Interdisciplinary understanding of macro rebound effects. How can we understand and mitigate them?

Global energy consumption, resource extraction, and greenhouse gas emissions are trending upwards, not downwards. We are far from meeting the goals set forth in the Kyoto Protocol (UNEP 2012). An understanding of rebound effects might be of great use in understanding why policy aiming to curb emissions such as energy efficiency has failed to yield the improvements they seemed to assure.

The energy or GHG-emission and environmental impact rebound effect (take-back effect) refers to behavioral and systemic responses to measures designed to reduce energy consumption or emissions. According to Maxwell et al (2011), a rebound effect could in general be understood through the use of the IPAT equation (Holdren and Ehrlich 1974, Commoner 1972): I (Impact) = P (Population) *A (Affluence)*T (Technological Efficiency). Impact is - in an environmental context - the total environmental impact. Thus, the total environmental impact depends on the population level, average products and services consumption per capita (A), and the environmental efficiency of production (T). Rebound effect refers to the relationship between improvements in technical efficiency (T) which lead to an increase in per capita consumption (A).

Energy economists distinguish among three different types of rebound effect: direct, indirect, and economy‐wide rebound effects (Sorell et al. 2007, Dimitropoulos 2007). For example, expected reductions in fuel consumption (and thus saving money) from making cars more fuel-efficient can partly be offset by car owners using their savings to drive extra kilometers. This is called direct rebound effects. It might also be the case that these savings are used on other activities, e.g. long distance flights, which could even lead to a net increase in energy use. This is called indirect rebound effect. The sum of direct and indirect rebound effects lead to so called economy-wide rebound effects at the macro level. Several researchers (Maxwell et al. 2011; Høyer 2010; Schneider 2008; Sorell et. al 2007) have argued that macro level rebound effects are currently not properly understood. Nevertheless, macro level rebound effects are fiercely debated. This controversy and lack of understanding makes it difficult to formulate policies that will actually help meet key environmental goals.

Rebound effects are widely discussed within energy economics. Where there is a disagreement in connection to prevails on detail questions, such as the scope of the output elasticity of energy (namely, how energy as a factor of production leverages overall economic growth), the degree of substitutability of all factors of production, or the relationship between efficiency increases and product/service innovation. It is difficult to prove or disapprove how the dynamics between energy efficiency and growth is based on macro-economic growth models. The results of the models depend on underlying assumptions.

While energy economist’s deals with how increases in energy efficiency influence economic growth are other researchers more concerned of how economic growth outstrips the efficiency gains. Schneider (2008) argues that it is not the efficiency improvements themselves that create the rebound effects. The problem lies, he asserts, in levels of economic growth that constantly outstrip the efficiency gains at the macro level. A similar thought is expressed by Nørgård (2009), who insists that there is nothing wrong with higher efficiency resulting in lower resource flows in the economy. Rather, the problem lies within the conventional economic request for higher flow.

Høyer (2010) replaces the concept of economy‐wide rebound effects with the concept of society‐wide rebound effects, arguing that rebound can only be understood through interdisciplinary research that accounts for social and technological structures and relations. This suggests that our problems are not just problems of rebound effect associated with improvements in energy efficiency; our problems are embedded in our contemporary society/economic system.

Key questions in this society-wide rebound discussion then become: “Is it possible to mitigate rebound effects under situations with economic growth?” and “Is the current organizational structures of society able to reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions?” By looking at the current European economic crises it shows that economic recession could lead to unemployment, poverty and instability. To get the economic growth on track is seen as a solution out of the crises; however this could further enhance the ecologic crises. A third question then becomes “Are there policy strategies that combine mitigation of emissions (and rebound effects) with avoidance of social crises?” – in other words “how do we avoid that rebound effects preventing sustainable development?”

This workshop aims to better understand macro-level rebound effects. We will dive into some of the core controversies in understanding of macro rebound effects, addressing the importance of interdisciplinary understanding of rebound effects. Thus we will attempt broadening the perspective and more comprehensively investigate why the current environmental and sustainability policies fails, by further discussing the interrelationship between efficiency, energy, and related environmental problems, and the current and dominating growth policy.

We call for contributions in the following thematic fields:
- Definitions of society-wide and macro rebound effects
- Analysis of key disagreements about macro rebound effects
- Analysis of causes and causalities for macro rebound effects
- How can and should interdisciplinary research help us to understand and mitigate macro rebound effects.
- Policy strategies for avoidance of macro rebound effects of environmental policy - hereunder strategies for sustainable transitions.
- Case studies illustrating the theoretical perspectives outlined above

The workshop is open for PhD-students and other interested parties concerned with the current ecological crises and wants to contribute with their knowledge in an interdisciplinary setting of how to understand and mitigate macro rebound effects.