IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/engenv/v15y2004i6p991-1009.html

Equating Efficiency with Reduction: A Self-Deception in Energy Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Harold Wilhite

    (University of Oslo, Centre for Development and the Environment, P. O. Box 1116 Blindern, N-0317 Oslo, Norway)

  • Jorgen S. Norgard

    (Technical University of Denmark, Department of Civil Engineering, Building 118, DTU DK 2800 Lyngby, Denmark)

Abstract

European energy policy has not faced up to something about which there is increasingly little doubt: Global reduction, or even stabilisation in energy use will not be achieved unless Europe and the other rich OECD countries aim at significantly curbing their energy services (heat, light, motive power, mobility and so on). The policy makers at the centre of the policy discourse on energy sustainability suffer from a form for self-deception which revolves around the equation of ‘efficiency’ with ‘reduction’ and ‘sustainability’, i.e., the untenable contention that technological and market efficiency alone will offset continued growth in energy services to the extent that deep reductions in energy use are possible. Many researchers and environmentalists seem to have, partly for strategic reasons, adapted to this view and thereby supported politicians in the self-deception. In this paper we use results from India and China, with more than one third of the world population, to show how there is likely to be dramatic increases in energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in those countries over the next half-century. Much of this increase will be in conjunction with the development of basic services and infrastructure for homes, businesses, transport, health and public services, so that it is neither ethical nor even practical to argue for restrictions in overall energy growth in these and other developing countries. This places the onus for deep reductions in energy use on Europe, North America and the other affluent countries. The paper explores what such a change of focus would mean for policy and research agendas, and why there is friction to moving the policy envelope from ‘efficiency’ to also include ‘sufficiency’.

Suggested Citation

  • Harold Wilhite & Jorgen S. Norgard, 2004. "Equating Efficiency with Reduction: A Self-Deception in Energy Policy," Energy & Environment, , vol. 15(6), pages 991-1009, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:engenv:v:15:y:2004:i:6:p:991-1009
    DOI: 10.1260/0958305043026618
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1260/0958305043026618
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1260/0958305043026618?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:aen:journl:1988v09-02-a10 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Herring, Horace, 1999. "Does energy efficiency save energy? The debate and its consequences," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 209-226, July.
    3. repec:aen:journl:1992v13-04-a07 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. Mundaca T., Luis, 2013. "Climate change and energy policy in Chile: Up in smoke?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 235-248.
    2. Santarius, Tilman & Soland, Martin, 2018. "How Technological Efficiency Improvements Change Consumer Preferences: Towards a Psychological Theory of Rebound Effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 414-424.

    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. Wang, Zhao-Hua & Zeng, Hua-Lin & Wei, Yi-Ming & Zhang, Yi-Xiang, 2012. "Regional total factor energy efficiency: An empirical analysis of industrial sector in China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 115-123.
    2. Ouyang, Jinlong & Long, Enshen & Hokao, Kazunori, 2010. "Rebound effect in Chinese household energy efficiency and solution for mitigating it," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(12), pages 5269-5276.
    3. Turner, Karen, 2009. "Negative rebound and disinvestment effects in response to an improvement in energy efficiency in the UK economy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 648-666, September.
    4. Chang, Tzu-Pu & Hu, Jin-Li, 2010. "Total-factor energy productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change: An empirical study of China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(10), pages 3262-3270, October.
    5. Shuangjie Li & Li Li & Liming Wang, 2020. "2030 Target for Energy Efficiency and Emission Reduction in the EU Paper Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.
    6. Estrella Trincado, 2024. "Physiconomics and a claim for transdisciplinarity in economics," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-7, December.
    7. Karen Turner, 2008. "A Computable General Equilibrium Analysis of the Relative Price Sensitivity Required to Induce Rebound Effects in Response to an Improvement in Energy Efficiency in the UK Economy," Working Papers 0807, University of Strathclyde Business School, Department of Economics.
    8. Achim Voß, 2015. "How Disagreement About Social Costs Leads to Inefficient Energy-Productivity Investment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 60(4), pages 521-548, April.
    9. Cui, Cathy Xin & Ha, Soo Jung & Hanley, Nicholas & McGregor, Peter G & Turner, Karen & Yin, Ya Ping, 2011. "Productivity Growth, Decoupling and Pollution Leakage," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2011-13, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
    10. Khang Yi Sim & Siok Kun Sek, 2024. "Unveiling the asymmetric energy-growth nexus in top oil-importing and exporting countries: The common correlated effects approach," Energy & Environment, , vol. 35(2), pages 539-568, March.
    11. Ayres, Robert U & Ayres, Leslie W & Warr, Benjamin, 2003. "Exergy, power and work in the US economy, 1900–1998," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 219-273.
    12. Wen, Fenghua & Ye, Zhengke & Yang, Huaidong & Li, Ke, 2018. "Exploring the rebound effect from the perspective of household: An analysis of China's provincial level," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 345-356.
    13. Alton, Theresa & Arndt, Channing & Davies, Rob & Hartley, Faaiqa & Makrelov, Konstantin & Thurlow, James & Ubogu, Dumebi, 2014. "Introducing carbon taxes in South Africa," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 344-354.
    14. Herring, Horace, 2006. "Energy efficiency—a critical view," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 10-20.
    15. Freire-González, Jaume & Font Vivanco, David & Puig-Ventosa, Ignasi, 2017. "Economic structure and energy savings from energy efficiency in households," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 12-20.
    16. Lu, Yingying & Liu, Yu & Zhou, Meifang, 2017. "Rebound effect of improved energy efficiency for different energy types: A general equilibrium analysis for China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 248-256.
    17. Turner, Karen & Hanley, Nick, 2011. "Energy efficiency, rebound effects and the environmental Kuznets Curve," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 709-720, September.
    18. Jin, Taeyoung & Kim, Jinsoo, 2019. "A new approach for assessing the macroeconomic growth energy rebound effect," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(C), pages 192-200.
    19. Hanley, Nick & McGregor, Peter G. & Swales, J. Kim & Turner, Karen, 2009. "Do increases in energy efficiency improve environmental quality and sustainability?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 692-709, January.
    20. Liu, Yunqiang & Ye, Deping & Liu, Sha & Wang, Fang & Zeng, Hui & Tang, Hong, 2024. "Whether the agricultural energy rebound offsets the governance effectiveness of the China's natural resource audit policy?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 189(PA).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:engenv:v:15:y:2004:i:6:p:991-1009. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.