Bleischwitz, Raimund (2009): Eco-innovation - putting the EU on the path to a resource and energy efficient economy.
Download (1534Kb) | Preview
The objective of this study is to support the European Parliament’s ITRE Committee in its work on the EU's industrial and energy policy and to give advice on the following issues: Why is the issue of resource scarcity back on the agenda? What are the strategic conclusions for the EU? What can the EU expect from eco-innovation in a large range of industrial sectors? Are existing measures meeting the EU aims and expectations, and what new policy initiatives should be set forward? To meet these objectives, this study is structured as follows: Chapter 2 will give an overview on resource scarcities. Chapter 3 elaborates on ecoinnovation, including trends, barriers and driving forces. Chapter 4 outlines proposals for future EU policies. Chapter 5 sketches out a possible vision for the future. Chapter 2 reveals recent findings on resource scarcity: Global extraction of natural resource is steadily increasing. Since 1980, global extraction of abiotic (fossil fuels, minerals) and biotic (agriculture, forestry, fishing) resources has augmented from 40 to 58 billion tonnes in 2005. Scenarios anticipate a total resource extraction of around 80 billion tonnes in 2020 (200 % of the 1980-value), necessary to sustain the worldwide economic growth. On average, a European consumes per year around three times the amount of resources of a citizen in the emerging countries while producing twice as much. Analysis on patterns of current resource use (direct and indirect use) is still in its infancy and shows data gaps. Based on country studies, however, one can arrive at tentative conclusions. A recent study on Germany reveals that ten production sectors account for more than 50 % of German Total Material Requirements (TMR). Industries of three areas are of strategic importance because here a huge number of technological interactions among production sectors take place:
• Stones, construction, and housing = housing
• Metals and car manufacturing = mobility
• Agriculture, food and nutrition = food.
The rapidly increasing demand for resources has led to an unprecedented boost in resource prices, especially during the last five years until the breakout of the financial crisis in Fall 2008. The EU is the world region that outsources the biggest part of resource extraction. In comparison to the overall global growth rate (45 % over the last 25 years), Europe’s resource extraction grew only by 3 %, but studies show that these domestic raw materials are increasingly substituted by imports from other world regions. World reserves in fossil fuels and metals are unevenly distributed across the world regions. Additionally, for various commodities, the peak of extraction has already been reached or is currently about to be reached. Not only for oil and gas, but also for critical metals such as Antimon, Gallium, Indium, Platinum and others the supply for European industry is at risk. Natural gas cannot replace oil as main energy source, once the latter is depleted. From this, the following main conclusions are derived:
• The European economy is increasingly dependent on resource imports from other world regions.
• Scarcity of ‘Critical metals’ will affect the European economy more subtle, but furtherreaching.
High-tech industries, in particular the electronic industry, will be affected by deWuppertal Institute et al. Eco-Innovation iv clining availability of precious metals. Also the development of new eco-technologies, such as photovoltaic electricity generation, could be slowed down by resource scarcity.
• It can be expected that worldwide competition for these resources will significantly increase in the near future, potentially leading to serious conflicts related to the access to resource reserves.
• In order to deal with this increased scarcity of natural resources, a significant reduction of the worldwide resource use will be necessary.
Chapter 3 gives a definition of eco-innovation as well as an overview of different types of eco-innovation and deals with measurement issues. Furthermore, it illustrates selected ecoinnovations in key areas, and highlights also trends, drivers and barriers analysed for these examples and illustrated by fishbone diagrams. The scrutinised eco-innovations and the regarding key conclusions are
(1) In the area of housing
a. “Deep Renovation”, which enables a minimisation of negative impacts on environment and health by system design and choice of components and is possible in nearly every building, though standardisation is limited, and
b. “Smart Metering”, for which there is worldwide evidence that giving consumers appropriate, relevant information on their energy and water use is an important basis for additional measures leading to a reduction in this use and thus in GHG emissions.
(2) In the area of mobility
a. the “Green Electric Car” and
b. “Car sharing”;
(3) In the area of food and drink
(a) the “Community Supported Agriculture” (CSA) and
(b) “Sustainable Sourcing of Retailers”.
The chapter concludes that eco-innovation has a crucial role to play in putting the EU on the path to a resource and energy efficient economy and thus significantly reducing the environmental impacts in each of the areas, housing, mobility and food and drink. Experts estimate that this is likely to become an $800 billion market worldwide by 2015 and a $ trillion market afterwards. Overcoming the barriers and building up eco-industries for energy and resource efficiency however calls for an active European Union. It requires the engagement of many different actors in society, and strategies should be implemented from many different sides. For an ecoinnovation to be fully accepted and diffused into wider society, a concerted effort must be made to engage people and target the emotional and psychological aspects required to reinforce its uptake.
Chapter 4 (How to speed up eco-innovation in the EU) undertakes an attempt to analyse existing EU policies and initiatives; selected member states’ efforts are also considered. This is done via a comparative methodology with a joint format. The annex to this study contains three further briefing notes on this issue written by other authors. The following policies, initiatives and instruments are considered in this study:
• The Eco-design Directive (2005/32/EU) – focuses on energy use for a number of products and neglects other environmental dimensions, functional innovation and system innovation are not yet covered; Wuppertal Institute et al. Eco-Innovation v
• The Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) – first experience suggests a bias in favour of recycling technologies and energy along existing technology trajectories, less visibility of resource efficiency and new pathways;
• The Seventh Framework Programme for research and technological development (FP7);
• The Environmental Technology Action Plan (ETAP) – Despite many achievements, environmental technologies still remain a niche market; further green procurement, greater financial investments, the establishment of technology verification and performance targets systems, and focussing on sectors with high gains is needed;
• The Directive on the energy performance of buildings (EPBD) – good ambitions, but a lack of implementation in many Member states, implementation requires both a speeding up and a scaling up, addressing the resource efficiency of buildings is desirable;
• The European Union Action Plan on Sustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy
• The European Directive on Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)
• The UK Aggregates Levy and Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund (ALSF)
• Environment-driven Business Development in Sweden
• The European Union Energy Label.
The analysis identifies specific gaps in the areas of entrepreneurship, pre-commercialisation and mass market development; in addition, the opportunities to refurbish buildings in Europe have not fully been deployed yet (see Figure 1). Based on this and supported by an expert workshop conducted by the ITRE on 12 November 08, the study formulates proposals that could support the EU to speed up eco-innovation. They promote market-based incentives and the reform of existing initiatives; in addition, new proposals are presented that address specific gaps in the areas of entrepreneurship, pre-commercialisation as well as the opportunities to refurbish buildings in Europe. Bearing in mind the importance of construction as a driving forces of resource use, the relevance of the construction industry in the EU Lead market Strategy and current deficits, and the overall success of market-based instruments, this study proposes to extend the existing eco-tax base in Europe by establishing a minimum tax directive on construction minerals. It is expected to drive up eco-innovation because it gives incentives to improve resource efficiency and to refurbish old buildings. In addition, it generates revenues, which can be utilized for specific eco-innovation programmes. A greening of the EU budget would be the material basis for speeding up eco-innovation beyond 2009. This would have to follow two strategic lines: on the one hand unsustainable spending would have to be cut, on the other hand the money saved by this activity could be shifted to support investments in structural eco-innovation. A budgetary strategy could include the following elements:
• Further redirecting CAP from direct payments towards integrated rural development schemes, which support eco-innovation in the area of sustainable production of highquality food and biomass. These integrated rural development schemes should include integrated logistical, economic and technological strategies for adapted sustainable natural resource management in the landscape (food, water, soil, biodiversity and closed-loop biomass production and use). These strategies would have to be highly adapted to local economies and landscape conditions thus inducing local eco-innovation and employment schemes. Wuppertal Institute et al. Eco-Innovation vi
• Rigorous environmental appraisal and reduction of Regional Policy schemes for large infrastructure projects which could support long-term unsustainable development paths, shifting towards funding for eco-innovation e.g. in the area of decentralized electricity grids (supporting green electric cars and renewable energies) and lighthouse projects on resource efficient construction and resource recovery.
• Redirection of Regional Funds from end-of-pipe technologies towards integrated solutions and eco-innovation (e.g. decentralized water treatment)
• More advanced schemes for improving energy and material productivity of economies would require an implementation of the CREST guidelines for improved coordination between Structural Funds, the Research Framework Program and the Competitiveness and Innovation Programme (CIP). Only such a concentration of forces could achieve a measurable improvement of resource productivity in Europe by means of regional eco-innovation clusters and a European network of regional resource efficiency agencies.
• Integration spending of the European Investment Bank (EIB) for improved cofinancing of eco-innovation Figure 1: Gaps of current EU programmes on eco-innovation Engaging industry in developing eco innovation for sustainable ways of living is considered to be essential. The study identifies six strategy areas where industry can act:
1. Strategy Area 1: Creating and satisfying demand for green and fair products
2. Strategy Area 2: Communicating for low impact product use
3. Strategy Area 3: Innovative after sales services
4. Strategy Area 4: Product and service innovations Wuppertal Institute et al. Eco-Innovation vii
5. Strategy Area 5: Service-oriented business models
6. Strategy Area 6: Leadership for social change and socially responsible business
The study formulates proposals to strengthen the SCP Action Plan accordingly, with a special focus on a framework for smarter consumption and leaner production. green public procurement and international processes. Following the gaps identified above, the study also proposes to establish three new initiatives:
• A European Trust Funds for Eco-Entrepreneurship, intended to support system innovation driven by new companies;
• A Technology Platform for Resource-light industries, intended to develop new markets for European manufacturing industries;
• A Programme to foster energy and resource efficiency in the building sector, intended to foster
• The deployment of existing opportunities in that area. Finally, a few thoughts are given to the international dimension of eco-innovation and a possible vision of an eco-innovative Europe.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Eco-innovation - putting the EU on the path to a resource and energy efficient economy|
|Keywords:||Eco-Inovation, Energy efficiency, EU Policy|
|Subjects:||Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q55 - Technological Innovation|
|Depositing User:||raimund bleischwitz|
|Date Deposited:||14. Jan 2010 00:02|
|Last Modified:||12. Feb 2013 21:46|
Acosta-Fernández, J. et al. (2007): Identifikation prioritärer Handlungsfelder für die Erhöhung der gesamtwirtschaftlichen Ressourcenproduktivität in Deutschland. Projektergebnisse zum Projekt im Auftrag des BMBF „Steigerung der Ressourcenproduktivität als Kernstrategie einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung“, Wuppertal Institut, Wuppertal, www.ressourcenproduktivitaet.de
Alcott, Blake (2005): Jevon’s Paradox. Ecological Economics 54 (1): 9-21
Arthur D’Little / Wuppertal Institute / Frauenhofer ISI (2005): Studie zur Konzeption eines Programms für die Steigerung der Materialeffizienz in Mittelständischen Un-ternehmen, Abschlussbericht [Study for the Conception of a Program to Increase Material Efficiency in Small and Medium Sized Enterprises, final report for the Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour (BMWi)]; Wiesbaden / Wuppertal / Karlsruhe.
BGR (2005): Reserven, Ressourcen und Verfügbarkeit von Energierohstoffen 2005. Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, Hannover.
BGR (2006): Trends der Angebots- und Nachfragesituation bei mineralischen Rohstoffen. Bundesanstalt für Geowissenschaften und Rohstoffe, Hannover.
BGS [British Geological Survey] (2008), ‘Primary aggregates’, in: European Mineral Statistics 2002-06, Keyworth, Nottingham, pp. 148-152.
Bleischwitz, R. (2003): Cognitive and Institutional Perspectives of Eco-Efficiency, in: Ecological Economics, 46: 453 – 467.
Bleischwitz, R. (2006): International Raw Materials Markets: Rising Prices and Growing Conflict Potential, in “Global Trends 2007”, edited by Tobias Debiel et al. and by the Foundation for Development and Peace (SEF), pp. 65 – 78.
Bleischwitz, R. (Ed.) (2007): Corporate Governance of Sustainability: A Co-Evolutionary View on Resource Management. Edward Elgar Publisher.
Bleischwitz, R. / Bahn-Walkowiak (2007): Aggregates and construction markets in Europe – towards a sectoral action plan on sustainable resource management, in: ‘Minerals and Energy’ H 3-4, pp. 159–176.
Bleischwitz, R. / Bringezu, S. (2007): Global Resource Management – Conflict Potential and Characteristics of a Global Governance Regime, SEF Policy Paper No. 27, Stiftung Enwicklung und Frieden (Foundation for Development and Peace). BMU (2009) : Umweltwirtschaftsbericht, Berlin.
Boverket (2005): Housing Statistics in the European Union 2004. National Board of Housing, Building and Planning, Sweden and the Ministry for Regional Development of the Czech Republic www.boverket.se
BP (2006): Review of world energy 2006. British Petrol, London.
BP (2007): Review of world energy 2007. British Petrol, London.
Brezet, H. and van Hemel, C. (1997): Ecodesign: a promising approach to sustainable production and consumption; United Nations Environment Programme, Industry and Environment Wuppertal Institute et al. Eco-Innovation 79
Bringezu, S., et al. (2007): Addressing multi-beneficial and cross-sectoral strategies for sustainability, Technical Report, http://www.forescene.net/Resources.htm
Carbon Trust (2008): Enhanced Capital Allowances. Available at: http://www.carbontrust.co.uk/energy/takingaction/eca.htm, 01 May 2008 Rosegrant, M.W., M.S. Paisner, S. Meijer, and J. Witcover. (2001): 2020 Global food outlook: Trends, alternatives, and choices. Food Policy Report 30, Washington, DC:
Cohen, D. (2007): Earth's natural wealth: an audit. New Scientist(2605).
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity
CSCP, gtz, the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development and the Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy (2006): Policies for Resource Efficiency, Towards Sustainable Consumption and Production, Wuppertal.
Davenport, E., Bruce, I. (2002): Innovation, Knowledge Management and the Use of Space: Questioning Assumptions About Non-traditional Office Work, in: Journal of Information Science, Vol. 28, Nr. 3, S. 225–230.
Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs [Defra] (2007), Recycling and waste: Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund in England.
Department for Transport (2008), Site Specific Advice - Aggregate Levy Sustainability Fund (ALSF), http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/freight/alsf/sitespecificadviceaggregatel3174, 2008- 11-04.
Destatis (Statistisches Bundesamt) (2005): Verwendung von Primärmaterial nach Produktionsbereichen und Materialarten 1995 - 2002. Statistisches Bundesamt, Wiesbaden.
Easterby-Smith, M., Araujo, L., Burgoyne J. (Eds) (1999): Organizational Learning and the Learning Organization. Developments in Theory and Practice, London; u.a.: Sage.
EEA (European Environment Agency) (2001): Indicator Fact Sheet Signals 2001 – Chapter Households. YIR01HH03 Household number and size. European Environment Agency (EEA), http://themes.eea.europa
EEA (2005): Household Consumption and the Environment. EEA Report No 11/2005.
EEA (2006): Urban sprawl in Europe – The ignored challenge. European Environment Agency (EEA), Office for Official Publications of the European Communities (OPOCE).
EEA Report No 10/2006. http://reports.eea.europa.eu/eea_report_2006_10/en
EEA (2007a): Europe’s environment. The fourth assessment, Copenhagen, 2007
EEA (2007b) Transport and Environment: On the way to a new common transport policy,
EEA Report No. 1/2007, EEA, Copenhagen
EEA (2008): Effectiveness of environmental taxes and charges for managing sand, gravel and rock extraction in selected EU countries, EEA report 2/2008, Copenhagen 2008.
EEA, CSCP, Ministry of Environment and Spatial Planning Slovenia (2008): Time for Action – Towards Sustainable Consumption and Production in Europe, EEA Technical Report 1/2008.
EIPRO-Study (2006): Environment Impact of Products Analysis of the life cycle environmental impacts related to the final consumption of the EU-25. Main report IPTS/ESTO project
Ernst and Young (2006): Eco-industry, its size, employment, perspectives and barriers to growth in an enlarged EU, Report commissioned by the European Commission, DG Environment, September 2006.
EU/UNEP (2005): Standstill or Move Clean. World Environment Day 5 June 2005
Europe Innova (2008): What is the right strategy for more innovation in Europe? Drivers and challenges for innovation performance at the sector level. Synthesis Report, Systematic Innovation Watch (SIW), prepared by Reinstaller, Andreas / Unterlass, Fabian; Vienna: Austrian Institute for Economic Research (WIFO).
European Commission (2000): Innovation in a knowledge-driven economy. COM(2000) 567 final, Brussels
European Commission (2003): Some key issues in Europe's competitiveness - towards an integrated approach. COM(2003) 704 final, Brussels
European Commission (2004): Stimulating Technologies for Sustainable Development: An Environment Technologies Action Plan for the European Union. COM(2004), 38 final, Brussels
European Commission (2005a): Annual Policy Strategy for 2006. COM(2005) 73 final, Brussels
European Commission (2005b): Integrated guidelines for growth and jobs (2005-2008). COM(2005) 141 final, Brussels
European Commission (2005c): A report on the functioning of public procurement markets in the EU: benefits from the application of EU directives and challenges for the future, 03/02/2004
European Commission (2007a): A renewable Energy Roadmap. MEMO/07/13, Brussels
European Commission (2007b): Observatory of European SMEs: Analytical report. Flash Eurobarometers 196, Brussels
European Commission (2007c): A lead market initiative for Europe. COM(2007), 860 final, Brussels
European Commission (2008a): communication from the commission to the european parliament, the council, the european economic and social committee and the committee of the regions on the sustainable consumption and production and sustainable industrial policy action plan, brussels 2008, SEC(2008) 2110; SEC(2008) 2111
European Commission, Energy Transport DG (2006e): Road Transport Policy: Open Roads Across Europe. Brussels
European Commission (2003b). Towards a thematic strategy for the sustainable use of natural resources. COM(2003) 572 final, DG Environment, Brussels.
EUROSTAT (2007): Measuring progress towards a more sustainable Europe, 2007 monitoring report of the EU sustainable development strategy, Luxembourg
Eurostat / European Commission (2007), Taxation trends in the European Union: Data for the EU Member States and Norway, Luxembourg.
Eurostat (2008), Environment: Environmental Accounts, Domestic material consumption, by material, http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page?_pageid=1996,39140985&_dad=portal&_sch ema=PORTAL&screen=detailref&language=en&product=REF_TB_environment&root= REF_TB_environment/t_env/t_env_acc/tsdpc230 , 2009-01-26.
Foxon T., Pearson P. (2008): Overcoming barriers to innovation and diffusion of cleaner technologies: some features of a sustainable innovation policy regime, The Journal of Cleaner Production, 16S1 (2008) 148 – 169
Fundetec (2007): Comparison and Assessment of Funding Schemes for the Development of New Activities and Investments in Environmental Technologies. Fundetec Consortium
Fussler, C., James, P. (1996) Driving Eco-Innovation: A Breakthrough Discipline for Innovation and Sustainability
Gravgård Pedersen, O. (1999): Physical Input-Output Tables for Denmark. Products and materials 1990. Air emissions 1990-92. Statistics Denmark, Kopenhagen. Greening, Greene, Difiglio (2000): Energy efficiency and consumption- the rebound effect – a survey, Energy Policy, Vol 28, Issues 6-7 June 2000, pp. 389-401
Hawken P., Lovins A., Lovins L.H. (1999): Natural Capital, Back Bay Books, New York
Herring H., Roy R. (2007 oder 2008 wie in Kap. 3.3.1.): Technological innovation, energy efficient design and the rebound effect, Technovation 27 (2007) 194–203
Hinterberger, F., Luks F., Schmidt-Bleek (1997): Material flows vs. ‘natural capital’. What makes an economy sustainable?, Ecological Economics 23, 1 – 14
HM Revenue & Customs (2008), Aggregates Levy, http://customs.hmrc.gov.uk/channelsPortalWebApp/channelsPortalWebApp.portal?_nfpb =true&_pageLabel=pageExcise_InfoGuides&propertyType=document&id=HMCE_CL_ 001169, 2008-11-04.
Horbach, Jens (2005): Methodological aspects of an indicator system for sustainable innovation, in: Jens Horbach (ed.) Indicator systems for sustainable innovation, Physica, Heidelberg 2005
IDEA consult (2008): Evaluation of the European Technology Platforms (ETPs). Request for Services in the context of the DG BUDG Framework Service Contracts on Evaluation and Evaluation-related Services, Ref. nr.: BUDG06/PO/01/Lot 3, Brussels.
IEA. (2007a): Energy balances of non-OECD countries, 1971-2005. IEA, Paris,
IEA. (2007b): Energy balances of OECD countries, 1960-2005. IEA, Paris,
INSEE, Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques (2006): Household Consumption.
Irrek, Wolfgang, Jarczynski, Lutz (2007): Overall impact assessment of current energy efficiency policies and potential 'good practice' policies. Working paper within the framework of the AID-EE project. Final Version. Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment, Energy. Wuppertal
Jacob, Klaus et al. (2005): Lead Markets of Environmental Innovations; Heidelberg-New York: Physica Wuppertal Institute et al. Eco-Innovation 82
Jacobsson, S., Bergek, A. (2004): Transforming the energy sector: The evolution of technological systems in renewable energy technology; Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 13, Issue 5, pp. 815-849.
Jänicke (2008): Megatrend Umweltinnovation: Zur ökologischen Modernisierung von Wirtschaft und Staat; München: oekom
Kemp, René, Pearson, P. (2008): MEI project about Measuring Eco-Innovation, Final report, Maastricht. Available at: http://www.merit.unu.edu/MEI/papers/Final%20report%20MEI%20project%20DRAFT %20version%20March%2026%202008.pdf, 06 April 2008
Kendall, G. (2008): Plugged in: the end of the oil age, WWF.
Koskimäki, Pirjo-Liisa; Lechtenböhmer, Stefan (2008): Potential, current implementation, and initial ideas for reinforcing the EPBD. Presentation at the European Commission together with Wuppertal Institute at the Sustainable Energy Week, 1 February 2008, Brussels
Lane, C., Bachmann, R. (Ed) (2002): Trust within and between Organizations. Conceptual Issues and Empirical Applications, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mäenpää, I., Muukkonen, J. (2001): Physical input–output in Finland: methods, preliminary results and tasks ahead. Conference on Economic Growth, Material Flows and Environmental Pressure, Stockholm, Sweden.
Mäenpää, I. (2002): Physical input–output tables of Finland 1995 — solutions to some basic methodological problems. 14th International conference on input–output techniques, Montreal, Canada.
Mäenpää, I. (2008): Comparison of environmental multipliers of monetary and physical Leontief inverse. Presentation at the International Input-Output Meeting on Managing the Environment (IIOMME) in Seville, 9-11th of July, 2008.
McKillop, A. (2006): Peak Oil to Peak Gas is a short ride. Energy Bulletin.
Meadows, D., Randers, J., Meadows, D. (2006): Grenzen des Wachstums. Das 30-Jahre- Update. German translation and update of “The limits to growth. The 30-years update”. Hirzel. Stuttgart.
NEA/IAEA (2008): Redbook Uranium 2007. Resources, Production and Demand, Vienna.
NAMEA-Study (2006): Environmental Input-Output Analyses based on NAMEA data — A comparative European study on environmental pressures arising from consumption and production patterns. Moll, S.; Vrgoc, M.; Watson, D.; Femia, A.; Gravgård, Pedersen, O. Draft; European Topic Centre for Resource and Waste Management, European Environment Agency, Copenhagen
OECD (2008): OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
Pehnt, Martin, Höpfner, Ulrich;, Merten, Frank (2007): Elektromobilität und erneuerbare Energien, Arbeitspapier Nr. 5 im Rahmen des Projekts “Energiebalance – Optimale Systemlösungen für Erneuerbare Energien und Energieeffizienz” im Auftrag des BMU, ifeu-Institut und Wuppertal Institut, Heidelberg und Wuppertal Wuppertal Institute et al. Eco-Innovation 83
Perez, J., Allen, P., Brown, M. (Winter 2003): Research Brief #1 Community Supported Agriculture on the Central Coast: The CSA Member Experience, The Center for Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems (University of California, Santa Cruz)
Reid, Alasdair, Miedzinski, Michal (2008): SYSTEMATIC Innovation Panel on ecoinnovation. Final report for sectoral innovation watch. www.europe-innova.org
Rennings, K. (2000): Redefining innovation — eco-innovation research and the contribution from ecological economics, in „Ecological economics“ Volume 32, Issue 2, pp. 319-332
Rocholl, Martin, Giljum, Stefan, Schlegelmilch, Kai (2006): Factor X and the EU: How to make the EU the most resource and energy efficient economy in the world; Aachener Stiftung Kathy Beys, 2nd edition. Aachen
Sarasin, B. (2006): Buying into sustainability - Environmental and social challenges in Trading, Distribution and Retailing, http://www.sarasin.ch/internet/iech/en/institutional_clients_trade_2006_iech
Schepelmann, Philipp (2005): Die ökologische Wende der EU-Regionalpolitik: die regionale Resonanz von umweltpolitischen Indikatoren des Lissabon-Prozesses der Europäischen Union. - Hamburg : Kovac, 2005 - (Studien zur Umweltpolitik ; 8)
Shaheen, S., Sperling, D., Wagner, C (Summer 1998): Carsharing in Europe and North America: Past, Present and Future, Transportation Quarterly, vol. 52, No. 3 pp.35-52
Smith, A. et. al. (2005): The Validity of Food Miles as Indicator of Sustainable Development - Final Report produced for DEFRA
SP/HUMI (2005): Sustainable urban development and affordable housing in south eastern Europe. Summary Progress Report May-November 2005
UNECE (2006): Bulletin of Housing Statistics for Europe and North America 2006. http://www.unece.org/hlm/prgm/hsstat/Bulletin_06.htm
UNEP (2008a): Environment Ministers Meet to Accelerate Transition to a Low Carbon Society. Available at: http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=528&ArticleID=5745&l=en, 03 April 2008
UNEP (2008b): Cleaner Production - Related Concepts. Available at: http://www.unep.fr/pc//cp/understanding_cp/related_concepts.htm, 13 April 2008
UNEP (2008c): Breaking Down the Barriers to a Green Economy, 20.02.08. Available at: http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual/Default.asp?DocumentID=528&ArticleID=5748&l=en, 16 April 2008
UNEP (2007): Global Environmental Outlook - 4. Progress Press Ltd, Malta.