University of Glasgow

Business Economics - Junior Honours Economics of Natural Resources and the Environment

Academic Year 1998/99

Topic The concept of sustainable economic development has received much attention recently. Explain what do you understand by the concept of sustainability and how development policies in Europe might need to be adapted to realise this aim. Lecturer: C. Doyle

Stefan Schasse s.schasse@amarth.net

Table of Contents Table of Contents...............................................................................................1 List of Tables......................................................................................................2 Glossary..............................................................................................................2 1 Introduction......................................................................................................3 2 The Concept of Sustainable Development...................................................4 2.1 Principles and Definitions..........................................................................4 2.1.1 Very Weak Sustainability....................................................................5 2.1.2 Weak Sustainability.............................................................................5 2.1.3 Strong Sustainability............................................................................5 2.1.4 Very Strong Sustainability...................................................................5 2.2 Key Dimensions of Sustainable Development...........................................6 2.2.1 The Social Dimension..........................................................................6 2.2.2 The Environmental Dimension............................................................6 2.2.2.1 Resources.......................................................................................7 2.2.2.2 Waste.............................................................................................7 2.2.2.3 Amenity.........................................................................................7 2.2.3 The Economic Dimension...................................................................8 2.2.3.1 Applying Economics to Environmental Problems........................8 2.2.3.2 Market Failure.............................................................................10 3 The Implementation of Sustainable Development into Politics.....................12 3.1 The State of Effort....................................................................................12 3.2 Problems of Implementation....................................................................15 3.3 Possible Solutions....................................................................................17 4 Conclusion......................................................................................................19 5 other Tables....................................................................................................21 6 References......................................................................................................22 6.1 Books........................................................................................................22 6.2 Web sources.............................................................................................22 6.3 official Publications.................................................................................23

List of Tables Table 1: Eight Environmental Heavyweights................................................12 Table 2: EC goals for atmosphere.................................................................14 Table 3: "EC implementation priorities"...........................................................16 Table 4: Timeline...........................................................................................21 Table 5: Substance Abbreviations.................................................................21

Glossary 5th EAP EC EU NGO OECD UN UN CED UN CSD UN FAO UN GASS UN WG/SPD US EPA WCED Fifth Environmental Action Programme of the European Community European Community European Union Non-Governmental Organisation Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development United Nations United Nations Conference on Environment and Development United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation United Nations General Assembly Special Session United Nations Working Group on Sustainable Product Development United States Environmental Protection Agency World Commission on Environment and Development

Introduction

Although much has been written about sustainable development, especially in the last 10 years, it is not easy to find a final definition of it. Some definitions are very colourful, but not precise or scientific at all, ... At one of these meetings, a participant likened sustainable development to going on a journey in a 15 th century sailing ship and being in the middle of the ocean. We only have an approximate idea of where we are, we think we know where we want to go (but may like Columbus end up somewhere completely different). Our options for control are limited, and even if we take no actions to set a course, the winds and currents will mean that we will ultimately arrive at some kind of destination.1 some are very short and foggy, Our target is a sustainable, this means an economical productive, social fair and ecological tolerable development. 2 and some are long and sophisticated, but none of them can be considered as the final truth. What is sustainable development and why its is so difficult to define it? The first part of the following essay is an attempt to describe the general idea of sustainable development and the difficulties to find a proper definition for it. The second part deals with problems arising from implementing it into policy and what might have to change in current policy making.

1 2

Friends of the Earth, Towards a sustainable Scotland: a discussion paper, Ch. 1.1 p 5 Extract from the German governmental coalition agreement between the Social Democratic Party Germany (SPD) and the Green Party (Grnen), Ch. 4 Part 1, original: Unser Ziel ist eine nachhaltige, das heit wirtschaftlich leistungsfhige, sozial gerechte und kologisch vertrgliche Entwicklung.

2 2.1

The Concept of Sustainable Development Principles and Definitions

In the 1960s and 1970s the awareness and concern about pollution intensified. The reason was identified as humankind and its behaviour in a complex surrounding of social and physical environment. Consequently, the traditional concept of growth became questionable. The only way to protect the environment was seen in the limitation of growth, zero-growth strategies arose.3 This uncomfortable theory was replaced in the 1980s, when economic growth and ecological protection was seen as not necessary incompatible. In 1987 the term sustainable development abandoned its narrow focus on ecological issues and was combined with social and economic aspects by the United Nations Environment Programme (UN EP), especially in the report Our Common Future published the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED). This report, also known as the Brundtland Report, named after its president, defined sustainable development as ... development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs4. This often quoted definition combines the need for growth and development with the limitations necessary to preserve the environment for the future. Sustainable development became a complex system of interrelations between economical, social and ecological dimensions on a large timescale. It was meant as a global concept not as a set of instructions, recognising the widely different conditions of countries and regions. In the years following the report, this definition becomes popular, and several organisations, including OECD, UN, EU and the World Bank, subscribed to it. Still there is no general agreement about the meaning. The different positions within sustainable development can be divided in 4 general groups, ranging from a pure anthropocentric to a pure ecocentric point of view.5

3 4

Meadows, D. H. et al., Club of Rome report 1972: The Limits to growth WCED, Our Common Future, p 5 5 Baker, S. et al., The politics of sustainable development, p 12

2.1.1

Very Weak Sustainability

The natural environment is seen only in terms of its utilisation to the economic system. Development is the dominant factor and growth unlimited. Protection of the environment is only done when there are economical reasons for it, or it at least does not hinder economic expansion. The global capital stock, a sum of man made and natural capital, remains at least constant. This was the dominant position of the industrialised countries before 1970/80. 2.1.2 Weak Sustainability

The weak sustainability tries to combine growth with environmental concerns. This position recognises natural resources as not being infinite and introduces maximal level of usage to maintain ecosystem stability and resilience. The overall costs of environmental resources are part of demand functions and therefore non-renewable resources are substituted by renewable sources. If the social benefits are higher than the social costs natural resources can be used, resulting in a shift from natural to man made capital with a limited rate of shifting. Technology and innovation are used to delink economic growth from environmental degradation.6 2.1.3 Strong Sustainability

Under strong sustainability, the natural environment becomes an additional non-economic value not accessible with economic methods. Therefore, there is an incentive to protect the natural capital stock without regard to the economic benefits of usage. Sustainable development is economic growth within a system of a constant natural capital stock. 2.1.4 Very Strong Sustainability

This kind of pure sustainability forces a zero-growth in quantitative terms. Regional growth is matched by negative growth in other regions. Restrictions constrain economic and population growth and development.

OECD, OECD Work on Sustainable Development, Ch. 1, Art 16-17

2.2

Key Dimensions of Sustainable Development

With reality ranging somewhere between weak and strong sustainability, there were several attempts to specify the idea to get guidelines for practical political implementation. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has split the idea into its three key dimensions to define them separately and to understand their interrelation.7 2.2.1 The Social Dimension

This covers social problems of poverty and distribution like unemployment, underdevelopment, social exclusion, over-ageing societies and undereducation. All of these problems have an impact on consumption and on the environment. An approach to social policy has to balance all dimensions, an economic only policy will result in enhancing social tension in global and on local terms. Too little social expenditure will increase poverty and human capital misuse, too much social expenditure will reduce private work and therefore will become economical unstable in the long run. Up to the moment, most of the trade-offs from social aspect to environmental or economical aspects are at least subject to some uncertainty. For example, the external effects of education on economic growth, employment rate and social behaviour are not fully investigated and quantified, but they are certainly existing. 2.2.2 The Environmental Dimension

The ecosystem we are living in is essential to human existence, but human existence has reached a level where it has an undeniable impact on the ecosystem. To maintain its life-supporting functionality this impact has to be at least controlled, otherwise it will influence in reverse economic and social conditions negatively. The environment is used generally by humankind in three different ways, except of global life support: as a resource for energy and materials, as a receptor for waste and for amenity purposes.

OECD, OECD Work on Sustainable Development, Ch. 2

2.2.2.1 Resources Non-renewable resources like mines, some forms of energy and land are finite in its amount and if used or otherwise made unusable for the future they will not regenerate. To define the optimal rate of usage is difficult, because the future value is in most cases uncertain. Therefore, a successful resource management should rely on substituting them by renewable resources as soon as possible and decrease usage to a necessary minimum. Renewable resources like fish stocks and forests regenerate from human impact, but only at a certain rate. If the human harvest exceeds this rate the stock will diminish and finally disappear. These rates vary, depending on the resource. Forests for example have a very long rate of regeneration, more than the normal human lifetime, so there is a lack of economic incentive to reinvest. These resources need to be managed in a way to maintain its integrity, so the rate of extraction has to be controlled. Some forms of energy are infinite or, at least regenerate with a very high rate like wind, wave or solar power, but their usage can only substitute a very small amount of non- or slow-renewable resources at the moment. 2.2.2.2 Waste At the other end of the production process, the environment is used as a receptor for substances. Some of them can be absorbed up to a specific rate by the environment, only exceeding these rates will lead to an environmental damage. Others are cumulative, not being assimilated at all. These are building a heritage passed on from generation to generation, increasing all the time. They are potentially the bigger problem, because most of them are first recognised when the damage has already taken place, the exact responsibility is uncertain and until counter-actions will become effective, they are continuing piling up. A waste management should limit the release of potential damaging substances to rates within the absorptive capacity and take special care of not absorbable substances. 2.2.2.3 Amenity This is the most vague area of usage. It is even more subject to uncertainty than the two other usages. The environment receives its amenity value by being 7

supplier of landscape, natural wonders, exotic species and so on. The social value of these is difficult to evaluate, because e.g. some people might have a positive value for something just by knowing of its existence without ever seeing it. This is called option or existing value. The individual value may vary with a large difference and are very difficult to determine. Another aspect is the non-renewable character; once destroyed a landscape will not recover by itself in a sensible timescale and may not be changeable back by men. There might be a new amenity value attached to the changed landscape, but most of the changes made results in a low-value area in this respect. 2.2.3 The Economic Dimension

The economic dimension becomes more and more important. The social and ecological problems are also economic problems of a large value, due to the link between economic growth and environmental degradation. Policy is made in economic terms and so the environmental and social affairs have to be converted into economic expressions. There are different tasks when economic methods are necessary in solving a non-economic problem, once it is recognised and verified. In the following, a production plant producing smoke pollution near a national park of rare trees is used as an example to show the difficulties attached to each task. 2.2.3.1 Applying Economics to Environmental Problems Once recognised, the pollution problem has to be valued and weighed. Here are several problems like, who and what is damaged and for how much. To get a usable answer, there has to be a sensible low number of involved persons. With smoke drifting with the wind, diluting and mixing with other substances, there is not a definite area with a definite polluter. Additional problems of finding responsibilities will arise when two harmless substances mix to a dangerous one. Assuming scientists have decided that the production plant responsible then there has to be decided for what. The people living around the plant are the obvious first choice to ask about their damage. To specify their material damage like dirty cloths hanging outside is easy, but to value the decrease of life quality or the possible increase in diseases is difficult. If damage is done to the national park, it is possible for persons very far away 8

to get involved, like scientists or environmentalists. Even if they actually may have never seen the park, it has a certain existence value for them. If the trees start dying, apart of the material damage of wood loss and a decline of paying visitors, there is a problem valuating the social damage, like the impact on other species, or the danger of extinction of the rare trees. The effect of the targeted production plant has to be separated from other influences. There are several models trying to determine a social value for a specific environmental feature, but none of it is complete. So the actual worth is most of the time a subjective political decision. The question of value is always a matter of uncertainty, due to incomplete information and it becomes worse taking into account the future and the irreversibility of extinction. It is simply not possible to know how future generations will value these trees, as a waste of space or the cure against a disease. Finding the social cost, of which the economic cost is only a part, and valuing the environment, is one of the main problems. The benefits of the pollution are much easier to find, because they are on the economic side. The benefits of a production plant are profit, jobs and so on. Often it is necessary to see the cost relative to the benefits. Many people are concerned about environmental degradation, but only a few wants to risk their job for it. A freerider-mentality like someone has to do something about it, but not me will reduce their subjective estimation of damage value if their income is at risk. For a cost-benefit analysis, the most useful method where the social costs are compared to the social benefits, the cost, i.e. the damage has to be weighted with the willingness to accept this specific ecological damage. Follower of a hard sustainability will weight the damage much higher as follower of a soft sustainability. So the extend of consequences will vary. When a project is valued and the decision to intervene is made, a proper policy has to be chosen creating an incentive to avoid making damage. An intervention by law, i.e. emission rationing, is one possibility, but an economic incentive to correct the behaviour is more likely to bring success. Each case has to be considered separately, fish stock management uses other tools than land management. In the example case, some possible options are a tax on output, profit or emission (price rationing) or a compensation for damage (liability rule). While output and profit tax might be inefficient, they are an incentive to produce more to compensate the tax resulting in more emissions or to close 9

down the plant permanently, a correct emission tax might achieve a pollution decrease. Central to environmental economics is the problem of evaluating the environment. For most of the environmental features, there is no market existing. Even if some are traded on markets, the markets fail in archiving the social optimal outcome. 2.2.3.2 Market Failure The gap between economic optimal and social optimal market results is created by incomplete cost internalisation. While the internal economic cost of the project, in the example like costs for capital or work are parts of the cost calculation for it, the external social costs like environmental damage are not considered. There are several reasons for incomplete market structure like the existence of externalities, where ones production negatively influences the others without a system of compensation. Another problem is the absence of well-defined property rights for environmental goods, so there is no one who could claim such compensation. This absence is based on the public good character of environmental assets, with open access and non-rivalry in consumption. To archive market forces bringing the social optimum, it is important to internalise the external costs, to make the private costs equal to social costs. But for this getting the price right 8 it is necessary to know the social costs and they are subject to high uncertainty and there is also a lack of proper methods to measure them. There are some techniques existing, called revealed preference methods, which model market behaviour. The contingent valuation method establishes a hypothetical market, in which consumers are questioned about their idea of price level for environmental goods. This is a very theoretical method, subject to several forms of potential errors. Other models use existing markets to avoid the problems of establishing a hypothetical one. Examples for this are hedonic price models, trying to extract the value of environmental features implicitly given in other prices like housing costs, and travel cost models, using the measurable data about visitors

OECD, OECD Work on Sustainable Development, Ch. 1, Art. 6

10

and their origins to attach a certain value to a specific area. None of them is very precise and can cope with option or existence value. The production function approach uses environmental features as input into a production function so damage done to this input factor can be measures either in the avoidance costs or in the decrease of output. It shares the difficulties with the previous methods. All these methods are not very precise due to the complex system of nature itself. They all try to value one single environmental feature from a human point of view. Side effects unknown or unimportant to humankind are not considered. They are also not objective, by carefully choosing the parameters it is possible to influence the result. The quality of the next step, the cost-benefit analysis will suffer from the resulting uncertainty about the cost factor.

11

3 3.1

The Implementation of Sustainable Development into Politics The State of Effort

There are some countries, which can disproportionately shape global environmental trends. The so-called E8 group contains of China, with the world largest population, the United States with the world largest economy and carbon emissions, and Brazil, with one of the richest array of biodiversity. Together with Japan, Indonesia, India, Germany and Russia these countries account for more then 50 percent of the worlds population, economic output, carbon emission, and forest areas.9 If they agree on common environmental targets, considering their influence in their specific region, they can determine the future development of the world. If they follow what they had agreed on. Eight Environmental Heavyweights Share of Share of Share of Share of World World Share of World World Gross Carbon World Flowering Population Product Emissions Forest Area Plant Species 1996 1994 1995 1990 1990*) (in percent) 5 26 23 6 8 3 2 7 21 9 2 17 5 0.7 2 1 8 4 0.3 1 21 2 13 4 12 17 1 4 2 6 4 0 .7 1 3 8 3 2 1 16 22 56 59 58 53 --

Country USA Russia Japan Germany China India Indonesia Brazil E8 Total
*)

Based on a total of 250,000 known species. Total could not be calculated due to overlap in species among countries. Source: Worldwatch Institute, State of the world 1997, p 8

Table 1: Eight Environmental Heavyweights

Worldwatch Institute, State of the world 1997, p 8, reproduction as Table 1on page 12

12

The efforts and success in reaching the agreed targets are very different. For example, while Germany10 and Russia11 will almost certainly reach the target of reducing or holding their carbon emission under or at the level of 1990, are the United States and Japan miles away from it. Although some progress was made, the general speed of global implementation is by far slower than expected. The more attention the idea of sustainable development gets, the more difficulties are discovered. Nevertheless, the idea of sustainable development becomes more and more part of policymaking. In 1992, the Rio Conference drew up Agenda 21 12 as a blue print for sustainable development in the future. Nearly the same time, the European Community (EC) published its Fifth Environmental Action Programme (5th EAP)13, following the same principal agreements. A specific chapter of the Maastricht Treaty introduced sustainable development into the European Union basic texts. This commits the Union as an institution and every single member country to comply with the commitments and to aim for the objectives involved in it. With the direction fixed in the 5th EAP, there was the task actually to move policy and to implement the ideas and thoughts. Five years after, the EC published a review14 of progress made by the EC in implementing the targets of its 5th EAP and of Agenda 21. It includes a list of atmospherical targets and the progress made towards them. 15 While some targets were nearly or completely achieved, others got even worse. Some are yet not even measurable, because of a significant lack of data and knowledge. The initial achievements were mainly reachable without big effort, but with increasing marginal costs of damage prevention, these achievements will become scarce. The core problems, like increasing road traffic, are not yet touched. Despite the initial success, the situation in total became not better; at best, it slowed down becoming worse. Several difficulties prevented fast success.

10 11

partly due to the shutdown of eastern Germanys obsolete power- and production plants mainly due to the collapse of its energy-intensive branches of industry 12 UN, Agenda 21: The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio 13 EC, Towards sustainability - a European Community programme of policy and action in relation to the environment and sustainable development. 14 EC, Agenda 21 The first five years 15 EC, Agenda 21 The first five years, p 50, adapted reproduction as Table 2 on page 14

13

Progress towards the 5th Environmental Action Programme Goals for the atmosphere
Goal set Climate change no exceeding of natural absorption capacity of planet Earth CO2 2000 stabilize at 1990 levels Progressive reductions at the horizons 2005 and 2010 CH4 1994 identify and apply N2O controlling measures Ozone depletion HCFCs CFCs, carbon tetrachloride, halons, III-trichlorethane Acidification Progress made to date Outlook for future increased global activity, programme needs more effort Expected to meet target

Stabilizing in EU

work towards ultimate goal of no emissions of ozone depleting substances 1995 limitation of consumption to 2.6% of 1989 CFC consumption level Phase out before 1.1.1996 Achieved except for some essential uses No exceedings of critical loads and levels 1994 stabilization at 1990 levels 2000 30% reduction on 1990 levels

Reliable data not available, adopting delayed EU phased out CFCs and halons by 1996 On target

Expected increase in methane emissions concern about ability of less-developed countries to follow Expected target will be archieved Achieved

NOx

SOx NH3 General VOCs

Dioxins Heavy metals

2000 35% reduction on 1985 levels regional targets 1996 10% reduction of data not complete Possible target miss, due manmade emissions on 1990 to expected increase in levels road transport 1999 30% reduction on 1990 levels 2005 90% reduction on Full data not possible reduction of 80% 1985 levels of dioxin available in all by 2005 emission of identified sources member states 1995 at least 70% reduction Most North Sea from all pathways of Cd, Hg countries archieved and Pb emissions 50% reduction Source: EC, Agenda 21 The first five years, p 50, adapted reproduction

Expected levels will fall, but critical loads will be exceeded in some regions. Not enough data. Substantial Target for 2000 unlikely increase (5%) in to reach due to expected emissions between increase in road traffic 185 and 1990 1994 target reached achieved in 1994 reduction of 50% on 1985 levels likely in 2000

Table 2: EC goals for atmosphere

14

3.2

Problems of Implementation

In this review, also a list of priorities 16 for further implementation was set up. This list covers many system immanent problems of implementing sustainable development into politics. The first point deals with the problem of finding general methods and measures to integrate environmental prospects into the target sectors agriculture, transport, energy, industry and tourism. There is no single measure existing for a single sector, not to mention all five of them. The second point is about the general lack of tools and methods to apply. Tools to control the unemployment rate are existing for a relatively long period, but there are no sophisticated methods to control things like emissions. The EC sets its priority to market-based instruments, therefore to methods to prevent market failure and to rely on the self-controlling powers of complete markets. Non-market EC regulations are expensive and of questionable efficiency, as the other subpoints state. They are necessary to build a proper framework for the markets to work in, but for regulating behaviour of market agents, they are to bulky and cost intensive. The third point touches the problem of insufficient existing legal framework for ecological affairs. The absence of property rights and the missing of an international environmental law prevent the use of legal actions in many cases. There are no sanctions for non-compliance, so following the guidelines is more or less a matter of good will. As environmental protection are at the expense of economic growth, there is not much incentive to implement it, especially for poor countries. The fourth point is concerned with information and awareness. Sustainable development is a relatively new idea and therefore relatively unknown, to the public and to the scientists. So it is important to share available information to build up a knowledge base as fast as possible. Awareness-raising of the public is not an easy but efficient way to get more support for the idea, a political necessity, and to abandon pure top-down plans in favour of private incentives. It will help to counter market failure, as it will shift the demand side towards a social optimum, and therefore create market power to move the supply side.

16

EC, Agenda 21 The first five years, p 9, reproduction as Table 3 on page 16

15

Proposals in the draft Decision on the Review of the Fifth Environmental Action Programme Key priorities for implementation 1. Specific measures integrating the environment in transport tourism agriculture energy industry 2. Broadening the range of instruments develop the use of market-based instruments targeted revision to improve effectiveness of EU regulations further develop Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) sustainable use of Community financial mechanism 3. Implementation and enforcement improve legislation improve reporting requirements enhance cooperation between authorities at different level consider sanctions for non-compliance 4. Awareness-raising and information prepare targeted information and communication strategy improve access to information enhance training and education 5. International cooperation reinforce role in international sustainable development issues integrate environment and trade policies strengthen cooperation particular with central and eastern Europe and the Mediterranean countries improve the environmental dimension of development cooperation Other priorities for implementation 6. Improve the data and research and development basis for environmental policy-making 7. Promote sustainable production and consumption 8. Promote shared responsibility and partnership 9. Promote local and regional initiatives 10. Give further attention to the main environmental themes (climate change and ozone depletion, acidification and air quality, management of water resources, waste management, noise, nature protection and biodiversity, management of risks and accidents)
Source: EC, Agenda 21 The first five years, p 9

Table 3: "EC implementation priorities"

16

The fifth point handles the difficult area of international cooperation. Environmental protection is at the moment a hobby of the developed western industrial countries only, the lower the national income, the lower the priority for it. With many global problems, like the climate change, and many important areas, like the tropical rain forest, lying outside the industrial countries, there is the need for a joint global action. The other five points are about the lack of data, due to the short history of environmental policy and about promoting the use of low-level methods of cooperations on local or regional basis. All these problems can be categorised as lack of knowledge, lack of cooperation, lack of information and lack of legal framework. 3.3 Possible Solutions

These categories are related to each other, a lack of knowledge leads to a lack of information, so nobody has incentive to cooperate and to create a legal framework or to finance research. A starting point to break the ring is the enhancement of international cooperation, in Europe the first few steps are already done by forming the EU. This is a basis for a common environmental policy, including common tax policy, to avoid situations called prisoners dilemma17 in a game theoretical setting. Nevertheless, there is still a long way until all member countries of the EU will agree on the same actions. Information is a crucial point. Changes in environmental behaviour are not possible with a top-down policy against the will or understanding of the people, so awareness-rising and information campaigns are necessary. This will not only change their behaviour, but also increase the political pressure on governments, it will strengthen the private local incentives and nongovernmental organisations (NGOs) and it will bring more scientific attention to the various fields involved in sustainable development. This in addition with international research programmes will help to build up the small knowledge

17

Prisoners Dilemma describes a situation in which both players would be better of if they cooperate, but because of the incentive to cheat to get an advantage, they both cheat and are both in the worst possible outcome. Here cooperating could mean to agree on and implement an emission tax, which of cause will restrict domestic industry. By one country cheating and not setting up this tax, her domestic industry will get a cost advantage over the foreign industry. It is a symmetrical situation, so both countries will cheat and no emission tax will be set up at all.

17

base of ecological connections and controlling methods. These methods then can be converted into a common legal framework. Therefore, the starting points are cooperation and information. From these points on the other problems can be tackled, but without the willingness to cooperate and to sacrifice bits of some beloved things like growth or independence it will not work.

18

Conclusion

Sustainable development is the idea of combining economical growth with environmental protection and social fairness. It sounds a little bit like the mixture of a transcendental dream, a glimpse of paradise and the squaring of the circle, but it should better work otherwise humankind is in trouble. In only 2000 years, starting from scratch, we succeeded in disturbing the global balance beyond its ability of self-repair. Now we have to proof that we can get out of this trouble with the same efficiency we used to get into it, and we have much less than another 2000 years. The problems are global, so international cooperation is necessary to solve them, national solutions can be of only limited success. Europe is in the role of a pacemaker; it can work as a role model for international cooperation. But success will not come for free, sacrifices of everybody are necessary. There is no use in persisting in glorious national independence and fighting for every meter. The european policymakers need to adopt a more objective view of the problems, asking What can I do? and not Why me?. If this understanding for the importance of the task is settled in the head of the average politician and not only in a few ones working hard convincing the others, progress will be much faster. Europe is one of the best places for this change, with its countries already having experience of cooperation and the necessary institutions already formed. European environmental policy has to become a european policy and not a policy made by several european countries. The level of public awareness and understanding differs greatly between European countries. While in Germany a product has to be ecologically friendly to be sold on a large scale, in Great Britain nobody really cares about this fact. For a common European environmental policy to meet with universal agreement, the populations of all countries need to have approximately the same level of information. Environmental policy has to become much more open and understandable for the public. Sustainable development is about involving NGOs and private citizen into the task of protecting the environment. On regional and lower levels, they are by far more efficient than governments, because they are more involved in their own surroundings. But first of all they need to know about the existence and importance of the problem and about 19

their possibilities helping to solve it, they need to be interested. This is not possible with complex declarations on press conferences in remote parts of Europe or with expensive, sophisticated and obscure television spots. Instead the idea of environmental protection has to be brought to the people in a simple and understandable way; e.g. calculating their long run cost savings and their break-even point for them when buying energy-saving devices instead of the cheaper normal devices. Building up some environmental responsibility takes its time, so it might be a good idea to start early. Development policies on international level should be more coordinated and determined to take even unpopular steps to reach its targets. The priority of environmental protection has to be increased. On national level sustainable development has to be introduced into everyday use, be it planing of a road or shopping in the supermarket.

20

other Tables

1972 UN Conference on Human Environment in Stockholm 1987 World Commissions Report on Environment and Development (The Brundtland Report) 1992 EU Fifth Environmental Action Programme (Title: Towards sustainability a European Community programme of policy and action in relation to the environment and sustainable development) 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro (Earth Summit / Rio Conference) 1992 Treaty on European Union (Maastricht Treaty) 1997 UN General Assembly Special Session Table 4: Timeline

Abbr. CCl3 Cd CFC CH4 CO2 HFC Hg N2O NH3 NOx Pb SOx VOC

Name Methyl Bromide CarbonTetraChlorid Cadmium CloroFluoroCarbon Methane Carbon Dioxide HydroFlouroCarbon

Application pesticide

Danger short lived ODS (2yrs) ODS HM strong ODS GG GG GG short lived ODS (1020yrs), strong GG HM

refrigerants, foam, aerosol propellants burning process substitute for CFC substitute for CFC

HFCF HydroChloroFlouroCarbon

Mercury Nitrous Oxide fertiliser Ammonia Nitrogen Oxide burning process AR Lead HM Sulphur Oxide burning process AR Volatile Organic Component incomplete burning process AR AR: causing Acid Rain GG: Greenhouse Gas ODS: Ozone-Depleting Substance HM: toxic Heavy Metal Sources: Worldwatch Institute, State of the world 1997, US EPA Webpage

Table 5: Substance Abbreviations

21

6 6.1

References Books Environmental Politics 1996, London The politics of sustainable development 1997, London / New York Towards a sustainable Scotland: a discussion paper 1996, Edinburgh Club of Rome report: The Limits to growth 1972, London State of the world 1997 1997, London, Earthscan

Garner, R. Baker, S. et al. Friends of the Earth Scotland Meadows, D. H. et al. Worldwatch Institute 6.2 Web sources

EU OECD Taurus Institute Trier UN UN CED (Agenda 21) UN FAO UN WG/SPD US EPA

http://europa.eu.int/ http://www.oecd.org/ http://www.uni-trier.de/taurus/index.htm http://www.un.org/ http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev http://www.fao.org/ http://unep.fru.viva.nl/ http://www.epa.gov/

22

6.3 UN

official Publications Agenda 21: The United Nations Programme of Action from Rio 1993, New York The challenges facing European society with the approach of the year 2000 Strategies for sustainable development in urban regions in Europe European regional planning, no. 57 1994, Strasbourg Agenda 21 the first five years: European Community progress on the implementation of Agenda 21 1992-97 1997, Luxembourg Towards sustainability - a European Community programme of policy and action in relation to the environment and sustainable development. 1992, Luxembourg Auszge aus der Koalitionsvereinbarung zwischen der Sozialdemokratischen Partei Deutschlands und Bndnis 90 / Die Grnen Aufbruch und Erneuerung - Deutschlands Weg ins 21. Jahrhundert 1998, Bonn OECD Work on sustainable development OECD Working papers, Vol. VI, No. 62 1998, Paris Increasing the compatibility of environmental policies Background report 1993, Paris Our Common Future 1987

Council of Europe

European Commission European Commission

German Government / Environmental Department OECD

OECD

WCED

23