Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-nr592 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-29T23:11:02.815Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Disagreement on Sustainability Policy within the Social Sciences?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 February 2016

Jeroen C.J.M. Van Den Bergh
Jeroen C.J.M. Van Den Bergh*
Affiliation:
Institute for Environmental Science and Technology, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Edifici Cn - Campus UAB, 08193 Bellaterra, Spain; and ICREA, Barcelona, and Faculty of Economics and Business Administration & Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University Amsterdam, the Netherlands. E-mail: jeroen.bergh@uab.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

One can find many proposals for policy responses to global environmental problems. Different disciplines – notably economics, geography, innovation studies, policy and political sciences, psychology and sociology – offer partly inconsistent advice. This undermines the social-political acceptance of policies as voters and politicians are likely to be left confused. To decide about an adequate sustainability policy mix we need to concur on the core problems such a mix has to tackle. I address four of these hereafter. Each one involves important issues of disagreement as well as unresolved questions.

Information

Type
Erasmus Lecture 2014
Information
European Review , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , February 2016 , pp. 83 - 88
Copyright
© Academia Europaea 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1.Sorrell, S. (2009) Jevons’ Paradox revisited: the evidence for backfire from improved energy efficiency. Energy Policy, 37, pp. 1456–1469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Tainter, J. (2011) Energy, complexity, and sustainability: a historical perspective. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1(1), pp. 89–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Hanley, N., McGregor, P. G., Swales, J. K. and Turner, K. (2009) Do increases in energy efficiency improve environmental quality and sustainability? Ecological Economics, 68(3), pp. 692–709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2011) Energy conservation more effective with rebound policy. Environmental and Resource Economics, 48(1), pp. 43–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Kuik, O. J. and Gerlagh, R. (2003) Trade liberalization and carbon leakage. The Energy Journal, 24, pp. 97–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Sinn, H. W. (2012) The Green Paradox: A Supply-side Approach to Global Warming (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Curran, M. A. (1993) Broad-based environmental life cycle assessment. Environmental Science and Technology, 27(3), pp. 430–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Jackson, T. (2009) Prosperity without Growth – Economics for a Finite Planet (London: Earthscan).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Fullerton, D. (Ed.) (2009) Distributional Effects of Environmental and Energy Policy (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate).Google Scholar
10.Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C. and Rothengatter, T. (2005) A review of intervention studies aimed at household energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25, pp. 273–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Arthur, B. (1989) Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal, 99, pp. 116–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Frank, R. (1999) Luxury Fever (New York: Free Press).Google Scholar
13.Frondel, M., Ritter, N. and Schmidt, C. M. (2008) Germany’s solar cell promotion: dark clouds on the horizon. Energy Policy, 36(11), pp. 4198–4204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.McCright, A. and Dunlap, R. (2011) Cool dudes: the denial of climate change among conservative white males in the United States. Global Environmental Change, 21(4), pp. 1163–1172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.van den Bergh, J. C. J. M. (2010) Safe climate policy is affordable – 12 reasons. Climatic Change, 101(3), pp. 339–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Biermann, F., Abbott, K., Andresen, S., Bäckstrand, K., Bernstein, S., Betsill, M. M.et al. (2012) Navigating the Anthropocene: improving Earth system governance. Science, 335(6074), pp. 1306–1307.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed