IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v2y2010i12p3623-3638d10318.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is Eco-Efficiency a Sufficient Strategy for Achieving a Sustainable Development? The Norwegian Case

Author

Listed:
  • Carlo Aall

    (Western Norway Research Institute, P.O. Box 163, N-6851 Sogndal, Norway)

  • Idun A. Husabø

    (Western Norway Research Institute, P.O. Box 163, N-6851 Sogndal, Norway)

Abstract

A split review of the environmental impact of Norwegian consumption and production over the last decade illustrates that rising consumption is eliminating the bonus of eco-efficiency in production. Two key drivers behind this situation are the large increase in person and goods transportation and an increase in wealth that has allowed Norwegians to spend more on purchasing products and services. To achieve a sustainable development in rich countries, two major adjustments to the prevailing environmental policy are suggested: (1) The environmental impact of consumption should also be monitored as part of the official sustainability indicator monitoring system, e.g., by calculating the ecological footprint. (2) A specific consumption focus in environmental policy should be developed, beginning with the consumption categories with the largest footprint (volume) and the most negative development (change).

Suggested Citation

  • Carlo Aall & Idun A. Husabø, 2010. "Is Eco-Efficiency a Sufficient Strategy for Achieving a Sustainable Development? The Norwegian Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(12), pages 1-16, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:2:y:2010:i:12:p:3623-3638:d:10318
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/2/12/3623/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/2/12/3623/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Munksgaard, Jesper & Pedersen, Klaus Alsted, 2001. "CO2 accounts for open economies: producer or consumer responsibility?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 327-334, March.
    2. van den Bergh, Jeroen C. J. M. & Verbruggen, Harmen, 1999. "Spatial sustainability, trade and indicators: an evaluation of the 'ecological footprint'," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 61-72, April.
    3. Lenzen, Manfred & Murray, Joy & Sack, Fabian & Wiedmann, Thomas, 2007. "Shared producer and consumer responsibility -- Theory and practice," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 27-42, February.
    4. Herman E. Daly, 1968. "On Economics as a Life Science," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 76(3), pages 392-392.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gaodi Xie & Wenhui Chen & Shuyan Cao & Chunxia Lu & Yu Xiao & Changshun Zhang & Na Li & Shuo Wang, 2014. "The Outward Extension of an Ecological Footprint in City Expansion: The Case of Beijing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(12), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Svein Gunnar Kjøde & Maja van der Velden & Mahsa Motevallian, 2021. "Sustainability Concepts in Nordic Business Research: A Critical Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-23, May.
    3. Jin Xue & Hans Jakob Walnum & Carlo Aall & Petter Næss, 2016. "Two Contrasting Scenarios for a Zero-Emission Future in a High-Consumption Society," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-25, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrew, Robbie & Forgie, Vicky, 2008. "A three-perspective view of greenhouse gas emission responsibilities in New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1-2), pages 194-204, December.
    2. Marques, Alexandra & Rodrigues, João & Domingos, Tiago, 2013. "International trade and the geographical separation between income and enabled carbon emissions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 162-169.
    3. Karl Steininger & Pablo Munoz & Jonas Karstensen & Glen Peters & Rita Strohmaier & Erick Velazquez, 2017. "Austria’s Consumption-Based Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Identifying sectoral sources and destinations," EcoMod2017 10472, EcoMod.
    4. Christian Lininger, 2013. "Consumption-Based Approaches in International Climate Policy: An Analytical Evaluation of the Implications for Cost-Effectiveness, Carbon Leakage, and the International Income Distribution," Graz Economics Papers 2013-03, University of Graz, Department of Economics.
    5. Rui Xie & Chao Gao & Guomei Zhao & Yu Liu & Shengcheng Xu, 2017. "Empirical Study of China’s Provincial Carbon Responsibility Sharing: Provincial Value Chain Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Thomas Grebel, 2019. "What a difference carbon leakage correction makes!," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 939-971, July.
    7. Chen, G.Q. & Zhang, Bo, 2010. "Greenhouse gas emissions in China 2007: Inventory and input-output analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 6180-6193, October.
    8. Wiedmann, Thomas, 2009. "A first empirical comparison of energy Footprints embodied in trade -- MRIO versus PLUM," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(7), pages 1975-1990, May.
    9. Springmann, Marco & Zhang, Da & Xiliang, Zhang & Karplus, Valerie J., 2013. "Incorporating consumption-based emissions accounting into climate policy in China: Provincial target setting and ETS baseline allocations," Conference papers 332341, Purdue University, Center for Global Trade Analysis, Global Trade Analysis Project.
    10. Rutger Hoekstra & Marco Janssen, 2006. "Environmental responsibility and policy in a two-country dynamic input-output model," Economic Systems Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 61-84.
    11. Zhou, P. & Wang, M., 2016. "Carbon dioxide emissions allocation: A review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 47-59.
    12. Dong, Gang & Mao, Xianqiang & Zhou, Ji & Zeng, An, 2013. "Carbon footprint accounting and dynamics and the driving forces of agricultural production in Zhejiang Province, China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 38-47.
    13. Verchère, Alban, 2011. "Le développement durable en question : analyses économiques autour d’un improbable compromis entre acceptions optimiste et pessimiste du rapport de l’Homme à la Nature," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 87(3), pages 337-403, septembre.
    14. Serrano, Mònica & Dietzenbacher, Erik, 2010. "Responsibility and trade emission balances: An evaluation of approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2224-2232, September.
    15. Turner, Karen & Munday, Max & McGregor, Peter & Swales, Kim, 2012. "How responsible is a region for its carbon emissions? An empirical general equilibrium analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 70-78.
    16. Xu, Xueliu & Wang, Qian & Ran, Chenyang & Mu, Mingjie, 2021. "Is burden responsibility more effective? A value-added method for tracing worldwide carbon emissions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    17. Wencheng Zhang & Shuijun Peng, 2016. "Analysis on CO 2 Emissions Transferred from Developed Economies to China through Trade," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 24(2), pages 68-89, March.
    18. Karen Turner & Max Munday & Stuart McIntyre & Christa D Jensen, 2011. "Incorporating Jurisdiction Issues into Regional Carbon Accounts under Production and Consumption Accounting Principles," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 43(3), pages 722-741, March.
    19. Zhang, Yang & Hu, Shan & Yan, Da & Jiang, Yi, 2023. "Proposing a carbon emission responsibility allocation method with benchmark approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    20. Jin, Wei & Xu, Linyu & Yang, Zhifeng, 2009. "Modeling a policy making framework for urban sustainability: Incorporating system dynamics into the Ecological Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2938-2949, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:2:y:2010:i:12:p:3623-3638:d:10318. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.