Findings of the Resource Panel.pdf

7/29/2019 Findings of the Resource Panel.pdf

1/36

Responsible Resource Management or a Sustainable World:

FindingsfromtheInternationalResourcePanel


2/36

Editor: The International Resource Panel

Author: The International Resource Panel

Contributors: Heinz Schandl and Karin Hosking romthe Commonwealth Scientifc and Industrial Research

Organisation (CSIRO).

Panel member Jacqueline Aloisi de Larderel provided

valuable guidance and comments.

Thanks go to Ernst Ulrich von Weizscker and AshokKhosla, the co-chairs o the International Resource Panel,the members o the Panel and the Steering Committee or

valuable comments and inputs received during the designand preparation o the synopsis.

ISBN number o the report: 978-92-807-3278-8Job Number: DTI/1546/PA

Copyright United Nations Environment Programme, 2012

This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and

in any orm or educational or nonproft purposes withoutspecial permission rom the copyright holder, provided

acknowledgement o the source is made. UNEP wouldappreciate receiving a copy o any publication that uses this

publication as a source.

No use o this publication may be made or resale or or

any other commercial purpose whatsoever without priorpermission in writing rom the United Nations Environment

Programme.

Photos : Pawel Kazmierczyk (cover, p.2, p.6, p.20); Janet

Salem (cover, p.1, p.31); Shutterstock (cover, p.10, p.14, p.24).

Design/Layout: Alexandrine Bauville / Escourbiac, based on

the original creative concept by Martina Otto.

Disclaimer

The designations employed and the presentation o thematerial in this publication do not imply the expression o

any opinion whatsoever on the part o the United NationsEnvironment Programme concerning the legal status o

any country, territory, city or area or o its authorities,or concerning delimitation o its rontiers or boundaries.

Moreover, the views expressed do not necessarily representthe decision or the stated policy o the United Nations

Environment Programme, nor does citing o trade names orcommercial processes constitute endorsement.

UNEP promotes environmentally sound practices globallyand in its own activities. This publication is printed on

PEFC certifed paper, using vegetable-based inks and otherecoriendly practices. Our distribution policy aims to reduce

UNEPs carbon ootprint.

acknowledgements

The full report should be referenced as follows: UNEP (2012) Responsible Resource Management for a SustainableWorld: Findings from the International Resource Panel.


3/36

This synopsis highlights key fndings rom the ollowing reports

o the International Resource Panel: A) Priority products andmaterials: assessing the environmental impacts of consumption and

production; B) Decoupling natural resource use and environmentalimpacts from economic growth; C) Metal Stocks in Society;

D) Recycling Rates of Metals; and E) Assessing biofuels: towardssustainable production and use of resources.

This synopsis and all the above-mentioned reports can be

downloaded at: www.unep.org/resourcepanel

United Nations Environment Programme

Division o Technology Industry and Economics

15 rue de Milan, 75441 Paris CEDEX 09, France

Responsible Resource Management or a Sustainable World:

FindingsfromtheInternational

ResourcePanel


4/36


5/36

preace

3

Natural resources rose to prominence at the turn o themillennium. The world saw a steady rise o their prices,reversing a trend that prevailed in act since the early19th century.

Mandated by the United Nations EnvironmentProgramme, the International Resource Panel (IRP)engages in studying the new situation and exploringoptions or nations and business dealing with challengesand grip with opportunities with regard to sustainable

management o natural resources.Take metals as an example. What is already there andin use? How can metals be recovered ater use? Whichare the present rates o recycling? Which technologiesare available or improving the situation? And howis the geological reach o dierent metals? Users ometals want to know the answers to such questions.And countries rich in mineral resources would like toknow at which stage recycling could beat the lucrativemining o ores. Two metals reports have been publishedalready, on metal now in stock, and on recycling rates.

Two more exist in a drat orm and are undergoing apeer review process, on environmental impacts o metaluse and on recycling opportunities. Some more reportsare under preparation or in a stage o planning.

Metals are just one example. The spectrum oresources reaches much wider. Land and soils arehot issues in the present day world, or many peoplemore vitally important than metals. Water is one othe most essential resources. How can it be usedmore eciently so that the obvious scarcity can beovercome? What can be said about carbon ree

technologies that are portrayed as the answer to thechallenge o global warming? Are there not mantrapso unoreseen damages? How is trade helpul insolving resource problems? But also: How are tradeand burden shiting also disguising or distorting theenvironmental perormance o countries? Finally,what is the specic role o cities regarding resources?They absorb the lions share o resource but they arealso the kitchens or new ideas and great solutions toresource problems. The IRP is gradually addressingmore and more o such questions, using scientic

expertise inside the Panel and inviting outsiders to joinand help.

On a more generic and undamental level, the IRPis addressing the question o Decoupling. How canhumanity learn to be more ecient and successulin creating human well-being rom a limited stock oresources? Facts have been collected and publishedabout the steady increase o resource consumptionbut also about success stories o countries reducingresource intensity and in some cases even reducingabsolute resource consumption. A new report willaddress opportunities o even more successul

decoupling strategies.

This Synopsis is presented at the occasion o theRio + 20 United Nations Conerence on SustainableDevelopment, held in Rio de Janeiro in June, 2012. Weat the IRP welcome any comments on the Synopsis andon the individual reports that are quoted therein.

Dr. Ernst Ulrich von Weizscker,Emmendingen, GermanyDr. Ashok Khosla, New Delhi, India

Co-Chairs o the International Resource PanelJune 2012


6/36


7/36

5

oreword

Rapid urban and industrial growth in recent decadeshave placed huge pressure on the worlds naturalresources, leading to threats o resource scarcity,price infation, and degraded ecosystems. Currentpatterns o resource use and emissions are out o stepwith what the planet can sustain in the medium tolong term. Problems o resource scarcity are relatedto changing patterns o consumption and production,with developing countries moving rom agricultural toindustrial ways o lie, while wealthy countries continueto consume more and more natural resources.Alongside these issues there is still much poverty andinequality in the world which needs to be addressed.There is an urgent need or more knowledge andcapacity on how to balance economic development andpoverty reduction with sustainability issues.

Resource productivity is essential to uture economicsuccess, sustainability and prosperity. Signicantpotential exists or improved resource productivitythrough technological innovation and demandchanges over the whole resource lie cycle -rom rawmaterials to eventual disposal. Eciency gains in the

construction, transport, agriculture and heavy industrysectors could lit resource productivity markedly.This will require enormous political commitment andnancial investment. I the situation is not addressed,however, actual costs to nations will be much higher.The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) istackling these challenges in a twoold manner. Firstly,the UN has adopted the notion o a Green Economy,aiming to shit investment away rom resource andcarbon intensive economic activities in a balanced

and inclusive way, ocusing on human and socialdevelopment. Secondly, the UNEP-hosted InternationalResource Panel (IRP) has been established to provideauthoritative scientic assessments on how sustainableresource use can be achieved and environmentalimpacts reduced over the lie cycle o resources. TheIRP is contributing to a better knowledge base on howto decouple human development and economic growthrom environmental degradation.

The assessments o the IRP to date make a convincingcase or sustainable natural resource management,and decoupling economic growth rom resourceuse and environmental impacts. There are manyopportunities or governments and businesses to worktogether to create and implement policies to encouragesustainable resource management. Better planning,more investment, technological innovation andstrategic incentives are all vital. Demand managementand waste reduction policies need to supplementsupply side activities. The IRP continues to provideknowledge and inormation to policy makers. In thenext ve years it plans to both deepen its assessmentso consumption and production, decoupling andbiomass, and to deliver additional assessments onwater, soil and land use, and the environmentalimpacts o trade. Only with the ull, complete andimpartial picture can governments make the deningchoices that might lead the world to a sustainablecentury.

Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary Generaland Executive Director UNEP

Nairobi, Kenya, June 2012


8/36

Introduction


9/36

7Introduction

Resources are undamental or the

wellbeing o people and planet.The wellbeing o humanity, environmental

health, and economic prosperity depend on

the way in which society uses and cares or

natural resources, including water, land,

energy and materials such as minerals,

biomass and ossil uels.

Urban and industrial growth in the early

21st century is placing vast pressure on

the worlds supply o natural resources,

raising threats o increased scarcity, price

infation and posing a threat to the lie

supporting systems o the Earth. The 20 th

century saw episodes o supply scarcity or

key resources, such as the oil shock o the

1970s. Today, there is a more undamentalmismatch between demand and current

supply systems or natural resources,

combined with degrading ecosystem

services and climate change. The problem

is systemic and includes resources such

as energy carriers, metals, water, soils

and ood crops. Current patterns o

resource use and emissions are out o stepwith what the planet can sustain. Resource

scarcity problems are growing rapidly,

driven by developing economies moving

rom agricultural to industrial consumption

and production while wealthy countries

continue to consume more resources too.

While the standard o living o millions

o people has been raised substantially

in recent decades, poverty and inequality

still needs to be addressed. Sustainable

resource use and equity are complexissues and oten contested. Better

knowledge and stronger institutions are

urgently needed to conront these issues.

Resource productivity is pivotal to uture

economic success, sustainability and

prosperity. Signicant potential exists to

improve resource productivity through

socio-technological innovation and

demand changes, across the whole lie

cycle rom primary resources to disposal.

There is great potential or eciency gains

in construction, transport, agriculture and

heavy industry and integrated systems

o production and services that, taken

together, could lit resource eciencyby 80% in some economic sub-sectors

aboutThis synopsis o the work o the UNEP International ResourcePanel is addressed to policy makers, the business community

and academics. It summarizes the International ResourcePanels ve reports to date, and provides a glimpseinto the uture work o the panel.

Scarcity is a

concern. The

availability and

accessibility o

resources that

are critically

important to

meet human

needs and

support green

economiesare becoming

unreliable.

In particular,

biomass and

minerals

are acing

signicant

fuctuations.


10/36

8

with technologies that are readilyavailable. Higher resource prices may

create an economic climate in which the

necessary transormation is hastened, i a

supportive environment or sustainability

oriented innovations is created, including

signicant up-scaling o investments.

Nevertheless the challenge o liting

world resource productivity is enormous.The political commitment and nancial

cost o urther developing and distributing

better technologies will be very large.

Rising and more volatile resource

prices and increased risk in accessing

resources also create opportunities to

increase political commitment and triggerinvestment into new technologies and

inrastructure to help raise resource

productivity. By contrast, i the current

situation is not addressed the cost

to nations will be much higher than

the investment required to support

changing to a more resource ecient

economy that produces lower emissionswhilst maintaining and raising material

standards o living.

The United Nations Environment

Programme has recognized the

importance o understanding the

relationship between economic activities,

which provide goods, services and jobs

and the associated natural resources use

and emissions, so that decision makerscan make progress towards sustainable

consumption and production and green

economy rameworks. The notion o

Green Economy has been adopted

across the United Nations and the need

or nancing, technology development

and capacity building to help countries

adapt to a changing economic context oreduced supply security and rising and

more volatile resource prices has been

recognized. The UNEPs Green Economy

initiative aims to shit investment towards

resource ecient and low carbon

economic activities in a balanced and

inclusive way, enabled by ocusing on

human and social development.

The International Resource Panel was

established to provide independent,

coherent and authoritative scientic

assessment on the sustainable use o

natural resources and the environmental

impacts o resource use over the ull

lie cycle. By providing up-to-date

inormation and best science available,

the International Resource Panel

contributes to a better understanding o

how to decouple human development and

economic growth rom environmental

degradation. The inormation contained

in the International Resource Panels

reports is intended to be policy relevantand support policy raming, policy and

introduction

Resource useis increasingly

inequitable.

Resource useper capitavaries by

a actor o10 between

nations.The shit tosustainable

resourcemanagement

will hencebe dierent

depending on

each countrysresourceendowments

anddevelopment

levels.


11/36

9

programme planning, and enableevaluation and monitoring o policy

eectiveness.

Between the International Resource

Panels launch in November 2007 and

March 2012, ve reports have been

completed. This rst series o reports

covered biouels, priority economic

sectors and materials or sustainable

resource management, metals already

in use and their rates o recycling,

and nally the unsatisactory state

o untapped potential or decoupling

resource use and related environmental

impacts rom economic growth. These

reports looked at two important groupso materials, namely metals and

biomass.

Over the next couple o years, the

IRP will continue to address critical

resources and their impacts on

the environment. It will also more

systematically explore opportunities,

chiefy or developing countries, o

reducing dependencies on scarce

resources. Reports currently in the

pipeline will deepen the knowledge

base about priority sectors, decoupling,

environmental impacts and strategic

natural resource groups such as metals

and biomass but will also engage in new

assessments, including:

Waterproductivity;

Waterfootprintsandaccounting;

Technologiestoreducegreenhouse

gas emissions and their environmental

impacts (two reports, one on supply

side technologies, one on demand

side);

TheEmbodiedresourcesandimpacts

in traded materials;

Theenvironmentalchallengeofmetals;

Metalsrecyclingopportunitiesand

technologies;

CitiesandDecoupling;

TechnologiesandPoliciesof

Decoupling.

Several new ideas or urther

assessments are under discussion.

The orthcoming reports o the International

Resource Panel will be based on identied

knowledge gaps. For instance, a new report

on recycling opportunities and technologies

will provide decision makers with

inormation on how to improve the current

low recycling rates or certain metals, and

the new reports on water productivity will

address scarcity and pollution issues in

water stretched countries and regions. For

a complete list o upcoming reports, please

reer to pages 32 and 33 o this report. Introduction

The UnitedNations is

taking the leadin building a

knowledgebase or a

sustainableuse o natural

resources anda transition

towardsa Green

Economy

H


12/36

Priority products& materials

How to set

i iti


13/36

11

The IRP report entitled Priority Products

and Materials: assessing the

environmental impacts of

consumption and production,

identified economic activities causing

the highest environmental impactso that decision makers can know

where to focus their attention. Sincedifferent decision makers have

varying perspectives and possibilitiesof intervention, the report provided

priorities from a number of entrypoints to the global economy:

production sectors, consumptioncategories and materials categories.

It is important to conceptualize

production and consumption as co-evolving activities that reinforce each

other. The influence of households goesbeyond the immediate environmental

effect of their purchasing decisions anduse patterns, but does not determine the

way the whole economy operates. Forsustainable consumption and production

(SCP) policies this means policies needto intervene in a complex co-evolving

relationship, therefore moving fromsimplistic intervention approaches to

more systemic interventions.

prioritiesOne important issue in formulating sustainable resource usepolicies is how to set priorities and where to invest effort and

funding.

P

riority

produ

cts

&

m

ateri

als

From a material perspective, agricultural goods, biotic

materials and fossil fuels have the most important

impact. This figure by Dehoust et al. 2004 illustrates

some of these impacts.

Figure 1: Environmental impacts of goods produced.

* ignored produced goods


14/36

12

how to set priorities

The assessment identied the priorityinterim environmental impacts and theirinteraction leading to end-point impacts onecosystem health, human health and naturalresource depletion. These included climatechange, acidication and eutrophication owater and soils, eco-toxicity and relatedhuman health eects, as well as overuse

o natural resource reserves. By startingwith these environmental priorities, it waspossible to pinpoint the hotspots along theinterace between the economy and thephysical environment, by identiying economicactivities that are most associated with theresource and emissions pressures causingthese environmental problems.

Little global data exists on the environmentalimpacts o production activities so the IRPassessment used US data, which showedthat economic activities using ossil uels,and the agriculture and shery sectors, arecritical because o their contributions to globalwarming, reshwater use, land use and sh

stock depletion.

The energy sector, manuacturing, agricultureand orestry (through land use change andemissions rom livestock), the transportsector and residential buildings are thelargest contributors to global warming. Thesesectors also drive acidication processes.

Eutrophication and reshwater eco-toxicity

are mainly caused by agricultural production,through emissions and pesticide use.

Agriculture consumes many renewable

resources, accounting or 50% o global

land use and 70% o global water use. While

renewable resources could, in principle,

be used sustainably this has not been the

case or orestry and shing resources, withdeorestation occurring in many countries and

overexploitation o sh stocks.

Non-renewable resources are a more

complicated issue, with abundant geological

reserves o metal ores and ossil uels still

available in parts o the globe. It has, however,

become more dicult to access and moreexpensive to extract these resources as ore

grades have declined. Surging demand and

slow development o new reserves has led

to supply security issues or ossil energy

carriers, metal ores and industrial minerals,

oreshadowing uture supply problems.

The IRP assessment used two methods

to attribute environmental impacts to

consumption clusters, namely Lie Cycle

Assessment (LCA) and Environmentally

Extended InputOutput Analysis (EE IOA). The

report assessed household and government

consumption, and investment into capital

goods and inrastructure.


15/36

Housing,mobility, ood

and electricitycontribute

most to the

environmentalimpacts oconsumption

13P

riority

produ

cts

&

m

ateri

als

In most countries, household consumptionaccounts or 60% or more o the lie cycle

impacts o nal consumption. This may bedierent or ast growing developing economies

which show high investment in inrastructure andproduction capacity, such as or example China,

where government consumption and investmentcontribute more to overall environmental impact

than households do.

The most important household consumption

activities are ood consumption, transport, andhousing, including energy use or heating, cooling

and electrical appliances. In developing countries,ood and housing dominate greenhouse gas

(GHG) emissions. In industrialized countries,housing, mobility, ood and electrical appliances

contribute to over 70% o the environmentalimpacts o household consumption.

The environmental impacts o government

consumption are driven by energy use in publicbuildings, schools and hospitals. Resource

use driven by government consumption canbe substantial, and can create new market

opportunities or products and services withless environmental impact through green public

procurement.

For capital investment, a comparative studyor some European economies indicates that

construction, transport and machinery cause thegreatest environmental impacts. In non-Asian

developing economies the public sector is oten a

very large part o the economy and may accountconsiderably or environmental pressures. Some

emerging economies in Asia are making largeinvestments in building up their inrastructure

and manuacturing capacity, with signicantenvironmental impacts.

Trade has grown in importance or environmentalimpact as many countries produce goods

and services or consumers abroad. Asianeconomies, especially, have become the

manuacturing powerhouse o the world. Tradecauses a translocation o environmental impacts

o consumption as a large share o the impactsoccurring in Asia (20% to 40%) can be attributed

to consumption in developed economies. Trade initsel is neither good nor bad or the environment,

but more inormation is needed as to what extentit shits environmental burdens to areas that are

more vulnerable or resilient with respect to theirlocal environmental thresholds. The IRP has

launched work to provide more inormation aboutthe embedded resource use and emissions in

traded products or decision makers.

The environmental impact o consumption growsas per capita incomes rise. The IRP assessment

assumes there will be urther increases in energyuse and GHG emissions rom nal consumption

with rising wealth and changing liestyles. Thisindicates that policy makers may need to consider

mainstreaming sustainable consumption policiesat earlier stages o their countries development

trajectories.

d li t t i


16/36

decoupling strategies

Decoupling natural resourceuse and environmental impacts

rom economic growth

t i bl t


17/36

1515

Global extraction o natural resourcesincluding biomass, ossil energy carriers,metal ores and construction materials hasincreased to 60 billion tonnes annually.Without decoupling, i each person

consumed resources in the same volumeas current developed countries rates, thiswould lead to an attempt to almost tripleresource extraction rates to about 140billion tonnes by 2050.

While resource use per capita indeveloped economies remains high and

continues to rise, accelerated economicgrowth and urbanization in developingeconomies is rapidly creating another 1to 3 billion middle class consumers whowill aspire to consume at the same level.

International trade has made it possibleto displace resource extraction andproduction to countries where the bulko manuacturing or global markets nowtakes place. Processes o modernization,industrialization and urbanization havecontributed to rising levels o resourceconsumption or building new inrastructure

or a sustainable utureThe last century saw significant global GDP growth, with increasesin the standard of living and poverty reduction in many countries.

There has also been, however, rising natural resource consumption,and increased emissions and waste.

D

ecoupling

Figure2: Global material extraction in billion tons, 1900 to 2005.

During the 20th century the annual extraction of construction minerals grew by a factor of 34, ores and

minerals by a factor of 27, fossil fuels by a factor of 12, biomass by a factor of 3.6, and total materialextraction by a factor of about eight, while GDP rose 23-fold.

Source: Krausmannet al., 2009


18/36

16

Human well-being

Economic activity (GDP)

Resource use

Environmental impact

Resource decoupling

Impact decoupling

Time

and increasing productive capacity anduelling the liestyles o new middle-classconsumers. These trends in developedand developing economies are ongoing butthere are serious risks associated withthe assumption that the supply o naturalresources will continue to grow in orderto keep up accordance with demand orbiomass, water, metal ores and ossil uels.

The most promising strategy or ensuringuture prosperity lies in decoupling utureeconomic growth rom the rising rates onatural resource use and the environmentalimpacts that occur across the production

consumption continuum. Decouplingeconomic growth rom (a) growth inresource use and (b) environmental impact,however, ollow dierent dynamics andhence require dierent policy responsesdepending on each countrys consumptionand resource endowment levels. Whilerelative decoupling o economic growthand resource use has occurred in manycountries, there is little evidence oabsolute decoupling, i.e. reduced overallresource use, even or the richest nations.In many instances the environmentalexternalities o resource use can increase,or example, as ore grades decline, or

Figure 3: Two aspects o decoupling

Resource decoupling refers to when fewer resources are used per unit of economic output,while impact decoupling is when negative impacts on the environment are reduced.

decoupling strategiesor a sustainable uture


19/36

17

Decoupling o

economicactivity rom

environmentalpressure is a

necessary butinsucient

strategy ora sustainable

level o naturalresource use

soil is depleted. There is, however, clearevidence that absolute decoupling owealth rom pollution is achievable andbecoming routine practice in industrialcountries through the use o pollutioncontrol technologies. These technologiesor pollution control should always beassessed or trade os and unintendedconsequences.

The IRP report on Decouplingarguesthe necessity o a new economic model

involving reduced resource use, emissionand waste intensity o production andconsumption. Economy-wide resourcedecoupling can be said to occur whenresource productivity improves at a ratethat is aster than the economic growthrate. This means that more economic valueand a greater level o well-being can becreated by using the same amount o - orless - resources. Economy-wide impact

decoupling reers to achieving more well-being and (i necessary) economic growth

Figure 4: The lie cycle o resource extraction and use

Undesirable environmental impacts can arise from any stage in the life cycle of resource use: in thephases of extraction, production/manufacture, consumption/use, or post-consumption disposal.

D

ecoupling

n rastructure

as esposa

onsumpt onan us

str ut on

ro uct on

esourceextract o

Environment

Socio-economic systemNote: flows of ressources, emissions and wastesaccording to European proportionsSource: Fischer-Kowalski, 2011

Recycling flows

Emissions (mainly CO

Flows of energy carrie )

(biomass and fossil fuels) Other material flows


20/36

18

decoupling strategies

with ew negative environmental impactsor, indeed, even restoration o eco-systemservices.

Over the past decade the world has aceda new economic context o rising pricesor many natural resources caused bydemand outpacing supply, and increasedchallenges in extracting natural resourcesin an aordable and timely manner.Past strategies where national policyrameworks and business plans haveocused on labor productivity at the costo increasing use o materials, energy,land and water require rethinking. Risingprices and greater price volatility ornatural resources, combined with new

supply risks, make resource productivityinvestments a new imperative. Indeed, thismay become the primary driver o the nextlong-term industrial development cycle.

Resource eciency at the product level andeconomy-wide resource productivity is animportant political and business objective,

especially or developing countries whichare acing the dual challenge o deliveringinrastructure and raising living standardswhile living within environmental means.In the past there has been a strongrelationship between growing incomesand growth in resource use in developingcountries. The relationship betweennatural resource use and economicgrowth, however, has become non-linear.

At lower income levels the correlationbetween income and resource use isvery strong. Above a certain thresholdo development a urther increase innatural resources and emissions doesnot necessarily enable greater economicdevelopment and wellbeing.

The report identies an importantrelationship between per capita resourceuse, per capita emissions and populationdensity. Greater density, as ound in citiesand in many countries in Europe andAsia, enables lower per capita resourceuse rates. On the other hand, cities anddensely populated nations have otenexternalized resource and emission

intensive production to other parts o theworld. Thereore their apparent resourceeciency may be somewhat articial. TheIRP used these observations to engagein a new report studying the relationsbetween urbanization and decoupling moresystematically.

Physical trade balances can help toindicate to what extent domestic resourceuse and emission accounts is linked toconsumption abroad (and conversely,to what extent domestic consumptionis linked to resource use and emissionsabroad). These observations have triggeredinterest and engagement in a newassessment systematically investigatingthe eects o burden shiting and trade.

or a sustainable uture


21/36

19

Investing in resource eciency is necessarybut not sucient or sustainable naturalresource use. Because o the size o theglobal challenge, resource eciencyneeds to be complemented by systemssustainabilityoriented innovation toenable the rates o decoupling thatwill be necessary to align developmentand environmental objectives. The IRPDecouplingreport identies the need orast and radical improvements in reducingglobal resource use and greenhouse gasemissions, to reduce the risk o resourcescarcity and accelerated climate change.The question o how to decouple will betaken up in the second decoupling report.

Innovation and decoupling are closelylinked. The report noted that nance,technology and capacity building will becore elements in enabling decoupling.Investment into supply systems or ood,housing and mobility needs to shit rombrown to green sectors to allow or aast transition rom current systems o

production and consumption. Innovationand technology development, in principle,could produce 80% reductions in resourceand emissions intensity in some crucialactivities (such as cement production)within these sectors. Decoupling economicactivity and wellbeing rom resource useand environmental impacts will dependon governments that provide enablingrameworks or businesses and workorce

training and up-skilling existing and newworkers across many industries.

Well-designed policies and institutionalinnovation, as well as new orms ogovernance, are identied as critical inthe report. The report identies Germany,China, South Arica and Japan as exampleso countries that have addressed decouplingin their policy rameworks.

The report stresses that countries andeconomic processes are increasinglyinterconnected through trade relations.Trade in natural resources is growing muchaster than domestic extraction, implyinggrowing environmental pressures and

impacts. Trade has direct environmentalimpacts o transportation and indirect(embodied) impacts that occur when acountry produces goods or services orconsumption abroad. The report shows thatCO2 emissions embodied in internationallytraded products account or 27% o totalenergy-related CO2 emissions. Embodied

water was around 16% o total water useand materials extraction embodied in globaltrade has been estimated at about 20% oglobal extraction.

D

ecoupling

the critical role


22/36

the critical role

Metal Stocks in society& Recycling Rates

o recycling


23/36

21M

etal

stocks

in

societya

nd

recycling

rates

o recyclingEconomic development is closely linked to the use o metals orconstruction, transport and communication systems, and or

machinery and appliances.

Figure 5: Metal stock locations

The lifetime of different metal products and the different metals within them varies, from weeks in the caseof a beverage can, to decades or centuries, in the case on construction and infrastructure. Different kinds ofstocks develop along the life cycle of metals.

A modern economy without iron and steel,

copper and aluminum seems unthinkable

and in act, metal applications grew rapidly

during the 20th century. In 2009, more than

1.2 billion tonnes o steel were produced

globally. Aluminum and copper have thesecond and third largest production gures

at about 30 million and 24 million tonnes

respectively.

While in the past industrialized countries

have dominated the use o metals, more

recently developing countries have markedly

increased their use o metals to build

modern inrastructure, manuacturing

acilities and transport systems. The astgrowing demand implies a permanent

pressure upon existing production systems

and has contributed to issues o supply


24/36

22

the critical role o recycling

security and rising metal prices. Investment inmining and metal rening has been growing

accordingly and new projects have increased the

environmental and social impacts o mining in

many parts o the world.

Growing metal inputs have also created large

metal stocks in society. Understanding stocks

in society can help decision makers knowwhere their uture secondary supplies will

come rom. The IRP reports entitled Metal

Stocks in Society and Recycling Ratesof

Metalsnds that the increased use o metals

over the 20th

century led to a shit in metalstocks rom natural reserves to applications

in society. The copper stock per US citizen, or

example, has quadrupled over the last 70 years

and dierences in per capita in-use stocks

between industrial and developing countries or

most metals are marked. As technologies and

liestyles in developing economies converge

with those in industrial countries the global in-use stocks o metal are expected to grow three-

to nine-old.

Metal recycling is an important strategy to

increase the economic benet o extracted

metals and to reduce

pressure on primary

metals and the

environment. Despite

metals having excellent

properties or recycling

the end-o-lie recycling

rates or many metals

are ar too low because

o a lack o recyclinginrastructure and

technologies, especially

in developing countries,

though it depends on

the metal and how it is

used. Recycling o iron

and steel, aluminum

and copper have a long

Figure 6: Metal flows

For some metals there is a long tradition of recycling, whereas for othersalmost no recycling infrastructure exists.


25/36

23

tradition and well-established inrastructure and

so recycling rates are quite high, 70% to 90% or

iron and steel, and above 50% or aluminum and

copper.

Precious metals including gold, silver and

platinum are valuable enough to have high

recycling rates, except in some applications

and when used in very small amounts.

Platinum group metals currently have

recycling rates o 60% to 70%, while gold

and silver are above 50%. These rates signal

a large amount o wasted metal and point

to the need or strengthening institutional

rameworks, and the logistics and technologies

or metal recycling in many countries in the

world. Consumer applications are much

harder to address by recycling than industrialapplications. Enhancing recycling or consumer

applications needs to be a priority in developing

policy, and practical solutions are required.

The increased use o specialty metals is a

airly recent phenomenon and has occurred

with many new applications such as the use

o lithium or batteries, gallium, germanium,indium and tellurium or solar cells, and

rare earth metals or catalysts, as battery

constituents and as permanent magnets or

power drives and wind turbines. The demand

or specialty metals will grow rapidly due to

innovative technologies and their increasing

market potential. The recycling rates o

specialty metals, however, are extraordinarily

low, oten below 1%, because o the lack o

recycling logistics, technologies and suitable

legal rameworks. The concentration o

specialty metals in products is oten very low

and would require suitable sorting and pre-

treatment inrastructure, which is rare. As

a consequence, the recycling o specialty

metals is in its inancy and deserves special

attention rom policy makers and industry in

the uture. As such it is a major opportunityor investment.

The IRP report advocates investment into research

and development to establish a knowledge base on

the amounts o recyclable metals in various stocks

in society, as well as to develop improved recycling

technologies. Eorts could ocus on recycling

demonstration projects, closed-loop recycling orare earths rom batteries, and tantalum recycling

rom electronic scraps. Current legislative systems

and rameworks or metal recycling need urther

strengthening, especially in developing countries

and at provincial and local levels, to make recycling

a signiicant solution.

There are important social and humanhealth issues related to using and recycling

metals, which need to be addressed by policy

rameworks. These include illegal waste

transport and trade, and the regulation o

the inormal recycling sector in developing

countries, which oten operates with inerior

technologies and creates severe risks or

human health and environmental toxicity.M

etal

stocks

in

societya

nd

recycling

rates

Metal recyclingis a key

opportunity,

since currentrecycling

rates or many

metals arevery low

towards sustainable


26/36

towards sustainable

AssesingBiouels

production and use of resources


27/36

A

s

s

e

s

s

in

g

B

io

fu

e

ls

Not all biofuels perform equally well in terms

of their impact on climate, energy security, and

on rural livelihoods and ecosystems. Land and

water are two key inputs not only for biofuels

development, but also food, feed, fibre and

other materials. These competing uses are

interdependent, and, therefore, ways to address

the constraints need to factor in and build on this

interdependency.

The IRP report Assessing Biofuels: towards

sustainable production and use of resources

highlights these two potentially limiting factors

for bioenergy development, land and water.

The report also shows that yield increases willprobably not compensate for the growing and

changing food demand, which means cropland

would have to be expanded already to feed the

worlds population. Further land requirements

for fuel crops would come on top of that.

25

production and use of resourcesThe long-term sustainability of the bioenergy sector can only

be achieved with sound policies and planning that take into

consideration global trends including population growth, yield

improvements, changing diets and climate change.

Figure 7: Greenhouse gas savings of biofuels compared to fossil fuels

Life cycle assessments (LCA) of biofuels show a wide range of net greenhouse gas balances compared tofossil fuels, depending on feedstock, conversion technology, and other factors.

Source: own compilation based on data from Menichetti/Otto 2008 for bioethanol and biodiesel, IFEU (2007) for sugar cane ethanol, and Liskaet al. (2009) for corn ethanol; RFA 2008 for biomethane, bioethanol from residues and FT diesel


28/36

26

Land use changes can come with negative

consequences. For instance, redirectingagricultural land to production of feedstocks for

biofuels may represent a risk for food security.Conversion of natural land for production of

feedstocks for biofuels may reduce biodiversityand increase green house gas (GHG) emissions.

Land use change can take place directly orindirectly, for instance, when biofuel feedstocks

are produced on existing cropland and existingproduction is displaced into natural lands.

Water is already a scarce resource in manyplaces. Agriculture uses about 70% of freshwater

globally. This has led to the overexploitationof important groundwater as well as the

deterioration of water quality in river basins dueto nitrogen and phosphorus run off. Expansion

of crop production for biofuels would be addingpressure on water resources. Furthermore,

climate change and extreme weather eventsincrease uncertainty of available water resources

and large-scale investment in biofuels productionadds pressure on freshwater availability. In water

scarce regions, this large-scale investment couldcreate a competing land use to food production.

Food security is an important issue in thepolicy debate around bioenergy. Risk for food

security comes from land use change for biofuelfeedstock production (using food or non-food

crops). When bio-energy is produced from

food (or fodder) crops, there can be localized

impacts on food availability and global impacts

on food prices. However, biofuel use can alsohelp strengthen food and energy security, by

improving food storage and cooking; as well asaccess to modern energy services for the 1.4

billion people who are currently dependent ontraditional biomass use for cooking and heating.

The production of biofuels for transport hasbeen mainly triggered by blending mandates

introduced by a number of countries to mitigategreenhouse gas emissions and improve energy

security. Strengthening rural developmentmay be an additional policy objective. By 2006

at least 36 states/provinces and 15 countriesat the national level had enacted blending

mandates. In 2007, liquid biofuels represented1.8% of the worlds total transport fuels, with

ethanol and biodiesel being the most widespreadapplications. Investment in new capacity for

biofuels production exceeded $4 billion in 2007and is expected to grow rapidly.

Biofuels may make a difference in achieving the

different policy objectives pursued. However,environmental and social impacts need to beassessed throughout the entire life-cycle. An

analysis of existing life cycle assessments ofbiofuels showed varied greenhouse gas savings

when compared to fossil fuels. Differencesdepend on the feedstock, production methods,

conversion technology and location. Negative

GHG savings (increased emissions) occur when

towards sustainableproductionand use of resources

The demandson biomass

are manifold,

and trade-offsbetween foodsecurity and

energy needto be managed

carefully bywell-designed

policies


29/36

27A

s

s

e

s

s

in

g

B

io

fu

e

ls

production takes place on converted natural

land because o the mobilization o carbon

stocks. Highest GHG savings come rom

biogas produced rom manure and ethanol

produced rom agricultural and orestry

residues, and rom biodiesel rom wood.

While the impact o biouels production on

GHG emissions has been relatively wellcaptured in existing lie cycle assessments,

other impacts such as the impact on

water and biodiversity, eutrophication and

acidifcation, trade-os with ood security,

or social and livelihood impacts or rural

smallholders, are usually not considered.

Many studies suggest that these impacts are

considerable and oten more negative orbiouels than ossil uels. Impacts need to be

assessed at the project level and at a broader

regional and/or global level. A single project

may be acceptable in terms o impacts, but

cumulative eects o several projects may be

signifcant.

Many governments have responded to theseimpacts with sustainability requirements that

complement blending mandates. However,

the impacts o a growing demand or biouels

on land use change deserve special policy

attention. Countries have started to introduce

mapping and zoning o suitable and available

land as a means to reduce risks related to

global expansion o cropland.

The IRP report highlights options or more

resource-eicient and sustainable production

and use o biomass that can help reduce

environmental pressures and impacts. Options

include optimizing agricultural production

systems, restoring degraded land, more eicient

biomass use including using waste and residues,

cascading use o biomass, and stationary use o

bio-energy.

Potential or yield increases is higher in developing

countries, especially those in Sub-Saharan Arica.

Such improvements depend on the availability

o agricultural inputs, machinery, biological

quality o the soils, skills and knowledge, as well

as inancing. Climate change impacts such as

looding, drought and extreme heat and windsadd to the risk o agricultural production ailure

compromising eorts to achieve higher output.

Like biomass, solar energy systems transorm

solar radiation into useul energy, albeit more

efciently. Solar installations require signifcantly

less land or the same amount o energy and

oten have ewer environmental impacts. Solarpower is rapidly becoming an economically viable

alternative to ossil uels, especially or o-grid

applications. Also, technologies such as solar

cookers can substitute or traditional biomass

use in developing countries. Such applications

may replace biouels and have potential to be

more benefcial in regards to local livelihoods and

the environment.

addressing the need for


30/36

Conclusions &Outlook

addressing the need for

sustainable resource management


31/36

29

The assessments are based on the best

available scientic inormation and aim toinorm policy makers and business leaders

about new opportunities and challenges theyace in regard to economic development,human wellbeing, equity, resource scarcity

and climate change.

There are many opportunities or

governments and businesses to worktogether to create policy to encourage

sustainable resource management, and

or business practices to make it happen.Countries and companies need to planor and invest in better use o natural

resources, and to reduce the environmentalimpacts o resource use. While

technological innovation and eciency areimportant they are not sucient to achieve

the required decoupling between economic

growth, resource use and emissions. Inmany cases, eciency improvementswill need to go hand in hand with systems

innovation in activities that have highresource use and emissions. New systems

o provision or these essential servicesare necessary and human ingenuity and

appropriate institutional rameworks will

help them to occur.

The assessment on priority sectors and

materials provided by the InternationalResource Panel is pivotal to helping

governments and businesses decide oninvestment priorities that will yield the greatestreturn upon investment in regard to saving

resources, reducing pressure on ecosystemservices, and avoiding emissions and pollution.

The need or systems innovation in providingessential services such as housing, mobility,

ood, energy and water especially applies

to growing cities in developing countries,where wise investments today will pay oin decades to come. The need or greater

resource productivity and systemsinnovation, as well as or more resources

to uel the transition in the developingworld, must be aligned with climate change

mitigation strategies, poverty alleviation and

equitable access to resources.

To provide an aordable, equitable andtimely supply o natural resources while

reducing greenhouse gas emissionsand waste will require a steep change

in investment and innovation, wellbeyond current models. To achieve this,

governments need to set appropriate priceC

onclusions&

O

utlook

Governmentsand businesses

need to worktogether to

create aninnovation

culture or

resourceeciencyto support

sustainability

b gThe International Resource Panels reports make a scientic caseor sustainable natural resource managementand decoupling economic growth rom natural resource useand environmental impacts.

dd i th d


32/36

30

Resource

efciency is an

opportunity.

With todaysunderstanding

and

technologies,massive

improvements

in resourceeciency are

possible andcould enable

improved

economicproductivity,

improved

resourcesecurity,

and reducedenvironmental

burdens.

Innovation willneed stimulation

or resource

eciencyto reach

sustainablelevels.

addressing the need or

signals and incentives, support innovation,

intervene in cases o market ailure, and

invest in urban design, inrastructure and

education.

One priority or governments is to reset

budget and tax systems and remove

resource price subsidies; this would provide

incentives to raise resource productivity.Specic measures include resource

taxes and cap and trade systems, with

compensation or lower income groups via

subsidies or tax relie.

Secondly, resource innovation will depend

on investment schemes, incentives and

legal rameworks that encourage greenbusinesses, inrastructure, buildings

and public transport as well as more

ecient energy and water supply systems.

Government procurement will play an

important role in encouraging a shit to

products and services that have been

produced with lower levels o resource use

and emissions.

Finally, governments can directly infuence

training and skills that underpin the

transition to sustainable resource use by

investing in education systems and improved

curricula, and by acilitating knowledge

transer. There is also a need to redesign

cities and their inrastructure in ways that

are less resource and emissions intensive

and which create a cleaner, healthier and

more ecient uture or their residents.

Dierent uses o biomass or ood, eed

and uel need to be balanced within an

overall resource strategy, considering

energy, climate, and water and assessing

the overall costs and benets to society,economy and the environment. This may

lead to reconsideration o current biouels

mandates, targets, quotas and subsidies,

to guide the contribution o biouels to

sustainable levels. On the supply side, the

potential or degraded land to be put into

production would go hand in hand with

activities to sustainably increase yields inlow-yield countries and regions such as

Arica. Demand management policies that

encourage public transport and higher uel

eciency standards, as well as policies that

help reduce ood waste across the whole

production lie cycle, need to complement

supply side activities.

For materials that are strategic or the

production o goods and services and

inrastructure, such as metals, recycling

rates need to increase substantially to

reduce resource pressure. As the world

transitions to low carbon economic

activities, metals will be pivotal in

underpinning new green technologies and

sustainable resource management


33/36

31 C

onclusions

&

O

utlook

any additional demand or metals or newtechnologies should be buered by muchhigher recycling rates.

In the resource-scarce world o the 21stcentury, businesses will need to switch rom

their traditional ocus on labor productivity,in avor o resource productivity. This will

require new inormation and monitoring,as well as business strategies to conserve

resources and reduce emissions. This canreduce costs, in a situation where taxation

has shited the ocus rom labor to pricing onatural resources at source.

The International Resource Panel continues

to provide knowledge and inormationto policy makers, business leaders and

the public on how to move to sustainableresource management. Over the next twoyears, the IRP will deepen its assessments

o consumption and production, decoupling,metals and biomass. It will deliver urther

reports on water, soil and land use andenvironmental impacts o trade.

The knowledge base that the IRP providessupports policy makers and business

leaders as they embark on the journey odecoupling economic activity rom resource

use and emissions to enable the globaleconomy to operate within the limits o the

Earths resources, climate and ecosystems,while providing equal opportunity and

wellbeing to a projected nine billion peopleon this planet.

The International Resource Panel


34/36

has established seven working groups to assess dierent aspects o decoupling economic growthrom resource use and environmental impacts. The working groups have been producing a series oreports and the ollowing table provides an overview o orthcoming reports.

IRP Working Groups Forthcoming reports

Decoupling Working Group Decoupling in Practice: Technology and PolicyThis report outlines the opportunities technologicalinnovation oer or increasing resource productivity andsuggests policies that would provide incentives oreconomic systems to transition to these new technologies.It ocuses on important sectors such as agriculture,

manuacturing, heavy industry, construction and transport.

Decoupling in Practice: InnovationThis report ocuses on the instrumental role o innovationin achieving decoupling and covers institutional aspects,nancing and capacity building or innovation, nationalinnovation culture and changes in social-technologicalsystems o energy, water, housing, mobility and ood.

Cities Working Group Cities and DecouplingThis report ocuses on the importance o urban planningand design, and investment into urban inrastructure andbuildings a as key element o decoupling.

Environmental Impacts WorkingGroup

Supply side GHG mitigation technologiesThis report ocuses on supply side options or reducingGHG emissions through greater eco-eciency and cleaner

production.

Demand side technologies or GHG mitigationThis report describes the importance o the role o privateand public consumers in reducing GHG emissions romconsumption, including the importance o changing

liestyles and public and corporate procurement.

The embodied material use and environmentalimpacts o traded productsThis report looks at the translocation o environmentalimpacts caused by international trade.

32

The International Resource Panel


35/36

Water Efciency Working Group Water ProductivityThis report outlines options or enhancing the productivityo water use in agriculture, manuacturing

and households.

Water Footprint and AccountingThis report looks at improving the quality o water accounts,and considers the important dierences between territorialand consumption based water accounting.

Metals Working Group Recycling technologiesThis report highlights recycling technologies and the

logistics that underpin recycling systems.

Environmental impacts o metal fowsThis report ocuses on the environmental impacts that

occur across the whole lie cycle o metal fows.

Demand scenarios or metalsThis report provides alternative scenarios or the utureo metal demand.

Policy options or metal stocks and fowsThis report identies the policy levers and barriersor sustainable metal use, and discusses decouplingmetal use rom economic growth.

Land and Soils Working Group Land and Soils

This report looks at the important role o land orproduction and consumption and identies options orimproving the eciency o land use.

Food Working Group Food pricingThis report ocuses on the issue o ood security,improvements in the ood system and the marketmechanisms that may provide incentives or sustainableood production and consumption.

33


36/36

www.unep.org

United Nations Environment Programme

P.O. Box 30552 Nairobi, Kenya

Tel.: ++254 (0) 20 762 1234

Fax: ++254 (0) 20 762 3927Email: [email protected]

About the International Resource Panel

The International Resource Panel (IRP) was established toprovide decision makers and other interested parties withindependent and authoritative policy-relevant scientificassessments on the sustainable use of natural resources and,in particular, on their environmental impacts over their full lifecycles. It aims to contribute to a better understanding of howto decouple economic growth from environmental degradation.

ISBN number of the report: 978-92-807-3278-8

Job Number: DTI/1546/PA

For more information, please visit:www.unep.org/resourcepanel

[email protected]

Documents

Findings of the Resource Panel.pdf