The Chicken/Egg Spiral
Download as PPT, PDF
1 like853 views
The document discusses the relationship between economic growth, environmental protection, and technological progress. It argues that while technological progress is often seen as decoupling economic growth from environmental impacts, in reality technological progress and economic growth are interlinked and both depend on natural capital stocks. Even with efficiency gains from technological progress, rising production and consumption will continue to increase environmental pressures unless the overall scale of the economy remains within ecological limits. A steady state economy with stable or mildly fluctuating production and consumption is needed for long-term sustainability.
More Related Content
Similar to The Chicken/Egg Spiral (20)
More from Goteo / Platoniq (15)
The Chicken/Egg Spiral
- 1. The Chicken/Egg Spiral "Reconciling" the Conflict Between Economic Growth and Environmental Protection with Technological Progress
- 3. Increasing production or efficiency resulting from invention and innovation Types (Wils 2001) Explorative Extractive End-use Technological Progress
- 4. Increase in the production and consumption of goods and services in the aggregate Typically expressed in terms of GDP Entails increasing population and/or per capita consumption Economic Growth
- 5. Solow Lucas Mankiw Romer Y = (K, L) Economic Growth Models
- 6. Y = (K, L) Production Function Czech, B. 2009. The neoclassical production function as a relic of anti-George politics: implications for ecological economics. Ecological Economics 68:2193-2197.
- 7. Business Household $ Neoclassical Economy
- 8. Business Household $ With Economic Growth
- 9. Ecological economics movement Laws of thermodynamics Principles of ecology Ecological Economics Herman Daly
- 10. Ecological Economy Heat Natural Capital Pollutants Natural Capital
- 11. With Economic Growth Heat Natural Capital Pollutants Natural Capital
- 12. 1956, A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth Technological progress Manna from heaven Stable capital:labor ratio Steady-state growth Mankiw et al. Solow Model Robert Solow
- 13. 1990, Endogenous Technological Change Research and development Production of ideas Population growth Increasing returns Patenting Romer Model Paul Romer
- 14. Time GDP K Natural capital allocated to human economy Natural capital allocated to economy of nature Economic Growth and Natural Capital
- 15. Fisheries Volume 30 Series Logo
- 16. K GDP Time ...maintain steady state economy sufficiently below K . To conserve fish and wildlife... Therefore
- 17. But what about technological progress?
- 18. But what about technological progress? Czech, B. 2008. Prospects for reconciling economic growth and biodiversity conservation with technological progress. Conservation Biology 22(6):1389-1398.
- 19. Increasing production or efficiency resulting from invention and innovation Types (Wils 2001) Explorative Extractive End-use Technological Progress
- 20. 油
- 21. Increasing production or efficiency resulting from invention and innovation Types (Wils 2001) Explorative Extractive End-use Technological Progress
- 22. K T GDP Natural capital allocated to human economy Natural capital allocated to economy of nature X natural capital allocable Time 油 K U Natural Capital Allocation
- 23. Capital-free growth zone 油 K T 1 K T 2 油 油 GDP Time K U Reconciliation Hypothesis Natural capital allocated to human economy Natural capital allocated to economy of nature X natural capital (still) allocable
- 24. Fixed amount of energy, matter (E = mc 2 ) Entropy; i.e. limits to efficiency in the economic production process Thermodynamics
- 25. Consider the Sources of Technological Progress
- 26. R&D Sources of Technological Progress
- 27. Entirely institutionalized (NSF 2007) Corporations Government Colleges and Universities Non-profits Requires surplus production in existing economic sectors Relevant Aspects of R&D
- 28. Representative Nations (Duga and Stadt 2005) 22% 7% 71% USA 24.1% 8.9% 67.0% UK 19.5% 2.8% 77.6% Sweden 5.6% 24.5% 69.9% Russia 33.8% 44.9% 21.4% Poland 30.6% 39.1% 30.3% Mexico 16.1% 9.5% 74.4% Japan 17.1% 13.8% 69.1% Germany 10.1% 28.7% 61.2% China 29.5% 22.9% 47.5% Australia Acad./Other Government Corporations Nation
- 29. Representative Nations 30% global R&D (Duga and Stadt 2005) 22% 7% 71% USA 24.1% 8.9% 67.0% UK 19.5% 2.8% 77.6% Sweden 5.6% 24.5% 69.9% Russia 33.8% 44.9% 21.4% Poland 30.6% 39.1% 30.3% Mexico 16.1% 9.5% 74.4% Japan 17.1% 13.8% 69.1% Germany 10.1% 28.7% 61.2% China 29.5% 22.9% 47.5% Australia Acad./Other Government Corporations Nation
- 30. Corporations profits. But first: Factors of production paid for. Shareholder dividends distributed. Governments income taxes and social security payments. But first, solvency. Surplus Production Required for R&D
- 31. More profits at the corporate level. Increasing income at the national level; i.e., economic growth. What would more R&D require?
- 32. Chartered for primary purpose of generating profits (Bakan 2005). Corporations
- 33. U.S. defense, economic objectives China defense, economic growth Russia defense, economic objectives Japan economic objectives Duga and Stadt (2005), AAAS (2002) Focus of R&D in Bellwether Nations
- 34. U.S. R&D, 2006, Billions $ National Research Council (2007) 174 69 55 299 299 Total 3 (1%) Other gov. 3 (2%) 4 (6%) 8 (15%) 15 (5%) 10 (3%) Non-profits 10 (6%) 7 (10%) 4 (7%) 21 (7%) 84 (28%) Fed. gov. 3 (2%) 11 (16%) 35 (64%) 50 (17%) 8 (3%) College/univ. 158 (91%) 47 (68%) 8 (15%) 213 (71%) 194 (65%) Industry Devel. Applied Basic Conducted Funded Entity
- 35. U.S. R&D, 2006, Billions $ National Research Council (2007) 174 69 55 299 299 Total 3 (1%) Other gov. 3 (2%) 4 (6%) 8 (15%) 15 (5%) 10 (3%) Non-profits 10 (6%) 7 (10%) 4 (7%) 21 (7%) 84 (28%) Fed. gov. 3 (2%) 11 (16%) 35 (64%) 50 (17%) 8 (3%) College/univ. 158 (91%) 47 (68%) 8 (15%) 213 (71%) 194 (65%) Industry Devel. Applied Basic Conducted Funded Entity
- 36. U.S. R&D, 2006, Billions $ National Research Council (2007) 174 69 55 299 299 Total 3 (1%) Other gov. 3 (2%) 4 (6%) 8 (15%) 15 (5%) 10 (3%) Non-profits 10 (6%) 7 (10%) 4 (7%) 21 (7%) 84 (28%) Fed. gov. 3 (2%) 11 (16%) 35 (64%) 50 (17%) 8 (3%) College/univ. 158 (91%) 47 (68%) 8 (15%) 213 (71%) 194 (65%) Industry Devel. Applied Basic Conducted Funded Entity
- 37. U.S. R&D, 2006, Billions $ National Research Council (2007) 174 69 55 299 299 Total 3 (1%) Other gov. 3 (2%) 4 (6%) 8 (15%) 15 (5%) 10 (3%) Non-profits 10 (6%) 7 (10%) 4 (7%) 21 (7%) 84 (28%) Fed. gov. 3 (2%) 11 (16%) 35 (64%) 50 (17%) 8 (3%) College/univ. 158 (91%) 47 (68%) 8 (15%) 213 (71%) 194 (65%) Industry Devel. Applied Basic Conducted Funded Entity
- 38. U.S. R&D, 2006, Billions $ National Research Council (2007) 174 69 55 299 299 Total 3 (1%) Other gov. 3 (2%) 4 (6%) 8 (15%) 15 (5%) 10 (3%) Non-profits 10 (6%) 7 (10%) 4 (7%) 21 (7%) 84 (28%) Fed. gov. 3 (2%) 11 (16%) 35 (64%) 50 (17%) 8 (3%) College/univ. 158 (91%) 47 (68%) 8 (15%) 213 (71%) 194 (65%) Industry Devel. Applied Basic Conducted Funded Entity
- 39. But assume the R&D complex generates technical efficiency gains.
- 40. annual growth rate in the global footprint of 2.12% per yearrequisite technological improvement needs to exceed 2% per year (Dietz et al., 2007, Frontiers 5:13-18) Productivity gains >2% typified advanced capitalist economies during third quarter of 20 th century (Madison 1987). Gains below 2% have befuddled economists since. Most economic growth elsewhere from factor inputs rather than productivity gains (Oguchi 2005). What rate of gain is required?
- 41. Redirected toward other activities that increase production and consumption in the aggregate due to: profit motive (corporations). macroeconomic goal of growth (governments). service of academia and NGOs. Jevons paradox Natural Capital Savings from Efficiency Gains?
- 42. R&D _______ Sources of Technological Progress
- 43. R&D Profits Sources of Technological Progress
- 44. Profits
- 46. R&D Profits Catch-22? Sources of Technological Progress
- 47. R&D ________________ Consider the Sources Profits
- 48. R&D Profits Economies of scale Consider the Sources
- 49. Reductions in average cost of product resulting from increased level of output Economies of scale operate: Internally (e.g., Weyerhauser) Externally (e.g., timber industry) Macroeconomically (Denison 1985) Increased efficiency but concomitantly with increased production with existing technology Economies of Scale } (Ruttan 2001)
- 51. X/2 re-allocated K T 1 K T 2 油 油 GDP Time K U Natural capital allocated to human economy Natural capital allocated to economy of nature X/2 natural capital allocable Hypothesis Refuted
- 52. Biodiversity loss GDP-TP TP1 TP3 K TP2 "Chicken-Egg Spiral"
- 53. With R&D focused on end-use efficiency, the rate of biodiversity loss due to economic growth may decrease via technological progress and because there is less biodiversity left to lose, but there are diminishing less-loss returns to R&D scale as the low-hanging thermodynamic fruits are picked and we approach ultimate ecological carrying capacity for the economy. Hypothesis
- 54. Technological progress is not manna from heaven. Technological progress and economic growth are tightly linked. Both are limited by natural capital stocks. The solution to environmental problems is not perpetually growing R&D budgets. The solution to environmental problems sustainable scale. Technological progress in a steady state economy would occur at a much slower pace. Conclusions
Editor's Notes
- #4: Technological progress, in the vernacular, implies inventions and innovation. In economic terms, technological progress refers to increasing output per unit input, or increasing productive efficiency, resulting from inventions and innovation.
- #20: Technological progress, in the vernacular, implies inventions and innovation. In economic terms, technological progress refers to increasing output per unit input, or increasing productive efficiency, resulting from inventions and innovation.
- #22: Technological progress, in the vernacular, implies inventions and innovation. In economic terms, technological progress refers to increasing output per unit input, or increasing productive efficiency, resulting from inventions and innovation.
- #25: The first law of thermodynamics, along with Einsteins insight on the equivalence of energy and matter, tell us that neither energy nor matter may be created nor destroyed (although they may be transformed). This puts a ceiling on the amount of material and energy available for economic production. The second law, the entropy law, may be reduced to the statement that no production process may achieve 100% efficiency. The first and second laws do not allow for a perpetual increase in the production and consumption of goods and services. That is, they put a cap on economic growth.