512
Y. Zhang
and nature) where a number of agents depend on each other, but according to traditional industrial logic, powerful industrial technologies and organizations shall be
mobilized to extract certain links that are considered “useful” from this symbiotic
system for mass industrial production. When this interdependent system is broken,
the entire natural ecosystem may collapse as a whole.
2 Can Green Industrial Civilization Resolve Sustainability
Crisis?
At the moment, the most common thought about achieving sustainable development
is through green industrial civilization, which means resolving problems with new
green technologies in the current industrial mode (Acemoglu et al. 2012). There is
no doubt that green technology innovations are extremely important for boosting
productivity and national competitiveness, but this paper focuses on the other side
of technological progress. With technological progress and improved efficiency, will
people choose to use fewer resources to produce the same products to improve the
environment, or will they use the same or even more resources to produce more
products, thus aggravating environmental degradation?
Unfortunately, the intrinsic logic of industrial capital decides the option for the
latter. Therefore, unlike what people intuitively think, technological progress doesn’t
always bring sustainable results; it even aggravates environmental crisis under certain
circumstances (Polimeni et al. 2009; Huesemann 2001; Huesemann and Huesemann
2011). The counter-intuitive phenomenon revealed by Jevons (1865) that a higher efficiency in Britain’s coal industry led to more coal consumption was not an accidental
case, but stemmed from the deep-rooted logic behind development—the so-called
development paradox.
Why is it that green technological progress may add to and exacerbate the aggregate of environmental pollution? It’s simple. Although green technology and higher
efficiency will reduce the environmental intensity of unit product, the endogenous drive—capitalists’ pursuit for maximal profits and consumers’ pursuit for
maximal utility—is sure to pump up the aggregate, and the resulting aggravation
of environmental pollution will eventually override the reduction in environmental
intensity.
Specifically, for consumers who aim at maximal utility, the more they consume,
the higher the utility; for producers who aim at maximal profits using green technologies, either self-developed or purchased, the more they produce, the higher the
profits. In this process, the producers and consumers follow a highly consistent
logic—the more, the better. Therefore, production and consumption keep expanding
when resource restrictions are fixed. In the long term, the day will never come when
technological progress will reduce resource consumption. In standard economics,
the impacts exerted by economic activities on ecological environment (the mannature relation) are not included in its analytical architecture, so as long as there are
Y. Zhang
and nature) where a number of agents depend on each other, but according to traditional industrial logic, powerful industrial technologies and organizations shall be
mobilized to extract certain links that are considered “useful” from this symbiotic
system for mass industrial production. When this interdependent system is broken,
the entire natural ecosystem may collapse as a whole.
2 Can Green Industrial Civilization Resolve Sustainability
Crisis?
At the moment, the most common thought about achieving sustainable development
is through green industrial civilization, which means resolving problems with new
green technologies in the current industrial mode (Acemoglu et al. 2012). There is
no doubt that green technology innovations are extremely important for boosting
productivity and national competitiveness, but this paper focuses on the other side
of technological progress. With technological progress and improved efficiency, will
people choose to use fewer resources to produce the same products to improve the
environment, or will they use the same or even more resources to produce more
products, thus aggravating environmental degradation?
Unfortunately, the intrinsic logic of industrial capital decides the option for the
latter. Therefore, unlike what people intuitively think, technological progress doesn’t
always bring sustainable results; it even aggravates environmental crisis under certain
circumstances (Polimeni et al. 2009; Huesemann 2001; Huesemann and Huesemann
2011). The counter-intuitive phenomenon revealed by Jevons (1865) that a higher efficiency in Britain’s coal industry led to more coal consumption was not an accidental
case, but stemmed from the deep-rooted logic behind development—the so-called
development paradox.
Why is it that green technological progress may add to and exacerbate the aggregate of environmental pollution? It’s simple. Although green technology and higher
efficiency will reduce the environmental intensity of unit product, the endogenous drive—capitalists’ pursuit for maximal profits and consumers’ pursuit for
maximal utility—is sure to pump up the aggregate, and the resulting aggravation
of environmental pollution will eventually override the reduction in environmental
intensity.
Specifically, for consumers who aim at maximal utility, the more they consume,
the higher the utility; for producers who aim at maximal profits using green technologies, either self-developed or purchased, the more they produce, the higher the
profits. In this process, the producers and consumers follow a highly consistent
logic—the more, the better. Therefore, production and consumption keep expanding
when resource restrictions are fixed. In the long term, the day will never come when
technological progress will reduce resource consumption. In standard economics,
the impacts exerted by economic activities on ecological environment (the mannature relation) are not included in its analytical architecture, so as long as there are