The international economics of resources and resource ... - Index of

More documents

Recommendations

Info

298 R. Kemp What these four traditions unite is: & An interest in understanding the mechanisms and politics of transformative change offering sustainability benefits & A co-evolutionary view on societal transitions, in which different evolutionary (evolving) systems are influencing each other. There are differences in focus. Some researchers are more interested in understanding change than in how transitions may be managed (Geels), others are more interested in evaluating policy and governance arrangements (Hendriks, Kern, Howlett, Smith), and there are those who are primarily interested in offering guidance for the management of system change processes (Rotmans and Loorbach). The scholars share a view that transitions defy control because they are the result of endogenous and exogenous developments in regimes and the macro-landscape: there are cross-over effects and autonomous developments. Technical change interacts with economic change (changes in cost and demand conditions), social change and cultural change, which means that in managing transitions one should look for virtuous cycles of reinforcement (positive feedback). The term transition management is only used by people from the transition management school, where it is variously labelled as goal-oriented modulation, directed incrementalism, co-evolutionary steering and reflexive governance for sustainable development (Rammel and van den Bergh 2003; Kemp and Loorbach 2006; Kemp et al. 2007a). It is a form of multilevel governance that is concerned with the co-evolution of technology and society in specific domains. In the Netherlands the national government is using transition thinking in its innovation policies. The transition approach is one of the pillars of the programme “Clean and Resource-Efficient” (In Dutch: Schoon en zuinig). In so doing they are using ideas from transition management. The next section will describe the Dutch transition approach for sustainable energy. 3 The Dutch transition approach Concerns about the depletion of fossil fuels, dependencies on foreign suppliers, and climate change led policy makers in the Netherlands to gradually adopt a transition approach for sustainable energy, mobility, agriculture and resource use, which is novel and very interesting. It is interesting because of its focus on transformative change, its reliance on bottom-up processes and enrolment of business and other non-state actors in the transformation process. 6 6 First ideas about transition management were created in the project “Transitions and transition management” for the fourth National Environmental Policy Plan (NMP4). In this project, a group of scientists and policy makers met to discuss a new strategic framework. A description of the coproduction process can be found in Kemp and Rotmans (2009) and Smith and Kern (2009). After the project the TM model was further developed by Derk Loorbach and Jan Rotmans and more or less independently by the Ministry of Economic Affairs (a description and discussion of this is given by Loorbach 2007).
The Dutch energy transition approach 299 The transition approach relies on guided processes of variation and selection. It makes use of “bottom-up” developments and long-term thinking. A set of 31 transition paths are being traversed (including biomass for electricity, clean fossil, micro cogeneration, energy-producing agricultural greenhouses). The government acts as a process manager, dealing with issues of collective orientation and interdepartmental coordination. It also takes on a responsibility for the undertaking of strategic experiments and programmes for system innovation. Control policies are part of the transition approach but the government does not seek to control the process—it is not directing the process but seeks to facilitate learning and change. At the heart of the energy transition project are the activities of 7 transition platforms. In these platforms individuals from the private and the public sector, academia and civil society come together to develop a common ambition for particular areas, develop pathways and suggest transition experiments. The 7 platforms are: & New gas & Green resources & Chain efficiency & Sustainable electricity supply & Sustainable mobility & Built environment & Energy-producing greenhouse The transition approach officially started in 2002 with the project implementation transition management (PIT) of the Ministry of Economic Affairs |(EZ). In 2004– 2005, the energy transition process gained speed through the establishment of 4 platforms (new gas, green resources, chain efficiency and sustainable mobility), and the creation of the Interdepartmental Project directorate Energy transition (IPE). In 2006 two additional platforms were established (sustainable electricity supply and built environment). The transition path energy producing greenhouse became a platform of its own in 2008. In the Interdepartmental Project directorate Energy transition (IPE) created in 2005, issues of policy coordination are being discussed and dealt with by the secretary generals of six ministries: EZ responsible for innovation policy, energy policy and economic policy, VROM responsible for the environment, V&W responsible for mobility, LNV responsible for agriculture, fisheries and nature development, BuZA responsible for foreign development aid and biodiversity and the Finance Ministry. 7 Based on suggestions from the transition platforms a transition action plan has been formulated which contains the following goals: ➢ −50% CO2 in 2050 in a growing economy ➢ An increase in the rate of energy saving to 1.5–2% a year 7 EZ is the Ministry of Economic Affairs, VROM is the Ministry of Health, Spatial Planning and Environment, V&W is the Ministry of Traffic and Water, LNV the Ministry of Agriculture and Nature, BUZA the Ministry of Foreign Affairs)
Page 1 and 2:
Int Econ Econ Policy (2010) 7:147-1
Page 3 and 4:
The international economics of reso
Page 5 and 6:
The international economics of reso
Page 7 and 8:
154 P.J.J. Welfens et al. Keywords
Page 9 and 10:
156 P.J.J. Welfens et al. developme
Page 11 and 12:
158 P.J.J. Welfens et al. In the su
Page 13 and 14:
160 P.J.J. Welfens et al. genuine s
Page 15 and 16:
162 P.J.J. Welfens et al. pt p0 1 p
Page 17 and 18:
164 P.J.J. Welfens et al. A synthet
Page 19 and 20:
166 P.J.J. Welfens et al. ecologica
Page 21 and 22:
168 P.J.J. Welfens et al. 1 0,8 0,6
Page 23 and 24:
170 P.J.J. Welfens et al. In additi
Page 25 and 26:
172 P.J.J. Welfens et al. Fig. 5 Pa
Page 27 and 28:
174 P.J.J. Welfens et al. 1.0 0.5 0
Page 29 and 30:
176 P.J.J. Welfens et al. 2007: 1.0
Page 31 and 32:
178 P.J.J. Welfens et al. weak in t
Page 33 and 34:
180 P.J.J. Welfens et al. Fig. 10 T
Page 35 and 36:
182 P.J.J. Welfens et al. pessimist
Page 37 and 38:
184 P.J.J. Welfens et al. Reference
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Sustainability economics, resource
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
The U.S. proposed carbon tariffs, W
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
228 R. Bleischwitz economics and po
Page 81 and 82:
230 R. Bleischwitz Fig. 1 Global re
Page 83 and 84:
232 R. Bleischwitz demand is estima
Page 85 and 86:
234 R. Bleischwitz the ‘socio-ind
Page 87 and 88:
236 R. Bleischwitz Fig. 4 Productiv
Page 89 and 90:
238 R. Bleischwitz 5 Resource produ
Page 91 and 92:
240 R. Bleischwitz The vast majorit
Page 93 and 94:
242 R. Bleischwitz Fig. 6 Resource
Page 95 and 96:
244 R. Bleischwitz Ericsson M (2009
Page 97 and 98: 246 R. Walz 1 Introduction Competen
Page 99 and 100: 248 R. Walz Based on the pollution
Page 101 and 102: 250 R. Walz procedures. However, ev
Page 103 and 104: 252 R. Walz In addition to exports,
Page 105 and 106: 254 R. Walz 4 Technological capabil
Page 107 and 108: 256 R. Walz 4.2 Analysis of patents
Page 109 and 110: 258 R. Walz recycling (e.g. shiftab
Page 111 and 112: 260 R. Walz Fig. 10 Specialization
Page 113 and 114: 262 R. Walz Table 1 Overview of ind
Page 115 and 116: 264 R. Walz questions alone. Clearl
Page 117 and 118: Int Econ Econ Policy (2010) 7:267-2
Page 119 and 120: Eco-innovation for environmental su
Page 143 and 144: The Dutch energy transition approac
Page 147: The Dutch energy transition approac
Page 169 and 170: Multi-agent modeling of economic in
Page 193 and 194: 344 C. Lutz 1 Introduction This cha
Page 195 and 196: 346 C. Lutz The scenario analysis a
Page 197 and 198: 348 C. Lutz is designed to reduce g
Page 199 and 200:
350 C. Lutz 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 C
Page 201 and 202:
352 C. Lutz Table 2 EU27 productivi
Page 203 and 204:
354 C. Lutz material-intensive to l
Page 205 and 206:
356 C. Lutz Giljum S, Behrens A, Hi
Page 207 and 208:
358 T. Machiba While industries are
Page 209 and 210:
360 T. Machiba Field Target Technol
Page 211 and 212:
362 T. Machiba 3 Understanding sust
Page 213 and 214:
364 T. Machiba The automotive and t
Page 215 and 216:
366 T. Machiba Air conditioners fun
Page 217 and 218:
368 T. Machiba Table 2 Application
Page 219:
370 T. Machiba Charter M, Clark T (
show all

The international economics of resources and resource ... - Index of

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?