IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v4y2015i1p25-54d45750.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Possible Target Corridor for Sustainable Use of Global Material Resources

Author

Listed:
  • Stefan Bringezu

    (Wuppertal Institute, P.B. 100480, Wuppertal 42004, Germany
    Center for Environmental Systems Research, University of Kassel, Wilhelmshöher Allee 47, Kassel 34109, Germany)

Abstract

Many countries have started to develop policy programs for the sustainable use of natural resources. Indicators and targets can cover both a territorial and a life-cycle-wide global perspective. This article focuses on how a safe operating space for global material resource use can be outlined based on existing economy-wide material flow indicators. It reflects on issues such as scale and systems perspective, as the choice of indicators determines the target “valves” of the socio-industrial metabolism. It considers environmental pressures and social aspects of safe and fair resource use. Existing proposals for resource consumption targets are reviewed, partially revisited, and taken as a basis to outline potential target values for a safe operating space for the extraction and use of minerals and biomass by final consumption. A potential sustainability corridor is derived with the Total Material Consumption of abiotic resources ranging from 6 to 12 t/person, the Total Material Consumption of biotic resources not exceeding 2 t/person, and the Raw Material Consumption of used biotic and abiotic materials ranging from 3 to 6 t/person until 2050. For policy, a “10-2-5 target triplet” can provide orientation, when the three indicators are assigned values of 10, 2, and 5 t/person, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefan Bringezu, 2015. "Possible Target Corridor for Sustainable Use of Global Material Resources," Resources, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-30, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:25-54:d:45750
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/4/1/25/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/4/1/25/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Lettenmeier & Christa Liedtke & Holger Rohn, 2014. "Eight Tons of Material Footprint—Suggestion for a Resource Cap for Household Consumption in Finland," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-28, July.
    2. Johan Rockström & Will Steffen & Kevin Noone & Åsa Persson & F. Stuart Chapin & Eric F. Lambin & Timothy M. Lenton & Marten Scheffer & Carl Folke & Hans Joachim Schellnhuber & Björn Nykvist & Cynthia , 2009. "A safe operating space for humanity," Nature, Nature, vol. 461(7263), pages 472-475, September.
    3. Daly, Herman E., 1990. "Toward some operational principles of sustainable development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-6, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fiaz Ahmad Sulehri & Marc Audi & Marc Poulin & Amjad Ali, 2024. "Nexus between Innovation and Ecological Impact: A Moderated Mediation Investigation through Structural Equation Modeling Approach," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 14(4), pages 509-518, July.
    2. Nada Bendahmane & Natacha Gondran & Jacques Chevalier, 2024. "Are Existing LCIA Methods Related to Mineral and Metal Resources Relevant for an AESA Approach Applied to the Building Sector? Case Study on the Construction of New Buildings in France," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(3), pages 1-17, January.
    3. William E. Rees, 2023. "The human eco-predicament: Overshoot and the population conundrum," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 21(1), pages 21-39.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Farley, Joshua & Costanza, Robert & Flomenhoft, Gary & Kirk, Daniel, 2015. "The Vermont Common Assets Trust: An institution for sustainable, just and efficient resource allocation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 71-79.
    2. Wolf Rogowski & Wolfram Elsner, 2021. "How economics can help mitigate climate change - a critical review and conceptual analysis of economic paradigms," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2106, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    3. Liobikiene, Genovaite & Chen, Xueli & Streimikiene, Dalia & Balezentis, Tomas, 2020. "The trends in bioeconomy development in the European Union: Exploiting capacity and productivity measures based on the land footprint approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Christa Liedtke & Katrin Bienge & Klaus Wiesen & Jens Teubler & Kathrin Greiff & Michael Lettenmeier & Holger Rohn, 2014. "Resource Use in the Production and Consumption System—The MIPS Approach," Resources, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-31, August.
    5. Larue, Louis, 2020. "The Ecology of Money: A Critical Assessment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    6. Felix Müller & Jan Kosmol & Hermann Keßler & Michael Angrick & Bettina Rechenberg, 2017. "Dematerialization—A Disputable Strategy for Resource Conservation Put under Scrutiny," Resources, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-32, December.
    7. Syrovátka, Miroslav, 2020. "On sustainability interpretations of the Ecological Footprint," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    8. Røpke, Inge, 2016. "Complementary system perspectives in ecological macroeconomics — The example of transition investments during the crisis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 237-245.
    9. Fang, Kai & Heijungs, Reinout & De Snoo, Geert R., 2015. "Understanding the complementary linkages between environmental footprints and planetary boundaries in a footprint–boundary environmental sustainability assessment framework," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 218-226.
    10. Grainger, Alan, 2017. "The prospect of global environmental relativities after an Anthropocene tipping point," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 36-49.
    11. Nelson, Ewan & Warren, Peter, 2020. "UK transport decoupling: On track for clean growth in transport?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 39-51.
    12. Ettore Bompard & Daniele Grosso & Tao Huang & Francesco Profumo & Xianzhang Lei & Duo Li, 2018. "World Decarbonization through Global Electricity Interconnections," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-29, July.
    13. Charfeddine, Lanouar & Umlai, Mohamed, 2023. "ICT sector, digitization and environmental sustainability: A systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2022," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    14. Richter, Andries & Dakos, Vasilis, 2015. "Profit fluctuations signal eroding resilience of natural resources," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 12-21.
    15. Yeray Hernandez & Gustavo Naumann & Serafin Corral & Paulo Barbosa, 2020. "Water Footprint Expands with Gross Domestic Product," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-6, October.
    16. Rostami-Tabar, Bahman & Ali, Mohammad M. & Hong, Tao & Hyndman, Rob J. & Porter, Michael D. & Syntetos, Aris, 2022. "Forecasting for social good," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1245-1257.
    17. Huiyuan Guan & Yongping Bai & Chunyue Zhang, 2022. "Research on Ecosystem Security and Restoration Pattern of Urban Agglomeration in the Yellow River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-19, September.
    18. Filipa Correia & Philipp Erfruth & Julie Bryhn, 2018. "The 2030 Agenda: The roadmap to GlobALLizaton," Working Papers 156, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
    19. Birgit Kopainsky & Anita Frehner & Adrian Müller, 2020. "Sustainable and healthy diets: Synergies and trade‐offs in Switzerland," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(6), pages 908-927, November.
    20. Hervé Corvellec & Johan Hultman & Anne Jerneck & Susanne Arvidsson & Johan Ekroos & Niklas Wahlberg & Timothy W. Luke, 2021. "Resourcification: A non‐essentialist theory of resources for sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 1249-1256, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:4:y:2015:i:1:p:25-54:d:45750. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.