Growth and sustainability: When can enough be enough? Dr Julia K. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

School of Earth & Environment

SUSTAINABILITY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

Growth and sustainability: When can enough be enough?

Dr Julia K. Steinberger *

Global Futures:Exploringburningquestions for global society Lancaster Environment Centre, UniversityofLancaster, January 31st 2014

* A balancing act with guest appearances by Scrooge McDuck, Wiley Coyote & Lego people

Long subtitle of questions

• Is sustainable growth a contradiction in terms or is it the only

realistic pathway? Could it be neither or both of these?

• Is economic growth really incompatible with decreasing carbon

emissions and environmental burdens?

• Are we driving growth, or is it driving us?
• What does questioning growth imply for modern societies and

mainstream economics?

• When can enough be enough; for people, organisations and

nations?

2

Evidence-based decision making

David Shrigley

3

Outline

• 1. Trends and limits – a reality check
• Discussion
• 2. Couplingand decoupling
• Discussion
• 3. Energy and carbon for human

development

• Discussion

4

Environmental limits: carbon emissions

Source: T . Stocker 2005 (Can extend graph to 850'000, T . Stocker 2006)

Homo Sapiens appears Agriculture begins 397 ppm in 12.2013

387 ppm in 2009 380 ppm in 2005 330 ppm in 1974

5

Growth is very steady

6

Growth in emissions, but also ….

Population

BrickTestament.com

Economy Oil Resource use Human Well-Being

7

Resource requirements of people; Resource requirements of the economy.

Oil

8

International evidence in 2000

9

Population (1000 persons) GDP (billion $) Fossil fuels (thousand tons) Biomass (thousand tons)

Steinberger et al 2010

People need biomass to live Economies need fossil fuels to grow

Global trends in material use , population and economy, 1900-2005

Source: Krausmann etal.2009

10 20 30

1 9 1 9 2 5 1 9 5 1 9 7 5 2 P

• p

u la t io n ,G D P a n d D M C in d e x e d 1 9 = 1

Population GDP Biomass Fossiland mineral materials

Biomass Population Mineral materials & Fossil fuels GDP

Global distribution of materials: Lorenz curves and Gini coefficients

Gini coefficients Equal distribution: Most unequal distribution: 1 Biomass: 0.29 Total materials: 0.35 Construction minerals: 0.38 Fossil fuels: 0.58 Ores/industrial minerals: 0.60

Steinberger,Krausmann & Eisenmenger,2010

11

Some conclusions

• People are not the same as the economy: have different physical

requirements;

• Replacing fossil fuels with biofuels will have catastrophic

implicationsfor basic survival of poorest populationsin terms of food supply and access;

• Physical limits of environment means that everything comes into

question and everything is linked,includingfood and diet choices.

• When can enough be enough?
• Alreadyfar too much for some, too little for manyothers.

12

Is it possible to decouple the economy from resource use?

Part 1: The great “race” between economic growth and technology.

13

Allocation: IPAT

Debate in late 1960s, early 1970s: Who (or what) is to blame for environmentalproblems?

• Paul Ehrlich: Population

Barry Commoner: Rich populations more than poor, “technology” can help or hinder.

Result: IPAT identity (Commoner, Ehrlich, Holdren, 1972)

Technology = “Carbon intensity of the economy:” kg carbon per $ GDP

                    GDP CO capita GDP Population CO Technology Affluence Population Impact

2 2

14

Society as an IPAT machine – +

Population

– +

Affluence

– +

Human Society

Technology

x x CO2 CO2 CO2

Growing Growing Only hope?

=

15

IPAT factors

50 100 150 200 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Carbon emissions: 1970 = 4.1 Gigatonnes Population: 1970 = 3.7 billion people Affluence: 1970 = 3'670 $/capita Technology: 1970 = 0.30 kg carbon per $

1970 value = 100% 1950- 1970 1970- 2000 2000- 2007 Carbon 4.7% 1.9% 3.1%  Population 1.9% 1.7% 1.2%  Affluence 2.9% 1.7% 3.2%  T echnology

• 0.1%
• 1.5%
• 1.2% 

Annual growth rates

16

Jackson 2009

7% 9% 11%

Carbon intensities required to meet 450 ppm target

17

Growth in productivity Growth in GDP Absolute decarbonisation Relative decarbonisation No decoupling at all

43% 48% 6%

Population

21% 65% 14%

GDP

Productivity ($ per ton CO2) and decarbonisation: international

Carbon productivity % annual growth GDP % annual growth 3 countries 21 countries 82 countries 61 countries

18

– + – +

Part 2: Efficiency as an engine of growth.

Efficiency Affluence

19

Can efficiency save economic growth?

Mainstream economic growth theories

Production function approach

• Labour L and capital K as main factors

But this does explain economic growth in 20th Century

• ‘Solow residual’ A:gap between real economicgrowth and output estimated

from changes in capital and labour alone

• “Measure of our ignorance”of technological progress

Endogenous growth theories

• Incorporate investment in research and/or probabilisticoccurrence of

innovation, but do not measure technical progress itself

Energy & efficiency are missing

• Need to measure conversion of energy (exergy) inputs into useful work
• Need to measure qualityofenergy (exergy) inputs

1. Primary energy (exergy) as a factor of production

• Problem: primary energy is a raw material – we’re still missing technology!
• Result: economic growth is STILL higher than expected!

2. Useful work (useful exergy) as a factor of production:

• Useful energy tells us not only how much energy we’re using, but what we really

get out of it: includes technology!

• Result: can model USA economic growth over 100 years (Ayres & Warr 2005, 2009).

The energy chain: resource and efficiency

Useful energy explains USA economic growth over 100 years

Ayres et al 2007

Useful energy

22

1. 2. 3. 4. Vicious or virtuous cycle?

Feedback loops driving growth and energy use

• Ayres & Warr feedback between efficiency, energy useand

economic growth

• “Treadmillof production:”efficiency lowers prices, need more

consumptionto maintainemployment.

24

Jackson 2009

Conclusion from Ayres et al work

Economic growth both drives and benefits from progress in energy efficiency .

• Energy efficiency leads to economicgrowth.

Troublingquestions:

• Can efficiency reallylead to decreases or decoupling, ifit drives growth?
• How can we deal with climate change without challengingthe imperative for

economic growth?

25

The problem(s) with efficiency

$

 Present development based on fixed pattern of resource use.  Technicallyextremely challengingto increase efficiency faster than economy.  Normally,efficiency drives economic growth, not savings or reductions.  Economic growth should be limited by efficiency growth

• Physical limits on economic growth
• Very unpopular

26

CO2

Part 4: Measuring the carbon efficiency of human development

27

Can efficiency save economic development? human

Sufficiency:

how much CO2 is necessary for human development?

28

Links between energy & human development

29

Wilkinson et al. 2007

Human Development vs. Carbon

Steinberger & Roberts 2010

Human Development Index Carbon emissions (tC/cap) 2005 2000 1995 1990 1985 1980 1975

High human development requires less and less carbon!

30

Carbon “thresholds” for sufficiency

0.6 tC/cap C&C 2050 level

Steinberger & Roberts 2010

31

Global carbon “thresholds”

5.5GtC C&C 2050 level

Steinberger & Roberts 2010

32

Sufficiency and carbon emissions: Taking trade into account

Carbon importer Carbon exporter

Steinberger, Roberts , Peters & Baiocchi 2012

Life expectancy (years) Carbon emissions (tonnes carbon per capita) Carbon neutral

CO2 emissions: R2 = 0.65 Corrected for trade: R2 = 0.72

33

Income and carbon emissions: Taking trade into account

Carbon importer Carbon exporter GDP ($ per capita) Carbon emissions (tonnes carbon per capita) Carbon neutral

CO2 emissions: R2 = 0.82 Corrected for trade: R2 = 0.90

34 Steinberger, Roberts , Peters & Baiocchi 2012

All together now: Life expectancy, income and trade-corrected carbon

$/cap

35 Steinberger, Roberts , Peters & Baiocchi 2012

Who is sustainable?

0.6tC/cap C&C 2050 level USA UK Brazil China India Nigeria

Life expectancy (years) Trade-correctedcarbonemissions (tonnes carbon per capita)

36

Steinberger,Roberts , Peters & Baiocchi 2012

But is it possible for countries to move to sustainable “Goldemberg Corner”?

Conduct cluster analysis on drivers of carbon emissions: clusters represent groups of countries with similar underlyingconditions.

37

Driver Trade-corrected CO2/cap Income (GDP/cap) XXXX Climate XXX Export share of GDP XX Population growth X Urbanization

• Population density
• Lamb et al 2014

Cluster Description 1 (20 countries) Core: wealthy consumers 2 (18 countries) Semi-periphery: Transitioning producers 3 (29 countries) Periphery 1: moderate income and closed economy 4 (9 countries) Periphery 2: moderate income and open economy 5 (10 countries) Periphery 3: least developed

Result in terms of human development performance

38 Lamb et al 2014

All clusters are represented in GoldembergCorner, except for core wealthyconsumers.

 Efficiency drives human development very fast:

• Faster than economic development

 High human development is compatible with low carbon emissions, for many types of countries.  But low carbon emissions remain incompatible with large incomes

• The sustainabilitychallenge requires

facing the economic – environmental conflict.

Conclusion?

39

Thank you for your attention

• Ayres, R. U. and B. Warr (2005). "Accounting for

growth: the role of physical work." Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 16(2): 181-209.

• Ayres, R. U., H. Turton and T. Casten (2007). "Energy

efficiency, sustainability and economic growth." Energy 32(5): 634-648.

• Ayres, R. U. and B. Warr (2009). “The economic

growth engine: How energy and work drive material prosperity.” Cheltenham, UK and Northhampton MA, US, Edward Elgar.

• Dale, M., S. Krumdieck and P. Bodger (2012). "Global

energy modelling - A biophysical approach (GEMBA) Part 2: Methodology." Ecological Economics 73: 158- 167.

• Foxon, T. J. and J. K. Steinberger (2013). Energy,

efficiency and economic growth: a coevolutionary perspective and implications for a low carbon transition, Sustainability Research Institute Working Paper.

• Lamb, W. F., J. K. Steinberger, A. Bows-Larkin, G. P.

Peters, J. T. Roberts and F. R. Wood (2014). "Transitions in pathways of human development and carbon emissions." Environmental Research Letters (accepted)

• Krausmann, F., S. Gingrich, N. Eisenmenger, K.-H. Erb,
• H. Haberl and M. Fischer-Kowalski (2009). "Growth in

global materials use, GDP and population during the 20th century." Ecological Economics 68(10): 2696- 2705.

• Steinberger, J. K. and J. T. Roberts (2010). "From

constraint to sufficiency: the decoupling of energy and carbon from human needs, 1975-2005." Ecological Economics 70(2): 425-433.

• Steinberger, J. K. and F. Krausmann (2011). "Material

and energy productivity." Environmental Science and Technology 45(4): 1169-1176.

• Steinberger, J. K., J. T. Roberts, G. P. Peters and G.

Baiocchi (2012). "Pathways of human development and carbon emissions embodied in trade." Nature Climate Change 2: 81–85.

• Wilkinson, P., K. R. Smith, M. Joffe and A. Haines

(2007). "A global perspective on energy: health effects and injustices." The Lancet 370(9591): 965-978. 40

Context: the challenge

• f a low-carbon future

Contraction& convergence of global emissions

2050 0.6 tC/cap 2010 1.33 tC/cap

Population growth

2010 tC/cap

USA 4.7 UK 2.16 China 1.68 Brazil 0.59 India 0.45 Nigeria 0.14

(or as low as 0.2 tC/cap)

41