Next Article in Journal
Waste Municipal Service and Informal Recycling Sector in Fast-Growing Asian Cities: Co-Existence, Opposition or Integration?
Next Article in Special Issue
Scarcity and Environmental Impact of Mineral Resources—An Old and Never-Ending Discussion
Previous Article in Journal
How Much Environment Do Humans Need? Evidence from an Integrated Online User Application Linking Natural Resource Use and Subjective Well-Being in Germany
Previous Article in Special Issue
Exergy as a Measure of Resource Use in Life Cycle Assessment and Other Sustainability Assessment Tools
Open AccessArticle

Dematerialization—A Disputable Strategy for Resource Conservation Put under Scrutiny

1
Section for Resource Conservation, Material Cycles, Minerals and Metal Industry, German Environment Agency, Wörlitzer Platz 1, 06844 Dessau-Roßlau, Germany
2
Division for Emissions Trading, German Emission Allowance Trading Authority, German Environment Agency, Bismarckplatz 1, 14193 Berlin, Germany
3
Division for Sustainable Production and Products, Waste Management, German Environment Agency, Wörlitzer Platz 1, 06844 Dessau-Roßlau, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Resources 2017, 6(4), 68; https://doi.org/10.3390/resources6040068
Received: 5 October 2017 / Revised: 16 November 2017 / Accepted: 24 November 2017 / Published: 4 December 2017
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Consideration of Abiotic Natural Resources in Life Cycle Assessments)
Dematerialization is a paradigm in resource conservation strategies. Material use should be reduced so that resource consumption as a whole can be lowered. The benefit for humankind should be completely decoupled from the natural expenditure by a definite factor X. Instinctively, this approach is convincing, because our entire value-added chain is based on material transformation. Targets for mass-based indicators are found within the context of justification for ecological carrying capacity and intergenerational fairness, taking into account the economic and socio-political expectation of raw material scarcity. However, in light of further development of material flow indicators and the related dematerialization targets, the question arises as to what they actually stand for and what significance they have for resource conservation. Can it be assumed that pressure on the environment will decline steadily if the use of materials is reduced, whether for an economy or at the level of individual products or processes? The present narrative review paper has discussed this issue and takes into account the authors’ experience of the extended political and scientific discourse on dematerialization in Germany and Europe. As a result, a high “resource relevance” cannot be inferred from high physical material inputs at any of the levels considered. It has been shown that establishing mass-based indicators as control and target variables is questionable and that dematerialization exclusively based on such indicators without mapping other resources should be critically examined. View Full-Text
Keywords: natural resources; mass-based indicators; dematerialization; MFA; raw materials; resource conservation; resource efficiency; criticality; area of protection; precautionary principle natural resources; mass-based indicators; dematerialization; MFA; raw materials; resource conservation; resource efficiency; criticality; area of protection; precautionary principle
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Müller, F.; Kosmol, J.; Keßler, H.; Angrick, M.; Rechenberg, B. Dematerialization—A Disputable Strategy for Resource Conservation Put under Scrutiny. Resources 2017, 6, 68.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop