The international economics of resources and resource ... - Index of
The international economics of resources and resource ... - Index of
The international economics of resources and resource ... - Index of
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
246 R. Walz<br />
1 Introduction<br />
Competences for green development <strong>and</strong> leapfrogging in Newly Industrializing<br />
Countries (NICs) are becoming increasingly urgent from a global perspective. This<br />
also holds for innovations to increase material efficiency, which are receiving<br />
increasing interest among sustainability innovations. <strong>The</strong> integration <strong>of</strong> these<br />
innovations into the development process in the rapidly growing economies requires<br />
knowledge build-up <strong>and</strong> technology cooperation. <strong>The</strong> prospect <strong>of</strong> exporting<br />
sustainability technologies can add an incentive for Newly Industrializing Countries<br />
to move towards sustainability technologies.<br />
<strong>The</strong> first part <strong>of</strong> the paper deals with conceptual issues. First, the importance <strong>of</strong><br />
innovation <strong>and</strong> technology cooperation are discussed within the traditional view <strong>of</strong><br />
environmental <strong>economics</strong> on global environmental challenges. Prerequisites for<br />
successful technology cooperation <strong>and</strong> export success in <strong>international</strong> trade are<br />
presented. Secondly, the empirical research concept to measure capabilities for green<br />
development is explained.<br />
<strong>The</strong> remainder <strong>of</strong> the paper analyses selected NICs. <strong>The</strong> empirical results include<br />
the general framework condition for sustainability innovations. <strong>The</strong> technological<br />
capabilities in sustainability technologies are analyzed. <strong>The</strong>y comprise 6 fields <strong>of</strong><br />
sustainability technologies: (1) material efficiency, including renewable <strong><strong>resource</strong>s</strong>,<br />
ecodesign <strong>of</strong> products <strong>and</strong> recycling, (2) environmental friendly energy supply<br />
technologies, including renewable energy, cogeneration <strong>and</strong> CO2 neutral fossil fuels,<br />
(3) energy efficiency, both in buildings <strong>and</strong> in industry, (4) transport technologies,<br />
(5) water technologies, <strong>and</strong> (6) waste management technologies. <strong>The</strong>se technological<br />
fields are analyzed with innovation indicators such as publications, patents <strong>and</strong> trade.<br />
In an additional section, disaggregated results are presented for the case <strong>of</strong> material<br />
efficiency. Based on these results, first conclusions for the role <strong>of</strong> sustainability<br />
innovations for the economic development process in NICs are drawn. Finally, the<br />
limitations <strong>of</strong> such an indicator based overview are explored.<br />
2 Conceptual issues<br />
2.1 Prerequisites for leapfrogging<br />
<strong>The</strong>re is general consensus that environmental sustainability requires an integration<br />
<strong>of</strong> environmental friendly technologies in the economic catching up process <strong>of</strong><br />
Newly Industrializing Countries (NICs). Since the seminal paper <strong>of</strong> Grossmann <strong>and</strong><br />
Krueger (1995), this challenge is discussed within the concept <strong>of</strong> the Environmental<br />
Kuznets Curve (EKC). According to the EKC-hypothesis, environmental pressure<br />
grows faster than income in a first stage <strong>of</strong> economic development. This is followed<br />
by a second stage, in which environmental pressure still increases, but slower than<br />
GDP. After a particular income level has been reached, environmental pressure<br />
declines despite continued income growth. Graphically, this hypothesis leads to an<br />
inverted U-curve similar to the relationship Kuznets suggested for income inequality<br />
<strong>and</strong> economic per capita income (Fig. 1).