Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1218e1225

www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Fostering change to sustainable consumption and production:

an evidence based view*
Arnold Tukker a,*, Sophie Emmert a, Martin Charter b, Carlo Vezzoli c, Eivind Sto d,
Maj Munch Andersen e, Theo Geerken f, Ursula Tischner g, Saadi Lahlou h
a
TNO Built Environment and Geosciences, PO Box 49, 2600 AA Delft, Netherlands
b
Centre for Sustainable Design, College of Creative Arts at Farnham, Falkner Road, Farnham, Surrey, GU9 7DS, UK
c
Politecnico di Milano, Industrial Design, Arts, Communication and Fashion (INDACO), via Durando 38/A, 20158 Milano, Italy
d
National Institute for Consumer Research, P.O. Box 4682 Nydalen, 0405 Oslo, Norway
e
Risoe National Laboratory, P.O. Box 49, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark
f
VITO, Flemish Institute for Technological Research, Boeretang 200, B-2400 Mol, Belgium
g
Econcept, Agency for Sustainable Design, Alteburger Strasse 32, D-50678 Cologne, Germany
h
Electricite de France, 1 Avenue Gen de Gaulle, Clamart, France
Revised 1 August 2007; accepted 13 August 2007
Available online 1 November 2007

Abstract

This Note from the field, is an edited version of a policy brief summarizing the key findings from the first half of the Sustainable Con-
sumption Research Exchange network (SCORE!) for the policy programs in the field of sustainable consumption and production (SCP). We
recommend a framework for action to change to SCP that mentions the key domains to include food, mobility, and energy use/housing (the
last two clearly related to urban development). It should use a systemic perspective on the SCP challenge and differentiate between developed,
fast developing, and base of the pyramid economies. SCORE! focuses mainly on developed economies, and here we propose to differentiate
between: (1) measures that fit with mainstream beliefs and paradigms. Here, governments could make operational agreements on implementa-
tion of instruments like green public procurement, stimulating ecodesign, etc. (2) Problems where a rough agreement on goals exists, but where
change is radical, or means are uncertain, and hence planning difficult. Here, governments could foster visioning, experimentation, and support
e.g. international collaboration in leapfrogging programs. (3) Problems that outright clash with the mainstream beliefs and paradigms. Here,
governments could foster informed deliberation on the more fundamental issues related to markets, governance and growth.
2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Sustainable consumption and production; Governance; Radical change; Sustainability; System innovation

1. Introduction Consumption Research Exchanges (SCORE!). This EU sup-

As indicated in the Editorial, this special issue of the Jour-
nal of Cleaner Production is a result of work of Sustainable
*
A Note from the Field based on a SCORE! Policy Brief distributed at the
Third International Expert Meeting of the 10-year Framework of Programmes
on Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP), Stockholm, Sweden,
26e29 June 2007.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 31 15 2695450; fax: 31 15 2696840.
E-mail address: arnold.tukker@tno.nl (A. Tukker).
ported network project under the sixth Framework Program
has engaged a few hundred professionals interested in SCP
in Europe and beyond. A key goal of the network is to enhance
understanding how radical reductions of environmental im-
pacts and at global level a more equitable growth can be real-
ized. Since October 2005, SCORE! organized two major
workshops and one conference, which resulted in over 2000
pages of proceedings, in which over 250 contributors pre-
sented some 160 conceptual and case-related papers on how
to foster change to SCP. In this Note from the Field, based

0959-6526/$ - see front matter 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.08.015
 A. Tukker et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1218e1225
on a Policy Brief, presented during the Third International Ex-
pert Meeting of the 10-year Framework Of Programmes on
sustainable consumption and production (SCP), Stockholm,
Sweden, 26e29 June 2007, the SCORE! team condenses the
insights gained into recommendations for how to set up the
10-year Framework of Programs on SCP. This Note from
the Field, is based on a book in production at Greenleaf Pub-
lishing ltd., called System Innovation for Sustainability e
Governance of radical change to sustainable consumption
and production. It will be available in the fall of 2007 [1].
Our recommendations are based on the following insights.
2. Not all economies are equal
Economies of the different countries in the world differ
markedly. Hence, a one size fits all SCP policy cannot work
[2,3].
It is well-known that the developed economies, that house
just 20% of the world population, are responsible for almost
80% of the life-cycle impacts of consumption [4,5,cf. 6].
The challenge for developed economies is therefore, to do
more with less: they must reduce their ecological footprint
and end overshoot [7,8,cf. 9]. A key problem is often lock-
in: existing infrastructures, habits, and other sunk costs, that
make it difficult to change [10e13].
Fast developing economies face a totally different chal-
lenge. Their societies are in flux, and will build, in the next
decades, 80% or more of their future infrastructures [14].
This gives, in theory, unique opportunities to leapfrog: forgo-
ing the problematic structures in the West, and jumping
directly to novel sustainable structures of production and con-
sumption [2,3].
And in the base of the pyramid economies, the challenge is
again different. Here the prime goal is to lay a basis for sus-
tainable, equitable growth, and to eradicate poverty [15,16].
Base of the pyramid or Human Development through the
Market (HDtM) approaches could be strategies to be pursued
[17,18].
3. Food, housing/energy use, and mobility have the
most environmental impact
All economic activity, and hence the related environmental
impacts, are driven by consumption. In the last years, many
studies were done to analyze what final consumption activities
cause most impacts. Despite an immense variety of approaches,
data sources, and indicators used, all studies agree on the main
priorities [19e27]. Mobility (car and air transport, including
for holidays), food (meat and diary followed by the other types
of food) and energy use in and around the home (heating, cool-
ing and energy using products) plus house building and demo-
lition, cause, on most environmental impact categories,
together 70e80% of the life-cycle environmental impacts in
society [28e30]. Note that concepts like sustainable cities
cover these priorities to a large extent.
1219
4. The SCP challenge has a systemic nature
The development of an SCP policy agenda has been slow.
Rather concrete ideas were already present in the Rio Declara-
tion of 1992 [31], but since then the many meetings and work-
shops did not lead to much implementation [32e34]; indeed,
in the view of some, the more recent policy declarations are
weaker than the original Rio text [cf. 35]. This is probably
no coincidence. We do not talk about diminishing an emission
here, or re-designing a product there. Production, markets and
consumption form a regime of an interdependent and co-
evolving set of technologies, symbolic meanings, services,
consumer practices, rules, interests, financial relations and
expectations [10,12,13,36,37]. It is difficult to change one
part without the rest. Further, this regime is embedded in
a landscape context consisting of meta-trends, meta-values,
meta-structures, and meta-shocks. Such meta factors usually
cannot be influenced directly by actors in the regime on the
short-term. New SCP practices or policies that deviate radi-
cally from this regime and landscape normally cannot be
pushed through, head-on. Usually, they stay for a significant
period in niches (if they do not die out there), until a window
of opportunity arises for a breakthrough [13,38e40].
5. Green consumers and businesses, plus policymakers,
should create the triangle of change
Green consumers and green businesses can do a lot to foster
changes to SCP (e.g. see Refs. [44e46]). And markets, to
some extent, will start to reflect scarcity of resources and other
sustainability problems, thereby, providing incentives for
Growth versus downshifting
One of the tense debates in the sustainable con-
sumption arena is the question if we can continue
to base our economy on the growth paradigm, or
that we should in fact reduce consumption (at least
in the West) [9,41]. Organizations like the Slow
Food movement and the Centre for a New Ameri-
can Dream provide inspiring examples of how
a high quality of life can be realized with a strong
reduction in material consumption [42,43]. Yet, it
is also obvious that the application of such inspir-
ing examples cannot (yet) be enforced top-down.
That would go counter e.g. to the principle that
humans should be free to shape their lives in the
way they want, the idea of consumer sovereignty,
and the concept of free markets. Any policy maker
proposing e.g. a cap on consumption levels,
probably, would not last long. A better strategy is
to foster experiments with such alternative organi-
zations of the economic system, gather evidence
of their merits, and start bending existing beliefs
and paradigms from there.
1220 A. Tukker et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1218e1225
The role e and limits e of business and
consumers in change to SCP
Business is probably best placed to respond pos-
itively to sustainability challenges via radical inno-
vative products and services and related new
business models. Their drive for efficiency gives
them a natural role in making production and
products more resource efficient, and the history
of e.g. the Marine Stewardship Council, Responsi-
ble Care, and similar schemes shows that busi-
ness is capable of promoting sustainability
values in their supply- and downstream chains.
Yet, the competitive market system also rewards
companies that make people dependent via the
promotion of greed, fear, and addictions, that ex-
ternalize costs, and draw hitherto freely available
non-market goods into a market context [51,54].
Consumers, in theory, can exercise sustainable
choice. This can be stimulated via informative in-
struments and campaigns. However, consumers
are, for a large part, locked-in in infrastructures,
social norms, and habits that severely limit con-
sumer choice, in practice. Consumer behavior
change is only likely if three components are ad-
dressed simultaneously: motivation/intent, ability
and opportunity [55]. The alternative opportunity
should at least be as attractive as the existing
way of doing things e not only in terms of func-
tionality, but also in terms of immaterial features
such as symbolic meaning, identity creation, and
expression of dreams, hopes and expectations
[56]. Relying on e.g. informative instruments
only, is utterly insufficient [55].
change [47]. But all evidence shows that since actors are trap-
ped in systemic interdependencies, such routes for change
have limits [10e13,36e38,48]. Bottom-up and market based
action can only result in lasting fundamental change if backed
up by top-down support and framework changes [49e51]. Pol-
icy makers, therefore, cannot outsource politics [52] but
must do their bit, and collaborate with business and consumers
to make things work, creating what the UK Sustainable Con-
sumption Roundtable calls a triangle of change [53].
6. Consumption is a key in change
Fundamentally, the goal of reducing environmental pressure
by consumption can be reached via three routes: greening pro-
duction and products, shifting demand to low-impact consump-
tion categories, and lowering material demands [28,30,57,58].
Since society is adverse to interfere directly with consumer
choice and markets, it is not surprising that government plans
for SCP often narrow down to the first point under banners like
Car transport e essential to be happy?
Megacities in e.g. Thailand, Indonesia and China
are infamous for their gridlocked traffic and air
pollution. In Curitiba, a major city in the South
of Brazil, some bright city planners created a dif-
ferent history. They took the strategic decision
to base further city development on principles
like minimizing urban sprawl, keeping the historic
district intact, and to use a cost-effective express
bus system as the back bone for mass transit.
The approach was so successful, that now 60%
of the travel in the city takes place via the public
bus system [4]. The city itself is one of the most
livable in Brazil. Hong Kong and Singapore
reached similar success in ensuring that public
rather than private transport takes on the brunt
of the modal split. This is a good example of indi-
rectly influencing consumption patterns.
dematerialization and resource productivity [32,52,cf. 59].
But history has shown that this strategy alone fails, due to
what has been loosely termed the rebound effect: the growth
of material consumption [60,61]. Yet, there are plenty of op-
tions to influence consumption patterns indirectly, without
loss e or even improvement e of quality of life. And it is
not difficult to see why. Important parts of the financial and
time expenditures of consumers are on duties such as com-
muting, business travel, etc., or compensate for a low local
quality of (social) environment. That changing such patterns
can yield a double dividend is rather likely e above a certain
threshold, improved quality of life, a higher degree of happi-
ness, etc., is not related to material consumption or GDP
[62e66].
7. Short-term measures can build upon mainstream be-
liefs and paradigms
On the short-term, many SCP solutions can already be
implemented that make positive use of the systemic meta
factors listed before: basic principles that friend and foe,
by and large agree upon [cf. 67e69]. Sure, they will need
leadership that makes a difference, if only to counter rear-
guard fights by dinosaurs setting traps like asking for evi-
dence beyond reasonable doubt before action can be taken
[cf. 70,71]. But, now widely held values that markets should
be transparent and fair, consumers should be sovereign, and
that sustainability needs action, gives legitimacy to measures
like [47,72,73]:
 Creating a level playing field for greening production and
products;
 Abolishing perverse subsidies and internalizing external
costs;
 A. Tukker et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1218e1225
The global compact
Around 2000, the UN launched the millennium
development goals [15], and later embarked via
the global compact [75] a strategic discussion
with industry on how to realize them. The global
compact articulates four sets of core values in do-
ing businesses, covering sustainability and social
standards, and managed to enlist 2900 (mostly
large) businesses supporting it. Though imple-
mentation is complex, it sets the direction and
a stage for discussing how to do it, and to ques-
tion deviating behavior. A perfect move that
helped to position a powerful actor (business) to
support changes for a better world.
 Promoting transparency about environmental and social
performance, and countering oligo- and monopolistic mar-
kets that reduce consumer choice.
Making darkness visible (showing who benefits from un-
sustainability) and articulating meta-values and -trends posi-
tive for sustainability are other tactics to pursue [74]. And
even radical SCP options can be tried out on the short-term.
These often sow seeds for change, and the front runners can
often do their thing very well in smartly chosen niches that
are not too much affected by forces at landscape and regime
levels [10,12,13]. On the long-term, such novel practices can
be important factors in changing meta-views and -paradigms.
8. Problems where only a rough agreement on the goals
and approaches exist, require experimentation
Sometimes there is agreement on the desired direction of
change, but the road to it is uncertain (e.g. due to the radical
nature of the required changes) [cf. 76]. In such cases, ap-
proaches have been proposed using terms like roadmapping
[53], indicative planning or learning [cf. 77], reflexive
governance [78], and transition management [10,13,79].
While such concepts have different roots, they all acknowl-
edge that the road to sustainability requires a joint search
process that entails a process of mutually enforcing actions
for change via the following lines:
1 Radical change usually takes a long period and command
and control approaches usually will not work. Indicative
planning and developing strategic intent with a process
of learning by doing along the way are likely to be
much more successful [10,13,71,77].
2 A process of visioning and experimentation, particularly
when it is not totally clear into which direction the change
has to go, is essential [77,80,81].
3 Flagship (niche) experiments with new practices and sys-
tems should provide stepping-stones for potential future
new socio-technical constellations [82,cf. 83].
1221
Indicative planning and leapfrogging e
Dongtan Ecocity
The Curitiba story is one example of adaptive
management. Another exciting example is Dong-
tan Ecocity in China. Acknowledging that millions
of peasants will become city dwellers in the next
decades, the Chinese developed the vision that
the new cities to house them should be as sus-
tainable as possible e probably the only way to
avoid that their economic growth will be stopped
due to resource scarcity and pollution. The cities
are planned to be ecologically friendly, with
zero-greenhouse-emission transit and complete
self-sufficiency in water and energy, together
with the use of zero energy building principles.
This initiative forms a massive learning by doing
exercise, guided by principles like energy-neutrality
and self-sufficiency [84,85].
9. Problems that question mainstream beliefs and
paradigms require informed deliberation
These are the more difficult issues to tackle, and that really
require discussion of widely held beliefs and paradigms in so-
ciety [86e88]. It concerns informed deliberation on issues
such as [53,54]:
a the underlying growth engine in our markets [89];
b how and if markets contribute to fairness and equity [cf. 90];
The happy planet index: challenging the
paradigm that all growth brings well-being
The happy planet index (HPI) measures the eco-
logical efficiency with which, country by country,
people achieve long and happy lives. In doing so,
it strips our view of the economy back to its abso-
lute basics: what goes in (natural resources), and
what comes out (human lives of different length
and happiness). The HPI suggests strongly that
above a threshold, high footprints (related to high
consumption per capita and high GDPs) are no pre-
condition for a high quality of life. One could even
go so far that having a very high GDP (and hence
footprint) per capita is no sign of progress, but
rather a sign of inefficiency in providing what truly
matters: countries with equal quality of life and life
years may differ by as much as a factor four in foot-
print. Once the factors determining this difference
are better understood e and shared e this will
give important guidance of how to structure pat-
terns of consumption and production [62].
Source: www.neweconomics.org.
1222 A. Tukker et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1218e1225

c how consumption supportive to sustainability can be dis-
cerned from consumption that is destructive for institu-
tions and non-market goods providing quality of life [91];
d how to develop novel and dematerialized ways of realizing
social aspirations [cf. 41,66], and how this relates to novel
business models [57,92];
e how to maintain a fair power balance in the triangle of
business, government and consumer (e.g. by questioning
the role of advertising and media) [cf. 93].
All these issues pose fundamental questions about the way
how our market based economic system works and about the
institutions that have been developed to support it. Gathering
credible evidence of how consumption and production
systems can be organized more efficiently in providing
quality of life [62,63], showing inspiring examples of alterna-
tive ways of doing things [42,43,94], are tactics to be pursued.
10. Conclusion
Based on the findings reviewed in this Note from the
Field, we would recommend a structure of a 10-year
framework of programs that is reflected in Fig. 1 [54]. It
should address, as key domains, food, mobility, and energy
use/housing (the last two clearly related to urban development)
[19,20,95]. It should use a systemic perspective on the SCP
challenge [96] and differentiate between developed, fast devel-
oping, and base of the pyramid economies [2,3,17,18].
SCORE!, focuses mainly on developed economies, and here
we propose to differentiate between:
 measures that fit with mainstream beliefs and paradigms.
Here, governments could make operational agreements
on implementation of instruments like green public pro-
curement, stimulating ecodesign, etc.;
 problems where a rough agreement on goals exists, but
where change is radical, or means are uncertain, and hence
planning is difficult. Here, governments could foster vi-
sioning, experimentation, and support e.g. international
collaboration in leapfrogging programs;
 problems that outright clash with the mainstream beliefs
and paradigms. Here, governments could foster informed
deliberation on the more fundamental issues related to
markets, governance and growth.

Meta-structures: infrastructure, geopolitical facts, etc.

Landscape Meta-values: Individual sovereignty, democracy, free markets & trade, growth, fairness
(factors out of reach for actors Meta-trends: individualisation, internationalisation, intensification, informatisation
in the regime) Meta-shocks: wars, crises, natural disasters

Regime
(ways of doing things in a Production Markets Consumption
domain, e.g. mobility)

Time horizon of impact
Short term impact
Goals and direction: agreement
Means: fairly clear
Main problem: overcoming
opposition of laggards.
Medium term impact
Goals and direction: agreement,
at least on the sense of urgency
for change
Means: not clear
Main problem: focusing direction
and learning about best means
Long term impact
Goals and direction: controversial
No insight in means-ends
relations
Main problem: managing a
mental revolution in a nice way
Actions and leading actor Dominant leverage point
Business Government Consumers/citizens/NGOs Technical and incentive
Apply cleaner production, ecodesign, etc. Internalizing externalities Exercise sustainable choice change
Manage supply and downstream chains; see Abolish perverse subsidies Set steps towards Lifestyles Of Health And
the examples of CSR, FSC, MSC, etc. Counter mono- and Sustainability (LOHAS)
Apply choice editing oligopolies and promote As citizen and worker: articulate and encourage
Promote industry self-regulation on the above consumer power and sustainable meta-values
Use meta factors as inspiration for new choice Government (combine the below for effect!)
sustainable products, business models (e.g. Promote transparency on GPP (focus on visible examples with ripple
product-services), and other strategic social and environmental effects; e.g. providing high quality school
innovations, e.g. via experience design issues related to products meals)
Government Set basic advertising Provide infrastructure for sustainable choice of
Provide level playingfield supporting the norms: fair, not promoting similar quality; create no-need contexts
above (covenants, regulations, standards) damaging offerings, and Motivate via appealing engagement and leader-
Foster greening innovation systems and not directed to vulnerable ship, and repetitive feedback (e.g. smart meters)
support sustainable (niche) entrepreneurs groups Business
Articulate and encourage sustainable meta- Promote sustainable consumer feedback (e.g.
values smart meters, green credit cards)
Apply sustainability marketing and demand
side management
Government (as initiator, in conjunction with business and NGOs): start processes of product roadmapping / indicative planning Enhancing self-
/ transition management / other learning and visioning approaches to overcome lock-ins and stimulate a sustainability focus for organising capacity and
long term change learning
Business: develop competing for the future capabilities
All: develop and test alternatives in niches (life boats)
All (emphasis on citizens and government): stimulating small group management via e.g. fostering locality and the creation of
local feedbacks.
All: Foster deliberation on the more fundamental issues related to markets, governance and growth: Adapting goals and
Beyond the consumer economy how does the sustainable growth engine look like? paradigms
Inequity how to promote markets that foster a fair level of (in)equity?
Consuming less or less material when does it help to reach a high quality of life?
Social aspirations and status how to reach this in an immaterial way, or damp this race altogether?
Power balances how to restore them in the triangle of business, government and citizens?

Fig. 1. A framework for policy and action for sustainable consumption and production (SCP) [54].
 A. Tukker et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1218e1225
Acknowledgements and disclaimer
SCORE! is funded by the EUs sixth Framework Program.
This paper, an edited version of a policy brief distributed at the
UN Expert Meeting on Sustainable Consumption in Stock-
holm, June 2007, is based on a book in production at
Greenleaf Publishing ltd., called System Innovation for
Sustainability e Governance of radical change to sustainable
consumption and production. It will be available in the fall of
2007. Further information will be available at www.greenleaf-
publishing.com. The book benefited from contributions of over
30 presenters during a workshop organized at the EEA, in
Copenhagen, on 20e21 April 2006, who are greatly acknowl-
edged for their input.
Statements in this policy brief may or may not reflect the
position of the sponsor. Further information: www.score-
network.org; or arnold.tukker@tno.nl, mads.borup@risoe.dk;
saadi.lahlou@edf.fr, u.tischner@econcept.org, mcharter@
ucreative.ac.uk, eivind.sto@sifo.no, theo.geerken@vito.be,
carlo.vezzoli@polimi.it.
References
[1] Tukker A, Charter M, Vezzoli C, Sto E, Munch Andersen M, editors.
System innovation for sustainability 1. Perspectives on radical change
to sustainable consumption and production. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf
Publishing Ltd.; 2007, in press.
[2] Hart S, Milstein MB. Global sustainability and the creative destruction of
industries. Sloan Management Review 1999;Fall:23.
[3] Tukker A. Leapfrogging into the future: developing for sustainability. In-
ternational Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development 2005;
1(1):65e84.
[4] Weizsacker EU, von A Lovins, Lovins LH. Factor four. Doubling wealth,
halving resource use. UK: Earthscan Publishers; 1996.
[5] Weterings RAPM, Opschoor JB. The ecocapacity as a challenge to tech-
nological development. Netherlands: Rijswijk: raad voor het milieu- en
natuuronderzoek; 1992. Rijswijk.
[6] Schor JB. Prices and quantities: unsustainable consumption and the
global economy. Ecological Economics 2005;55:309e20.
[7] Wiedmann Thomas, Minx Jan, Barrett John, Wackernagel Mathis. Allo-
cating ecological footprints to final consumption categories with inpute
output analysis. Ecological Economics 2006;56(1):28e48.
[8] WWF. The living planet report. Gland, Switzerland: WWF, <http://www.
wwf.org.uk/filelibrary/pdf/lpr2004.pdf>; 2004 [accessed 20.06.2007].
[9] Princen T. The logic of sufficiency. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press;
2005.
[10] Elzen B, Geels FW, Green K, editors. System innovation and the transi-
tion to sustainability: theory, evidence and policy. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar; 2004.
[11] Hughes TP. The seamless web: technology, science, etcetera, etcetera.
Social Studies of Science 1986;16(2):281e92.
[12] Geels FW. Technological transitions and system innovations: a co-evolu-
tionary and socio-technical analysis. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar; 2005.
[13] Rotmans J. Transitiemanagement. Sleutel voor een duurzame samen-
leving. [Transition management. Key to a sustainable society]. Assen,
Netherlands: Van Gorcum; 2003.
[14] Meyers Norman, Kent Jennifer. The new consumers: the influence of
affluence on the environment. Washington D.C: Island Press/Shearwater
Books; 2004.
[15] UN. The millennium development goals report. New York, USA:
United Nations. Available from: <http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/
pdf/mdg2007.pdf>; 2007 [accessed 20.06.2007].
1223
[16] Sachs J. The end of poverty. How we can make it happen in our lifetime.
New York, USA: Penguin Press; 2005.
[17] Prahalad CK. The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Eradicating
poverty through profits. Upper Saddle River, NJ/Philadelphia, PA,
USA: Wharton School Publishing; 2004.
[18] UNEP and CSCP. Background paper for the UNEP 9th high-level
seminar on sustainable consumption and production (SCP9) e creating
solutions for industry, environment and development 10e12 December
2006. Arusha, Tanzania; 2006. Available from: <http://www.scp-
centre.org/uploads/media/scp9_bckgrdpaper_final_cscp.pdf>; [accessed
20.06.2007].
[19] Collins A, Flynn A, Wiedmann T, Barrett J. The environmental impacts
of consumption at a sub-national level: the ecological footprint of Car-
diff. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2006;10(3).
[20] Dall O, Toft J, Andersen TT. Danske husholdningers miljbelastning. K-
benhavn: Miljstyrelsen (Arbejdsrappport 13) Available from: <http://
www.mst.dk/udgiv/Publikationer/2002/87-7972-094-3/pdf/87-7972-095-
1.PDF>; 2002.
[21] Huppes G, de Koning A, Suh S, Heijungs R, van Oers L, Nielsen P, et al.
Environmental impacts of consumption in the European Union using de-
tailed inputeoutput analysis. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2006;10(3).
[22] Moll S, Acosta J. Environmental implications of resource use e NAMEA
based environmental inputeoutput analyses for Germany. Journal of
Industrial Ecology 2006;10(3).
[23] Nijdam DS, Wilting HC, Goedkoop MJ, Madsen J. Environmental load
from Dutch private consumption. How much damage takes place abroad?
Journal of Industrial Ecology 2005;9(1e2):147e68.
[24] Palm V, Wadeskog A, Finnveden G. Swedish experiences of using envi-
ronmental accounts data for integrated product policy (IPP) issues. Journal
of Industrial Ecology 2006;10(3).
[25] Peters GP, Hertwich EG. Measuring household environmental impacts:
the case of Norway. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2006;10(3).
[26] Weidema BP, Nielsen AM, Christiansen K, Norris G, Notten P, Suh S,
et al. Prioritisation within the integrated product policy. 2.-0 LCA consul-
tants for danish EPA. Copenhagen, Denmark; 2005.
[27] Tukker A, Huppes G, Suh S, Heijungs R, Guinee J, de Koning A, et al.
Environmental impacts of products. Seville, Spain: ESTO/IPTS; 2006.
[28] Hertwich E. Life cycle approaches to sustainable consumption: a critical
review. Environmental Science & Technology 2005;39(13):4673.
[29] Tukker A, Jansen B. Environmental impacts of products. A detailed
review of studies. Journal of Industrial Ecology 2006;10(3):159e82.
[30] Tukker A. Special issue on priorities for environmental product policy.
Journal of Industrial Ecology 2006;10(3).
[31] UN. Report of the United Nations conference on environment and develop-
ment (Rio de Janeiro, 3e14 June 1992). Rio declaration on environment
and development. New York, USA: UN; 1992.
[32] Fuchs D, Lorek S. Sustainable consumption governance: a history of prom-
ises and failures. Journal of Consumer Policy September, 2005;28(3).
[33] De Wit D. Setting sustainable consumption on the agenda. Masters The-
sis. TNO/Erasmus University Rotterdam, Delft/Rotterdam Netherlands;
2006.
[34] Tukker Arnold, Cohen Maurie J, de Zoysa Uchita, Hertwich Edgar,
Hofstetter Patrick, Inaba Atsushi, et al. The Oslo declaration on sustain-
able consumption. Journal of Industrial Ecology Winter/Spring 2006;
10(No. 1e2):9e14.
[35] Barber J. Civil society and progress toward sustainable production and
consumption. In: Waiting for delivery. A civil society assessment of
progress toward sustainable production and consumption. International
coalition for sustainable production & consumption, p/o integrative strat-
egies forum. Rockville, MD, USA. Available from: <http://icspac.net/
files/WaitingForDeliveryReport.pdf>; 2002 [accessed 22.07.2007].
[36] Shove E. Comfort, cleanliness and convenience. The social organisation
of normality. Oxford, UK: Berg publishers; 2003.
[37] Spaargaren G. The ecological modernization of production and consump-
tion. Essays in environmental sociology. Netherlands, Wageningen:
Landbouw Universiteit; 1997.
[38] Kemp R. Transition management for sustainable consumption and pro-
duction. In: Tukker A, Charter M, Vezzoli C, Sto E, Munch Andersen
1224 A. Tukker et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1218e1225
M, editors. System innovation for sustainability 1. Perspectives on radical
change to sustainable consumption and production. Sheffield, UK:
Greenleaf Publishing Ltd.; 2007, in press.
[39] Kingdon JW. Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston: Little
Brown; 1984. p. 23.
[40] Munch Andersen M. Review: system transition processes for realising
sustainable consumption and production. In: Tukker A, Charter M, Vez-
zoli C, Sto E, Munch Andersen M, editors. System innovation for
sustainability 1. Perspectives on radical change to sustainable consump-
tion and production. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing Ltd.; 2007,
in press.
[41] Jackson T. The earthscan reader in sustainable consumption. London,
UK: Earthscan Publications Ltd; 2006.
[42] Available from: http://www.slowfood.com/ [accessed 20.06.2007].
[43] Available from: http://www.newdream.org/ [accessed 20.06.2007].
[44] Goodall C. How to live a low carbon life. The individuals guide to
stopping climate change. London, UK: Earthscan Publications Ltd;
2007.
[45] Elkington John, Hailes Julia. The green consumer guide. From shampoo
to champagne. High-street shopping for a better environment. London,
UK: Victor Gollancz; 1989.
[46] Elkington John. Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st
century business. Oxford, UK: Capstone Publishing; 1997.
[47] Holliday C, Pepper J. Sustainability through the market. Seven keys to
success. Geneva, Switzerland: WBCSD. c/o E&Y Direct. Available
from: <www.wbcsd.org>; 2001 [accessed 28.07.2006].
[48] St E, Throne-Holst H, Vitters G. The role of consumers in environmen-
tal successes. In: Grunert KG, Thgersen J, editors. Consumers, policy
and the environment. A tribute to folke Olander. New York: Springer;
2005. p. 325e56.
[49] Sheikha Hayarashed Al Khalifa HE. United Nations global compact
leaders summit. Chairpersons summary ministerial roundtable on the
role of governments in promoting responsible corporate citizenship. Ge-
neva, Switzerland; July 6, 2007. Available from: <http://www.unglobal
compact.org/docs/summit2007/Role_of_Governments_Chairs_summary.
pdf>; [accessed 22.07.2007].
[50] Global Roundtable on Climate Change. The path to climate sustainabil-
ity. A joint statement by the global roundtable on climate change, ;
February 20, 2007. Available from: <http://www.earth.columbia.edu/
grocc/documents/GROCC_statement_2-27_1.pdf>; February 20, 2007
[accessed 20.06.2007].
[51] Charter Martin, Casper Gray, Tom Clark, Tim Woolman. Review: the
role of business in realising SCP. In: Tukker A, Charter M, Vezzoli C,
Sto E, Munch Andersen M, editors. System innovation for sustainability
1. Perspectives on radical change to sustainable consumption and produc-
tion. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing Ltd.; 2007, in press.
[52] Berg A. European forerunners of sustainable consumption and production
programmes e challenges and possibilities in an emerging environmental
policy field. Paper for a Marie Curie European summer school on earth
system governance. Amsterdam, Netherlands; May 2007. Available
from: <http://www.2007amsterdamconference.org/Downloads/07Summer
School%20e%20Berg.pdf>; [accessed 20.06.2007].
[53] UK Sustainable Consumption Roundtable. I will if you will. Towards
sustainable consumption. Sustainable development commission and
national consumer council. London, UK; 2006. Available from:
<www.sd-commission.org.uk>.
[54] Tukker A. Conclusions: change management for SCP. In: Tukker A, Char-
ter M, Vezzoli C, Sto E, Munch Andersen M, editors. System Innovation
for sustainability. Perspectives on radical change to sustainable consump-
tion and production. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing Ltd.; 2007,
in press.
[55] St Eivind, Harald Throne-Holst, Pal Strandbakken, Gunnar Vitters.
Review: a multi-dimensional approach to the study of consumption in
modern societies and the potentials for radical sustainable changes. In:
Tukker A, Charter M, Vezzoli C, Sto E, Munch Andersen M, editors.
System innovation for sustainability. Perspectives on radical change to
sustainable consumption and production. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Pub-
lishing Ltd.; 2007, in press.
[56] Scholl G. product service systems e taking a functional and a symbolic
perspective on usership. In: Tukker A, Charter M, Vezzoli C, Sto E,
Munch Andersen M, editors. System innovation for sustainability. Per-
spectives on radical change to sustainable consumption and production.
Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing Ltd.; 2007, in press.
[57] Tukker A, Tischner U, editors. New business for old Europe. Product
services, sustainability and competitiveness. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf
Publishing Ltd.; 2006.
[58] UNEP. Consumption opportunities. Geneva, Switzerland: UNEP; 2002.
[59] Ekins P, Simon S, Deutsch L, Folke C, De Groot R. A framework for the
practical application of the concepts of critical nature capital and strong
sustainability. Ecological Economics 2003;44:165e85.
[60] Hertwich EG. Consumption and the rebound effect: an industrial ecology
perspective. Journal of Industrial Ecology Winter/Spring 2005;
9(1e2):85e98.
[61] Binswanger M. Technological progress and sustainable development:
what about the rebound effect? Ecological Economics 2001;36:
119e32.
[62] Marks N, Abdallah S, Simms A, Thompson S. The (un) happy planet. An
index of human well-being and environmental impact. London, UK: New
Economics Foundation and Friends of the Earth; 2006.
[63] Layard R. Happiness: lessons from a new science. London, UK: Allen
Lane/Penguin Press; 2005.
[64] Binswanger M. Why does income growth fail to make us happier?
Searching for the treadmills behind the paradox of happiness. The Jour-
nal of Socio-Economics 2006;35:366e81.
[65] The Economist. Happiness (and how to measure it). Special holiday
double issue. December 23, 2006.
[66] Jackson T, Jager W, Stagl S. Beyond insatiability e needs theory, con-
sumption and sustainability. In: Reisch L, Rpke I, editors. The ecolog-
ical economics of consumption. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar; 2004
[chapter 5].
[67] Schon DA, Rein M. Frame reflection. Towards the resolution of intracta-
ble policy controversies. New York, USA: Basic Books; 1994.
[68] Sabatier P. Knowledge, policy oriented learning, and policy change. An
advocacy coalition framework. Knowledge 1987;8(4):649e92.
[69] Fischer F. Evaluating public policy. Chicago, USA: Nelson-Hall Pub-
lishers; 1995.
[70] Jasanoff SS. The fifth branch. Science advisors as policy makers. Cam-
bridge, USA: Harvard University Press; 1990. 250.
[71] De Geus A. The living company: habits for survival in a turbulent
environment. Washington, DC: Longview Publishing; 1997.
[72] ANPED. Eco-forum and EEB Ostend NGO statement towards sustainable
consumption and production patterns. EU Stakeholder Meeting 24e26
November 2004. Available from: <www.eeb.org/activities/sustainable_
development/NGO-Ostend-Statement-24-11-2004.pdf>; [accessed
20.03.2007].
[73] Commission of the European Communities. Integrated product policy e
building on environmental life-cycle thinking. Communication from the
commission to the council and the European parliament. COM (2003)
302 final, Brussels; 2003 [accessed 18.6.2003].
[74] Lebel L, Garden P, Giap DH, Shamshub H. Enabling sustainable
production and consumption systems. USER Working Paper WP-
2006e08. Unit for social and environmental research: Chiang Mai, Thai-
land; 2006.
[75] Available from: http://www.unglobalcompact.org/ [accessed 10.06.
2007].
[76] Hisschemoller M. De democratie van problemen. De relatie tussen de in-
houd van beleidsproblemen en methoden van politieke besluitvorming
[The democracy of problems. The relation between policy problems
and methods for political decision making. Ph.D. thesis. Amsterdam,
Netherlands: VU Uitgevery, Free University of Amsterdam; 1993.
[77] Hamel G, Prahalad CK. Competing for the future. Boston, USA: Harvard
Business Review Press; 1994.
[78] Voss J-P, Kemp R, Bauknecht D. Reflexive governance a view on the
emerging path. In: Voss J-P, Bauknecht D, Kemp R, editors. Reflexive
governance for sustainable development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar;
2006. p. 419e37.
 A. Tukker et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 16 (2008) 1218e1225
[79] Loorbach D. Transition management. New mode of governance for sus-
tainable development. Ph.D. thesis. Utrecht, Netherlands: International
Books/Rotterdam, Netherlands: Erasmus Universiteit; 2007.
[80] Sondeijker Saartje, Geurts Jac, Rotmans Jan, Tukker Arnold. Imagining
sustainability: the added value of transition scenarios in transition
management. Foresight 2006;8(5):15e30.
[81] Quist J. Backcasting for a sustainable future. The impact after 10 years.
Ph.D. thesis. Delft, Netherlands: Eburon/TU Delft; 2007.
[82] Kemp R, van den Bosch S. Transitieexperimenten. Praktijkexperimenten
met de potentie om bij te dragen aan transities. Delft/Rotterdam, Nether-
lands: TNO and DRIFT; 2006. KCT Publicatie No. 1.
[83] Christensen Clayton M. The innovators dilemma: when new technolo-
gies cause great firms to fail. Cambridge, MA, USA: Harvard Business
School Press; 1997.
[84] Langellier Jean-Pierre, Pierre Jean, Pedroletti Brice. China to build
first eco-city. Guardian Weekly. Available from: <http://english.cri.
cn/811/2006/05/07/301@85444.htm>; 7 May 2006 [accessed 20.07.
2007].
[85] Website of the Shanghai-Chongming-Dongtan Investment & Develop-
ment Co. Ltd. Available from: http://www.dongtan.com.cn/english/
gywm/ [accessed 20.07.2007].
[86] Meadows Donella H, Meadows Dennis L, Randers Jrgen,
Behrens III William W. The limits to growth. New York: Universe
Books; 1972.
1225
[87] Meadows D, Randers J, Meadows D. Limits to growth. The 30-year
update. White River Jct., VT, USA: Chelsea Green Publishing; 2004.
[88] Kuhn TS. The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, USA: Univer-
sity of Chicago Press; 1962.
[89] Jespersen J. Macroeconomic stability: sustainable development and full
employment. In: Reisch L, Rpke I, editors. The ecological economics
of sustainable consumption. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar; 2004. p.
233e50.
[90] Stiglitz Joseph. Making globalization work. New York, USA: W.W.
Norton & Company, Inc.; 2006.
[91] Scherhorn G. Sustainability, consumer sovereignty and the concept of the
market. In: Grunert KG, Thgersen J, editors. Consumers, policy and the
environment. A tribute to folke Olander. New York, USA: Springer; 2005.
[92] Mont O. Product-service systems: panacea or myth? PhD dissertation.
Sweden: IIIEE, University of Lund; 2004.
[93] Montesquieu C. De lesprit des lois. Available from: http://classiques.
uqac.ca/classiques/montesquieu/de_esprit_des_lois/de_esprit_des_lois_
tdm.html#Anchor-23543; 1758 [accessed 20.07.2007].
[94] Manzini E, Jegou F. Sustainable everyday. Scenarios of urban life. Milan:
Edizioni Ambiente; 2003.
[95] European Environment Agency. Household consumption and the envi-
ronment. Copenhagen, Denmark: EEA; 2005 [Report No 11/2005].
[96] Meadows Donella. Leverage points. Place to intervene in a system.
Hartland, VT, USA: The Sustainability Institute; 1999.