Adaptation presents developing countries with the ultimate dual challenge – building a rapidly evolving, sustainable economy within an environment increasingly altered by the impacts of climate change. To meet this challenge, adaptation policy must find balance and create synergy between the two, as climate resilience and economic resilience go hand in hand.
Economic development is associated with structural change, including an evolving sector composition, the emergence of new comparative advantages and skills, and shifts in consumer demand as a result of rising incomes – all of which has implications for adaptation. Existing attempts to adapt developing economies to climate change have nonetheless ignored these economic dynamics. Current approaches to adaptation often seek to preserve current structures, for example by protecting agricultural output, which neither acknowledges nor takes advantage of the fact that the status quo is evolving.
The aim of this paper is to provide a critical review of the literature on the econometric analyses of firm-level determinants to eco-innovation. The review reveals some gaps in knowledge. First, an integrated theoretical framework which merges the insights from different approaches is missing. Second, the influence of some variables is still unsettled (demand-pull and cost-savings), whereas others have hardly been included in previous analyses (internal and international factors). Third, studies on the drivers to eco-innovation versus general innovation are relatively scarce with respect to those on the drivers to eco-innovation in general. Fourth, analyses of the relevance of different determinants to eco-innovation for distinct eco-innovator and eco-innovation types have largely been missing. Fifth, studies on middle-income and developing countries are still scarce. Sixth, the econometric analyses have relied on microeconometric methods based on cross-section data (mostly logit and probit models), whereas the use of panel data is virtually absent.
Attempts to govern, sustainably, the global environment and manage the world economy without destabilising crises, remain hopelessly disconnected. Since the original Earth Summit conference we have lived with an economic model based on debt-fuelled over consumption that coexists with vast levels of poverty and inequality. Comparable dynamics are visible in most economic sectors. Many working in the fields of environment and development now find that systematic problems require a systemic solution. This paper puts forward 6 challenges to lay the foundations for systemic change: Develop a national transition plan that puts countries on paths to operate within planetary boundaries, and on timescales sufficiently quick to preserve key, ecological life support functions; don’t start from a growth perspective; agree to develop and implement new measures of economic success; commit to reduce income and wealth inequalities between and within nations; put fiscal policy and public expenditure centre stage in managing economic transition; and recapture the financial sector for the public good.
For decades governments have allowed a single indicator, Gross Domestic Product (GDP), to assume dominance as the critical measure of a nation’s progress. It is now widely recognised by politicians and officials across the world that we must move beyond GDP and recognise it for what it is – a measure of economic exchange, which is itself a means to an end; the ‘end’ being the achievement of high well-being for all within environmental limits (‘sustainable well-being’). This paper focuses on ways of measuring environmental sustainability and well-being, and offers a view from the global South which entails measures of both of these. It calls for governments around the world to:
This paper proposes the establishment of a “plenty line” as a counterpart to the poverty line, as a means of focusing public and political attention on the issue of over-consumption. In other words, is there a level of income such that people with incomes above this level have minimally greater well-being than those with incomes at this level? While the analysis is complicated by the nature of the data available (viz. its reliance on self-reporting of income, and more specifically self-attribution to a limited range of income bands) and the relatively small sample sizes in most relevant surveys, the authors find indicative evidence for the existence of “plenty lines” ranging between household incomes of $35,000 and $107,000 in six Western European countries (and at $20,000 in one Eastern European country), where well-being is defined in terms of life satisfaction.