Dematerialization—A Disputable Strategy for Resource Conservation Put under Scrutiny

Felix Müller, Jan Kosmol, Hermann Keßler, Michael Angrick and Bettina Rechenberg
Additional contact information
Felix Müller: Section for Resource Conservation, Material Cycles, Minerals and Metal Industry, German Environment Agency, Wörlitzer Platz 1, 06844 Dessau-Roßlau, Germany
Jan Kosmol: Section for Resource Conservation, Material Cycles, Minerals and Metal Industry, German Environment Agency, Wörlitzer Platz 1, 06844 Dessau-Roßlau, Germany
Hermann Keßler: Section for Resource Conservation, Material Cycles, Minerals and Metal Industry, German Environment Agency, Wörlitzer Platz 1, 06844 Dessau-Roßlau, Germany
Michael Angrick: Division for Emissions Trading, German Emission Allowance Trading Authority, German Environment Agency, Bismarckplatz 1, 14193 Berlin, Germany
Bettina Rechenberg: Division for Sustainable Production and Products, Waste Management, German Environment Agency, Wörlitzer Platz 1, 06844 Dessau-Roßlau, Germany

Resources, 2017, vol. 6, issue 4, 1-32

Abstract: Dematerialization is a paradigm in resource conservation strategies. Material use should be reduced so that resource consumption as a whole can be lowered. The benefit for humankind should be completely decoupled from the natural expenditure by a definite factor X. Instinctively, this approach is convincing, because our entire value-added chain is based on material transformation. Targets for mass-based indicators are found within the context of justification for ecological carrying capacity and intergenerational fairness, taking into account the economic and socio-political expectation of raw material scarcity. However, in light of further development of material flow indicators and the related dematerialization targets, the question arises as to what they actually stand for and what significance they have for resource conservation. Can it be assumed that pressure on the environment will decline steadily if the use of materials is reduced, whether for an economy or at the level of individual products or processes? The present narrative review paper has discussed this issue and takes into account the authors’ experience of the extended political and scientific discourse on dematerialization in Germany and Europe. As a result, a high “resource relevance” cannot be inferred from high physical material inputs at any of the levels considered. It has been shown that establishing mass-based indicators as control and target variables is questionable and that dematerialization exclusively based on such indicators without mapping other resources should be critically examined.

Keywords: natural resources; mass-based indicators; dematerialization; MFA; raw materials; resource conservation; resource efficiency; criticality; area of protection; precautionary principle (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/6/4/68/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/6/4/68/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jresou:v:6:y:2017:i:4:p:68-:d:121566

Access Statistics for this article

Resources is currently edited by Ms. Donchian Ma

More articles in Resources from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().