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

被引:33
作者
Huesemann M.H. [1 ]
Huesemann J.A. [2 ]
机构
[1] Marine Sciences Laboratory, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Sequim, WA 98382
[2] Critical Science Institute, 998, Carlsborg
基金
欧盟地平线“2020”;
关键词
Collapse; Consumption; Eco-efficiency; Industrial ecology; IPAT equation; Population growth; Rebound effect; Steady-state economy; Subjective well-being; Sustainable development;
D O I
10.1007/s10668-007-9085-4
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
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. © 2007 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
引用
收藏
页码:787 / 825
页数:38
相关论文
共 149 条
[1]  
Abramovitz M., Resource and output trends in the United States since 1870, American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 46, pp. 5-23, (1956)
[2]  
Adriaanse A., Et al., Resource Flows the Material Basis of Industrial Economies, (1997)
[3]  
Alfredsson E.C., Green consumption-no solution for climate change, Energy, 29, pp. 513-524, (2004)
[4]  
Argyle M., The Psychology of Happiness, (1987)
[5]  
Ausubel J.H., Can technology spare the earth?, American Scientist, 84, MARCH-APRIL ISSUE, pp. 166-178, (1996)
[6]  
Ausubel J.H., Gruebler A., Working less and living longer: Long-term trends in working time and time budgets, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 50, pp. 113-131, (1995)
[7]  
Ayres R.U., Van Den Bergh C.J.M., A theory of economic growth with material/energy resources and dematerialization: Interaction of three growth mechanisms, Ecological Economics, 55, pp. 96-118, (2005)
[8]  
Ayres R.U., Warr B., Accounting for growth: The role of physical work, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 16, pp. 181-209, (2005)
[9]  
Balzhiser R.E., Samuels M.R., Elisassen J.D., Chemical Engineering Thermodynamics-the Study of Energy, Entropy, and Equilibrium, (1972)
[10]  
Barnard N.D., Nicholson A., Howard J.L., The medical costs attributable to meat consumption, Preventative Medicine, 24, 6, pp. 646-655, (1995)