Technology sensitive indicators of sustainability
The idea of sustainable development was introduced as a remedy that should improve the situation of environment, should balance living conditions for human beings in various countries and continents, and finally should lead to rational exploitation of natural resources.
The contradiction between needs and ambitions of human societies and the need for conservation of environmental resources can only be, at least partially, removed by change of technologies being used in industrial processes. Only use of modern technology can assure growth of production with simultaneous reduction of consumption of energy, raw materials and reduction of environmental damage.
A number of sustainability indicators have been already proposed and recommended by several international organizations. It should be considered, however, that even those quantitative ones have to be considered as variables consisting s. c. affine space. It means that having two or more states, described by appropriate values of the indicators, we cannot determine distances between those states. From this point of view it is also clear that changing some of the variables we are unable to determine distance between the old and a new position of particular state.
Consequently an attempt should be made to constitute s. c. metric space of variables that would describe, at least most important aspects of sustainable development.
In the second step a trajectory that could be considered as at least approximate realization of sustainability, should be defined. Preliminary attempts and discussion of possible formulations of the model will be presented in the paper.
KeywordsEntropy Assure OECD
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Borys T (ed) (1999) Wskazniki Ekorozwoju (Eco-development indicators). Bialystok, PolandGoogle Scholar
- EC (1996) Environmental Indicators and Green Accounting. BrusselsGoogle Scholar
- Fet AM (2003) Eco-efficiency reporting exemplified by case studies. This book.Google Scholar
- Foster R (1986) Innovation: The Attacker’s Advantage. Summit Books, New York (cited after Affuah A ( 1998 ) Innovation Management. Oxford Univ Press, New York, Oxford )Google Scholar
- Jimenez-Gonzales C, Constable DJC, Curzons AD, Cunningham VL (2002) Developing GSK’s green technology guidance: methodology for case-scenario comparison of technologies. Clean Techn. Environ Policy 4, pp. 44–53Google Scholar
- Saling P (2003) Realizing More Sustainable Products and Processes in Different Fields of Business by application of the Eco-efficiency Analysis. This Book.Google Scholar
- Saling P, Kicherer A, Dittrich-Kramer B, Wittlinger R, Zombik W, Schmidt I, Schrott W, Schmidt S (2002) Eco-efficiency Analysis by BASF: The Method. Int. J. of Life Cycle Assessment 7, No. 4, pp. 203 — 218Google Scholar
- Solow RM (1956) A contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics MITGoogle Scholar
- Solow RM (1957) Technical Change and the aggregate production function. Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
- Solow RM (1960) Investment and Technical Progress. Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyGoogle Scholar
- Stone R (1956) Quantity and Price Indexes in National Accounts. ParisGoogle Scholar
- UNCSD (1996a) Indicators of Sustainable Development: Methodology Sheets. New YorkGoogle Scholar
- UNCSD (1996b) Indicators of Sustainable Development: Framework and Methodologies. New York.Google Scholar
- UNCSD (1996c) Sustainable Development Indicators: a pilot study following the methodology of the Commission of the United Nations on Sustainable Development. LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
- UNEP (1994) An Overview of Environmental Indicators: State of the Art and Perspectives. Environmental Assessment Technical Report, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Uzawa H (1961) Natural Inventions and Stability of Growth Equilibrium. Royal Economic Society, LondonGoogle Scholar