Link between climate change mitigation and resource efficiency: A UK case study

This paper provides an in-depth analysis of the links between dematerialisation and climate change mitigation. Methods used for material flow analyses (MFA) within the wider context of industrial ecology (which includes a focus on all resource flows in an economy, not purely material tonnage) tend to focus either on detoxification and pollution reduction or dematerialisation and resource productivity. An environmentally extended input–output (EEIO) model incorporates both aspects, which need to be dealt with when looking at how to meet challenging greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets. The approach understands both production systems and consumption patterns and has the ability through scenarios to analyse the (GHG) effectiveness of a wide range of material efficiency options. This analysis adopts an environmentally extended input–output approach to assess the role of material efficiency measures in reducing UK GHG emissions by 2050. A method for projecting the variables and parameters in the model, including the supply of and demand for materials and products, is presented and applied to investigate thirteen material efficiency strategies in the UK.

[1]  Michael Katzmayr,et al.  Examples of Sustainable Consumption: Review, Classification and Analysis , 2004 .

[2]  T. Cooper.  Inadequate Life?Evidence of Consumer Attitudes to Product Obsolescence , 2004 .

[3]  Klaus Hubacek,et al.  Economic and Societal Changes in China and their Effects onWater Use A Scenario Analysis , 2005 .

[4]  Manfred Lenzen,et al.  A CARBON FOOTPRINT TIME SERIES OF THE UK – RESULTS FROM A MULTI-REGION INPUT–OUTPUT MODEL , 2010 .

[5]  A. Washizu,et al.  An Analysis of Sustainable Consumption by the Waste Input‐Output Model , 2005 .

[6]  P. Ehrlich,et al.  IMPACT OF POPULATION GROWTH , 1971, Science.

[7]  Kate Scott,et al.  Meeting the UK climate change challenge: The contribution of resource efficiency , 2009 .

[8]  Neil Strachan,et al.  Methodological review of UK and international low carbon scenarios , 2010 .

[9]  E. Hertwich,et al.  CO2 embodied in international trade with implications for global climate policy. , 2008, Environmental science & technology.

[10]  Tobias Kronenberg,et al.  The impact of demographic change on energy use and greenhouse gas emissions in Germany , 2009 .

[11]  Albert Faber,et al.  Investigating new technologies in a scenario context: description and application of an input–output method , 2008 .

[12]  G. Peters.  From production-based to consumption-based national emission inventories , 2008 .

[13]  Faye Duchin,et al.  Technological change, trade and the environment , 1995 .

[14]  G. Peters,et al.  APPROXIMATION AND REGIONAL AGGREGATION IN MULTI-REGIONAL INPUT–OUTPUT ANALYSIS FOR NATIONAL CARBON FOOTPRINT ACCOUNTING , 2009 .

[15]  F. Krausmann,et al.  Global patterns of materials use: A socioeconomic and geophysical analysis , 2010 .

[16]  Shigemi Kagawa,et al.  The environmental and economic consequences of product lifetime extension: Empirical analysis for automobile use , 2006 .

[17]  Manfred Lenzen,et al.  CO2 Multipliers in Multi-region Input-Output Models , 2004 .

[18]  Jesper Munksgaard,et al.  CO2 accounts for open economies: producer or consumer responsibility? , 2001 .

[19]  Giovanni Baiocchi,et al.  Understanding changes in the UK's CO2 emissions: a global perspective. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[20]  Peter C. Bishop,et al.  The current state of scenario development: an overview of techniques , 2007 .

[21]  Alice Bows,et al.  Living within a carbon budget , 2007 .

[22]  Göran Finnveden,et al.  Scenarios in selected tools for environmental systems analysis , 2008 .

[23]  S. Sorrell,et al.  The rebound effect: Microeconomic definitions, limitations and extensions , 2008 .

[24]  K. Anderson,et al.  From long-term targets to cumulative emission pathways: Reframing UK climate policy , 2008 .

[25]  P. Mokhtarian.  Telecommunications and Travel: The Case for Complementarity , 2002 .

[26]  Paul Ekins,et al.  The Tyndall decarbonisation scenarios—Part I: Development of a backcasting methodology with stakeholder participation , 2008 .

[27]  M. Binswanger.  Technological progress and sustainable development: what about the rebound effect? , 2001 .

[28]  S. Sorrell.  The rebound effect: an assessment of the evidence for economy-wide energy savings from improved energy efficiency , 2007 .

[29]  Alice Bows,et al.  Living within a carbon budget - report for Friends of the Earth and the Co-operative Bank , 2006 .

[30]  Thusnelda Tivig,et al.  Regionale Bevölkerungsentwicklung in der Metropolregion Hamburg und Mecklenburg-Vorpommern. Bevölkerungsvorausberechnung im Rahmen des Projekts "Infrastrukturplanung und demografische Entwicklungen" (InfraDem) , 2008 .

[31]  Ste Preprint.  The Impact of Demographic Change on Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions , 2008 .

[32]  G. Finnveden,et al.  Scenario types and techniques: Towards a user's guide , 2006 .

[33]  Vaclav Smil,et al.  Perils of Long-Range Energy Forecasting , 2000 .

[34]  Jack E. Adams,et al.  The Future Impact of Automation on Workers , 1987 .

[35]  C. Weber,et al.  The drivers of Chinese CO2 emissions from 1980 to 2030 , 2008 .

[36]  H. Schütz,et al.  Rationale for and Interpretation of Economy‐Wide Materials Flow Analysis and Derived Indicators , 2003 .

[37]  Helga Weisz,et al.  Reducing energy and material flows in cities , 2010 .

[38]  Stefan Bringezu,et al.  The physical dimension of international trade: Part 1: Direct global flows between 1962 and 2005 , 2010 .

[39]  F. Duchin.  Structural Economics: Measuring Change in Technology, Lifestyles, and the Environment , 1998 .

[40]  D. Greene,et al.  Energy efficiency and consumption — the rebound effect — a survey , 2000 .