Since the early 1980s, there has been a lively discussion about the rhetoric of economics. Ecological economists, however, so far have not tried to incorporate this discussion into their work. This paper is a first step towards including the discourse on rhetoric into the self-awareness of ecological economics. After a brief outline of what this discourse is about, the importance of metaphors as one aspect of rhetoric is examined. Connections of the rhetorical discourse to ecological economics as a post-normal science are shown. It is argued that two rhetorics of ecological economics can be distinguished: internal and external rhetoric. While the former refers mostly to methodological issues, the latter is of particular importance for the political impact that ecological economics can have. Finally, some suggestions for research are made.
The European Commission has established the Eco Management and Auditing Scheme (EMAS) to promote and institutionalize corporate environmental management and environmental audits. This article summarizes a study primarily concerned with the execution of an ecoaudit in a medium-sized furniture enterprise according to the rules of EMAS. Material flow accounting was used to assess and analyze the "gate-to-gate" and "cradle-to-grave" environmental impacts related to the firm's products and activities. A resource management strategy was developed that permits the determination of methods for firm-specific material flow management, product management, and ecological product design to improve environmental performance as seen from the vantage point of resource efficiency.
Global climate
(1998)
This report will first provide a brief account of the political developments that led to the adoption of the Kyoto Protocol. Second, it will provide a preliminary analysis of the Kyoto Protocol itself, and, third, it will assess the prospects for the further development of international climate policy and law in 1998 and beyond. Developments outside of the Kyoto negotiations will be included to further elucidate the actual international negotiations.
Differences in climate change policy in Germany and the U.S. from a political science perspective
(1998)
International and national climate change policies may either mutually support or block each other. The international political debate can on the one hand be a driving force, mainly because of its "agenda-setting" power for the national political debate, but on the other hand the outcome of international climate change policy depends on the capability of national governments to formulate adequate political goals and programs, and to have the power for their realisation and implementation in the national political process.
The following analysis will focus on the differences in climate change policy in Gerrnany and the United States. From a po1itical science perspective, it has to deal with the determinants and restrictions of the policy-making processes and their impact on policy formulation and implementation in both countries. Two kinds of determinants will be considered: structural "internal" determinants deriving from the specific setting and mode of operation of the political-administrative systems, and external determinants, such as public opinion, the role of the media. interest groups, and cultural values, which favour or restrict the process of a pro-active climate change policy.
"Joint Implementation" (JI) is considered by many participants in the international negotiations on aclimate protocol to be an important economic instrument for the implementation of greenhouse gas obligations. Apart from a wide range of problems that still have to be resolved on the project level, the institutional and procedural design of such a mechanism is of vital importance. Because JI has a "perverse incentive" to overstate results achieved by individual projects, careful reporting, monitoring and verification procedures are essential. Furthermore, the institutional structure must reconcile the sometimes conflicting demands of overall effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. This paper explores the possible design of a future international mechanism for JI and makes recommendations with regard to the institutional and procedural requirements.