This is illustrated in the film: Age of the stupid: 'why didn't we stop climate change while we had the chance?' by Pete Postlethwaite. In this film, efforts to build a ...
HOW ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION POLICIES CONSTRAIN SUSTAINABLE ENGINEERING DESIGN
ENCOURAGE
OR
The last two decades have witnessed advances in technology which are largely geared towards minimal environmental impact, better efficiency and energy conservation. Scientific evidence suggests that most of our environmental problems today developed as a result of the inadequate emission control measures in early technologies. Efforts to solve these environmental problems have resulted in stricter environmental regulations and policies and the emergence of global concepts such as low carbon emission, sustainable development and renewable energy. Current evidence suggests that environmental problems can be managed by anticipating possible environmental impact at the conceptual and design stages of technology-based projects. Spaagaren and Mol in Fisher R. et al (2001) particularly argue that further advancements in technology and industrialisation will contribute hugely towards solving environmental problems. Their argument advocates the use of new and clean technology to solve or control the problems created by older technologies. If implemented within a framework of cost and energy efficiency, improved performance, reliability and acceptance supported by effective government policies, this approach has the benefit of being pragmatic and measureable with underlying economic benefits. Thus this approach forms the basis of ecological modernisation’ (EM) today. The apparent simplicity of Spaagaren and Mol’s approach along with the potential economic benefits has generated interests from many stakeholders. However, the process through which technologies advance or develop and the various ways in which the public and stakeholders support or influence these innovations are complex (Kivimaa, 2007). The potential intricacy of this apparently simple approach is highlighted by increased levels of participation, flexible economic policies and market forces, evolving industries and stricter government regulations in engineering issues. Thus, engineers are now faced with the complicated task of resolving different design goals from competing social, economic, environmental and political interests. The polarisation of opinions on this approach is illustrated here by two distinct perspectives. On one hand, some critics have argued that engineering designs and technological advances are influenced by partisan interests and policies. They maintain that although such technological advances are feasible and achievable, they may not be widely enough utilized due to the impact of external factors. They also argue that new and improved technology alone cannot achieve better environmental protection particularly if left to business self-regulatory practices (York and Rosa, 2003). Kivimaa (2007), in particular contends that policies aimed at addressing one environmental problem may end up causing other problems, although she concedes that the converse could also occur, technologies designed to solve a problem in response to a policy may also solve other problems not targeted by that policy. On the other hand, Gibbs (1998) argues that advances in technology are autonomous in nature and are reflective of the changes in our industrial systems as it relates with the social and natural environment. Both arguments have their merits, but the autonomy of technology in this regard can be questioned on the basis that relationships are established within a social environment. It is therefore imperative that the users of the 1
technology are involved in the development process. These users are a key indicator of the sustainability of any engineering design (Jensen and Gram-Hanssen, 2008). This essay explores the how ecological modernisation policies affect sustainable engineering designs. Scenarios have been chosen for their relevance in terms of carbon emission, energy demand, and changing technology in addition to the significant influence of global and government policies over them. Definition of Key Concepts EM is a system created by governments and key policy makers in attempt to mitigate, control or eliminate environmental risks/impact associated with industrialisation and modernity while maintaining a steady advancement in technology with its underlying benefits. EM involves the remodelling of economic and industrial growth to meet environmental requirements (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_modernization). It advocates the idea that environmental sustainability programmes and economic development can be mutual (Barry in Dryzek and Schlosberg, 2005). Sustainable engineering design simply means the optimal use of material resources to achieve human satisfaction while ensuring environmental protection. Hence this term generally refers to technological innovations and advances that are “eco-friendly”. The sustainability of designs is a function of economical, political and organisational factors. The larger implications of sustainable engineering design include: reduced energy consumption, safer and cleaner methods of production, reduced risk and overall environmental impact (Henry G. et al, 1996). But these advantages and potentials must be weighed against cost (economics) and social adaptability (acceptance). These two factors are key indicators of sustainable engineering design (Adetunji et al, 2003). The Effects of Some Ecological Modernization Policies on Sustainable Engineering Designs EM policies in this context are interventions from stakeholders especially governments in the development and use of technology in a way not harmful to the environment but beneficial to humans. Examples of EM policies include: environmental taxes, environmental impact assessment, regulatory and building codes, emissions trading, waste management privatisation and precautionary principle (Bell S., 2009) The construction industry, for example, has a long history of unsustainable practices and environmental impact (Kilbert et al, 2002). With the threat of climate change, this industry is heavily regulated by governments especially in the developed world. In the UK, key aspects of sustainable designs such as waste management, procurement, reuse and recycling, site planning and life cycle assessment are closely regulated by the government through strict building codes, regulations and other initiatives. Studies carried out by Adetunji et.al (2003), showed increased levels of awareness of possible environmental impacts of construction amongst stakeholders. Consequently, these stakeholders press engineers to produce designs 2
which are sustainable thereby driving the adaptation of many building designs to meet the user requirements. The study further showed that government regulations and building codes drive sustainability in construction, which in turn leads to increased turnover. Interestingly, the biggest barrier (in the study) to sustainability was identified to be the ‘client’, albeit in many instances the client is also the government. In Denmark, many standards such as the ‘Greenbuild point system’ and Building Environmental Assessment Tool (BEAT) have been used to assess sustainability in buildings. However, these standards used in Denmark have not been very successful (Jensen and Gram-Hanssen 2008). Nonetheless, there seems to be an increasing alignment in the perception of the need for sustainable buildings. The automobile industry presents another case where regulations and codes have a huge influence. Here, regulatory measures on carbon emission especially for car exhausts have continuously been intensified (Wells and Orsato, 2004). In response to these regulations car makers are compelled to engage in expensive research in order to produce more sustainable designs. Today we have ethanol driven cars which are relatively eco-friendly and electric cars. But questions have been raised concerning the affordability and durability of these cars and thus the consumer uptake has been less than optimal. Good technology that remains unutilized cannot be regarded as sustainable. The Precautionary Principle is a key ecological modernization policy. It forms article 15 of the 1992 Rio Declaration (UNCED). “..Where there are threats of irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost effective measures to prevent environmental degradation”(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle). One of the demerits of this system is that it could allow for a margin of ignorance to set in thereby undermining the social and ethical aspects of the risk management process (Lee and Stokes, 2007). This is illustrated in the film: Age of the stupid: ‘why didn't we stop climate change while we had the chance?’ by Pete Postlethwaite. In this film, efforts to build a wind farm in a community so as to mitigate the effects of climate change led to protests from the host community. The project engineer tried to persuade the community on the sustainability of the wind farm project but the residents were not willing to accept the ‘risks’. Besides not being convinced about immediate threats of climate change, they feared that the wind farms would destroy their landscape! The project was eventually discontinued. Critics of the precautionary principle have argued that it could be used to further political interests that ultimately limit innovative ideas as an example of the relative ease with which it could be misapplied (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary_principle). The impact of this principle on sustainable engineering designs could vary. On one hand, this principle could lead to spurious rejection of new innovations on the grounds that operability or adverse effects of a design cannot be ascertained. On the other hand, this principle spurs engineers to do more research and present more articulate proofs on the viability and reliability of their designs. The precautionary principle enhances ‘vulnerability’ studies in engineering designs (UNESCO, 2005) and ensures that the right-of-choice of people and stakeholders in engineering designs is not undermined in the quest for sustainability.
3
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a tool that includes policies, proposals, projects and procedures designed to identify, interpret and predict the temporal impact of an engineering activity on the environment and humans (Munn in Henry G. et al, 1996). In several countries, (including developing countries such as Nigeria), it is mandatory to carry out an EIA before and after any project with environmental implications. Hence, EIA has influenced the way engineering projects are executed. Significant waste reduction and local content initiatives are notable advantages of EIA. In the event of an incident such as oil spillage, EIA is used as a tool to ensure full compliance with regulations on clean-up and remediation. For example, most local communities in Nigeria have accepted the idea of EIA and insist on it prior to the commencement of any project. It is required that the contracting process also fully accounts for the EIA programme of any project. Thus, EIA is a measure of the sustainability of any engineering project in Nigeria. Nevertheless, EIA has notable disadvantages which include: project delays, enormous cost implications, uncertainty in predictions and at times it is regarded as just a document with which to secure a contract (Henry G et al, 1996). These call for regular appraisal and enforcement of the requirements in an EIA. Emissions’ trading (also known as cap and trade) is a key part of the Kyoto Protocol treaty (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emissions_trading). It involves a mechanism whereby emissions are monetized according to limits of industrial pollution set by individual governments. When a set limit of emissions is exceeded, a trade is required to expand the limit. As a result of this limit, construction engineering projects especially in the developed world are increasingly conscious of the financial implications of uncontrolled carbon emission. This factor has inspired a wide range of research sponsored by industries to develop new technologies with low emissions capabilities, although questions have been raised about the authenticity and reliability of these new technologies. There are fears that emissions trading may reduce jobs and income, as well as encourage the introduction of ‘dubious science’ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emissions_trading). Critics of emissions trading have also argued that it is a reactionary means of solving pollution problems. But this is assertion needs to be placed in a proper context. For example, stricter air pollution policies were implemented in Finland in the 1980’s and this affected further development in Nordic Pulp, and Paper packaging industries (Kivimaa, 2007). However, this regulatory push spurred a proactive response from the industries to develop recyclable packaging, better waste management systems and other cost-benefit innovations. Emissions trading may be said to place an “artificial limit” on engineering designs but it ultimately ensures that any acceptable engineering design or innovation will be eco-friendly. In effect, anticipating environmental policies such as the emissions trading will enhance development of more sustainable engineering designs. Ecological Taxes (or eco-taxes) in this context are taxes intended to promote ecologically sustainable engineering design in activities via economic incentives (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecotax). These taxes have been established in most ecologically modernist nations primarily to make industries and companies have an indirect experience of 4
their actions which have culminated into environmental problems. For example, fuel consumption is a key factor in design and purchase of new vehicles, thus, most new vehicles boast of improved efficiency and low fuel consumption. From a survey in Germany, there are increasing numbers of people using public transport. About 80% of respondents say the environment will top their priority in the purchase of new cars while 63% say fuel economy. Contrary to claims by critics that eco-tax has no impact on the environment, the survey claimed that carbon emissions reduced by about six to seven percent from 2000 to 2004. This invariably implies the design of cars is tilting towards sustainability. However, studies have also shown that attempts to attain sustainable designs limit design options available in car manufacturing (Wells and Orsato, 2004). Contrary to the German experience, Wells and Orsato also mentioned that the automobile industry has generally not performed well with respect to carbon emissions and fuel economy and that the advances in automobile engineering have reduced the pressure faced by companies in the industry. Just like emissions trading, there is some scepticism that regressive attributes of eco-taxes outweigh its progressive attributes. Many automobile companies have now resulted in mergers to counter difficult financial situations which they largely blame on government reforms. Eco-tax has unarguably created awareness for lesser energy consumption in the German car industry. This has in turn resulted in improved car designs which are eco-friendly. Eco-tax has now been introduced into most EU nations (http://www.greengrowth.org/download/15dec06/ GBGMemorandum2004.pdf). Summary and conclusion Ecological modernization policies foster relevant research on the development of cleaner technologies, promote re-use and recycling through innovative engineering design, increase awareness on climate change and advocate energy conservation in a wider perspective. The proactive application of ecological modernisation policies has more advantages in sustainable engineering design than the reactionary approach where the ecological modernization policies are seen as ‘imposed polices’ rather than ‘necessary policies’. Also, engineers have a huge role to play in making their designs sustainable. However, the financial, socio-technical and ethical aspects of ecological modernization which are key to sustainable engineering design need to be addressed by all stakeholders. Green technology must not only be developed, it must also be widely utilised. Sustainability can only be fully achieved when people accept and use new innovations. In conclusion, ecological modernization is a positive development that needs to be approached in an ethical manner in order to fully harness its potentials towards achieving sustainability in engineering designs. The complexity of achieving sustainability in engineering design can be further simplified by taking proactive measures towards minimized environmental impact.
5
REFERENCES Adetunji I, Price A, Fleming P, and Kemp P., Sustainability in the UK Construction Industry – A Review, Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Engineering Sustainability Vol 156, Issue ES4, December 2003, pp185-199. http://www.atypon-link.com/ (Accessed 23-112009) Barry J, 2005, Ecological Modernization in: Dryzek J and Schlosberg D, Debating the Earth: The Environmental Politics Reader, Oxford University Press, Chapter 21, pp 303-321. Bell S. 2009, Lecture notes on Systems Society and Sustainability: Ecological Modernisation, University College London. Fisher D. and Freudenburg W., Ecological Modernisation and its Critics: Assessing the Past and Looking Toward the Future, Society and Natural Resources, Vol. 14, 2001, pp 701-709, Taylor and Francis http://www.es.ucsb.edu/ (Accessed 21-11-2009) Gibbs D. , Ecological Modernisation: A Basis for Regional Development? Paper Presented to the Seventh International Conference of the Greening of Industry Network ‘Partnership and Leadership: Building Alliances for a Sustainable Future’, Rome 15-18 November 1998 Henry G. and Heinke G. 1996, Environmental Science and Engineering, Prentice-Hall, India Jensen J and Gram-Hanssen K, Ecological Modernisation of Sustainable Buildings: a Danish Perspective, Building Research and Information, Vol 36, Issue 2, 2008, pp 146-158 www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713694730 (Accessed 23 -11-2009) Kibert C, Sendzimir J and Guy B. 2002, Construction Ecology: Nature as the basis for green buildings, chapter one, Defining an ecology of construction, pp 7-28, Spon Press London and New York. Kivimaa P., The Determinants of Environmental Innovation: the Impacts of Environmental Policies on the Nordic Pulp, Paper and Packaging Industries, European Environment, Vol 17, January 2007, pp 92-105 www.interscience.wiley.com (Accessed 23-11-2009) Koontz T., Collaboration for Sustainability? A framework for Analyzing Government Impacts in Collaborative-Environmental Management, Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, Vol 2, Issue 1, Spring 2006, pp15-24 http://ejournal.nbii.org (Acccessed 23-11-2009) Lee R. and Stokes E. 2007, Ecological Modernization and the Precautionary Principle, Cardiff Centre for Ethics, Law and Society http://www.ccels.cf.ac.uk/archives/ Pete Postlethwaite: Age of the stupid: ‘why didn't we stop climate change while we had the chance?’ ( a documentary on climate change)
6
UNESCO, World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology (COMEST) March 2005 http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001395/139578e.pdf#33 (Accessed 05-12-2009) Wells P. And Orsato R. The Ecological Modernisation of the Automotive Industry, Government for Industrial Transformation. Proceedings of the 2003 Berlin Conference on the Human Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, Environmental Policy Research Centre, 2004, pp 373-385. York R and Rosa E., Key Challenges to Ecological Modernization Theory, Organisation and Environment, Vol 16 No. 3, September 2003, pp 273-288 http://www.sagepublications.com (Accessed 21-11-2009) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emissions_trading (Accessed 26-11-2009) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecotax (Accessed 26-11-2009) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precautionary _principle (Accessed 26-11-2009) http://www.greengrowth.org/download/15dec06/GBGMemorandum2004.pdf (Accessed 2611-2009)
7
