Advertisement

Environment, Development and Sustainability

, Volume 10, Issue 6, pp 787–825 | Cite as

Will progress in science and technology avert or accelerate global collapse? A critical analysis and policy recommendations

  • Michael H. HuesemannEmail author
  • Joyce A. Huesemann
Article

Abstract

Industrial society will move towards collapse if its total environmental impact (I), expressed either in terms of energy and materials use or in terms of pollution, increases with time, i.e., dI/dt > 0. The traditional interpretation of the I = PAT equation reflects the optimistic belief that technological innovation, particularly improvements in eco-efficiency, will significantly reduce the technology (T) factor, and thereby result in a corresponding decline in impact (I). Unfortunately, this interpretation of the I = PAT equation ignores the effects of technological change on the other two factors: population (P) and per capita affluence (A). A more heuristic formulation of this equation is I = P(T)·A(T)·T in which the dependence of P and A on T is apparent. From historical evidence, it is clear that technological revolutions (tool-making, agricultural, and industrial) have been the primary driving forces behind successive population explosions, and that modern communication and transportation technologies have been employed to transform a large proportion of the world’s inhabitants into consumers of material- and energy-intensive products and services. In addition, factor analysis from neoclassical growth theory and the rebound effect provide evidence that science and technology have played a key role in contributing to rising living standards. While technological change has thus contributed to significant increases in both P and A, it has at the same time brought about considerable eco-efficiency improvements. Unfortunately, reductions in the T-factor have generally not been sufficiently rapid to compensate for the simultaneous increases in both P and A. As a result, total impact, in terms of energy production, mineral extraction, land-use and CO2 emissions, has in most cases increased with time, indicating that industrial society is nevertheless moving towards collapse. The belief that continued and even accelerated scientific research and technological innovation will automatically result in sustainability and avert collapse is at best mistaken. Innovations in science and technology will be necessary but alone will be insufficient for sustainability. Consequently, what is most needed are specific policies designed to decrease total impact, such as (a) halting population growth via effective population stabilization plans and better access to birth control methods, (b) reducing total matter-energy throughput and pollution by removing perverse subsidies, imposing regulations that limit waste discharges and the depletion of non-renewable resources, and implementing ecological tax reform, and (c) moving towards a steady-state economy in which per-capita affluence is stabilized at lower levels by replacing wasteful conspicuous material consumption with social alternatives known to enhance subjective well-being. While science and technology must play an important role in the implementation of these policies, none will be enacted without a fundamental change in society’s dominant values of growth and exploitation. Thus, value change is the most important prerequisite for avoiding global collapse.

Keywords

Collapse Consumption Eco-efficiency Industrial ecology IPAT equation Population growth Rebound effect Steady-state economy Subjective well-being Sustainable development 

References

  1. Abramovitz, M. (1956). Resource and output trends in the United States since 1870. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 46(May), 5–23.Google Scholar
  2. Adriaanse, A. et al. (1997). Resource flows the material basis of industrial economies. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute.Google Scholar
  3. Alfredsson, E. C. (2004). Green consumption—no solution for climate change. Energy, 29, 513–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Argyle, M. (1987). The psychology of happiness. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
  5. Ausubel, J. H. (1996). Can technology spare the earth? American Scientist, 84, 166–178, March–April Issue.Google Scholar
  6. Ausubel, J. H., & Gruebler, A. (1995). Working less and living longer: Long-term trends in working time and time budgets. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 50, 113–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ayres, R. U., & van den Bergh, C. J. M. (2005). A theory of economic growth with material/energy resources and dematerialization: Interaction of three growth mechanisms. Ecological Economics, 55, 96–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ayres, R. U., & Warr, B. (2005). Accounting for growth: The role of physical work. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 16, 181–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Balzhiser, R. E., Samuels, M. R., & Elisassen, J. D. (1972). Chemical engineering thermodynamics—the study of energy, entropy, and equilibrium. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  10. Barnard, N. D., Nicholson, A., & Howard, J. L. (1995). The medical costs attributable to meat consumption. Preventative Medicine, 24(6), 646–655.Google Scholar
  11. Beaudreau, B. C. (2005). Engineering and economic growth. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 16, 211–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Beckerman, W. (1996) Through green-colored glasses: Environmentalism reconsidered. Washington, DC: Cato Institute.Google Scholar
  13. Bender, W. H. (1994). An end use analysis of global food requirements. Food Policy, 19(4), 381–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bentzen, J. (2004). Estimating the rebound effect in US manufacturing energy consumption. Energy Economics, 26, 123–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Betts, K. (2004). Calculating computing’s environmental cost. Environmental Science and Technology, November 15 Issue, 432A–433A.Google Scholar
  16. Binswanger, M. (2001). Technological progress and sustainable development: What about the rebound effect? Ecological Economics, 36, 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Birdsall, N. (1994). Another look at population and global warming. In Population, environment, and development. Proceedings of the United Nations Expert Group Meeting on Population, Environment, and Development held at the United Nations Headquarters, 20–24 January 1992, New York, United Nations, pp. 39–54.Google Scholar
  18. Birol, F., & Keppler, J. H. (2000). Prices, technology development and the rebound effect. Energy Policy, 28, 457–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Blair, R. D., Kaserman, D. & Tepel, R. C. (1984). The impact of improved mileage on gasoline consumption. Economic Inquiry, 22, 209–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Bongaarts, J. (1992). Population growth and global warming. Population and Development Review, 18(2), 299–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Bongaarts, J., O’Neill, B. C. & Gaffin, S. R. (1997). Global warming policy: Population left out of in the cold. Environment, 39(9), 40–41.Google Scholar
  22. Braun, E. (1995). Futile progress: Technology’s empty promise. London, UK: Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
  23. Brookes, L. (2000). Energy efficiency fallacies revisited. Energy Policy, 28, 355–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Campbell C. J., & Laherrere, J. H. (1998). The end of cheap oil. Scientific American, March, 78–83.Google Scholar
  25. Carlsson-Kanyama, A. (1998). Climate change and dietary choices—how can emissions of greenhouse gases from food consumption be reduced? Food Policy, 23(3/4), 277–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Castaneda, B. (1997). An index of sustainable economic welfare for Chile, institute for ecological economics. Maryland: Solmons.Google Scholar
  27. Cavanagh, J., & Mander, J. (2002). Alternatives to economic globalization (1st ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.Google Scholar
  28. Chalkley, A. M., Billett, E., & Harrison, D. (2001). An investigation of the possible extent of the re-spending rebound effect in the sphere of consumer products. The Journal of Sustainable Product Design, 1, 163–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Chertow, M. R. (2001). The IPAT equation and its variants, Journal of Industrial Ecology, 4(4), 13–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Cleveland, C. J., & Ruth, M. (1997). When, Where and by How much does thermodynamics constrain economic processes? A survey of Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen's contribution to ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 22, 203–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Cleveland, C. J., & Ruth, M. (1999). Indicators of dematerialization and the materials intensity of use, Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2, 15–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Connelly, L., & Koshland, C. P. (1997). Two aspects of consumption: Using an exergy-based measure of degradation to advance the theory and implementation of industrial ecology, Resource Conservation and Recycling, 19, 199–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Cooper, T. (2005). Slower consumption: Reflections on product life spans and the ‘Throwaway Society’. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9(1–2), 51–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Daly, H. E. (1980). The steady-state economy: toward a political economy of biophysical equilibrium and moral growth. In H. E. Daly (Ed.), Economics, ecology, ethics—assays toward a steady-state economy. New York: W.H. Freedman.Google Scholar
  35. Daly, H. E., & Cobb, J. (1989). For the common good—redirecting the economy towards community, the environment, and sustainable development. London, UK: Green Print.Google Scholar
  36. Deevey, E. S. (1960). The human population. Scientific American, 203, 195–204.Google Scholar
  37. Denison, E. F. (1985). Trends in American economic growth: 1929–1982. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  38. Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed. New York, NY: Viking Penguin.Google Scholar
  39. Diefenbacher, H. (1994). The ISEW in Germany. In C. Cobb & J. Cobb (Eds.), The green national product. Lanham, Maryland: University of Americas Press.Google Scholar
  40. Diener, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Money and happiness: Income and subjective well-being across nations. In E. Diener, & E. M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, pp. 185–218.Google Scholar
  41. Dresner, S. (2002). The principles of sustainability. London, UK: Earthscan Publications.Google Scholar
  42. Duchin, F. (2005). Sustainable consumption of food. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9(1–2), 99–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Dohmen, F., & Hornig, F. (2004). Der Windmuehlen Wahn—Die Grosse Luftnummer (The Windmill Craze – The Great Air Number). Der Spiegel, 14, 80–97.Google Scholar
  44. Durning, A. T. (1992). How much is enough? The consumer society and the future of the earth. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  45. Ehrlich, P. R. (1989). The limits to substitution: Meta-resource depletion and a new economic-ecological paradigm. Ecological Economics, 1, 9–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ehrlich, P. R., & Ehrlich, A. H. (1991). The population explosion. Touchstone Books.Google Scholar
  47. Ehrlich, P. R., & Holdren, J. (1971). Impact of population growth. Science, 171, 1212–1217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Elliott, D. L., Wendell, L. L., & Gower, G. L. (1992). Wind energy potential in the united states considering environmental and land-use exclusions. In M. E. Ardan, S. M. A. Burley & M. Coleman (Eds.), Proceedings of the biennial congress of the international solar energy society, Solar World Congress in Denver, Colorado, Oxford, UK, Pergamon, Vol. 1(2), pp. 576–581.Google Scholar
  49. Faber, M., Niemes, H. & Stephan, G. (1995). Entropy, environment, and resources. Berlin, Germany: Spinger Verlag.Google Scholar
  50. Fabricant, S. (1954). Economic progress and economic change, 34th Annual report of the National Bureau of Economic Research, New York.Google Scholar
  51. Frank, R. H. (1999). Luxury fever—Why money fails to satisfy in an era of excess. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  52. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2000). Happiness, economy, and institutions. Economics Journal, 110(446), 918–938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Frey, B. S., & Stutzer, A. (2002). What can economists learn from happiness research? Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 402–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Gaffin, S. R. (1998). World population projections for greenhouse gas emission scenarios. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 3, 133–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Gerbens-Leenes, P. W., & Nonhebel, S. (2002). Consumption patterns and their effects on land required for food. Ecological Economics, 42, 185–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Glasby, G. P. (1988). Entropy, pollution and environmental degradation. Ambio, 17, 330–335.Google Scholar
  57. Goodland, R. (1997). Environmental sustainability in agriculture: Diet matters, Ecological Economics, 23(3), 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Graedel, T. E., & Allenby, B. R. (1995). Industrial ecology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  59. Greene, D. L. (1992). Vehicle use and fuel economy: How big is the rebound effect? The Energy Journal, 13(1), 117–143.Google Scholar
  60. Greening, L. A., Greene, D. L. & Difiglio, C. (2000). Energy efficiency and consumption—the rebound effect—a survey. Energy Policy, 28, 389–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Grubb, M. J. (1990). Energy efficiency and economic fallacies. Energy Policy, October Issue, pp. 783–785.Google Scholar
  62. Gruebler, A. (1994). Industrialization as a historical phenomenon. Industrial Ecology and Global Change, pp. 43–68.Google Scholar
  63. Gutes, M. C. (1996). The concept of weak sustainability. Ecological Economics, 17, 147–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Haas, R., & Biermayr, P. (2000). The rebound effect for space heating: Empirical evidence from Austria. Energy Policy, 28, 403–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Hamilton, C. (2003). Growth fetish. NSW Australia: Allen and Unwin, Crows Nest.Google Scholar
  66. Hannon, B. (1975). Energy conservation and the consumer. Science, 189(4197), 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Herring, H. (1999). Does energy efficiency save energy? The debate and its consequences. Applied Energy, 63, 209–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Hertwich, E. G. (2005). Consumption and the rebound effect: An industrial ecology perspective. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9(1–2), 85–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Hobbs, F., & Stoops, N. (2002). Demographic trends in the 20th century, U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Special Reports, Series CENSR-4, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/CENSR-4.pdf.Google Scholar
  70. Holdren, J. P. (1991). Population and the energy problem. Population and Environment, 12(3), 231–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Howarth, R. (1997). Energy efficiency and economic growth. Contemporary Economic Policy, 15, 1–8.Google Scholar
  72. Huesemann, M. H. (2001). Can pollution problems be effectively solved by environmental science and technology? An analysis of critical limitations. Ecological Economics, 37, 271–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Huesemann, M. H. (2003). The limits of technological solutions to sustainable development. Clean Technology and Environmental Policy, 5, 21–34.Google Scholar
  74. Huesemann, M. H. (2006). Can advances in science and technology prevent global warming? A critical review of limitations and challenges. Mitigation and Adaptation for Global Change, 11, 539–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Inhaber, H., & Saunders, H. (1994). Road to nowhere: Energy conservation often backfires and leads to increased consumption. The Sciences, 34(6), 20–25.Google Scholar
  76. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). (2001). Special report on emission scenarios, www.ipcc.ch.Google Scholar
  77. International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA). (1998). The real price of gasoline, report no. 3: An analysis of the hidden external costs consumers pay to fuel their automobiles, www.icta.org/doc/Real%20Price%20of%20Gasoline.pdf.Google Scholar
  78. Jackson, T. (2005). Live better by consuming less? Is there a ‘double dividend’ in sustainable consumption? Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9(1–2), 19–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Jackson, T., & Marks, N. (1999). Consumption, sustainable welfare and human needs—with reference to UK expenditure patterns between 1954 and 1994. Ecological Economics, 28, 421–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Jackson, T., & Stymne, S. (1996). Sustainable economic welfare in Sweden—a pilot index 1950–1992. Stockholm, Sweden: Stockholm Environment Institute.Google Scholar
  81. Jevons, W. S., (1906). The coal question: Can Britain survive? First published in 1865. London, UK: Republished by Macmillan.Google Scholar
  82. Jobling, M. A., Hurles, M. E., & Tyler-Smith, C. (2003). Human evolutionary genetics: Origin, peoples and disease, Garland Science/Francis and Taylor Group.Google Scholar
  83. Jochem, E. (2000). Energy and end-use efficiency. In J. Goldemberg (Ed.), World energy assessment: Energy and the challenge of sustainability (pp. 174–217). Chapter 6, United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, World Energy Council.Google Scholar
  84. Kahnemann, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Kasser, T., (2002). The high price of materialism. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  86. Keeling, C. D., & Whorf, T. P. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations (up to 2003)—Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, http://mercury.ornl.gov/cdiac.Google Scholar
  87. Kendrick, J. W. (1961). Productivity trends in the United States. New York: Princeton University Press (for the National Bureau of Economic Research).Google Scholar
  88. Khazzoom, J. D. (1980). Economic implications of mandated efficiency standards for household appliances. Energy Journal, 1(4), 21–40.Google Scholar
  89. Khazzoom, J. D. (1987). Energy saving resulting from the adoption of more efficient appliances. Energy Journal, 8(4), 85–89.Google Scholar
  90. Khazzoom, J. D. (1989). Energy savings from more efficient appliances: A rejoinder. Energy Journal, 10(1), 157–166.Google Scholar
  91. Kheshgi, H. S., Prince, R. C. & Marland, G. (2000). The potential of biomass fuels in the context of global climate change: Focus on transportation fuels’. Annual Review Energy Environment, 25, 199–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Kivel, P. (2004). You call this a democracy? Who benefits, who pays and who really decides. New York: The Apex Press.Google Scholar
  93. Korten, D. (1995). When corporations rule the world. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.Google Scholar
  94. Kramer, K. J., Moll, H. C., Nonhebel, S. & Wilting, H. C. (1999). Greenhouse gas emissions related to Dutch food consumption. Energy Policy, 27, 203–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Laitner, J. A. (2000). Energy efficiency: Rebounding to a sound analytical perspective. Energy Policy, 28, 471–475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Lane, R. E. (2001). The loss of happiness in market democracies. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  97. Lovins, A. B. (1988). Energy saving resulting from the adoption of more efficient appliances: Another view. Energy Journal, 9(2), 155–162.Google Scholar
  98. Maddison, A. (1991). Dynamic forces in capitalist development: A long-run comparative view, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  99. Mander, J. (1978). Four arguments for the elimination of television, Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
  100. Marland, G., Boden, T. A., & Andres, R. J. (2002). Global, regional, and national fossil fuel CO2 emissions (up to 2002), Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, http://mercury.ornl.gov/cdiac.Google Scholar
  101. McDonough, W., & Braungart, M. (2002). Cradle to cradle: Remaking the way we make things. North Point Press.Google Scholar
  102. McKeown, T. (1988). The origins of human disease. New York: Basil Blackwell, Inc.Google Scholar
  103. Meadows, D., Randers, J. & Meadows, D. (2004). Limits to growth the 30-year update. White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  104. Myers, D. G., & Diener, E. (1996). The pursuit of happiness. Scientific American, 274(5), 70–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Myers, N., & Kent, J. (2001). Perverse subsidies: How misused tax dollars harm the environment and the economy. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  106. Myers, N. (2003). Consumption: Challenge to sustainable development. Science, 276, 53–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Nakicenovic, N. (1996). Freeing energy from carbon. Daedalus, 125(3), 95–112.Google Scholar
  108. Nakicenovic, N., & Gruebler, A. (1993). Energy conversion, conservation, and efficiency, chapter 2. Energy, 18(5), 421–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Nakicenovic, N., Gruebler, A. & McDonald, A. (1998). Global energy perspective. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  110. Nelson, D. L, & Cox, M. M. (2005). Lehninger principles of biochemistry (4th ed.). New York: W.H. Freeman and Company.Google Scholar
  111. O’Connor, M. (1994). Entropy, liberty, and catastrophe: The physics and metaphysics of waste disposal, In P. Burley & J. Foster (Eds.), Economics and thermodynamics: New perspectives on economic analysis. Boston, Mass: Kluwer, pp. 119–182.Google Scholar
  112. OECD/IEA. (2004). 30 Years of energy use in IEA countries. Paris, France: International Energy Agency (IEA).Google Scholar
  113. O’Neill, B. C., MacKellar, F. L. & Lutz, W. (2001). Population and climate change. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  114. Oswald, A. J. (1997). Happiness and economic performance. Economic Journal, 107(445), 1815–1831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Pimentel, D., & Pimentel, M. (1996). Food, energy, and society. Boulder, Colorado: University of Colorado Press.Google Scholar
  116. Pritchett, L. H. (1994). Desired fertility and the impact of population policies. Population and Development Review, 20(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Rees, W. E., & Wackernagel, M. (1995). Our ecological footprint: Reducing environmental impact on the earth. Gabriola Island, British Columbia, Canada: New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
  118. Romm, J. J., & Curtis, C. B. (1996). Mideast oil forever? Atlantic Monthly, 277(4), 57.Google Scholar
  119. Roy, J. (2000). The rebound effect: Some empirical evidence from india. Energy Policy, 28, 433–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Ruth, M. (1993). Integrating economics, ecology and thermodynamics. Dortrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  121. Ruth, M. (1995). Information, order and knowledge in economic and ecological systems: Implications for material and energy use. Ecological Economics, 13, 99–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Ryerson, W.N., (1995). Sixteen myths about population. Focus, 5(1), Population Media Center, http://www.populationmedia.org/issues/sixteen_myths/myths.html.
  123. Salter, W. E. G. (1960). Productivity and technical change. London, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  124. Samuelson, P. A., & Nordhaus, W. D. (1989). Economics, 13th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  125. Sanne, C. (2000). Dealing with environmental savings in a dynamical economy—how to stop chasing your tail in the pursuit of sustainability. Energy Policy, 28, 487–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Saunders, H. D. (1992). The Khazzoom-Brookes postulate and Neoclassical growth. Energy Journal, 13(4), 131–148.Google Scholar
  127. Saunders, H. D. (2000). A view from the macro side: Rebound, backfire, and Khazzoom-Brookes. Energy Policy, 28, 439–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Schipper, L., & Grubb, M. (2000). On the rebound? Feedback between energy intensities and energy uses in IEA countries. Energy Policy, 28, 367–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Schor, J. B. (2005). Sustainable consumption and worktime reduction. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 9(1–2), 37–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Schor, J. B. (1992). The overworked American: The unexpected decline of leisure time. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  131. Schurr, S. (1982). Energy efficiency and productive efficiency: Some thoughts based on american experience. Energy Journal, 3(3), 3–14.Google Scholar
  132. Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  133. Sieferle, R. P. (2004). Sustainability in a world history perspective, In B. Benzing & B. Hermann (Eds.), Exploitation and overexploitation in societies past and present. Muenster: Lit Verlag, pp. 123–141.Google Scholar
  134. Simon, J. L. (1996). The ultimate resource 2. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  135. Solow, R. M. (1957). Technical change and the aggregate production function. Review of Economics and Statistics, 39(August), 312–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. Stockhammer, E., Hochreiter, H., Obermayr, B., & Steiner, K. (1997). The Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare (ISEW) as an alternative to GDP in measuring economic welfare. The results of the Austrian ISEW calculation 1955–1992. Ecological Economics, 21(1), 19–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Tainter, J. A. (1988). The collapse of complex societies. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  138. The Population Council. (1992). Future population growth and global warming. In Population, environment, and development, Proceedings of the United Nations Expert Group Meeting on Population, Environment, and Development held at the United National Headquarters, 20–24 January 1992, New York, United Nations, pp. 280–285.Google Scholar
  139. Trainer, T. (1995). The conserver society: Alternatives for sustainability. London, UK: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  140. U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). (2005). National Agricultural Statistics Service, Crops by State, http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/data-sets/crops/95111/.Google Scholar
  141. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). (2003). Energy information administration. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases in the United States 2003, Trends in U.S. Carbon Intensity and Total Greenhouse Gas Intensity, www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt/trends.html.Google Scholar
  142. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). (2004). Energy information administration. Energy Overview, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/overview.html.
  143. U.S. Office of Management and Budget (OMB). (2004). Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2004, Historical Tables, Table 10.1, pp. 182–183, http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget.
  144. Vollebergh, H. R. J., & Kemfert, C. (2005). The role of technological change for a sustainable development. Ecological Economics, 54, 133–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. Von Weizsacker, E., Lovins, A. B., & Lovins, L. H. (1998). Factor four: Doubling wealth—halfing resource use. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  146. Weeks, J., (1992). How to influence fertility: The experience so far. In L. Grant (Ed.), Elephants in the Volkswagen: Facing the tough questions about our overcrowded country (pp. 178–196), Chapter 15. New York: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  147. Williams, E., Ayres, R. U., & Heller, M. (2002). The 1.7 kilogram microchip: Energy and material use in the production of semiconductor devices. Environmental Science and Technology, 36(24), 5504–5510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. Williams, E. (2004). Energy intensity of computer manufacturing: Hybrid assessment combining process and economic input-output methods. Environmental Science and Technology, 38(22), 6166–6174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. Wright, R. (2004). A short history of progress. New York: Carroll and Graf Publishers.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Marine Sciences LaboratoryPacific Northwest National LaboratorySequimUSA
  2. 2.Critical Science InstituteCarlsborgUSA

Personalised recommendations