作者： Arnold Tukker,  Sophie Emmert,  Martin Charter,  Carlo Vezzoli,  Eivind Sto,  Maj Munch Andersen,  Theo Geerken,  Ursula Tischner,  Saadi Lahlou
作者单位： 1TNO Built Environment and Geosciences, PO Box 49, 2600 AA Delft, Netherlands
                     2Centre for Sustainable Design, College of Creative Arts at Farnham, Falkner Road, Farnham, Surrey, GU9 7DS, UK
                     3Politecnico di Milano, Industrial Design, Arts, Communication and Fashion (INDACO), via Durando 38/A, 20158 Milano, Italy
                     4National Institute for Consumer Research, P.O. Box 4682 Nydalen, 0405 Oslo, Norway
                     5Risoe National Laboratory, P.O. Box 49, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark
                     6VITO, Flemish Institute for Technological Research, Boeretang 200, B-2400 Mol, Belgium
                     7Econcept, Agency for Sustainable Design, Alteburger Strasse 32, D-50678 Cologne, Germany
                     8Electricité de France, 1 Avenue Gén de Gaulle, Clamart, France
刊名： Journal of Cleaner Production, 2007, Vol.16 (11), pp.1218-1225
来源数据库： Elsevier Journal
DOI： 10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.08.015
关键词： Sustainable consumption and production;  Governance;  Radical change;  Sustainability;  System innovation;  
英文摘要：  This “Note from the field,” is an edited version of a policy brief summarizing the key findings from the first half of the Sustainable Consumption 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 implementation 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.