FROM RESOURCE EFFICIENCY

TO LIMITING RESOURCE USE -INNOVATIVE TOOLS FOR

A SUSTAINABLE

EUROPE

GREEN WEEK SIDE EVENT – CONFERENCE BOOKLET

Table of contents

Introduction

Presentations of the conference

I. Natural resource use in the policy context

The treasures of our planet – the future of our natural resources

Former and present initiatives to control natural resource use: past failures and new efforts

Obstacles to deliver energy and climate goals through output side regulations

II. Towards a Resource Effi cient Europe European Commission Keynote speech: A roadmap for a Resource Effi cient Europe Policy challenges in moving toward resource effi ciency

Sustainability aspects of LED products - how resource effi ciency drives a triple win value creation

Blue Economy: a new way of designing business

III. Introducing limits in a limited world

Input side regulation through economic measures: the tax reform

Using tradable energy quotas for limiting energy use

Cap and share natural resources: an integrated tool for sustainability

Panel Discussion

Conclusion

4

6

6

7

9

11

13

14

16

18

20

22

23

24

26

29

30

4

Natural resources, such as fuels, minerals and metals but also food, soil, water, air, biomass and ecosystems underpin the functioning of the economy and provide an indispensable contribution to human wellbeing.

However, pressures exerted by growing consumption levels and by an increasing global population threaten the security of supply of these resources to current and future generations. Thus, continuing our current patterns of resource use is not an option.

In response to these changes, the European Commission launched a Flagship initiative under the Europe 2020 Strategy on a resource-effi cient Europe in January 2011. As a cornerstone of future environmental policy, increasing resource effi ciency will also aim at securing growth and jobs for Europe. It is expected to bring major economic opportunities, improve productivity, drive down costs and boost competitiveness. It also seems necessary to develop new products and services and fi nd new ways to reduce inputs, minimise waste, improve management of resource stocks, change consumption patterns, optimise production processes, management and business methods, and improve logistics. This will help stimulate technological innovation, boost employment in the fast developing ‘green technology’ sector, sustain EU trade through opening up new export markets, and benefi t consumers through more sustainable products.

However, some warn of the consequences of the rebound effect, which can threaten the achievement of many of these objectives. The rebound effect occurs when some or all of the savings from below cost effi ciency increase (when effi ciency improvements pay for themselves) are cancelled out (or even exceeded) due to various reasons. It can be a direct (e.g. turning up the heating in a newly insulated house) or indirect (e.g. starting new investments from the realised savings) effect on either a consumer or fi rm level. On a macro-economic level, improved below cost efficiency drives economic productivity overall, resulting in more

Introduction

Conference Booklet

5

rapid economic growth and resource consumption. Recently, the global economy as a whole showed signifi cant improvements in resource effi ciency. On the other hand, the total resource consumption of the global economy continued to increase.

In this light, the European Commission’s Green Week Satellite Event was organized in Budapest, 17 May 2011 under the Hungarian EU Presidency by the European Commission, its Representation in Hungary and CEEweb for Biodiversity to open discussion about the resource challenges we face and the possible policy solutions and already existing best practices that can aid us. The one day conference, ‘From resource effi ciency to limiting resource use – innovative tools for a sustainable Europe’ was centred around three sections: the challenges and problems in terms of natural resources, the already existing initiatives and answers from different sectors and the potential introduction of probable tools that can serve as solutions. Accordingly, the structured presentations and panel discussion revealed that although resource effi ciency is highly important and necessary, further steps towards resource use limitation are desirable if we are to achieve a sustainable Europe.

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011

6

The European Commission’s Green Week Satellite Event in Budapest was an interdisciplinary conference simultaneously organized with similar conferences in other Member States. The speakers were representing sectors such as, academia, businesses, governmental and non-governmental organizations from all over Europe. The conference was dedicated to revealing the recent status of resource use, evaluating its policy context and opening a discussion about innovative tools aiming to realise resource effi ciency and resource limitation at European and national levels.

Presentations of the conference

International politics plays a fundamental role in environmental issues since they do not know national borders. A decision on one side of the world is not independent from the standard of living on the other side. At the same time, there was no period in human history when our species had larger impact on the whole ecosystem as it has in our modern industrialised age. Will interconnectedness and the power we gained draw attention to the need of wise and responsible global leadership?

I. Natural resource use in the policy context

7

Éva Hartai,

University of Miskolc The treasures of our planet –

the future of our natural resources

No human historical age had larger global impact than modern civilization; no period had the capacity and technique to exploit all fundamental resources globally.

Environmental science and movements generally do not pay too much attention to the lithosphere even though this inorganic component of planet Earth is a fundamental part of the whole system. It supplies organic life with solid basis, raw material, and from a human point of view, identifi es historical periods and determines civilizations.

The general tendency however, is that we are running out of the most important resources, which form the fundaments of our economy: ores and fossil fuel. Looking back only in a historical scale, the shrinkage of the mineral particle size and the occurrence of mined minerals is remarkable. We also need to consider two important factors: The global human population and therefore the need of raw material are increasing with an accelerating speed never experienced before, and so does the demand for fossil fuels that the mining industry and mineral refi ning processes are extremely dependent on. These shortages are not expressly obvious now, but according to several studies on this topic, the reachable mineral resources will be depleted in the coming decades considering the actual technology and estimated population growth. Besides, even though technology is advancing at an extremely remarkable level and promises some headway, it cannot provide a solution for resource depletion. There are natural limitations such as the unmanageable underground pressure deeper than 3.6 km, which will presumably not be overcome even with modern technology.

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011

8

The Olduvai theory of Richard Duncan does not trust technological solutions either. It says that after the age of fossil fuels, a catastrophic social and economic collapse will terminate the period around 2030, which will be followed by a so called de-industrialised age.

Geopolitically, the extreme dependency what modern society generates raises another question. China owns 97% of the world’s rare earth metal production that is essential to high-tech electronics (e.g. modern communication, military use and healthcare). Europe provides only 3% of the world ore production, but using 30% of it makes it desperately dependent on imported resources. Strategic resources are centred in one hand and interdependency from resources is not equally allocated among nations. Meanwhile, we are running out of several crucial resources simultaneously. Can Antarctica, new substitution elements or mining the Moon or the Mars mean a solution? The close future will present the answer.

Conference Booklet

Tibor Faragó, St. István University Former and present initiatives to control natural resource use: past failures and new efforts

Our era is facing a new challenge. Confl icts that remained local earlier are growing global today in our globally interconnected economy; therefore, we need global solutions based on enhanced international cooperation. However, as long as the ignorance of global justice and huge development/poverty gap continues, strong and binding multilateral agreements are hardly likely. The solution is in the hand of decision makers and they need to fi nd the answers and change willingly before we become forced to change by resource shortages and the subsequent global confl icts.

The historical past was the time of local confl icts for local possessions and the period of seemingly endless global resources. Local disasters happened due to the overuse of locally available resources (extinction of civilization in the Easter Island, desertifi cation of the Sahel region). Colonisation could also lead to a critical level of irresponsible resource use (Spanish gold “export” from the colonised American territories from the 16th century, African elephant became nearly extinct before being listed by CITES in 1989). Tragedy of the commons occurs when use of common possessions are not regulated such as fi sheries in the high seas (e.g. confl icts between UK and Iceland in the past).

The recent past was the environmental enlightenment. Europe has been running an ecological defi cit since the 1960’s when the ecological footprint per capita had exceeded the natural biocapacity. The belief in infi nite resources and the invisible controlling mechanisms of free market are still a major part of the problem. Problems cannot be solved with the same thinking we used when we created them. Stockholm (1972), Helsinki (1975),Rio de Janeiro (1992) and Johannesburg (2002)

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011

10

were all high-level negotiations about long-term sustainable development, but did the political agreements put us on a new path?

Even though we became relatively more effective and adopted new goals in some areas (e.g. on global biodiversity or climate-energy package at EU level), in absolute terms, we do not consume less. We need to set up more ambitious targets by taking into account the carrying capacity of the global ecosystem. There are some promising initiatives such as the “green economy” on the agenda of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development in 2012 (Rio+20), the Global Green New Deal by the UNEP, or the EU2020’s Resource Effi ciency Flagship Initiative, which recognise that we cannot continue our current patterns of resource use. However, according to previous experiences, improved effi ciency alone will not prevent resource overuse because of the more rapidly expanding consumption levels (including also the rebound-effect). Nonetheless, do we want only to green the growth of economy to some extent or do we want to change the philosophy behind or the paradigm of the socio-economic development?

Conference Booklet

A shift in thinking is needed when we talk about effective prevention and control of man-caused environmental damage. The problem cannot be solved without pointing out the reasons leading to the occurrence of the problem. Focusing on the cause instead of the effect is the thinking we need in order to fi nd real and sustainable solutions.

The solely output-side regulation concept – focusing only on reducing the quantity of the output - is an obstacle in many cases.

Firstly, we can examine some failure symptoms of an output-side binding global agreement like the Kyoto Protocol. Europe is not on track to meet either the targets of the Protocol, or the agreed 20% GHG emission reduction goal by 2020. Meanwhile, the Commission already debates about 30%, whereas climate science and relevant studies urge 40% reduction in order to stay below the critical 2 Celsius degree global average surface temperature increase, a criteria which the EU is committed to.

The Kyoto-related output-side fl exibility mechanisms also contributed to the failure symptoms. Regarding the EU-ETS fi rst phase (2005-2007), the overestimation (by 8,3%) of the needed CO2 allowances meant no limitation at all. In the

second phase (2008-2012), the cap was just 2% lower than the baseline of 2005. The EU-ETS rules plan to allow unused CO2 allowances to be set aside from the

fi rst and second phases and be used in the third (2012-2020). With the original over-allocation - mainly in CEE countries - this can lead to

Alexa Botár,

National Society of Conservationists –

Friends of the Earth Hungary Obstacles to deliver energy and climate goals through output side regulations

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011

a virtually cap-less GHG emission growth to the ETS sector according to the business-as-usual scenario. The EU-ETS rules plan to allow unused CO2 allowances to be set aside from the fi rst and second phases and be used in the third (2012-2020). With the original over-allocation - mainly in CEE countries - this can lead to a virtually cap-less GHG emission growth to the ETS sector according to the business-as-usual scenario.

Offsetting and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) are global output-side fl exibility mechanisms that create loopholes and often support unsustainable projects such as palm tree plantations for agrofuels in the place of the rainforests. In spite of this, the EU intends to expand this system in order to set up a broader market including Australia, Japan, New Zealand and the US till 2020.

We need to mention innovations and technologies like agrofuel, nuclear power plants and carbon capture and storage that also benefi t from solely focusing on emission reductions. If we regard the full life cycle these are NOT zero-emission technologies and have signifi cant negative externalities. These include huge, adverse social, environmental impacts, biodiversity decline, food shortages as well as colonisation; and are not cost-effective for the planned low-carbon economy with a low material-and energy intensity.

The output and the input side regulations are both necessary and could strengthen each other. Input side regulation is more appropriate for quantitative control and is realised through economic measures (less resource and land use input). While output side method is rather a legal tool and more effective as a qualitative control(quality of emissions, pollutions), if weeffectively want to stop climate change (and prevent the comingenergy crisis and fuel shortages), we need to put a cap on resourceuse - fossil fuel in this case - rather than on GHG emissions.

Conference Booklet

13

Europe traditionally plays a leading role in environmental and sustainability issues while policies still need to develop in order to answer the greatest challenge of our age. Review of policies and alternative proposals should be gathered under a common framework that provides the guideline towards a sustainable Europe.

II. Towards a Resource Effi cient Europe

14

A synergy of policies and coherent regulation is needed that is both understood and widely accepted. The main message of the Green Week Satellite Event is that resource effi ciency issues have to be discussed not only in Brussels but also in cities of the Member States.

The Europe 2020 Strategy is the course for the EU’s economy for the next 10 years and also beyond. A signifi cant transition in energy, industrial, agricultural and transport systems as well as in consumer behaviour is urgently needed. It requires coordinated action and synergy within several political areas at the same time. Series of initiatives are related to resource effi ciency at the EU level policies (2020 EU biodiversity policy and strategy, European Energy Effi ciency Plan 2020, Low Carbon Economy 2050 Roadmap and others). More proposals are expected, including, for instance, “circular economy” regarding recycling systems.

Resource effi ciency has to include all resources and related barriers have to be tackled carefully. Market failures (externalities, information gaps), policy inconsistency (environmentally harmful subsidies, incoherent policies) and lock-in mechanisms (industrial processes, thinking patterns) are all blocking resource effi ciency, while the pressure is coming from two sides to push it forward. One side is the supply threats such as uncertain global supply chain and danger of running out. On the other side, there are demand threats such as population growth and the symptom of economic growth.

Robert Konrad,

Directorate General

fo r E n v i ro n m e n t ,

European Commission European Commission Keynote speech:

A roadmap for a Resource Effi cient Europe

Conference Booklet

15

A Resource Effi cient Economy aims to • save resources: taking existing opportunities for effi ciency; • reduce: dematerialise ways to meet people’s needs; • substitute for alternatives with lower resource use over the life cycle, • value resources correctly in policy and business decisions, • recycle and reuse for a circular economy.

The content of the Roadmap is going to be communicated throughout the autumn of 2011 and it will contain the Resource Effi cient Europe vision. It aims to outline key challenges and opportunities, proposals for positive 2020 and 2050 visions, and for crosscutting and specifi c areas for action, governance and monitoring structure. The roadmap will only feature an illustrative set of policy changes needed to tackle resource ineffi ciencies. Lead actions are identifi ed for the EU, its Member States, and regions as well as for business. The monitoring will be realised within Europe 2020 Strategy Analysis as part of the Annual Growth Survey exercise where using the appropriate indicators is particularly important. Their development is the most challenging at the moment.

16

Definition of resource is elementary before efficiencyor limitation is at stake. If we stick to the narrow meaningcovering only natural material resources, we miss theunderstanding that human resources and social resources could also be depleted. Resource use begins with a value driven behaviour.

Resource effi ciency is an opportunity and a dilemma at the same time. It is a dilemma for many reasons and the rebound effect is only one of them. Narrower and broader defi nitions of resource use are possible. So far, it has been interpreted as an innovation issue but we need to have a wider view to examine our human and social resource use patterns as well. We rarely distinguish renewable resources from optionally renewable ones that can renew themselves only if we let them do that and if we leave a critical proportion untouched for recovering processes.

The turning point means the fi nal loadability, the moment when the system cannot recover anymore. Soil is a good example due to its complex system of solid matter, water, air and bioorganisms. We often forget to think of ecosystem services as resources because they operate invisibly. However, e.g. the lack of insect pollination alone could block our complete fruit production and the reduction of bee population is an alarming fact today. From year to year, we use up our ecological budget before the end of the year according to the Global Footprint Network. The global ecosystem needs 1.5 years to produce and clean what we consume and pollute in one year. artifi cial circle. Global injustice divides the planet to south and north and extreme data urge the need of act: 850 million people suffer from malnutrition while the UK

Erzsébet Gergely,

Ministry of Rural

Development, Hungary Policy challenges in moving toward resource effi ciency

Conference Booklet

spends 1 billion £ a year to health care services for obesity. Developed Europe cannot be proud of its biodiversity performance either: 42% of its native mammals and 600 plant species are threatened with extinction while 52% of freshwater fi sh species are endangered and the number of the most important populations have decreased under a critical level.

Life cycle analysis highlights the major problem of long linear supply chains. Long ago, the chain had one or two steps and food was available in the local market, but now nearly everything travels from factories through logistic centres to transport chains and shopping centres and we are dependent on this

The logic of regulation is also value driven. Europe pushes education and awareness raising solutions forward while the US mainly believes in inter-est driven win-win methods. Expres-sion of sustainability had a special journey over different sectors starting with environmental conferences a few decades ago, then being taken over by the social sector and economic dis-cussions, nowadays occurring also in security policy. This means that the matter is becoming more and more serious.

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011

Innovation and clean technology in many cases are ready or just around the corner. If we consider this and design for recycle or further use, a new business model can be created.

EcoDesign is an approach to reduce impacts of production and products, where life cycle analysis and benchmarking have a major role. Philips reduces the impact of its products via six Green Focal Areas: energy consumption, packaging, hazardous waste, weight, recycling and disposal and lifetime reliability. LED light bulbs save up to 80% electricity compared to traditional technologies like incandescent or halogen and last for 25 years. It is probably less known that lighting can also have other benefi cial impacts. The color of sunlight changes slightly during the day and the human metabolism and activity react directly to these changes. Philips can mimic these conditions with dynamic lighting leading introducting signifi cant improvements in learning and concentration at work or school. Also, in developing countries solar powered lighting can extend the useable hours of a day for study or work while reducing health risks related to fumes and hazards of the dangerous kerosene burning lamps.

In terms of closing the material loop, there are several drivers to take action. We are facing rising material prices; mining and extraction lead to environmental problems; scarcity of resources is already leading to issues of security of supply. Up to now, almost none all of the innovations and technologies were designed with reclamation of resources in mind; i.e. products are “designed for the dump”. In practice, this means that materials are dispersed and not recovered efficiently and effectively,and are eliminated for future applications.

Maarten ten Houten, Philips Lighting Sustainability aspects of LED products - how resource effi ciency drives a triple win value creation

Conference Booklet

19

If a company invests R&D money into more recyclable products, the recycling companies will benefi t with a higher value, which is not a good business incentive. As Albert Einstein said: “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used that created them in the fi rst place”. So a new idea has been introduced at Philips “Pay per Lux”. Philips does an energy scan of a building and installs an energy effi cient solution via leasing, still keeping the ownership. The user pays for the light used and the electricity bill is paid by Philips. After usage, Philips collects and recycles them.

Green innovation is a triple win solution because closing material loop is good for the environment, reduction of energy consumption is good for society and innovation is good for businesses and competitiveness and it also creates new jobs.

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011

The main principle in an ecosystem is that there is no waste, every output material is a resource for something else, everything has its own use and the cycle is continuous.

Günter Pauli is the member of the Club of Rome, publisher of the Dutch edition of the ‘State of the World’ and author of the book “Blue Economy”, which advocates for a new perspective and mindset and which became a report of the Club of Rome.

Günter Pauli was the President of Ecover, producing biodegradable soap, but after realising that due to the spreading of the idea natural, mainly forest lands were used to produce the environmental friendly cleaning liquids, he reconsidered his concept. Biodegradable soap should not cause the degradation of rainforests. Because of this unintended consequence, he started to collect innovations from all over the world that are truly sustainable, local, inexpensive and support the community. He could not use the “green economy” anymore as the business sector misunderstood the green concept earlier, so the new business model is called the blue economy. In such a system, businesses produce only value.

Why are ecosystems so effective? Because long-term evolution, based on natural processes and local conditions, create fi ne-tuned natural technologies. The aim of the blue economy is local job creation (even if some disappear, many more should emerge),

local resource use (less physical mobility, work and capital flow) and cheap technologies (reduction of income

differences). The reason why the shift is necessary from green to blue is that business has not

understood the point yet: from conservation to reconstruction, from closed processes to circles, from renewable to sustainable,

Tibor Kiss, University of Pécs Blue Economy: a new way of designing business

Conference Booklet

21

from need-driven to resource-driven, from fund-dependent to competitive. This way we can evolve from an economy where good quality is expensive, and the bad one is cheap, to a system where the good and innovative is affordable. To achieve this vision, thousands of innovations were screened and hundreds were identifi ed, which imitate natural ecosystems and their effi ciency. Hundreds of those innovations were presented as a Report to the Club of Rome in 2009. As a result of the concept, the Blue Economy Innovation Claster was formed in Hungary at the beginning of 2011 to advocate for blue solutions.

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011

Principles and targets are primary steps but remain useless without effective tools that guarantee the success. We can learn from existing experiences and practices but sometimes we simply need to use the “try and error” method. There are several proposals available for introducing limits to resource use, which should be thoroughly considered taking environmental, social and economic aspects into account.

III. Introducing limits in a limited world

Conference Booklet

23

Environmental taxation in the EU proved that it can have substantial environmental, social and economic benefi ts. The case of transport clearly illustrates this issue.

State budget revenues from road transport are larger than those from railways, but counting the state expenditures (infrastructure costs, etc.) and the negative social and environmental externalities (healthcare, environmental damage, accidents), it is clear that railway transport is not only more environment-friendly, but also costs much less to the state and the society.

The Clean Air Action Group worked out proposals according to which the state budget revenue could be raised by 680 billion HUF (about 2.4 billion EUR) in 2011 in case of a well-constructed environmental taxation of road and air transport. Introduction of a distance-based fee for trucks could generate 100 billion HUF (about 357 million EUR). In Switzerland, thanks to such a fee, heavy truck traffi c decreased by 40% between 2001 and 2008 in comparison with the business as usual case, and Switzerland is still one of the most competitive countries of the world. In Germany, even the announcement of such a fee (which was fi nally introduced in 2005) resulted in a faster increase of railway freight transport. Eliminating the fuel savings related tax-free salary would mean at least 30 billion HUF (107 million EUR) for the state budget. Stricter regulation of the accounting of passenger car use could greatly diminish the related tax evasion, and would raise about 200 billion HUF for the state (714 million EUR). Externalities of accidents should be charged to the business insurance companies (80 billion HUF, 286 million EUR). If Hungary followed the example of the already existing British air passenger duty (fl ight ticket tax), the revenue from this source would amount to more than 30 billion HUF (107 million EUR). One of the most important benefi ts of increasing environmental taxes is the fact that labour related taxes can be lowered and this can help create new jobs.

András Lukács,

Clean Air Action Group Input side regulation through

economic measures: the tax reform

24

Internationally or nationally accepted environmental targets are necessary but far from suffi cient if effective economical tools are not introduced. The real challenge is to fi nd ways of creating a thriving society within these limits.

Tradable energy quotas (TEQs) is a system designed by Dr. David Fleming in 1996, and would serve some major purposes: guaranteeing that a national carbon budget is achieved, empowering communities and building a common purpose and securing fair access to fuel at times of deep scarcity. It is an electronic system for rationing carbon-rated energy for all energy users within the economy, including the government, and would be implemented at the national level.

Under TEQs, every adult is given an equal free Entitlement of TEQs units each week. Meanwhile, other energy users (government, industry etc.) bid for their units at a weekly tender or auction. The total number of units issued is determined by the national carbon budget. You would only need to use TEQs units when purchasing fuel or electricity, but all emissions within the economy are accounted for within the scheme.

If you use less than your Entitlement of units, you can sell your surplus. If you need more, you can buy them. All trading takes place at a single national price, which will rise and fall in line with demand. Since the national TEQs price is determined by national demand, it is transparent in everyone’s interest to help each other to reduce their energy demand, and to work together, encouraging a national sense of common purpose.

Shaun Chamberlin,

The Lean Economy

Connection Using tradable energy quotas for limiting energy use

Conference Booklet

25

Unlike a carbon tax, TEQs address climate change and fuel shortage in an integrated way, resolving the confl ict between trying to keep energy prices low and carbon prices high, it helps the poor (who use less energy), is based on bottom-up solutions and is specifi ed in terms of carbon/energy rather than in monetary terms. Guaranteeing the achievement of national carbon targets with TEQs would also permit governments to lead on the international stage, declaring “we are acting, so must you”!

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011

26

Separated policies, short-run interest and lack of holistic approach lead to managing problems separately, which creates contradictory regulations and confl icting solutions in economic, environmental and social problems.

Fundamentally, three types of environmental pressures exist: emission of polluting materials, use of natural resources and human appropriation of space. Environmental protection aims to eliminate pollution (but does not properly regulate the other two). During this process of elimination, it uses resources and space, thus creating another type of emission, most often pollution. Environmental protection with incoherent regulations is a good way of producing environmental problems. The quota concept -used either on the input or the output side of resource use or for land use- is a limitation that ensures the end of growing consumption of natural resources and space.

National Resource Quota System:

The National Resource Quota System proposal lies on three plus one additional pillars. The fi rst pillar is the National Resource Quota System, which is a consumption entitlement trading system of fossil fuels. Therefore, this is an input side regulation instead of an emission regulation. The national quota budget as a resource cap for fossil fuels is set at the beginning of every year and gradually decreases year after year. The so-called consumption groups are defi ned, and trade is possible for eachconsumer. Who has unused consumption permission rights(entitlements) can sell it getting quota-money in return.

Iván Gyulai, Ecological Institute for

Sustainable Development Cap and share natural resources: an integrated tool for sustainability

Conference Booklet

27

Quota money is a complementary currency and it is accepted on the Green-Market that is the second pillar, a free market for labelled and qualifi ed products and services. Requirements to enter this Green-Market are defi ned according to the internationally accepted sustainability principals. Revolving Fund from state fund is necessary for the structural change, which is the third pillar of the scheme. The Revolving Fund would operate with quota-money and interest-free loans where the debt is paid back from the saved quotas.

The benefi ts of the system are social and environmental. It increases environmental consciousness, decreases social injustice, reduces fossil fuel use and dependency on external resources, encourages innovation and makes environmentally qualifi ed products available for everybody. The system needs an additional support service to provide lifestyle, trade and investment consultancy.

A national and international land use rights trading system:

Natural interactions and processes assure that nature remains renewable but in order to supply its inestimable services, nature needs space. Untouched areas and more nature friendly land use are needed.

The regulatory system integrates all land use types related to urbanisation, industry, infrastructure, agriculture, forestry, recreation and nature conservation. The system sets requirements for all land use types and groups them under A, B, C categories. The „A” category is the highest achievable category under which optimal ecosystem services are maintained, „B” is an intermediate status, while the „C” category shows the current land use practices. Land users obtain land use entitlements (quotas) according to their current land use practices, e.g. 2 (A) or 1 (B) or 0 (C) per hectares or square meters. A controlling institution is responsible to develop regulations conducive to sustainable resource use in each land use type.

Every year the controlling institution (e.g. the state) sets a level of fulfi lment which has to be achieved by all land users in that year. This level of fulfi lment is increased annually by the controlling institution. In case they do not possess

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011

28

enough entitlements to carry out their activities, either they change their land use practices partially or entirely; or they buy additional entitlements. Those land users who accomplish the prescribed level of fulfi lment could sell the rest of their entitlements for those who could not fulfi l. The system transaction costs are covered by a 0.5 % fee on all entitlement transactions. This regulatory system can be also applied at the international level among participating states.

Conference Booklet

29

After the presentations, a panel discussion took place with the participation of János Mika (Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Erzsébet Gergely (Ministry of Rural Development, Hungary), Maarten ten Houten (Philips Lighting) and Iván Gyulai (Ecological Institute for Sustainable Development), who refl ected on the important issues and questions.

The panel discussion was focusing on some relevant questions, namely whether resource limitation is necessary beside resource effi ciency and what roles the different sectors (government, academia, business and NGOs) should play in forming policies and implementing activities.

Most panellists expressed their views that resource use limitation will not only be necessary but also inevitable due to resource depletion and population growth. This challenge cannot be solely solved by quickly advancing scientifi c and technological innovations. Thus, resource use limitation is a need besides resource effi ciency and they should go together hand in hand.

Forming and implementing relevant policies should play the guiding role to realise resource use limitation, while science would provide a de facto knowledge and guide the way with actual and relevant fi ndings. Business’ essential role is clearly understood as this sector mainly defi nes consumer habits, which could also be formed by raising awareness through civil organizations.

Besides, the position of the four sectors represented, the role of society was also emphasised. It has to take the form of an altruist and less individualistic society, where not only materialistic resources, such as fuel, ores and money are valued, but our human and environmental resources are taken at a more accentuated level into account. To achieve this, applying holistic approach both within and throughout the sectors is crucial. Only through joint efforts can we achieve a paradigm change and the sustainable development of our continent and consequently, our planet.

Panel Discussion

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011

30

The world is facing a crisis never experienced before. Climate change, fi nancial crisis, social tensions are all problems of our age, but do they have a common root? Can we identify and solve them at the same time? The original meaning of crisis in Greek is turning point. A turning point of a society is when the society needs to make a decision about its future, a decision where the conventional patterns cannot be used anymore and change of thinking is needed. After the fi nancial crisis, however, no global paradigm change has been realised; only already existing strategies have been corrected to some extent. If we want to continue consuming and believing in economic growth until natural resources are completely exploited or reach their turning point, global human society will face its biggest challenge during its history.

To avoid such calamity, the outcomes of the European Green Week Satellite Side Event implied that we have to see the urge of applying improved resource effi ciency and the introduction of resource use limitation since these two ways may be our only option to face with the growing pressures of population growth and increasing demands. Only jointly they can operate successfully and act together to overcome the overuse and depletion of our natural resources. These resources should not be limited only to ores and fossil fuels, but they should also be defi ned from a non-material perspective and contain other forms of resources e.g., soil, biodiversity and human power.

The potential answers presented at the event examined the nature of the output side and input side regulations as well as the characteristics of taxation and different quota systems. One of the important messages is that input side regulation is the road we need to continue on. Declaring whether taxation or quota system is the better economic tool was not the aim of this conference. Pointing out, however, possible advantages and disadvantages of both methods and understanding that they can be used simultaneously are important for following reasonable debates. More interdisciplinary consultations are needed to develop and share the most effective tools for realising a sustainable future.

Conclusion

Conference Booklet

From resource effi ciency to limiting resource use - innovative tools for a sustainable Europe

Copyright © CEEweb for Biodiversity, 2011

CEEweb for Biodiversity is an international umbrella organization of NGOs in Central and Eastern Europe. The mission of CEEweb is the conservation of biodiversity through the promotion of sustainable development.

Published with the fi nancial support of the European Commission. The contents of this publication do not necessarily refl ect the position or opinion of the European Commission.

Editor responsible: Klára Hajdu, Secretary General

Editing: Katalin Csiba, Klára Hajdu, Csilla M. Kaiser, Veronika Kiss, Ágnes Zólyomi

Photos: www.sxc.hu

Green Week Side Event, 17 May 2011