from a growing eco-industry to a sustainable economy

There are still many illusions to overcome in the growth discussion. These illusions may be seen in the idea that long-term, significant growth could be achieved using government resources or that the solution to pressing financial and social problems necessitates higher growth. It is also an illusion, however, to say that giving up on growth is the alternative. In fact, it is about radical growth in environmental and resource-saving technologies. It is also about radical “de-growth” in products and processes that undermine long- term living and production conditions. Is the concept of "Green Growth" proposed by the OECD and other established institutions in Europe and Asia part of the growth illusion? This paper traces the transformation of the concept of "Green Growth" and evaluates the strategy that accompanies it in order to provide a more nuanced answer

innovation and diffusion of policy and technology

The article gives an analysis of the possibilities and limits of the concept of ecological modernization. The concept was used already in the early 1980s to describe the common field of ecology and economy. The focus was on technological progress reducing the environmental impact of production and consumption. Hajer and other authors had a broader definition of the concept. But it could make sense to differentiate technical / non-technical solutions (the latter being less compatible with the economic system). The limits to eco-modernization strategies and the need for “structural” solutions could possibly better be demonstrated by the earlier concept. A policy for ecological modernization may be defined as the sum of government actions aimed to stimulate environmental innovations and their diffusion. Higher eco- efficiency - instead of end-of-pipe measures - is its main objective. But innovation is a highly difficult task, especially for governments. No simple “instrumentalistic” solution is available. Therefore, a more complex policy pattern will be necessary. A more global policy approach would be the stimulation of “green” lead markets. As a rule a complex interplay between political and technical innovation and diffusion can be observed

Akzeleratoren der Diffusion klimafreundlicher Technik: Horizontale und vertikale Verstärker im Mehrebenensystem

Vor dem Hintergrund der hohen Dynamik des Klimawandels untersucht der Beitrag die Möglichkeiten einer beschleunigten Diffusion klimafreundlicher Technik. Bei einer Klimapolitik, die auch industriepolitisch angelegt ist, lassen sich solche „Akzeleratoren“ beobachten. Dabei werden folgende Verstärkungsfaktoren behandelt: (a) die interaktive Innovationsdy-namik mit Rückkopplungseffekten, die eine ambitionierte Klimapolitik auslösen kann („mutually reinforcing cycles“), (b) der Mechanismus des nationalen Lead-Marktes mit glo-baler Diffusionswirkung, (c) die von Pionierländern ausgehende Diffusion technologie-basierter politischer Fördermaßnahmen („lesson-drawing“) und (d) die vertikal induzierte horizontale Innovationsdynamik im politischen Mehrebenensystem speziell auf der subnati-onalen Ebene. Allen Mechanismen ist gemeinsam, dass sie erstens von einem Wechselspiel zwischen Politik und Technik bestimmt sind, dass sie zweitens eine Mobilisierung ökonomi-scher Interessen für die Klimapolitik bewirken und dies drittens auf allen Ebenen der glo-balen Politik möglich ist (multi-level governance). Der explorative Beitrag bestätigt die Po-tenziale eines „polyzentrischen Ansatzes“ der Klimapolitik im Sinne Ostroms

the challenge of globalisation

During the last years we have witnessed more and more fears that the nation state and its ability to set demanding standards in fields like environmental policy has diminished in the context of globalisation. There is, on the other hand, the hopeful prognosis of neo-classical economists that the same globalisation would be connected with deregulation and fundamental reduction of the role of government. Neither the fear nor the hope of a withering away of the nation state in times of globalisation are supported by empirical research. States in concert have expanded and co-ordinated their regulatory powers. And it is only the nation state, the guarantor of diverse societal interests, that has the competence, the resources, the power and legitimacy to regulate the actions of disparate actors who might otherwise destroy shared environmental resources. There is a remarkable potential at least in the advanced OECD countries to promote change by the adoption of a pioneering policy, the stimulation of international competition and the diffusion of best practice. This potential of the highly advanced countries may be seen as a moral obligation to assume a higher responsibility for the global environmental development. The advanced nations cannot hide behind the fictive monster of globalisation, seemingly legitimising any kind of inactivity. On the contrary, it is their obligation to provide the world with better “demonstration effects”, with a better model of production and consumption overcoming the resource and environment intensive model of the past

Horizontal and Vertical Reinforcement in Global Climate Governance

This paper is dealing with mechanisms that can accelerate the global diffusion of climate-friendly technologies. The accelerated diffusion of low-carbon technology innovation can possibly be achieved by interactive processes such as: (1) mutually reinforcing cycles of policy-induced domestic market growth, innovation, and policy feedback; (2) lead markets and political lesson- drawing, the reinforced international adoption of innovations from pioneer countries; and (3) interaction between the vertical and horizontal dynamics in multi-level systems of governance. The three mechanisms are not exclusive. They can overlap and reinforce each other. After a theoretical introduction they will be described. The empirical focus is on the European system of multi-level climate governance. The paper draws some final conclusions for policy makers

Möglichkeiten und Grenzen eines Konzepts

Der Beitrag gibt – unter Rückgriff auf eigene Forschungen zum Thema – einen Überblick über Möglichkeiten und Grenzen des für die Umweltstrategie wichtig gewordenen Konzepts der „ökologische Modernisierung“. Der Begriff beschreibt in seiner ursprünglichen Fassung das große Segment möglicher Umweltverbesserungen, die durch technischen Fortschritt jenseits von End-of- pipe-Ansätzen und diesseits von weitergehenden strukturellen Lösungen zu erzielen sind. Dabei kommt dem Mechanismus der Innovationsdiffusion eine spezielle Bedeutung zu, zumal dann, wenn es um die Entwicklung einer globalen Strategie der ökologischen Modernisierung geht. Von besonderem Interesse ist das Wechselspiel von Politik und Technik in diesem Prozess. In aller Regel weisen technisch lösbare Umweltprobleme umweltpolitisch einen geringeren Schwierigkeitsgrad auf als solche, die strukturelle Eingriffe erfordern. Der Begriff der ökologischen Modernisierung könnte – im Gegensatz zu weiteren Fassungen - dieses ökonomischtechnische Potenzial akzentuieren und so die Abgrenzung des schwierigeren Pensums eines ökologischen Struktur- und Lebensstilwandels erleichtern.The article gives an analysis of the possibilities and limits of the concept of ecological modernisation. The concept was used already in the early 1980s to describe the common field of ecology and economy. The focus was on technological progress reducing the environmental impact of production and consumption. Hajer and other authors had a broader definition of the concept. But it could make sense to differentiate technical non-technical solutions (the latter being less compatible with the economic system). The limits to eco-modernisation strategies and the need for „structural“ solutions could possibly better be demonstrated by the earlier concept. A policy for ecological modernisation may be defined as the sum of government actions aimed to stimulate environmental innovations and their diffusion. Higher eco- efficiency - instead of end-of-pipe measures - is its main objective. But innovation is a highly difficult task, especially for governments. No simple „instrumentalistic“ solution is available. Therefore, a more complex policy pattern will be necessary. A more global policy approach would be the stimulation of „green“ lead markets. As a rule a complex interplay between political and technical innovation and diffusion can be observed