Journal of ENGINEERING AND

TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT

JET-M ELSEVIER J. Eng. Technol. Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271

Industry and the environment: a case study of cleaner technologies in selected European countries

John P. Ulh¢i *

Department of Organization and Management, Facul~' of Business Administration, The Aarhus School of Business, Haslegaardsvej 10, DK-8210 Aarhus V, Denmark

Abstract

The aim of this case study is to discuss the role of technology in addressing environmental problems. The paper tries to scratch beneath the surface of the increasingly frequent 'quick-fix' solutions to the present environmental problems, based on such beguiling catchwords as Cleaner Technologies, Best Available Technologies, and Best Available Technologies Not Exceeding Excessive Costs, etc., in an attempt to discover whether there is any substance in them, or whether they are just full of hot air. Recent data from case studies performed by the author in Germany and Finland as well as a postal questionnaire in Denmark are presented. The paper analyses and discusses the roles and responsibilities of designers, industrialists, and government policy-makers. It is argued that existing regulatory regimes, supranational industrial structures, and market mechanisms do not favour the development of cleaner technologies, nor do they promote a reduction in consumption patterns. Evidence from ongoing empirical research in Northwest Europe suggests that industry is far from developing and/or implementing cleaner technologies. The paper closes with a discussion of some of the policy implications involved and some examples of urgently needed further research. © 1997 Elsevier Science B.V.

1, In t roduc t ion

The history of industrial development has been glamourised in the best Hollywood tradition as an ever-progressive triumph of technical achievement, in which man typically plays the role of the conquering hero, besting nature at every turn. This has been fuelled by an underlying belief in the universal applicability of Cartesian science and Newtonian mechanical physics to all scientific problems, including those concerning

living organisms.

* Corresponding author. TeL: +45-8948-6459; fax: +45-8615-7629; e-mail: @jpu.hdc.hha.dk.

0923-4748/97/$15.00 © 1997 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. Pll S0923-4748(97)00011-8

260 J.P. Ulhoi /,L Eng. Technol. Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271

The question is, therefore, have man's activities become so menacing to the balance of the biosphere as to render his technical tool kit impotent? To answer this question with absolute certainty is probably not possible without the evidence of more irre- versible environmental damage, but even the prospect of such a scenario is alarming. In the meantime, it may be more constructive to look at the roles and responsibilities of designers, industrialists and policy-makers in promoting cleaner technologies.

However, given the urgency of addressing many of the presently identified environ- mental problems of the planet which, to a large extent, is brought about by technology there is every reason in considering how to speed up the rate of technology in directions which are less harmful to the environment. Given the strategic role of technology, it is somewhat surprising to learn that the role of technology and technology management in the environmental management literature has been totally overlooked as has the role. of the environment in the technology management literature. However, an attempt has recently been made to address these important interrelationships (Ulh¢i and Madsen, 1994).

The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 discusses and categorises technologies according to their environmental advantages and disadvantages. This gives way for the view that technological development is to be seen as a three-dimensional sword, which can be used to either destroy, protect and/or restore the environment. Section 3 presents some new empirical evidence from the European and Scandinavian industry allowing both for a general picture of industry as well as of exemplar cases from environmentally state-of-the-art companies. This leads to the conclusion that although there are a few exceptions-from-the-rule type of companies with regard to development/and or imple- menting cleaner technologies, the general picture displays that industry in general is not yet adopting cleaner technologies at a larger scale. In consequence, Section 4 and Section 5 address the roles and responsibilities of the key actors in developing and promoting cleaner technologies as well as the related policy implications thereof. The article is closed with some suggestions for future research needs.

2. From technology to best available technology and cleaner technology

Man is part of a biosphere that he has had no part in creating. This biosphere is supported by a complex set of ecosystems governed by natural laws, which man is both subject to and cannot re-invent. Man has, however, had a hand in creating what may be called the technosphere, a 'sphere' of relatively recent date which cannot be explained solely by nature. The biosphere, it is generally accepted, can be destroyed but never overruled.

The biosphere sustains itself through a set of complex mechanisms which are still only poorly understood. The technosphere, on the other hand, although created by man, is not the result of a deliberate 'plan', but of a dynamic and chaotic process of local actions and increases in knowledge which spread and interact in ways that no one can predict or control. During the process of co-development between the revolutionary man-made sphere (the technosphere) and the evolutionary natural sphere (the biosphere), the former has gradually seized the initiative in terms of speed of development, and this

J.P. Ulhoi/J. Eng. TechnoL Manage. 14 (1997) 259-27l 261

has enabled man to transgress the carrying capacity of nature (assimilation) without violating its underlying rules (the physical laws).

The biosphere and the technosphere can be seen as systems for the transportation of materials. But while the former is close to being a perfect system of recycling, the opposite seems to be tree for the latter. Most materials run through the system in an inherently quick and dissipative way, in which materials are quickly degraded, dispersed and lost to use, typically in the course of a single use (Ayres, 1989).

Until now, technology has been developed for the sole purpose of increasing economic and social standards, with little or no regard for its potential negative impact on the environment (e.g., exhaustion of non-renewable resources, extinction of species, eutrophication, acidification, ozone-depletion, etc.). Today, however, an increasing amount of irrefutable scientific evidence is forcing us to accept that we cannot continue along the same development path as we have done since the beginning of the industrial revolution. 'Green' and 'clean' have become the new buzz words for a new 'enlight- ened' age, as in 'green industries' and 'clean technologies'.

Even if the technologies now available in various primary and secondary sectors only result in a doubling, or even redoubling, of economic activity, it is likely to have truly catastrophic effects on global climate, human health, and the productivity of natural systems (Heaton et al., 1991). Most forecasts point to a doubling of the global population during the next 30 years. To meet even the basic needs of so many new mouths, the production of goods and energy will have to increase substantially from present levels. Given present technologies and consumption patterns, this will result in widespread pollution and resource depletion on a scale undreamed of today.

However, despite the gloomy picture, the development of environmentally less harmful technologies and the introduction of environmental legislation have made significant strides. A whole new environmental technology industry has been created to meet the challenge of cleaning up the environmental effects of industries and private households. This is basically a reactive approach, however, and at best it is just a cure for the illness.

The concept of technology adopted here should be understood in a broad sense as encompassing both software (knowledge and skills) and hardware (technical auxiliaries and artefacts) and organisational components (how these components are employed). Best Available Technology (BAT) describes the environmentally most efficient abate- ment technology available (locally or internationally). Best Available Technology Not Entailing Excessive Costs (BATNEEC) is a slightly watered-down interpretation of the BAT philosophy, which appeared officially in the mid-1980s. BATNEEC technologies are normally related to environmental command-and-control regulation strategies, i.e., they are aimed at removing environmentally hazardous substances from production residuals (waste and emissions) before they reach the environment. Clift and Longley (1996) have suggested to label such technologies as Clean-up Technologies.

Cleaner Technologies (CTs), on the other hand, aim at preventing environmental damage at sources by producing lower quantities of waste and less harmful residuals than in the first place, and to use less energy and resources during the industrial throughput processes.

Clean technology addresses the design and product and production processes from the

262 J.P. Ulhoi/J. Eng. Technol. Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271

very beginning. To further realise the full potential, CTs Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) can be implemented (Ulh¢i, 1996), which is a methodology to define and evaluate the total environmental load associated with providing a service or a product, including all associated flows of material and energy during their 'cradle-to-their-grave' life. Environ- mental life-cycle assessment is a formal approach to identify and evaluate the total environmental load associated with providing a good or a service, by following the associated material and energy-flows from their cradle (i.e., inputs) to their grave (i.e., ultimate output).

Another way of trying to understand the meaning of technology in relation to the natural environment is to consider the environment as a three-dimensional sword as argued by Doeleman (1992). Most people would probably agree on the fact that technology in economic growth played a very important role. This has been a role, however, where technology can be said to have had an environment-using dimension based on resource affluence and technological optimism. The result of this dimension is what can be seen in the form of environmental degradation (pollution, resource depletion, etc.). In pace with the tightening of environmental concern, another dimension of technology has come to the open, the environment-saving dimension. This type of technology permits the same level of production, or even some time an increased level of production, at lower environmental costs. Environment-saving technology has been in use in industry for a couple of decades in the form of various pollution abatement techniques. However, a third and maybe often overlooked dimension of technology is what Doeleman (1992) calls environment-replacing technology. This dimension of technology has two functions. Firstly, it describes a technology that counters damage to a natural environmental system by means of preventing environmental problems at source or by neutralisation of potentially harmful spillovers. Secondly, it has a capacity to supplement and/or replace an environmental damage with a man-made technology. Cleaner technology, it is argued in this article, is somewhere in between the environ- ment-saving and the environment-replacing technologies.

Environmental concern necessitates technological changes and developments. A well known and rather dramatic example, with which the manufacturers of refrigerators have been confronted in recent years, was the need to phase out CFC which was a life-threatening event for an entire industry if it did not come up with an environmental less harmful substitute. There is, therefore, every reason to adopt a more integrated perspective, as argued in this paper, when addressing environmental problems and technological developments. This invites to include environmental consideration from the very conceptual stage of product development throughout the entire development process and thus for an integration between corporate strategy and technology and environmental management.

3. Cleaner technologies: empirical evidence from Europe

Information on the current environmental management situation in Danish companies was obtained from a questionnaire-based survey carried out in Autumn 1995 (Madsen and Ulh¢i, 1996). A random sample of approximately 500 Danish companies (_> 10

.I.P. Ulhoi/J. Eng. Technol. Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271 263

employees) and a following pre-notification and an effective response rate of approxi- mately 55% gave a firm basis for some interesting statistical analyses.

When asked about the importance of environmental initiatives/measures in relation to various key routines of a firm, the following picture emerges (Table 1).

As can be seen from the table above, about one out of two companies in the survey did not even consider environmental issues relevant for their R & D activities, thus, indicating that any consideration of preventing environmental problems from occurring in the first place (as often possible via the development and /or implementation of cleaner technologies), is not taking place at any substantial scale. Another way of interpreting this picture is by saying that even in areas characterised by a general high level of environmental awareness, industry does not tend to consider the attempt to make competitive advantages out of greening. Put differently, industry still is stuck between BATNEEC and BAT technological investments, which typically results in end-of-pipe solutions to environmental problems.

The other part of the empirical evidence presented here comes from case studies in France, England, Germany, Denmark and in Finland in Autumn during 1994-1996 (Ulh¢i et al., 1996). The materials from the latter consist of personal in-depth interviews with key persons such as environmental directors and managing engineers from produc- tion as well as from archival documents and/or reports. The companies were selected based on their environmental management excellence, as the selected sample of indus- trial companies representing both large- as well as small-medium-sized enterprises epitomised the environmentally leading edge from a number of industries such as the automotive industry and the chemical industry, for example.

A few companies that were visited explained that new products must first pass

Table 1 Environmenta l initiatives in various business areas

"E

o= n

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0 Purchase raw mat.

R&D

Production

Marketing/Sales

Logistics Recyc,IDisposal

264 J.P. Ulhoi/J. Eng. Technol. Manage. 14 (1997) 259 271

through a 'green evaluation', during which they are exposed to a kind of Life Cycle Assessment matrix with a point system. One SME said that both the designer, produc- tion technicians and environmental specialists had an equal say in the development of new products. A few of the large enterprises visited had assigned special R & D staff to focus on environmental issues related to their technologies. During some of the interviews, few examples of cleaner technologies were mentioned. Most frequently, the examples represented situations, where environmentally hazardous technological pro- cesses were substituted by cleaner process technologies. A typical example showing this can be taken from one of the Finnish cases, a company from Finnish metal industry. The general manager described how the company had technologically substituted the emul- sion used as lubricant and solved both an economic as well as environmental problem at the same time. After usage, the previous emulsion would have to be sent to a chemical handling and treatment company which was very expensive and caused environmental problems. With the lubricants used today, the company no longer offloads the former lubricant wastes and is thus saving a lot of money while averting a negative environmen- tal impact.

Very little evidence was found to support the idea of including environmental dimensions from the design stage to prevent environmental problems from occurring in the first place.

Exerting influence with the dimension of the 'technological sword' that is at work means influencing the very process of technological innovation. This can be done at societal level by various means (e.g., funding, etc.). This aspect, however, will not be addressed in this article. Influencing the process of corporate technological innovation, on the other hand, means influencing R & D as early as possible. When corporate R & D considers environmental factors equally important as the other decisive factors such as quality, price, etc., there is a great likelihood of preventing environmental problems and /or gaining economically attractive savings.

4. The roles and responsibilities of designers, industrialists, and policy-makers

This paper is based on the assertion that the technological innovation-diffusion process must be pursued and maintained if the increasing demands of a rapidly growing world population are to be achieved without destabilising the geopolitical, socio-eco- nomic and environmentally-unsustainable consequences. As the dynamics of the techno- sphere most likely cannot be slowed down, controlled, or even predicted, there is only one alternative: to join forces in nudging the process of technological change in an environmentally and more socially-sustainable direction. In other words, technology is not only an important part of the environmental problem, but must also be part of the solution.

The need for influencing the present process of technological innovations directs the attention on industrial R & D research. It is not only an important contributor to environmental degradation, it possesses the majority of financial resources and it also controls the majority of human know-how. And last but not least, industry accounts for commercialising, mass-producing and disseminating technologies. This suggests that

.I.P. Ulhoi / J. Eng. Technol. Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271 265

part of the solution to environmental problems can be found through a better understand- ing of how technologies evolve in general and of the roles and responsibilities of various strategic actors in the technoeconomic process of change in particular.

At the macro level, it has been documented by evolutionary economists that technological innovations tend to exert paradigmatic characteristics and thus to evolve according to well-defined technological trajectories (Ulh¢i, 1996). However, since technologies themselves are not independently struggling for survival or following pre-programmed and unchangeable trajectories, it may be a good idea instead to examine more closely what produces trajectories (Green and Miles, 1996).

At the micro level, which is the primary focus of this paper, key actors in any process of technological innovation are the industrialists in general and designers and engineers, in particular, whose (and their managers') decisions and choices fundamentally influence which new ideas and projects will be realised. Decisions and choices made throughout the R&D-related processes and activities are most likely to have a critical effect on the kinds of technologies underpinning the knowledge and learning processes that will be at the disposal of key actors, should they wish or be told (by top management) to move towards a more sustainable development trajectory.

Designers have traditionally been taught that their area of responsibility is limited to function and appearance. However, as pointed out by Mackenzie (1991), designers are the principal determinants and/or creators of the products, and thus have a direct influence on the environment during the production, consumption and recycling stages. Designers also influence the environment indirectly through their roles as trend-setters and through their choice of materials. They, together with the marketers, fully participate in the disposable society, creating new styles with increasing frequency and thus contributing to increasing obsolescence. Designers, typically very strategically located within the technology innovation process, thus have a very important role and responsi- bility. By recognising this, and adopting a total-life-cycle approach from 'cradle-to- grave', designers can also be trend-setters in environmental consideration, e.g.:

design for dematerialisation; design for miniaturisation; design for durability; design for maintainability/reparability; design for demanufacturing and sorting; and design for recyclability and material reclaimability. Before this can happen, however, at least three conditions must be met. Firstly,

designers are normally employees and their freedom of action is restricted by the decisions made by corporate managers. So, unless corporate management supports a greater emphasis on environmental consideration, the designers' hands are tied.

Secondly, the designers, R&D staff and managers will need retraining to handle the increasing demands to internalise environmental aspects. Higher and further education must incorporate environmental considerations into existing curricula. Recent research in Germany, Denmark, the UK and France, however, indicates that there is a gap between what is taught at business schools and universities and the skills required by industry to deal with environmental issues (Ulhoi and Madsen, 1995).

There is a growing industrial awareness of environmental issues, however. This is

266 J.P. Ulh¢i / J. Eng. Technol. Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271

shown by the initiatives of various industrial organisations, e.g., the ICC Business Charter for Sustainable Development, and various industry-specific initiatives, e.g., the Responsible Care Programme for the chemical industry, the British Standard for Environmental Management scheme (BS7750), and the European Environmental Man- agement and Auditing Scheme (EMAS) and the new international ISO 14000-scheme.

Thirdly, managers must recognise that, in addition to 'old stakeholders', such as the firm's immediate neighbours, regulators, suppliers, investors, etc., 'new' stakeholders are beginning to articulate legitimate environmental interests in corporate activities, and these must also be taken into consideration if they want to avoid, or limit, damaging confrontations.

Although the private sector is the principal developer and user of technology, governments often have a leading role in creating and maintaining a strong demand for its products. As a recent OECD report argues, governments can only maintain this role over time by: • removing strategic diffusion-adoption barriers, providing information, carefully se-

lecting incentives favouring prevention approaches; • identifying the best mix of economic, regulatory and information policies that favour

longer-term prevention technologies; • establishing a framework for the creation and deployment of the next generation of

cleaner technologies; and promoting basic changes in public awareness and behaviour (OECD, 1995).

5. When green technological solutions are not the entire answer- -beyond techno- logical fixes

As convincingly argued by Schumacher (1979), industrial society is based on at least two dangerous illusions, namely that unlimited growth is possible in a finite world and that science can be used to solve fundamentally social problems. The possibility of exponential growth through technical mastery over nature has been central to Western thinking for centuries.

Accepting the Laws of Thermodynamics, it seems reasonable to conclude that even the greenest or cleanest technologies will require some input of low entropy energy. At best, this strategy will just win a little more time. In a historical time frame, this is hardly worth talking about. The question remains, therefore: Is there any other way to increase the amount of time we have left before all low entropy energy is converted to high entropy energy? An affirmative answer is only possible if we are ready to accept the consequences. This is where the Brundtlandian concept of sustainability, which relates environmental problems to population growth and existing socio-economic structures, comes in. Accepting this means accepting the need for a stable population, environmental and intergenerational security, and a redistribution of wealth (Ulh0i, 1995).

The technological fix-approach to environmental problems is firmly rooted in the eco-efficiency approach developed by leading manufacturers such as those in the chemical industry. Although there have been and still remains some important develop-

J.P. Ulh¢i /J. Eng. Technol. Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271 267

ments along this line of reasoning (see, e.g., Ausubel, 1996), which have contributed to substantial improvements in the resource usage, it seems to sustain eco-efficiency worldwide. With the rising economies of the new Tigers of the Far East, there seems to be a fast growing tendency of an overall growth in total industrial input consumption.

Some authors have suggested distinguishing between growth and development (Goodland, 1992). Growth leads to an increase in the assimilation or accretion of materials, whereas development implies the realisation of potentials, to bring something to a fuller, greater, or better state. When something grows it gets quantitatively bigger; when it develops, on the other hand, it gets qualitatively better, or at least becomes different. Quantitative growth and qualitative improvement follow different laws. Our planet develops over time without growing. Our economy, a subsystem of the finite, non-growing earth, must eventually adapt to a similar pattern of development. Alterna- tively, we could say that physical inputs must cease growing, whereas the value of outputs may continue to increase, subject only to the prevailing level of technological development. Of course, if the physical input is limited, then, according to the Law of conservation of mass and energy, so is the physical output. This is equivalent to saying that quantitative growth in throughput is not permitted, but qualitative improvement in services rendered can develop with new technology.

6. Policy implications of the development of (cleaner) technologies

The development and implementation of cleaner technologies capable of preventing and/or reducing environmental pollution is often delayed by the tendency of the existing technopolitical infrastructure and taxation system to slow down R & D in cleaner technologies and/or make existing ones appear economically less attractive. One example is the present pricing system, where virgin materials are priced at levels which can only be maintained by passing on negative externalities to future generations. This situation leaves recycled materials financially less attractive to virgin materials. The only hope for the future, therefore, is that those in a position to make a difference, whether in companies or governments, will realise that protecting the environment is both urgent and to everybody's benefit. They must also see that, for any strategy to succeed, new combinations of direct and indirect regulation, as well as self-regulation, will be needed, in addition to global political acceptance of changes in the existing geopolitical power structure.

The 'consume-and-throw-away' mentality will increasingly have to be replaced by a repair-and-recycle philosophy. It is recognised that economic welfare is a vital part of the environmental problem. High standards of living causes high wage costs and this means that there is a shift to capital and resources. In other words, it costs too much to repair/reuse and this has exposed the market failures more than would otherwise be the case. However, this will not be addressed in more details in this paper.

Designers and industrialists will have a central role in changing such attitudes, i.e., replacing the consume-and-throw-away mentality with a repair-and-maintain-and-re- manufacture philosophy. For designers, this will mean redesigning old designs, and making sure that the choice of materials and production methods are based on the

268 J.P. Ulh¢i/J. Eng. Technol. Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271

highest degree of reparability and environmental consideration. For industrialists, it will mean being proactive and willing to take risks. The advantage of such a change in attitudes is that, among other things, it will allow them to make new environmental investments at their own pace, rather than at the request of the authorities, not to mention the competitive edge it will give them.

Technology cannot be understood in isolation from its social context, or from industry, which controls most of the economic and know-how resources. However, unless the role and functions as well as the limitations of technology and companies are properly understood, there will be little room for hope in the long term, i.e.., the prospects for environmental improvements are likely to disappear in an explosion of hot air.

Until recently, technology policies at both corporate and political level have been an almost completely ignored area of environmental objectives. However, addressing environmental issues at this level offers some interesting perspectives. Since teclhnical change occurs at the bottom of the social process, it can be achieved only by redirecting economic, political, ethical and cultural values and goals in ways that promote cleaner technologies. Consumers' values and expectations as well as the trajectories of techno- logical development are affected by an enormous range of public programmes and policies. More focus is needed on how economic incentives can reduce expectations of continued growth and contribute to the development of cleaner technologies.

Other important policy issues relate to distinctions between different shades of green technologies, e.g., light green for superficial short-term responses, resulting only in marginal improvements, and dark green for genuine attempts to solve environmental problems in a more sustainable way. This will require new supranational consensus, as well as specific agreements on common standards, e.g., environmental performance indicators, environmental reporting practices, environmental product-related information.

Results from our ongoing research on Scandinavia and Europe indicate that industry, as a whole, leaves much to be desired, however. Environmentally leading companies, which are typically highly innovative, tend either to follow or be slightly ahead of legislation, whereas industry in general has a predominantly reactive attitude to environ- mental issues (Madsen and Ulh0i, 1996). They tend to await new environmental regulations before acting. Only in very few cases among environmentally leading European companies (Ulh¢i et al., 1996), are there clear signs of a more proactive and preventive corporate approach to environmental problems.

Any attempt to deal with the 'eco-techno-dilemma' must first of all recognise that the process of technological change is not at all deterministic, value-free, or independent of the Laws of Thermodynamics, but a result of a set of underlying human beliefs and values. These must be taken into account in any attempt to redirect the outcome within the physical boundaries of nature. Only this, it is argued, will improve the chances of the concept of clean technology of becoming more than hot air. However, it will require some new thinking in the existing regulatory system.

As pointed out by Green and Miles (1996), firms do not chose what R & D to carry out in a vacuum. When, for example, it comes to incremental technological innovations they are much affected by what the market is prepared to accept. Further, they are much dependent on the boundaries of existing technological regimes. On the other hand, as

J.P. Ulhoi / J. Eng. TechnoL Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271 269

noted by Madsen and Ulh¢i (1992), industry can hardly expect the market always to know in advance what it needs when it does not know what is technologically possible! It is in fact within the very nature of radical technological innovations that demand does not, yet, exist.

7. Conclusion

Since the market, left to its own devices, is unlikely to introduce cleaner technologies at the pace required to overcome--or at least postpone--some of the most threatening environmental problems associated with economic growth, governments will have to lend a helping hand. The means include setting out long-term environmental goals, implementing standards, removing barriers, supporting promising R&D, and developing a new mix of initiatives which stimulate manufacturers to improve the environmental performance of their companies.

Realising that technological innovations are results of social processes and construc- tions and that science and technology tend to develop within fairly rigid paradigmatic regimes, the more important it is to realise that the way social actors involved think of technology and the environment heavily affects the outcome of the social interactions.

The size of the challenge faced by individuals is quite impressive. If, as pointed out by Green and Miles (1996), only single products were improved--as suggested by the LCA approach--the existing complex of supporting technologies would still continue along well-established and environmentally-unsustainable trajectories. What, therefore, seems to be required is nothing less than a radical shift in whole series of interrelated generic technologies towards new and more sustainable ones.

Recalling our assertion that technological regimes are socially constructed calls for directing the focus on education and training at all levels, such institutions may be seen as key facilitators for changing existing beliefs and values to direct technological development during a process of social, political and organisational dynamics (Anderson and Tushman, 1990) towards more environmentally-sustainable ones. A modern educa- tional and training system is needed to create a strong and lasting preference for cleaner production and products, otherwise the technologies to create them will have no market. However, as recent research indicates (Ulh0i and Madsen, 1995), environmental concern has still not been fully incorporated into the existing curricula of higher educational institutions. Speeding up the diffusion-adoption process of cleaner technology will require a more proactive approach throughout the entire education and training system.

Research is needed at both the macro and the micro level. At the macro level, for example, more information is needed on new and efficient financial incentives for the development of cleaner technologies, including transfers to both newly industrialised countries and less developed countries. Commonly-agreed quantifiable and comparable key environmental performance indicators at both the macro and the company level will have to be developed and universally adopted. Commonly-agreed standards must be implemented worldwide so as not to cause any competitive distortions. More informa- tion is needed on when, and to what extent, the so-called green consumers are willing to pay a premium for greener products. How can the western 'use-and-throw-away'

270 J.P. Ulhoi/J. Eng. TechnoL Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271

mental i ty be t ransformed into a ' r epa i r -and-main ta in ' mental i ty? What is s lowing the

speed of deve lopmen t o f greener technologies , and how can these barriers be o v e r c o m e ?

What can corporate m a n a g e m e n t do to further the greening process internal ly? I f only

some o f these quest ions can be answered, there will be grounds for op t imism and hope.

Acknowledgements

The author would l ike to express his grat i tude to Dr. Henn ing Madsen for assistance

during the col lec t ion and analysis o f the data. Funds for the t ime consuming case studies

were made avai lable by an E U grant (96-3030-64). An earl ier and shorter vers ion o f this

paper has been presented at the l A S T E D International Confe rence on A d v a n c e d

Techno logy in the Env i ronmenta l Field May, 1996, Gold Coast, Australia. C o m m e n t s

and suggest ions through the r ev iew process during and by the delegates and after the

conference as well as construct ive commen t s f rom the referees are acknowledged with

thanks.

References

Anderson, P., Tushman, M.L., 1990. Technological discontinuities and dominant design: a cyclical model of technological change. Administrative Sci. Q., 35.

Ausubel, J.H., 1996. Can technology spare the earth?. Am. Scientist 84, 166-178. Ayres, R.U., 1989. Industrial metabolism. In: Ausubel, J.H., Sladovich, E. (Eds.), Technology and Environ-

ment. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, Clift, R., Longley, A., 1996. Introduction to clean technology. In: Welford, R., Starkey, R. (Eds.), The

Earthscan Reader in Business and the Environment. Earthscan Publications, London. Doeleman, J.A., 1992. Environment and technology--speculating on the long run. In: FerrY, F. (Ed.),

Research in Philosophy and Technology, Vol XII. Jai Press, Greenwich. Goodland, R., 1992. The case that the world has reached limits. More precisely that current throughput growth

in global economy cannot be sustained. In: Goodland, R., Daly, H., Serafy, S.E., Droste, B.V. (Eds.), Environmentally Sustainable Development: Building on Brundtland. UNESCO, Paris.

Green, K., Miles, I., 1996. Part III. Research, development and technology. Introduction. In: Welford, R., Starkey, R. (Eds.), The Earthscan Reader in Business and the Environment. Earthscan Publications, London.

Heaton, G., Repetto, R., Sobin, S., 1991, Transforming Technology: An Agenda for environmental Sustainable Growth in the 21st Century. World Resource Institute, Washington, DC.

Mackenzie, D., 1991. Green Design. Design for the Environment. Laurence King, London. Madsen, H., Ulhoi, 1996. Environmental management in Danish manufacturing companies: attitudes and

action. Business Strategy Environ. 5 (1), 22-29. Madsen, H., Ulhoi, J,P., 1992. Strategic considerations in technology management: some theoretical and

methodological perspectives. Technol. Anal. Strategic Manage. 4 (3), 311-318. OECD, 1995. Technologies for Cleaner Production and Products. Towards Technological Transformation for

Sustainable Development. OECD Publication Service, Paris. Schumacher, E.F., 1979. Good Work. The Anchor Press, London. Ulhoi, J.P., Madsen, H., 1994. Management of technology and sustainable development. In: Khalil, T.M.,

Bayraktar, B.A. (Eds.), Management of Technology. The Creation of Wealth. Industrial Engineering and Management Press, Norcross, GA, pp. 653-62.

J.P. UlhOi /.l. Eng. Technol. Manage. 14 (1997) 259-271 271

Ulhoi, J.P., Madsen, H., 1995. The greening of European management education. Greener Manage. Int. 10, 85-96.

Ulh¢i, J.P., 1996. Towards a theoretical and methodological technology management framework. The strategic perspective. Accepted for publication in Int. J. Technol. Manage.

Ulhoi, J.P., Madsen, H., Rikhardsson, P.M., 1996. Training in Environmental Management--Industry and Sustainability. Corporate Environmental and Resource Management and Educational Requirements: Part I. Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg.

Ulh#i, J.P., 1995. Corporate environmental and resource management: in search of a new managerial paradigm. Eur. J. Operational Res. 80, 1-15.