Search

The paper outlines guidelines and pillars of a resource policy. Two reasons favour the formulation of such policy: a demand to increase sluggish resource productivity growth as well as environmental damages occurring along material flows at an international scale. Thus, it is both the innovation and environmental perspective that legitimate policies. The paper surveys recent empirical trends. Referring to research on innovation and transition management, it develops guidelines for a resource policy, namely, market order, provision function, learning processes, market development, and orientation. It furthermore describes four instruments as potential pillars of a future policy mix: a tax on construction minerals, an ecologically differentiated VAT tax, and an international covenant for metals and an international convention for sustainable resource management. The paper finally reflects these guidelines and pillars against weaknesses and ongoing discussions of climate policy. It concludes that despite all uncertainties and complexities, a well-designed resource policy is on the verge of becoming essential for unleashing eco-innovation dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of a circular economy (CE) has become popular and important issue in environmental management in recent years; however, there are not particular indicators dedicated to it in regional policy. CE approach is an industrial system that is restorative by design, and it emphasises that it is important that, rather than extracting natural resources, the materials that have already been taken can and should be recovered and reused in different ways, thereby securing natural resources from over-exploitation. In order to meet CE assumptions, modern and innovative technologies that allow for the recovery of valuable materials should be developed. This also applies to eco-innovation that connects technology development with environmental aspects. It is therefore obvious that issues of CE and eco-innovation are linked, and a uniform methodology aimed at compare the levels of moving to CE including eco-innovation solutions should be established. Because the focus in European Union (EU) has been paid on regions, measuring of CE-eco-innovations levels is especially important at the regional level. In this paper, the proposals of CE indicators, based on eco-innovation factors, which can be possible to create based on existing data set (Eurostat, Cohesion policy) are presented. It is recommend to use of five group indicators for measuring regional CE-eco-innovation. Based on Eco-Innovation Scoreboard which describes innovation measurement, three of proposed indicator groups are associated directly with innovations, taking into account the principles of CE: CE-eco-innovation inputs, CE-eco-innovation activities and CE-eco-innovation outputs, and other two groups of indicators are effects of the CE-eco-innovation introduction: resource efficiency outcomes and socio-economic outcomes. This way of measuring CE-eco-innovation allows for create holistic, systematic and integrated approach for the CE concept at the regional level. Proposed indicators can be used in current transition stage for assessment of implementation regional policy and as a base for creation final CE indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are warning signs for impending scarcity of certain technology metals that play a critical role in high-tech products. The scarce elements are indispensable for the design of modern technologies with superior performance. Material scarcity can restrain future innovations and presents therefore a serious risk that must be counteracted. However, the risk is often underrated in the pursuit of technological progress. Many innovators seem to be inattentive to the limitations in availability of critical resources and the possible implications thereof. The present shortages in industrial supply with technology metals may be interpreted as a wake-up call for technology developers to tackle the issue with due consideration. The article reviews the materials scarcity phenomenon from the viewpoint of sustainable development ethics. The following questions are discussed: 'Should preventative actions be taken today in order to mitigate resource scarcity in future?' and 'Should technology developers feel responsible to do this?' The discussion presents arguments for industrial designers and engineers to create a sense of responsibility for the proactive mitigation of material scarcity. Being protagonists of the innovation system, they have the opportunity to lead change towards resource-aware technology development. The paper concludes by outlining ideas on how they can pioneer sustainable management of critical materials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]