Abstract
Sustainability has become the emerging goal for countries, companies, and people. Sustainability usually refers to the need to develop models necessary for both human beings and our planet to survive. However, sustainability is not a short-term problem; it is above all a long-term issue, posing intergenerational equity problems. Moreover, sustainability requires efficiency. The efficient use of energy and of natural, material, and informational resources is vital for sustainability and sustainable development, which should be the major goal of every country, as established in Rio in 1992, and reaffirmed at Rio+20 in 2012. But any strategy aiming at sustainability and efficient use of resources must focus on innovation and technological progress. Consequently, innovation is fundamental to making sustainability possible and improving efficiency. Yet innovation for sustainability must be environmentally friendly (e.g., green technologies). The principle behind such a strategy is better instead of more. This chapter aims at highlighting the key relationship among sustainability, innovation, and efficiency. First, it examines the concept of sustainability, looking at the neoclassical literature on sustainability and its relationship with innovation. Then, it analyzes different theoretical approaches and discusses the policy issues for sustainability where innovation, natural capital, human capital, population, and institutions are fundamental factors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The Brundtland Report (World Commission on Environment and Development 1987) follows an all-encompassing approach in which economic, social, and environmental objectives are placed on the same logical level. However, an increasingly common criticism of this approach is that it does not take sufficient account of the limits imposed by the ecosystem. In fact, in the Brundtland Report (and this is perhaps the key to its success) the natural environment does not constitute a limit for economic growth, while synergies are emphasized.
- 2.
European Commission (2014).
- 3.
- 4.
Solow (1974a, p. 4) pointed out that a backstop technology is “a technology capable of producing or substituting for a mineral resource at relatively high cost, but on an effectively inexhaustible resource base.”
The concept of backstop technology was developed by Nordhaus (1973) and was very influential in energy economics; in fact, it is a technology for mobilizing energy that is not based on an exhaustible resource. Backstop technology, according to Nordhaus, is an ultimate technology resting on a very abundant resource base. This technology allows for a substitute process with an infinite resource base. See also Nordhaus (1993).
- 5.
Hotelling’s rule states that the most socially and economically profitable extraction path of a non-renewable resource is one along which the price of the resource, determined by the marginal net revenue from the sale of the resource, increases at the rate of interest.
- 6.
A limitation on the substitutability between natural capital and artificial capital is that natural capital has the feature of multi-functionality (all life-support functions); a similar feature is not shared by artificial capital (Pearce and Turner 1990).
- 7.
Hartwick (1977, 1978), following Solow (1974b), showed in a number of models that keeping investment equal to the rents (really profits from the flow of depletion) from exhaustible resources under competitive pricing yields a path of constant consumption. Thus, altogether this is known as the Solow–Hartwick sustainability model (Solow–Hartwick sustainability was defined as “weak sustainability”).
- 8.
The Hartwick’s rule consists in continuously zero net investment in human-made capital and natural resources, and it guarantees sustainability in the form of constant utility. Without disutility from degradation, the rule results in constant consumption as well as constant utility. The Hartwick’s rule has been extensively developed since its first appearance in Hartwick (1977).
- 9.
Solow was aware that the concrete translation of sustainability into a policy is problematic, for example the deep uncertainty about environmental benefits and costs.
- 10.
It is well known that the Hotelling rent or scarcity rent is the maximum rent that could be obtained while emptying the stock resource (Hotelling 1931).
- 11.
Solow is arguing for comprehensive green national accounts that would allow some approximation to the volume of net investment in reproducible capital required for sustainability of national consumption (2009).
- 12.
In the Appendix (Solow 2009, pp. 5–14).
- 13.
Although Dasgupta is labeled a neoclassical economist (e.g., the Dasgupta-Heal model, 1974), he continued to work for a much wider economic science than classical or neoclassical theories.
- 14.
This definition corresponds, de facto, to the Brundtland Commission report’s definition of sustainable development.
- 15.
- 16.
Natural capital includes aquifers, ocean fisheries, tropical forests, estuaries, the atmosphere as a carbon sink—that is, ecosystems generally (Dasgupta 2010, p. 5).
- 17.
An economy’s productive base will shrink if its stock of capital assets depreciates and its institutions are not able to improve sufficiently to compensate for that depreciation.
- 18.
However, other than institutions, Dasgupta has expressed concern about population growth especially in poor countries (Dasgupta 1995).
- 19.
The authors apply the framework to five countries that differ significantly in stages of development and resource bases: United States, China, Brazil, India, and Venezuela.
- 20.
Dasgupta (2016).
- 21.
The Agenda is an action program for people, the planet, and prosperity signed in September 2015 by the governments of the 193 member countries of the UN. It includes 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
- 22.
UNCC (2016). https://unfccc.int/documents/9097.
- 23.
The European Council agreed on the 2030 climate and energy framework on October 23, 2014.
- 24.
Among the actions proposed, there is a commitment to continue reducing greenhouse-gas emissions, setting a reduction target of 40% by 2030 relative to 1990 levels. There is also a renewable energy target of at least 27% of energy consumption, with flexibility for member states to set national targets (European Commission 2014). https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/climate-change/2030-climate-and-energy-framework/.
- 25.
European Commission (2015).
- 26.
IPCC (2018).
- 27.
Companies must rely on synthesis rather than separation to contain tensions between them, following a sort of contextual integration.
- 28.
OECD (2018), Effective Carbon Rates 2018. http://www.oecd.org/tax/effective-carbon-rates-2018-9789264305304-en.htm.
- 29.
There are several problems with carbon pricing. However, more companies are using internal carbon pricing to drive their business decisions.
- 30.
For instance, technological innovation plays a key role in curbing CO2 emissions.
References
Arrow, K. J., Dasgupta, P., Goulder, L. H., Mumford, K., & Oleson, K. (2012). Sustainability and the Measurement of Wealth. Environment and Development Economics, 17(3), 317–353.
Beise, M., & Rennings, K. (2003). Lead Markets of Environmental Innovations: A Framework for Innovation and Environmental Economics. ZEW Discussion Paper No. 03-01. Retrieved from http://ftp.zew.de/pub/zew-docs/dp/dp0301.pdf.
Carfì, D., & Schilirò, D. (2012a). A Coopetitive Model for the Green Economy. Economic Modelling, 29(4), 1215–1219.
Carfì, D., & Schilirò, D. (2012b). Global Green Economy and Environmental Sustainability: A Coopetitive Model. In Communications in Computer and Information Science (Vol. 300, pp. 593–606). Berlin: Springer.
Dasgupta, P. (1995). The Population Problem: Theory and Evidence. Journal of Economic Literature, 33(4), 1879–1902.
Dasgupta, P. (2001). Human Well-Being and the Natural Environment (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Dasgupta, P. (2007). Measuring Sustainable Development: Theory and Application. Asian Development Review, 24(1), 1–10.
Dasgupta, P. (2010). Nature’s Role in Sustaining Economic Development. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 365, 5–11. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0231.
Dasgupta, P. (2014). Measuring the Wealth of Nations. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 6(1), 17–31.
Dasgupta, P. (2016). Sustainable Development and the Wealth of Nations, Conference on the Green Economy, Berlin, 2 November 2016. Mimeo. Retrieved from https://www.fona.de/mediathek/pdf/GEK2016_Eroeffnung_Partha_Dasgupta.pdf.
Dasgupta, P., & Heal, G. (1974). The Optimal Depletion of Exhaustible Resources. Review of Economic Studies, 41(5), 3–28.
Dasgupta, P., Ramanathan, V., Raven, P., & Sánchez Sorondo, M. (2015). Climate Change and the Common Good. A Statement of the Problem and the Demand for Transformative Solutions (The Pontifical Academy of Sciences and the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences). Città del Vaticano: Pontificia Academia Scientiarum.
European Commission. (2014). A Policy Framework for Climate and Energy in the Period from 2020 to 2030. COM/2014/015 final (52014DC0015), 4 January 2014, Brussels.
European Commission. (2015). Closing the Loop – An EU Action Plan for the Circular Economy. COM (2015) 614 final, 2 December 2015. Brussels. Retrieved from https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2015/EN/1-2015-614-EN-F1-1.PDF
Ghisellini, P., Cialani, C., & Ulgiati, S. (2016). A Review on Circular Economy: The Expected Transition to a Balanced Interplay of Environmental and Economic Systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 114, 11–32.
Hartwick, J. M. (1977). Intergenerational Equity and the Investing of Rents from Exhaustible Resources. American Economic Review, 67(5), 972–974.
Hartwick, J. M. (1978). Substitution Among Exhaustible Resources and Intergenerational Equity. Review of Economic Studies, 45(2), 347–354.
Hemmelskamp, J., Rennings, K., & Leone, F. (Eds.). (2000). Innovation-Oriented Environmental Regulation. Theoretical Approaches and Empirical (ZEW Economic Studies vol. 10). Berlin: Springer.
Hotelling, H. (1931). The Economics of Exhaustible Resources. Journal of Political Economy, 39(2), 137–175.
IPCC. (2018). Global Warming of 1.5 °C. Special Report. October, 2018. Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/.
Luqmani, A., Leach, M., & Jesson, D. (2017). Factors Behind Sustainable Business Innovation: The Case of a Global Carpet Manufacturing Company. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 24, 94–105.
Mayumi, K., Giampietro, M., & Gowdy, J. (1998). Georgescu-Roegen: Daly Versus Solow: Stiglitz Revisited. Ecological Economics, 27, 115–117.
Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C. K., & Rangaswami, M. R. (2009). Why Sustainability Is Now the Key Driver of Innovation. Harvard Business Review, 87(9), 56–64.
Nordhaus, W. (1973). The Allocation of Energy Resources. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,3, 529–570.
Nordhaus, W. (1993). Reflections on the Economics of Climate Change. Journal of Economic Perspectives,7(4), 11–25.
OECD. (2018). Effective Carbon Rates 2018. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/tax/effective-carbon-rates-2018-9789264305304-en.htm.
Pearce, D. W., & Turner, R. K. (1990). Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Perman, R., Ma, Y., McGilvray, J., & Common, M. (2003). Natural Resource and Environmental Economics (3rd ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson-Addison Wesley.
Rennings, K. (2000). Redefining Innovation – Eco-innovation Research and the Contribution from Ecological Economics. Ecological Economics, 32(2), 319–332.
Rennings, K., & Rammer, C. (2011). The Impact of Regulation-Driven Environmental Innovation on Innovation Success and Firm Performance. Industry and Innovation, 18(3), 255–283.
Schilirò, D. (2017). A Glance at Solow’s Growth Theory. Journal of Mathematical Economics and Finance, 3(2), 83–103.
Solow, R. (1973). Is the End of the World at Hand? Challenge, 16(1), 39–50.
Solow, R. (1974a). The Economics of Resources or the Resources of Economics. The American Economic Review, 64(2), 1–14.
Solow, R. (1974b). Intergenerational Equity and Exhaustible Resources. Review of Economic Studies (Symposium), 41(5), 29–46.
Solow, R. (1976). Optimal Fishing with a Natural Predator. In R. Grieson (Ed.), Public and Urban Economics: Essays in Honor of William S. Vickrey. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Solow, R. (1986). On the Intergenerational Allocation of Natural Resources. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 88(1), 141–149.
Solow, R. (1992). Sustainability: An Economist’s Perspective. In R. Dorfman & N. Dorfman (Eds.), Economics of the Environment: Selected Readings, Vol. 3 (pp. 179–187). New York, NY: Norton.
Solow, R. (1993). An Almost Practical Step Toward Sustainability. Resources Policy, 19(3), 162–172.
Solow, R. (2009). An Amateur Among Professionals. Annual Review of Resources Economics, 1(1), 1–14.
Stiglitz, J. E. (1974). Growth with Exhaustible Natural Resources: Efficient and Optimal Growth Paths. Review of Economic Studies, 41(5), 123–137.
Tascioglu, M. (2015). Sustainable Supply Chain Management: A Literature Review and Research Agenda. Journal of Management, Marketing and Logistics, 2(1), 1–11. Retrieved from http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/375029.
UNCC. (2016). Report of the Conference of the Parties on Its Twenty-First Session, Held in Paris from 30 November to 13 December 2015. Part Two: Action Taken by the Conference of the Parties at Its Twenty-First Session. Retrieved from https://unfccc.int/documents/9097.
UNEP. (1992). Rio Declaration on Environment and Development. New York, NY: United Nations. Retrieved from http://environmentandhumanrights.org/resources/Rio%20Declaration.pdf.
United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. (2012). The Future We Want. Outcome of the Conference. RIO + 20. New York, NY: United Nations, pp. 1–53. Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/index.php?menu=1298.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our Common Future (The Brundtland Report). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Schilirò, D. (2019). Sustainability, Innovation, and Efficiency: A Key Relationship. In: Ziolo, M., Sergi, B.S. (eds) Financing Sustainable Development. Palgrave Studies in Impact Finance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16522-2_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16522-2_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-16521-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-16522-2
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)