Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (34) (remove)
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Peer-Reviewed Article (13)
- Report (9)
- Working Paper (8)
- Contribution to Periodical (4)
Division
- Stoffströme und Ressourcenmanagement (34) (remove)
This article proposes a policy framework for analysing corporate governance toward sustainable development. The aim is to set up a framework for analysing market evolution toward sustainability. In the first section, the paper briefly refers to recent theories about both market and government failures that express scepticism about the way that framework conditions for market actors are set. For this reason, multi-layered governance structures seem advantageous if new solutions are to be developed in policy areas concerned with long-term change and stepwise internalisation of externalities. The paper introduces the principle of regulated self-regulation. With regard to corporate actors| interests, it presents recent insights from theories about the knowledge-based firm, where the creation of new knowledge is based on the absorption of societal views. The result is greater scope for the endogenous internalisation of externalities, which leads to a variety of new and different corporate strategies. Because governance has to set incentives for quite a diverse set of actors in their daily operations, the paper finally discusses innovation-inducing regulation. In both areas, regulated self-regulation and innovation-inducing regulation, corporate and political governance co-evolve. The paper concludes that these co-evolutionary mechanisms may assume some of the stabilising and orientating functions previously exercised by framing activities of the state. In such a view, the government's main function is to facilitate learning processes, thus departing from the state's function as known from welfare economics.
The Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy and the UNEP/Wuppertal Institute Collaborating Centre on Sustainable Consumption and Production (CSCP) set out to analyse Japanese dematerialisation and resource efficiency strategies within the 3R scope and searched for options of enhancing resource effi ciency strategies, commissioned by the German Federal Environment Agency. A further task of the project was to initiate a policy dialogue including stakeholders, academia, politics and Japanese and European environmental experts. The following paper summarises findings from the analyses, the results of the policy dialogues (Experts Workshop, 6 June 2007 and International Conference, 6 November 2007) and draws conclusions for a potential Japanese-European cooperation on the resource efficiency issue.
The paper aims to shed light on the methodological challenges of GHG monitoring at local level and to give an overview on current practices. Questions addressed are as follows: How do the methodologies which underlie different GHG inventory tools differ? What are the critical variables explaining differences between inventories? Can different GHG inventory tools be compatible - and/or interoperable - and under which conditions? The first section discusses methodological challenges related to the formation of local GHG inventories. Rather than giving a comprehensive overview on methodological problems, this section mainly highlights some of the central methodological challenges posed by local GHG inventories. This overview identifies critical variables and clarifies concepts that are necessary for the understanding of the subsequent analysis. In section two, some of the most advanced GHG inventory tools are analysed and the most important differences between these tools are highlighted. The paper concludes that the methodologies are not consistent. Local GHG inventories can thus hardly be compared. The paper gives research and policy recommendations towards greater comparability and sketches the requirements of an international protocol on urban GHG inventories.
Dieser Beitrag stellt Ressourcenproduktivität als Kernstrategie vor. Schließlich kann sie nicht nur als Entschlackungskur fungieren, sondern auch als Innovationsmotor. Darüber hinaus wird ein Vorschlag zu einer internationalen Konvention für ein nachhaltiges Ressourcenmanagement gemacht, das vorhandene Verzerrungen reduzieren und zur Prävention von Ressourcenkonflikten beitragen soll. Erforderlich ist eine Sichtweise, bei der Material-, Energie-, Umwelt- und Technologieaspekte einerseits und internationale Entwicklungsaspekte andererseits integriert betrachtet werden. Schließlich geht es nicht um Rohstoffe als solche, sondern um ihre Funktion für menschliche Bedürfnisbefriedigung und Wohlstand. Nötig ist ein Paradigmenwechsel, in dem ein reines Angebotsdenken - welche Rohstoffmengen werden benötigt und wie können sie beschafft werden - zugunsten einer Systemperspektive überwunden wird.
This paper undertakes a step to explaining the international economics of resource productivity. It argues that natural resources are back on the agenda for four reasons: the demand on world markets continues to increase, the environmental constraints to using resources are relevant throughout their whole life cycle, the access to critical metals could become a barrier to the low carbon economy, and uneven patterns of use will probably become a source of resource conflicts. Thus, the issue is also of relevance for the transition to a low carbon economy. "Material Flow Analysis" is introduced as a tool to measure the use of natural resources within economies and internationally; such measurement methodology now is being harmonized under OECD auspices. For these reasons, the paper argues that resource productivity - that is the efficiency of using natural resources to produce goods and services in the economy - will become one of the key determinants of economic success and human well-being. An empirical chapter gives evidence on time series of resource productivity increases across a number of economies. Introducing the notion of "material flow innovation", the paper also discusses the innovation dynamics and issues of competitiveness. However, as the paper concludes, market barriers make a case for effective resource policies that should provide incentives for knowledge generation and get the prices right.