Decoupling environmental impacts from economic growth Marina FischerKowalski

  • Slides: 26
Download presentation
Decoupling environmental impacts from economic growth Marina Fischer-Kowalski (Institute for Social Ecology, Vienna) Presentation

Decoupling environmental impacts from economic growth Marina Fischer-Kowalski (Institute for Social Ecology, Vienna) Presentation at the CEFO Research Forum, Uppsala March 7 th, 2017

What I will talk about 1. A short narrative: how did the idea of

What I will talk about 1. A short narrative: how did the idea of „decoupling“ come about? What does it mean? 2. A longer view: how was economic growth linked to the use of natural resources? Metabolic rates and global metabolic phases 3. Learning to decouple human wellbeing from resource use and environmental impact

How did the idea of „decoupling“ come about? 1 • Ernst von Weizsäcker, et

How did the idea of „decoupling“ come about? 1 • Ernst von Weizsäcker, et al. : Books on „Factor Four“ (1995) and „Factor Five“ (2009). Basic idea: demonstrating that technological change can allow to produce the same product, the same service, with much fewer resources, much less energy, much fewer wastes and emissions. Increasing resource productivity, not labour productivity! • Weizsäcker became Chair of UNEP‘s INTERNATIONAL RESOURCE PANEL (IRP, starting in 2008), with the goal to invent and drive an international policy of „decoupling“, and invited me to join. • Strategically, he wanted to demonstrate that environmental concerns and economic growth / development could be reconciled by policies directed at promoting resource-saving technologies. Main idea: shifting the tax burden from labour to energy and resources.

Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth Fischer-Kowalski, M. Swilling et

Decoupling natural resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth Fischer-Kowalski, M. Swilling et al. , 2011 www. unep. org/resourcepanel/decoupling 1

The UNEP – IRP policy message 1

The UNEP – IRP policy message 1

1 sociometabolic mindmap natural resources Depletion Social system size of economy, technology human prosperity

1 sociometabolic mindmap natural resources Depletion Social system size of economy, technology human prosperity human quality of life wastes and emissions environmental impact

The mindmap of „pollution control“ natural resources Depletion Social system size of economy, technology

The mindmap of „pollution control“ natural resources Depletion Social system size of economy, technology wastes and emissions technologypollution control human prosperity human quality of life environmental impact 1

The mindmap of „decoupling“ Social system natural resources size of economy, technology wastes and

The mindmap of „decoupling“ Social system natural resources size of economy, technology wastes and emissions decoupling Depletion human prosperity human quality of life environmental impact 1

Global annual material extraction increased sevenfold, and still fourfold per capita population. BUT: Income

Global annual material extraction increased sevenfold, and still fourfold per capita population. BUT: Income increased even faster (world GDP times 23, per capita times 6). Global material extraction Global metabolic rates 1900 -2005 GDP Material extraction Billion tons Trillion (1012) international dollars Metabolic rate t/cap/yr Income/cap in $ GDP in $ Ores and industrial minerals Income International dollars cap/yr Fossil energy carriers Construction minerals Biomass Source: UNEP International Resource Panel, Decoupling Report 2011 Biomass 2

2 Metabolic rates and metabolic phases: global material and energy use per capita 2000

2 Metabolic rates and metabolic phases: global material and energy use per capita 2000 Materials 1973 Energy E 1945 British Source: after Krausmann et al. 2009 USA L BB Lock-in BU

2 The 1970 s syndrome in high income countries

2 The 1970 s syndrome in high income countries

Ok. Decoupling happens – so obviously, it is possible. • it is possible for

Ok. Decoupling happens – so obviously, it is possible. • it is possible for economic growth to continue while reducing natural resource use and environmental impacts; • in the short term there are many cost-effective opportunities for greater resource efficiency that will offset wholly or partially any costs incurred in this decoupling; • in the medium to long term decoupling will generate higher economic growth than would occur on current trends of inefficient resource use, environmental destruction and climate change. • Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals with Ambitious Policies for Climate Mitigation Heinz Schandl, CSIRO, at the 2016 IRP / UNEP presentation to G 7 meeting But can „spontaneous“ decoupling do the job? 2

IRP: Projections of global resource use to the year 2050 UNEP, International Resource Panel

IRP: Projections of global resource use to the year 2050 UNEP, International Resource Panel 2011 2

Resource extraction und resource use 1950 -2010 in mature industrial and in emerging economies

Resource extraction und resource use 1950 -2010 in mature industrial and in emerging economies Western Industrial Asia 16 16 14 14 8 8 6 6 4 4 2 2 1950 Source: Schaffartzik Brussels, Feb. 24, et al. 2014 2015 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 0 8 DE in Gt/a 10 10 25 DE and DMC in t/cap/a 10 12 30 12 12 DE in Gt/a 35 20 6 15 4 10 2 5 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 0 DE and DMC in t/cap/a 18 0 2

Sociometabolic rates: A log-linear function of income 2 Metabolic rate t/cap/yr USA Germany China

Sociometabolic rates: A log-linear function of income 2 Metabolic rate t/cap/yr USA Germany China India Data for the year 2000 Source: UNEP Decoupling Report 2011. Brazil R 2 = 0. 60

Interim resumé: decoupling • Spontaneous decoupling happened and accellerated in OECD countries since the

Interim resumé: decoupling • Spontaneous decoupling happened and accellerated in OECD countries since the 1970 s (and nowhere else) • Why? Øbecause economic growth was slowing down? Øbecause material production was outsourced to emerging and developing economies? Øbecause increasing inequality reduced mass consumption? Øbecause there was some saturation of material needs? • The associated change in the global division of labor gave emerging economies a chance to catch up. Fine. • But globally and in the medium term, catching up with the rich is not feasible solution. 2

Labour, material and energy productivity 6. 51 US$/h 0. 10 US$/MJ 0. 75 US$/kg

Labour, material and energy productivity 6. 51 US$/h 0. 10 US$/MJ 0. 75 US$/kg GDP at 2005 constant prices Source: Heinz Schandl (CSIRO): 2016 Presentation of IRP findings to G 7 meeting 2

Can the world, will the world, shift to another track, choose another pathway? •

Can the world, will the world, shift to another track, choose another pathway? • will it be forced to? • are there plausible scenarios? • are there signs that people might enjoy that? 3

Raw material prices throughout the 20 th century and beyond International economic advisors start

Raw material prices throughout the 20 th century and beyond International economic advisors start warning about rising resource prices Source: Mc. Kinsey 2012 3

Metal mines worldwide: Peak everything? Source: Giurco et al, 2010, p. 28: based on

Metal mines worldwide: Peak everything? Source: Giurco et al, 2010, p. 28: based on Mudd 2010, 2009, 2007 3

Geologists project the 21 st century as the period in which all key mining

Geologists project the 21 st century as the period in which all key mining resources will peak and decline Element estimated peak year Estimated risk of scarcity (years from now) burn-off Hubbert 3 dyn. model pessimistic average optimistic Iron 214 176 200 2025 2040 2080 Aluminum 478 286 300 2030 2130 2230 31 71 120 2032 2038 2042 2026 2028 Copper Nickel Gold 37 37 75 2012 2013 2017 Silver 14 44 30 2028 2034 2040 Platinum 73 163 50 2015 2025 oil 44 100 99 coal 78 174 220 natural gas 64 143 100 uranium 144 140 phosphorus 161 190 2025 2040 2100 230 source: Sverdrup & Ragnarsdottir 2014, pp 270 -276 21| Event, Date This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement No. 290647.

Scenarios for assessing resource and climate futures Source: Heinz Schandl (2016), Presentation of IRP

Scenarios for assessing resource and climate futures Source: Heinz Schandl (2016), Presentation of IRP findings to G 7 meeting 3

The Economist‘s final kick: Peak Car? The Future of Driving. Seeing the Back of

The Economist‘s final kick: Peak Car? The Future of Driving. Seeing the Back of the Car? The Economist Sept. 22 nd, 2012. http: //www. economist. com/node/21563280 3

Brauchen wir materielle Ressourcen für unsere Wohlfahrt? Öffentliche Meinung in Japan ändert sich… 3

Brauchen wir materielle Ressourcen für unsere Wohlfahrt? Öffentliche Meinung in Japan ändert sich… 3 70% 60% 50% immaterial welfare 40% 30% 20% Source: Public Survey about Living for Citizens, Cabinet Office 10% 0% 1972 24| Event, Date 1977 1982 1987 1992 1997 2002 2007 2010 2012 This project has received funding from the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under grant agreement No. 290647.

Per capita energy use and Human Development Index (HDI) HDI 3 Yes, we can!

Per capita energy use and Human Development Index (HDI) HDI 3 Yes, we can! 2005 R 2 = 0, 85 – 0, 90 2000 1995 1990 1985 1980 1975 source: Steinberger & Roberts 2010 Energy

IRP Assessment Reports using material flow data 2011 2015 2016

IRP Assessment Reports using material flow data 2011 2015 2016