Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Investing in Resource Efficiency pp 227–244Cite as

Enabling Resource Efficiency Investments: A Review and Outlook of the Resource Efficiency Agenda of the European Union

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 585 Accesses

Abstract

In times of volatile resource prices, possible disruptions in resource trade, re-industrialisation objectives, and concerns about environmental pressures arising from resource use, resource efficiency, i.e. ‘doing more with less’, is seen as one possibility to address these issues and deliver multiple economic and environmental benefits. All these challenges are particularly relevant for the European Union (EU) since it depends on resource imports, aims to increase industrial production, and has set itself the goal to significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The EU attempts to achieve several objectives by increasing resource efficiency: reducing its dependency on resource imports, increasing the cost competitiveness of its industry, mitigating climate change, and working towards the UN Sustainable Development Goals. To this end, the EU declared resource efficiency a flagship initiative as part of its Europe 2020 strategy, introduced a Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe, and developed a Circular Economy Action Plan, among other initiatives. Additionally, the EU and its member states currently devote substantial capital to resource efficiency and circular economy investment projects. However, recent economic, political, and social circumstances have seemingly put other policy issues to the forefront of discussions, and slowed the political momentum for the resource efficiency agenda. Nevertheless, the implementation of the Circular Economy Action Plan and ensuring access to adequate finance for investments in resource efficiency and the circular economy remain key priorities. Accordingly, this chapter outlines the opportunities as well as challenges for advancing the resource efficiency agenda in the future, and discusses the role resource efficiency investments can play in that development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allwood JM, Ashby MF, Gutowski TG, Worrell E (2011) Material efficiency: a white paper. Resour Conserv Recycl 55:362–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bahn-Walkowiak B, Steger S (2015) Resource targets in Europe and worldwide: an overview. Resources 4:597–620. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources4030597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrett J, Scott K (2012) Link between climate change mitigation and resource efficiency: a UK case study. Glob Environ Chang 22:299–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.11.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleischwitz R, Flachenecker F (2017) Sustainable resources: managing markets, increasing efficiency and establishing partnerships. In: Sustainable development policy: a European perspective. Routledge, Oxford, pp 1–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleischwitz R, Welfens P, Zhang Z (2009) Sustainable growth and resource productivity: economic and global policy issues. Greenleaf Publishing, Austin, TX

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of the European Union (2014) Council conclusions on greening the European semester and the Europe 2020 strategy—mid-term review 2013. pp. 1–5

    Google Scholar 

  • Distelkamp M, Meyer M (2016) Quantitative assessment of pathways to a resource-efficient and low-carbon Europe. Osnabruck, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  • EBRD (2015) Green economy transition approach. EBRD, London

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2008) The raw materials initiative—meeting our critical needs for growth and jobs in Europe COM(2008) 699 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2010) Europe 2020—a strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2011a) A resource-efficient Europe—flagship initiative under the Europe 2020 strategy—COM(2011) 21 final. European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2011b) Roadmap to a resource efficient Europe—COM(2011) 571 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2011c) A roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050—COM(2011) 112 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2012) European innovation partnership on raw materials—COM(2012) 82 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2014a) For a European industrial renaissance—SWD(2014) 14 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2014b) On resource efficient opportunities in the building sector—COM(2014) 445 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2014c) Towards a circular economy: a zero waste programme for Europe—COM(2014) 398 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2014d) Report on critical raw materials for the EU. Report of the ad hoc working group on defining critical raw materials

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2015a) Closing the loop: an EU action plan for the circular economy—COM(2015) 614/2. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

  • EC (2015b) Better regulation guidelines—SWD(2015) 111 final. Comm staff work doc. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(12)00047-9

  • EC (2016a) Energy, transport and environment indicators—2016 edition. European Union, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2016b) Capital markets union—accelerating reform COM(2016) 601 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2016c) Commission work programme 2017. Delivering a Europe that protects, Empowers and defends—COM(2016) 710 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2016d) State of the union 2016: the European fund for strategic investments—frequently asked questions. The European Commission, Strasbourg

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2016e) Ecodesign working plan 2016–2019—COM(2016) 773 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2016f) EU resource efficiency scoreboard 2015. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2016g) Raw materials scoreboard—European innovation partnership on raw materials. doi: https://doi.org/10.2873/28674

  • EC (2016h) Delivering the benefits of EU environmental policies through a regular environmental implementation review—COM(2016) 316 final. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2016i) The implementation of the 2011 white paper on transport—roadmap to a single European transport area, SWD(2016) 226 final

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2017a) Material flow accounts. The European Commission, Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • EC (2017b) Review of waste policy and legislation. The European Commission, Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/target_review.htm

  • EC (2017c) Circular economy: commission delivers on its promises, offers guidance on recovery of energy from waste and works with EIB to boost investment—press release. The European Commission, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • EEA (2013) Environmental pressures from European consumption and production—a study in integrated environmental and economic analysis. EEA technical report no 2/2013

    Google Scholar 

  • EIB (2015) The EIB in the circular economy. Luxembourg

    Google Scholar 

  • EP (2015) Report on resource efficiency: moving towards a circular economy—2014/2208(INI). Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  • European Resource Efficiency Platform (2014) Manifesto & policy recommendations. Brussels, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  • Flachenecker F, Bleischwitz R, Rentschler JE (2016) Investments in material efficiency: the introduction and application of a comprehensive cost–benefit framework. J Environ Econ Policy 6:1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/21606544.2016.1211557

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • G7 (2015) Leaders’ declaration G7 summit 7–8 June 2015. Schloss Elmau

    Google Scholar 

  • G8 (2008) Kobe 3R action plan. Kobe, Japan

    Google Scholar 

  • IPCC (2007) Contribution of working group III to the fourth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change summary: summary for policymakers

    Google Scholar 

  • Krausmann F, Gingrich S, Eisenmenger N et al (2009) Growth in global materials use, GDP and population during the 20th century. Ecol Econ 68:2696–2705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.05.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGlade C, Ekins P (2014) The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting global warming to 2°C. Nature 517:187–190. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD (2014) Green growth indicators 2014. doi: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264202030-en

  • OECD (2015) Material resources, productivity and the environment. OECD, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  • Peake S, Ekins P (2016) Exploring the financial and investment implications of the Paris agreement. Clim Policy 17:1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2016.1258633

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • POLFREE (2014) D3.5 report on scenario formulation. pp 1–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Rockström J, Steffen W, Noone K (2009) Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecol Soc 14

    Google Scholar 

  • Steffen W, Richardson K, Rockström J et al (2015) Planetary boundaries: guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347:1259855. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UN (2015a) Paris agreement. United Nations framework convention on climate change 21st conference parties. Paris, France

    Google Scholar 

  • UN (2015b) Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development—United Nations sustainable development goals. New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • UN (2015c) Outcome document of the third international conference on financing for development: Addis Ababa action agenda. In: Third international conference on financing for development A/CONF227, pp. 1–39. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

  • UNEP IRP (2011) Decoupling: natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP IRP (2014) Decoupling 2—technologies, opportunities and policy options. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi

    Google Scholar 

  • UNEP IRP (2016) Global material flows and resource productivity. Assessment report for the UNEP international resource panel. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this chapter are entirely those of the authors, and should not be attributed to the institutions with which the authors are associated.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. European Commission, Brussel, Belgium

    Manfred Rosenstock

  2. University College London, Institute for Sustainable Resources, London, UK

    Florian Flachenecker

Authors
  1. Manfred Rosenstock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Florian Flachenecker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manfred Rosenstock .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University College London, Institute for Sustainable Resources, London, United Kingdom

    Florian Flachenecker

  2. University College London, Institute for Sustainable Resources, London, United Kingdom

    Jun Rentschler

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Rosenstock, M., Flachenecker, F. (2018). Enabling Resource Efficiency Investments: A Review and Outlook of the Resource Efficiency Agenda of the European Union. In: Flachenecker, F., Rentschler, J. (eds) Investing in Resource Efficiency. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78867-8_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation