1996
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1099-0836(199609)5:3<178::aid-bse62>3.0.co;2-m
|Get access via publisher |Summarize |Cite
Cleaner Production Assessment in Norway: Experiences and Policy Implications
Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Select...
8
1
1
0
Citation Types
0
8
0
1
Year Published
1996
2019
Publication Types
Select...
9
1
Relationship
0
10
Authors
Journals
Cited by 10 publications
(9 citation statements)
References 12 publications
0
8
0
1
“…Albareda et al . ; Egels‐Zandén & Hyllman ; Fernández‐Fernández ; Newman & Marks de Chabris ; Nyquist ; Saether & Amundsen ; Valentine et al . ).…”
Section: Resultsunclassified
“…Albareda et al . ; Egels‐Zandén & Hyllman ; Fernández‐Fernández ; Newman & Marks de Chabris ; Nyquist ; Saether & Amundsen ; Valentine et al . ).…”
Section: Resultsunclassified
“…He notes that environmental pressures have forced firms in the industry to adopt new technology to improve production processes and product quality, search for new sources of raw materials, substitute hardwoods for traditional coniferous softwoods and increase recycling of waste paper. Saether and Amundsen (1996) in a survey of Norwegian industry find that (pollution) prevention is an important principle, and continuous initiatives towards a longer-term pollution efficiency and product innovations are an important challenge facing companies. Frondel et al (2007) note that cleaner production technologies are likely to be more beneficial than end-of-pipe technologies for environmental and economic reasons.…”
Section: Discussion Of Findingsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A study examining 24 pollution prevention projects in Holland concluded that the efficiency was only just acceptable and in a few cases the cost/benefit relation was exceptionally unfavourable (de Bruijn et al, 1996). A similar study from Norway shows that pollution prevention demonstrates benefits for companies and how governments promote cleaner production throughout industry is the basic question to be addressed for government institutions (Saether and Amundsen, 1996).…”
mentioning
confidence: 95%
