A global Fordian compromise?—And what it would mean for the transition to sustainability

Karlsson, Rasmus

doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2008.11.007

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Accepting that it is unlikely that we will be able to 'hit the brakes' of modernity to a sufficient degree to achieve sustainability, it may make more sense to attempt the opposite: to draw on the existing momentum towards modernisation and to align the interests of economic growth, environmental responsibility and social policy through massive investments in education and accelerating socio-economic globalisation. Many of these processes would be strongly self-reinforcing, for instance the dismantling of agricultural subsidies and trade barriers could free up capital for social investments in developed economies (without the need to increase taxes) while at the same time allowing economic development from below in the developing countries (Karlsson 2009). Bright as such win-win outcomes may seem, we should not underestimate the seriousness of our predicament and Environmental Values 21.4 the urgency by which we need to halt the rate of environmental destruction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Second, on this basis, it is argued that environmental citizenship theory fundamentally misconstrues our duties towards the environment by confusing local practices of environmental stewardship with global strategies for sustainability. Third and finally, it is argued that environmental citizenship theory obscures what is truly at stake in contemporary debates on sustainability and that, by individualising environmental responsibility, it risks deflecting our attention away from more promising alternative paths to sustainability (Galiana and Green 2010;Karlsson 2009). However, prior to engaging with any of these arguments, I will provide a brief conceptual background to the notion of environmental citizenship.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Individual Guilt or Collective Progressive Action? Challenging the Strategic Potential of Environmental Citizenship Theory

Karlsson¹

2012

Environmental Values

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual Guilt or Collective Progressive Action? Challenging the Strategic Potential of Environmental Citizenship Theory

Karlsson¹

2012

Environmental Values

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…is convinced that a combination of solar energy, genetic engineering and the internet will solve poverty in the world; the only problem is to make them cheap and universally available. From a very different corner, Karlsson (2009) (IPCC 2000), that still underlies IPCC's emission projections, concluded that technology was of similar importance for future GHG emissions as population and economic growth combined. "The development and diffusion of new technologies is perhaps the most robust and effective way to reduce GHG emissions", state Banuri et al (2001, p. 83) in the IPCC's third assessment report (TAR), and they mention cost and market failures as the most significant barriers to innovation and diffusion of these technologies.…”

Section: The Mainstream Interpretation: Technology As a Tool For An Ementioning

confidence: 98%

Sustainability Transitions and the Nature of Technology

Paredis

2010

Found Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For more than 20 years, sustainable development has been advocated as a way of tackling growing global environmental and social problems. The sustainable development discourse has always had a strong technological component and the literature boasts an enormous amount of debate on which technologies should be developed and employed and how this can most efficiently be done. The mainstream discourse in sustainable development argues for an eco-efficiency approach in which a technology push strategy boosts efficiency levels by a factor 10 and more in industrialised and developing countries. A minority argues for a socio-cultural lifestyle switch, relying on new values, quality of life, sufficiency and redistribution strategies, with calls for appropriate and soft technologies. It is remarkable, however, that the articles, books and policy debates on sustainability seldom explicitly draw in a discussion of the nature of technology, how technology influences and is influenced by society, and what this implies for sustainable development. The mainstream interprets technology as neutral and instrumental: technology is no more than an instrument to reach a goal; it cannot be judged on its intrinsic characteristics, only on its use. The alternative view often builds on an autonomous and substantive interpretation of technology: technology is an autonomous, almost uncontrollable power that fundamentally reshapes our culture. A more balanced approach seems to be growing in the research on socio-technical sustainability transitions where the focus shifts to the co-evolution of technology and society, and to the networks, seamless webs and complex multi-actor processes that may carry a sustainability transition forward. This approach builds on insights from recent traditions in the philosophy and sociology of technology, in particular the social construction of technology (SCOT) and actor-network theory (ANT). While this provides for a better understanding of the nature and potential role of technology in sustainability policies, it remains to be seen whether it will actually influence the choice between technologies. This article investigates the different conceptualisations of technology in the sustainability debate. It first distinguishes between different approaches of sustainability and how these are related to differing views on technology. It then moves on to how the socio-technical transitions research incorporates insights 123 196 E. Paredis from contemporary philosophy and sociology of technology. It reflects on the potential of transitions research to give guidance in technology choices, suggesting that the transition approach might be strengthened by drawing in insights from critical theory of technology and by taking a more political stance in defining sustainable development.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the same time, climate change is leading to production uncertainties, and the reliance on fossil fuels in food production systems is of increasing concern. (RSC, 2009; Karlsson, 2009;UNCOD, 2008). Against this backcloth, a range of transgenic crops have been developed, and a few are now being grown in many parts of the world; so far the crops are either herbicidetolerant, giving farmers greater choice in crop management, or insect-resistant, reducing the need for spraying with pesticides.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of transgenic crops in sustainable development

Park¹,

McFarlane

Phipps

et al. 2010

Plant Biotechnology Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe concept of sustainable development forms the basis for a wide variety of international and national policy making. World population continues to expand at about 80 M people per year, while the demand for natural resources continues to escalate. Important policies, treaties and goals underpin the notion of sustainable development. In this paper, we discuss and evaluate a range of scientific literature pertaining to the use of transgenic crops in meeting sustainable development goals. It is concluded that a considerable body of evidence has accrued since the first commercial growing of transgenic crops, which suggests that they can contribute in all three traditional pillars of sustainability, i.e. economically, environmentally and socially.Management of herbicide-tolerant and insect-resistant transgenic crops to minimize the risk of weeds and pests developing resistance is discussed, together with the associated concern about the risk of loss of biodiversity. As the world population continues to rise, the evidence reviewed here suggests it would be unwise to ignore transgenic crops as one of the tools that can help meet aspirations for increasingly sustainable global development.

show abstract

A global Fordian compromise?—And what it would mean for the transition to sustainability

Cited by 5 publications

References 33 publications

Individual Guilt or Collective Progressive Action? Challenging the Strategic Potential of Environmental Citizenship Theory

Individual Guilt or Collective Progressive Action? Challenging the Strategic Potential of Environmental Citizenship Theory

Sustainability Transitions and the Nature of Technology

The role of transgenic crops in sustainable development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About