Abstract
Energy has been at the forefront of the sustainable development discourse for quite some time as policymakers, industry heads and society at large have taken progressive steps to cut carbon via renewable energy technologies and energy efficiency measures. Unfortunately, some of these methods have given rise to perverse socio-environmental effects; as materials have been unnecessarily sacrificed, mines and wells have opened and plantations grown, in the name of energy saving. This paper contributes to clean energy-orientated policies and practices by exploring the discipline of sustainable materials. We first review two strategies: energy efficiency linked to materials; and material efficiency, meaning “doing more with less.” We find that, although both contribute significantly, they are hampered by the rebound effect and their focus on “doing less bad” rather than “good”. Furthermore, they do not in themselves evaluate the services and societal wellbeing that materials provide. We then define “material services” and propose a wider strategy that encompasses and enhances the previous two. Under the new strategy, we argue that sustainable materials should be considered as those that do no harm and which optimally, through the services provided, contribute to better sustainable development policies and practices.
Highlights
Throughout time, humankind has required materials and energy to thrive
We argue that sustainable materials should be considered as those that do no harm and which optimally, through the services provided, contribute to better sustainable development policies and practices
Allwood et al call for a transition from a carbon cutting strategy based on conventional approaches, to one that emphasises the potential benefits of reducing material consumption in the production phase
Summary
Throughout time, humankind has required materials and energy to thrive. the only way, so far, for countries to advance and develop entails their mass consumption [1,2]. Allwood et al call for a transition from a carbon cutting strategy based on conventional approaches, to one that emphasises the potential benefits of reducing material consumption in the production phase The former strategy is referred to as “one eye open” and the latter as “both eyes open.”. The added value of the “eyes wide open” strategy is that it breaks a production-centric paradigm by extending the scope to consumption and the wider effect that material services have on societal and environmental wellbeing This is in line with the United Nations Environment Programme’s broader and more inclusive definition of resource efficiency: producing more wellbeing with less material consumption to meet human needs, whilst respecting the ecological carrying capacity of the Earth [4,11]. “material services” have no consensus as to their definition and scope [15], the need for this paper, which defines the term and expands the aforementioned concepts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
