Advertisement

System Innovation for Environmental Sustainability: Concepts, Policies and Political Economy

  • Paul Ekins
Chapter

Abstract

Given the scale of contemporary environment and resource challenges in relation to climate change, energy and other resources, and biodiversity, it is common to hear international bodies and policy makers at both international and national levels call for major changes in most aspects of contemporary resource use and interactions with the natural environment. To give just one example, in 2005 the Synthesis Report of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MEA) concluded: “The challenge of reversing the degradation of ecosystems while meeting increasing demands for their services … involve significant changes in policies, institutions, and practices that are not currently under way” (MEA 2005, p. 1).

Keywords

Environmental Performance Economic Performance Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Technological Transition Environmental Innovation 
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.

References

  1. Adamson K-A (2005) Calculating the price trajectory of adoption of fuel cell vehicles. Int J Hydrogen Energy 30:341–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aghion P, Veugelers R, Serre C (2009a) ‘Cold Start for the Green Innovation Machine’, Bruegel Policy Contribution, Issue 2009/12, November, Bruegel, Brussels, http://www.bruegel.org/publications/publication-detail/publication/354-cold-start-for-the-green-innovation-machine/
  3. Aghion P, Veugelers R, Serre C (2009b) ‘No Green Growth without Innovation’, Bruegel Policy Brief, Issue 2009/07, November, Bruegel, Brussels, http://www.bruegel.org/publications/publication-detail/publication/353-no-green-growth-without-innovation/
  4. Anderson D (1999) Technical progress and pollution abatement: an economic view of selected technologies and practices, mimeo. Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, LondonGoogle Scholar
  5. Anderson D et al (2001) Innovation and the environment: challenges & policy options for the UK. Imperial College Centre for Energy Policy and Technology & the Fabian Society, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Arthur WB (1988) Competing technologies: an overview. In: Dosi G, Freeman C, Silverberg G, Soete L (eds) Technical change and economic theory. Frances Pinter, London, pp 590–607Google Scholar
  7. Ashford NA (2005) Government and environmental innovation in Europe and North America. In: Weber M, Hemmelskamp J (eds) Towards environmental innovation systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Berkhout F, Smith A, Stirling A (2003) Socio-technological regimes and transition contexts, Paper No. 106, September. SPRU, University of Sussex, BrightonGoogle Scholar
  9. Birkenfeld F, Gastl D, Heblich S, Maergoyz M, Mont O, Plepys A (2005) Product ban versus risk management by setting emission and technology requirements. The effect of different regulatory schemes taking the use of trichloroethylene in Sweden and Germany as an example. Universität Passau, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät, Diskussionsbeitrag Nr. V-37-05, Oct 2005Google Scholar
  10. Carbon Trust (2002) Submission to energy white paper consultation process. Carbon Trust, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. CEC (Commission of the European Communities) (2007) Report of the environmental technologies action plan (2005–2006). Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM(2007) 162 final [SEC(2007) 413], May, CEC, Brussels. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2007:0162:FIN:EN:PDF. Accessed 27 Aug 2009
  12. David P (1985) Clio and the economics of QWERTY. Am Econ Rev 76:332–337Google Scholar
  13. EC (European Commission) (2006) Eco-industry, its size, employment, perspectives and barriers to growth in an enlarged EU. Final report to DG Environment from Ernst & Young, European Commission, Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/industry_employment/pdf/ecoindustry2006.pdf
  14. Edgerton D (2006) The shock of the old: technology in global history since 1900. Profile Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. EEA (European Environment Agency) (2006) Using the market for cost-effective environmental policy: market-based instruments in Europe, EEA Report No.1/2006. EEA, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  16. Ekins P, Speck S (2008) Environmental tax reform in Europe: energy tax rates and competitiveness. In: Chalifour N, Milne J, Ashiabor H, Deketelaere K, Kreiser L (eds) Critical issues in environmental taxation, vol V. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 77–105Google Scholar
  17. Ekins P, Venn A (2009) Assessing innovation dynamics induced by environmental policy. In: MacLeod M, Ekins P, Moran D, Vanner R (eds) Understanding the costs of environmental regulation in Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 193–229Google Scholar
  18. Elzenga H, Ros J (2004) MEI-Energie: RIVM’s energiebesparingsmodel (MEI energy: RIVM’s energy savings model). Kwartaalschrift Economie 1(2):168–189Google Scholar
  19. Eurostat 2003, Energy Taxes in the Nordic Countries – Does the polluter pay? A report prepared by the National Statistical Offices in Norway, Sweden, Finland & Denmark, LuxembourgGoogle Scholar
  20. Foxon T (2003) Inducing innovation for a low-carbon future: drivers, barriers and policies, a report for the Carbon Trust. Carbon Trust, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Freeman C, Louça F (2001) As time goes by. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  22. Geels F (2002a) Understanding the dynamics of technological transitions. Twente University Press, Enschede, NL, published in revised form as Geels 2005Google Scholar
  23. Geels F (2002b) Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res Policy 31:1257–1274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goldenberg S (2009) Oil lobby to fund campaign against Obama’s climate change strategy. Guardian, August 14. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/aug/14/us-lobbying
  25. Harmon J (2000) Experience curves of photovoltaic technology. Interim report IR-00-014. International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), LaxenburgGoogle Scholar
  26. Hughes T (1987) The evolution of large technological systems. In: Bijker W, Hughes T, Pinch T (eds) The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, MIT Press, Cambridge MA, pp 51–82Google Scholar
  27. Huppes G, Kleijn R, Huele R, Ekins P, Shaw B, Esders M, Schaltegger S (2008) Measuring eco-innovation: framework and typology of indicators based on causal chains. Final report of the ECODRIVE project, CML, University of Leiden. http://www.eco-innovation.eu/wiki/images/Ecodrive_final_report.pdf
  28. IEA (2000) Experience curves for energy technology policy. International Energy Agency, ParisGoogle Scholar
  29. Jaffe AB, Newell RG, Stavins RN (2002) Environmental policy and technological change. Environ Resour Econ 22:41–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jänicke M, Zieschank R (2011) ETR and the Environmental Industry, Ch.12 In: Ekins P, Speck S (eds) Environmental Tax Reform: A Policy for Sustainable Economic Growth, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 313–339Google Scholar
  31. Johnstone N (2005) The innovation effects of environmental policy instruments. In: Horbach J (ed) Indicator systems for sustainable innovation. Berlin, Springer, pp 21–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jordan A, Wurzel R, Zito A (eds) (2003) ‘New’ instruments of environmental governance? National experiences and prospects. Frank Cass, LondonGoogle Scholar
  33. Junginger M (2005) Learning in renewable energy technology development. PhD Thesis, Utrecht UniversityGoogle Scholar
  34. Kemp R (1997) Environmental policy and technical change: a comparison of the technological impact of policy instruments. Edward Elgar, CheltenhamGoogle Scholar
  35. Kemp R (2000) Technology and environmental policy: innovation effects of past policies and suggestions for improvement. In: OECD (ed) Innovation and the Environment. OECD, Paris, pp 35–61Google Scholar
  36. Kemp R, Foxon T (2007a) Eco-innovation from an innovation dynamics perspective. Deliverable 1 of MEI project, April, UNU-MERIT, Maastricht. http://www.merit.unu.edu/MEI/deliverables/MEI%20D1%20Eco-innovation%20from%20an%20innovation%20dynamics%20pespective.pdf
  37. Kemp R, Foxon T (2007b) Typology of eco-innovation. Deliverable 2 of MEI project, April, UNU-MERIT, Maastricht. http://www.merit.unu.edu/MEI/deliverables/MEI%20D2%20Typology%20of%20eco-innovation.pdf
  38. Kemp R, Pearson P (2008) Policy brief about measuring eco-innovation. Deliverable 17 of MEI project, April, UNU-MERIT, Maastricht. http://www.merit.unu.edu/MEI/deliverables/MEI%20D17%20Policy%20brief%20about%20measuring%20eco-innovation.pdf
  39. Kemp R, Rotmans J (2001) The management of the co-evolution of technical, environmental and social systems. International conference Towards Environmental Innovation Systems, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  40. Kemp R, Schot J, Hoogma R (1998) Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation: the approach of strategic niche management. Tech Anal Strateg Manage 10:175–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kline SJ, Rosenberg N (1986) An overview of innovation. In: Landau R, Rosenberg N (eds) The positive sum strategy. National Academic Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  42. Krozer Y (2002) Milieu en innovatie (Environment and innovation). PhD Thesis, Groningen University. (http://irs.ub.rug.nl/ppn/241947103)
  43. McDonald A, Schrattenholzer L (2001) Learning rates for energy technologies. Energy Policy 29:255–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. MEA (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment) (2005) Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis. Island, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  45. Mokyr J (2002) The gifts of Athena: historical origins of the knowledge economy. Princeton University Press, Woodstock (GB)Google Scholar
  46. Nelson R, Winter S (1982) An evolutionary theory of economic change. Bellknap, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  47. Nordic Council of Ministers (2006) The Use of Economic Instruments in Nordic and Baltic Countries 2001-2005, TemaNord 2006:525, Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  48. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2007) Instrument mixes for environmental policy. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  49. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2008) Environmental policy, technological innovation and patents. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  50. OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) (2009) Indicators of innovation and transfer in environmentally sound technologies: Methodological Issues. ENV/EPOC/WPNEP/1(2009)FINAL, Environment Directorate/Environment Policy Committee, June, OECD, Paris. http://www.oecd.org/officialdocuments/displaydocumentpdf/?cote=ENV/EPOC/WPNEP(2009)1/FINAL&doclanguage=en
  51. OECD/Eurostat (1999) The environmental goods & services industry, manual for data collection and analysis. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  52. Oosterhuis F (ed) (2006) Innovation dynamics induced by environmental policy. Final report to the European Commission DG Environment, IVM Report E-07/05, November. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/policy/pdf/2007_final_report_conclusions.pdf
  53. Oosterhuis F, ten Brink P (2006) Assessing innovation dynamics induced by environment policy: findings from literature and analytical framework for the case studies. The Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), Vrije Universiteit, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  54. Requate T (2005) Dynamic incentives by environmental policy instruments – a survey. Ecol Econ 54(2–3):175–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rip A, Kemp R (1998) Technological change. In: Rayner S, Malone E (eds) Human choice and climate change, vol 2. Battelle, Columbus, OH, pp 327–399Google Scholar
  56. RIVM (2000) Techno 2000; Modellering van de daling van eenheidskosten van technologieën in de tijd. Rapportnummer 773008003, April. RIVM, BilthovenGoogle Scholar
  57. Ross T (1995) A cost-effectiveness study on the various measures that are likely to reduce pollutant emissions from road vehicles for the year 2010. Final report to the CEC, DG III, NovemberGoogle Scholar
  58. ten Brink P (ed) (2002) Voluntary environmental agreements: process, practice and future use. Greenleaf, SheffieldGoogle Scholar
  59. TME (1995) Technische vooruitgang en milieukosten, aanzet tot methodiekontwikkeling (Technological progress and environmental costs, initiative for methodological development). TME, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  60. Wallace D (1995) Environmental policy and industrial innovation: strategies in Europe, the US and Japan. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  61. Wessner C (2005) Driving innovations across the ‘Valley of Death’. Res Technol Manage 48(1):9–12Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Physica-Verlag HD 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UCL Energy InstituteUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations