Energy Conservation Policies in the Light of the Energetics of Evolution

  • Franco RuzzenentiEmail author
  • Paolo Bertoldi
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)


With more energy efficiency it is possible to do the same—or even more—with less energy. This is why energy efficiency is prompted by many as an absolute remedy for the evils of energy use, such as the environmental pressure or the security of supply. Nevertheless, historically energy consumptions at the world level have always been growing in spite of—or perhaps because of—an increasing level of energy efficiency. Some scholars have called this paradox the rebound effect. The rebound effect (REE) is an unintended consequence of the introduction of more energy-efficient technology. It occurs when the reduction in energy consumption is less than that expected from the magnitude of the increase in energy efficiency. REE and backfire are caused by behavioural and/or other systemic responses to efficiency gains in production or consumption (Maxwell et al. in Addressing the rebound effect, a report for the European Commission DG Environment, 2011). However, this paradoxical nexus between energy efficiency and energy consumption is not only confined to human-made systems: nature exhibits a same type of linkage among energy efficiency, energy growth and complexity. To what extent can the energetics of evolution help us in understanding this conundrum and forge a doable energy policy aimed at reducing energy use by fostering energy efficiency? In this chapter we will analyse current areas of improvement in energy policy targeting energy efficiency in the light of the rebound effect and we will try to advance a different policy framework, based on a deeper understanding of this phenomenon.


Energy Efficiency Energy Policy Rebound Effect Energy Service Price Signal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ayres, R.U., and B. Warr. 2005. Accounting for growth: The role of physical work. Structural Change.Google Scholar
  2. Chaisson, Eric J. 2002. Cosmic evolution: The rise of complexity in nature. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Cullenward, D., and J.G. Koomey. 2016. A critique of Saunders’ ‘historical evidence for energy efficiency rebound in 30 US sectors’. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 103: 203–213. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2015.08.007 (ISSN 0040-1625).
  4. Dahmus, J.B. 2014. Can efficiency improvements reduce resource consumption? Journal of Industrial Ecology 18 (6): 883–897.Google Scholar
  5. Fath, B.D., B.C. Patten, and J.S. Choi. 2001. Complementarity of ecological goal functions. Journal of Theoretical Biology 208 (4): 493–506.Google Scholar
  6. Feng, K., S.J. Davis, L. Sun, and K. Hubacek. 2015. Drivers of the US CO2 emissions 1997–2013. Nature Communications.Google Scholar
  7. Gillingham, K., M.J. Kotchen, D. Rapson, and G. Wagner. 2013. The rebound effect is overplayed. Nature 493: 475–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Greening, L., D. Green, et al. 2000. Energy efficiency and consumption—The rebound effect—A survey. Energy Policy 28: 389–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. IEA. 2007. Mind the gap. Quantifying principal-agent problems in energy efficiency.Google Scholar
  10. Lane, N. 2011. Energetics and genetics across the prokaryote-eukaryote divide. Biology direct 6: 35.Google Scholar
  11. Landes, D.S. 1969. The unbound prometheus: Technological change and industrial development in Western Europe from 1750 to the present. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Lebot, B., P. Bertoldi, and P. Harrington. 2004. Consumption versus efficiency: Have we designed the right policies and programmes? In Proceedings of the ACEEE 2004 Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings. Washington: American Council for Energy Efficient Economy.Google Scholar
  13. Lenzen, M., K. Kanemoto, D. Moran, and A. Geschke. 2012. Mapping the structure of the world economy. Environmental Science and Technology 46 (15): 8374–8381. doi: 10.1021/es300171x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lenzen, M., D. Moran, K. Kanemoto, and A. Geschke. 2013. Building Eora: A global multi-regional input-output database at high country and sector resolution. Economic Systems Research 25 (1): 20–49. doi: 10.1080/09535314.2013.769938.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lotka, A.J. 1956. Elements of mathematical biology. New York: Dover Publications, Inc. (first publication: Elements of physical biology, The Williams and Wilkins Co., Inc, 1924).Google Scholar
  16. Lucas, R.E. 1988. On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics 22 (1): 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Makarieva, A.M., V.G. Gorshkov, and Li B. Bai-Lian. 2005. Energetics of the smallest: do bacteria breathe at the same rate as whales? Proceedings of Royal Society B 272: 2219–2224.Google Scholar
  18. Maxwell, D., P. Owen, L. McAndrew, K. Muehmel, and A. Neubauer. 2011. Addressing the rebound effect, a report for the European Commission DG Environment, 26 April 2011 (
  19. Nicolis, G., and I. Prigogine, 1977. Self-organization in nonequilibrium systems, vol. 191977. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  20. Odum, H.T., and R.C. Pinkerton. 1955. Time’s speed regulator: The optimum efficiency for maximum power output in physical and biological systems. American Scientist 43 (2): 331–343.Google Scholar
  21. Ruzzenenti, F., F. Picciolo, and R. Basosi. 2015a. Rebound effect and structural change (Chapter 17). In: Energy security and development—The global context and Indian perspectives. ed. Reddy, B. Sudhakara, and Ulgiati, Sergio. Berlin: Springer (ISBN 978-81-322-2064-0).Google Scholar
  22. Ruzzenenti, F., A. Joseph, E. Ticci, P. Vozzella, and G. Gabbi.2015b. Interactions between financial and environmental networks in OECD countries. PLoS ONE 10 (9):e0136767. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136767
  23. Schneider, E.D., and J.J. Kay. 1994. Life as a manifestation of the second law of thermodynamics. Mathematical and Computer Modelling 19 (6): 25–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Solow, R.M. 1956. A contribution to the theory of economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 65–94.Google Scholar
  25. WRI. 2015. CAIT country greenhouse gas emissions: Sources & methods. World Resources Institute.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Management and Quantitative SciencesParthenope University of NaplesNaplesItaly
  2. 2.Institute of SociologyJagiellonian UniversityKrakowPoland
  3. 3.European Commission, Directorate-General Joint Research CentreUnit C.02 Energy Efficiency and RenewablesIspraItaly

Personalised recommendations