Catalog

	Table of Contents
p. 14 of 57 BACK | NEXT I. The Changing Environment II. Driving Forces of Change Population Explosion Urbanization and Industrialization Income Growth and Inequality Technological Changes Governance Institutions, Policy, and the Market Toward Sustainable Development III. Options and Opportunities IV. Toward Policy Integration V. Call to Action

Asian Environment Outlook 2001 : II. Driving Forces of Change

---

Technological Changes

In many cases, technological changes have ameliorated the environmental and resource effects of economic growth. For example, the long-term trend is toward decarbonization of economic activity and a decrease in energy use per unit of economic output. Fuel switching in electricity generation away from high-carbon fuels (for example, from coal to natural gas) and improvement in energy and pollution efficiency within the transportation sector are among the more important contributors to this trend. In the Asia and Pacific region, however, perverse incentives exist for the continued use of highly polluting coal and pollution-intensive, outdated modes of automobile and bus transportation.

In general, the rate of improvement in energy, materials, and pollution efficiency of technologies has been slow relative to the rate of economic growth in many Asian and Pacific economies (see Box 2-5). This pattern is reflected both in individual sectors of the economy, such as energy production, and in the economy as a whole (incorporating substitution effects across sectors). Industrial growth in Japan, for example, has more than offset the significant improvement in the efficiency of fuel, electricity, and water use in industry (Janicke and others 1997), and the generation of pollutants associated with industrial production (such as heavy metals) has grown substantially. The decline in the intensity of metals used in telecommunications and information technology products has been offset by the overall growth in these industries (Key and Schlabach 1986). Material and energy consumption will therefore continue to rise under a “business-as-usual” scenario.

The rate of adoption of green environmental technologies has been slow, despite numerous efforts to promote the use of efficient process technologies as well as end-of-pipe pollution controls. Widespread use of these technologies in the region is questionable under current policy frameworks and lacking the political will and incentives for clean production. Infor-mation clearing-houses and other efforts to correct for “market failures” in the provision of information on cleaner technology alternatives have generally not been successful in effecting substantial changes in investment and technology choices, especially among small and medium-sized firms.

The absolute gains from technology are also limited by market response to technology changes. Improvements in energy efficiency may be experienced as price reductions. This spurs an increase in demand for energy either directly through price elasticity effects or indirectly through released purchasing power redirected to energy-using goods and services (Saunders 1992). This “rebound effect” can be substantial.

Inappropriate use of and failure to maintain technologies as intended are also important drivers of environmental problems within the region. For example, technologies that depend on the availability of requisite monitoring equipment (e.g., equipment that monitors for leaks in material supply systems) or adequate systems of technical support risk causing major environmental disasters and resource inefficiency when inappropriately used or maintained, problems that are magnified by tendencies towards large-scale, capital-intensive projects in areas such as water and energy supply.

Many technologies also have unintended side effects (Tenner 1996). These effects are often displaced in time and space, making their presence and causes more difficult to detect. Therefore, there has been a systematic underestimation of the adverse effects of these types of technology on the environment and systematic overestimation of their positive effects (Doeleman 1992).

Back Income Growth and Inequality	Next Governance