In the preceding chapters the term ‘integration’ was used many times, but what is in fact meant by integration, or integrated, as in ‘integrated policy instruments’ or ‘integrated environmental management’? According to the dictionary, to integrate means ‘to combine parts into a whole’, ‘to complete by the addition of parts’, or ‘to bring into equal participation in or membership of society’, as for instance in ‘Can these immigrants be integrated into our society?’ Applied to policy, ‘integrated’ often tends to correspond with ‘integral’ and statements on environmental issues often suggest that the word ‘integrated’ means ‘covering all aspects’ — although this is in fact usually a hollow pretence. In practice, it is rarely possible to integrate all relevant aspects in a project or method, if only because time or manpower restrictions make choices inevitable. On closer inspection, then,‘integrated’ approaches usually turn out not to be ‘fully integrated’ in the absolute sense of the phrase, but ‘more integrated’, usually signifying that the analysis includes a few more factors than earlier approaches. This process may repeat itself, leading to greater and greater ‘integra-tive’ scope, but the concept may well lose some of its meaning along the way, reminding one of the detergents that claim to make your wash ‘ever whiter’. There would thus seem to be a need for a more precise defi nition of the concept of integration.
KeywordsToxicity Europe Radar Marketing Coherence
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bell, S.,&Morse, S. (2003). Measuring sustainability. Learning from doing. London: Earthscan.Google Scholar
- Bossel, H. (1999). Indicators for sustainable development: Theory, method applications. A report to the Ballaton Group. Winnipeg: IISD.Google Scholar
- Herendeen, R. A. (1998). Ecological numeracy. Quantitative analysis of environmental issues. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Hertin, J., Berkhout, F., Moll, S.,&Schepelmann, P. (2001). Indicators for monitoring integration of environment and sustainable development in enterprise policy. Sussex: Science and Technology Policy Research, University of Sussex, UK.Google Scholar
- Murray, C. J. L.,&Lopez, A. D. (Eds.). (1996). The global burden of diseases: A comprehensive assessment of mortality and disability from diseases, injuries and risk factors in 1990 and projected to 2020. Cambridge, MA: Harvard School of Public Health.Google Scholar
- Schmidt-Bleek, F. (1993). MIPS –A universal ecological measure? Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 2(6), 306–311.Google Scholar
- Schmidt-Bleek, F. (1998). Das MIPS Konzept. Weniger Naturverbrauch — mehr Lebensqualität durch Faktor 10. München: Droemer-Knaur.Google Scholar
- Wackernagel, M.,&Rees, W. (1996). Our ecological footprint. Gabriola Island, B.C. Canada, New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
- WWF (2006). Living planet report 2006. Gland: WWF International.Google Scholar