Fact Versus Conjecture in the History of Industrial Waste Utilization
This piece is a response to Pierre Desrochers’ criticism of an article by me. This response challenges Desrochers’ argument that market forces compelled nineteenth- and early twentieth-century manufacturers to recycle, voluntarily, the vast majority of their wastes. I argue that Desrochers provides no counter-evidence that disproves my findings and that he bases some of his criticism on conjecture that is factually inaccurate and/or overly simplistic. I conclude that to do justice to this important and complex subject, historians need to investigate the barriers that discouraged manufacturers from using their wastes, as well as the full range of regulatory as well as market-based drivers that encouraged them to do so.
Volume (Year): 9 (2012)
Issue (Month): 2 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: (703) 993-1151
Web page: http://econjwatch.org/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Pierre Desrochers, 2012. "Freedom Versus Coercion in Industrial Ecology: A Reply to Boons," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 9(2), pages 78-99, May.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ejw:journl:v:9:y:2012:i:2:p:112-121. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jason Briggeman)The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Jason Briggeman to update the entry or send us the correct address
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.