastics in electrical and electronic equipment. Taking the case study of Germany we evaluate instruments theoretical quantity effects and their feasibility. In reality, instruments are often weak and scattered implemented. To identify a policy mix without the risk of creating expensive policies with the potential for inefficient outcomes, we make two complementary conceptual proposes, which first open up perspectives for possible synergies of instruments and second allow an integrated understanding of the regional context in which instruments are implemented. The discussion of the case study of promoting reuse within this framework makes clear, that such an integrated understanding is the basis for any appropriate, targeted and efficient stimulation and bridges the gap between theoretical policy formulation and practically implementation.
This article presents an account of how deeply entrenched the neoclassical economic paradigm with its homo economicus and unlimited growth ideals has become in our societies and why this inhibits solutions for sustainable futures. Drawing on political economists like Karl Polanyi and Antonio Gramsci it also highlights how the current questioning of this paradigm and thus informed mindsets provides a renewed window of opportunity for a Great Transformation towards more sustainable futures. It reviews Transition Towns, Beyond GDP and Common Good Economies as examples of movements that lead the way in putting a new paradigm into practice.
Against the background of the question which role tax based instruments have to play in policy mixes to counteract the unbroken growth trend of global resource use, this chapter initially describes how the insights from a country comparative study on national resource policy frameworks could be linked to instruments for the internalisation of external environmental costs on a European scale. On the basis of a project specific but substantiated resource use vision and potential governance principles for three transition processes to reach the goals, the tax concepts are subsequently connected to simulation scenarios in order to illustrate the resource impacts that could be achieved by those policy reforms. Conclusively, barriers to such fundamental changes of framework conditions are briefly reflected upon and some conclusions are drawn.
The Ernst Strüngmann Forum seeks to link justice, sustainability, and diversity agendas. In support, this chapter discusses how linkages between these three concepts have formed and changed in the climate change discourse, particularly in light of the recent Paris Agreement. As the latest addition to the portfolio of international climate change agreements, the Paris Agreement establishes a landscape in which nation-states, subnational actors, and transnational networks will be able to reconfigure existing linkages between sustainability, diversity, and justice, and perhaps improve upon them.
Here, three possible developments are identified which may substantially influence the reconfiguration process. Recognition is given to the sustainability and justice deficits that have plagued the "top-down" character of the international climate change discourse, and it is hypothesized that the Paris Agreement opens the door for "bottom-up" movements to claim a larger segment of climate change policy decision making and design. In turn, the "polycentric" landscape created by such "movement from below" appears to emphasize concepts such as inclusivity and transparency perhaps allowing for explicit climate justice commitments. Finally, to advance societal transformation and embrace diversity, it is hypothesized that the scientific endeavor needs to be transformed from a purely analytical pursuit to an effort that makes use of the wide range of scientific competences and provides support for transformative innovations to change unsustainable sociotechnical systems.