Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAshford, Nicholas A.
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-24T20:06:55Z
dc.date.available2021-06-24T20:06:55Z
dc.date.issued2002
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/131030
dc.description.abstractThis article challenges certain tenets of the theories of reflexive law and ecological modernization. While far-sighted prevention-oriented and structural changes are needed, some proponents of these theories argue that the very industries and firms that create environmental problems can, through continuous institutional learning; the application of life cycle analysis; dialogue and networks with stakeholders; and implementation of "environmental management systems," be transformed into sustainable industries and firms. While useful, these reforms are insufficient. It is not marginal or incremental changes that are needed for sustainability, but rather major product, process, and system transformations – often beyond the capacity of the dominant industries and firms. This article also questions the alleged failure of regulation to stimulate needed technological changes, and identifies the conditions under which innovation for sustainability can occur. Finally, it discusses differences in needed policies for industrialized and developing countries.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Behavioral Scientisten_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/*
dc.titleGovernment And Innovation in Europe And North Americaen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record