Industrial Ecology For Sustainable Development - Six Controversies in Theory Building

Industrial Ecology for Sustainable Development: Six Controversies in Theory Building
Author(s): JOUNI KORHONEN

Source: Environmental Values, Vol. 14, No. 1 (February 2005), pp. 83-112
Published by: White Horse Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30302055 .
Accessed: 18/06/2014 22:34
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
White Horse Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Environmental
Values.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Industrial Ecology for Sustainable Development:
Six Controversies in Theory Building
JOUNIKORHONEN
University
ofTampere, ResearchInstitute
forSocial Sciences
Kanslerinrinne
1 (PinniB)
FINS 3014 University
ofTampere, Finland
Email:Jouni.Korhonen@uta.fi
ABSTRACT
This articleis buildingthetheory forthescientific fieldof industrial

ecology.
For this,theindustrial (IE)
ecosystem concept is used. IE uses themodelof
sustainableecosystems inunsustainableindustrialsystems formakingprogress
towardsthevisionof theindustrial ecosystem. Six controversies arerevealed
and identified as researchchallenges.I inviteall thosewho are interestedin
industrial to
ecology respond to thiscontribution.
KEYWORDS
Sustainable industrial
development, industrial
ecology, controversies,
ecosystem,
theorybuilding
1. INTRODUCTION: SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND

INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY
Theconcept
The emergingfieldof industrial ecologyand theconceptof industrialeco-
system(IE) (Frosch and Gallopoulos;1989;Erkman,1997; Ehrenfeld, 2000;
Korhonen, 2004a; 2004b;Korhonen, vonMalmborg, StrachanandEhrenfeld,
2004;Korhonen andStrachan,2004;Korhonen, HuisinghandChiu,2004)have
a
generatedrapidlydeveloping in
literature1 sustainable
development(WCED,
1987)discussionanddebate.Twonewacademicjournals,2 somejournalspecial
societyandnumerous
issues,books,an international conferencesandseminars
havebeenlaunched.
The first of thenewIE conceptis close to theotherrecent
basic principle
materialand energyfloworientated concept,'industrial
metabolism'(Ayres,
Values14(2005):83-112
Environmental
© 2005TheWhite
HorsePress

84
JOUNIKORHONEN
1994).IE comparesthenatural ecosystem andtheindustrial system bytracking

theflowsof matterand energy(Erkman,1997).The secondprinciple extends
industrialmetabolism (Erkman,1997) and uses thenatural ecosystemmodel
in industrial the
systems(Graedel,1996).Hence, provocative term'industrial
ecosystem' hasbeencoined.Bothphysicalmaterial energyand flowsas wellas
themorestructural andorganisational andproperties
characteristics arestudied
in a systemsperspective (Korhonen, 2004a). The philosophy is to iearn from
nature'(see thediscussionlateron inthispaperon thisdifficult question).But
theconceptis onlyrarely presented orclassified accordingtothetwocategories;
flows(1) andstructure (2) (Korhonen, 2000a; 2001a).Thesystems perspective,
i.e.,thatall theindustrial systemcomponents arestudied,is thebasisofall IE
principles (Erkman,1997).
IntheliteratureontheIE concept, thenatural ecosystem material andenergy
flowsthatrelyon infinite solarenergy, andarematerially closeddemonstrating
advancedrecycling andwasteenergy utilisation(cascading)emitting onlywaste
heat(infrared radiation)tospace(figure1), areseenas theonlyavailableexam-
ple forhumansof sustainable or long-livedmaterialandenergyflowsystems
(figure2) (Jelinski et al, 1992;GraedelandAllenby,1995; Ehrenfeld, 2000).
The morestructural and organisational of ecosystemsused in
characteristics
industrialsystems includediversity, connectance, interdependency, symbiosis,
cooperation, community, adaptation and locality(Allenbyand Cooper,1994;
Benyus,1997; Ehrenfeld, 2000; Korhonen, 2000a; 2001a; 2004a; Hardyand
Graedel,2002; GengandCote,2002).
Plants j Animals
Solarenergy Wasteheat
► e Wastematerial
andenergyflows ►
Decomposers,
' • scavengers,
bacteria,fungi
FIGURE1. Simplified flowofmatter andenergy inanecosystem. Theflowofmatter

ina naturalecosystemis cyclic.Plantsbindsolarenergy intochemicalform. Plants
animals
(producers), (consumers) anddecomposers, microbes andbacteria (recyclers)
area system inwhichtheactorsutiliseeachother's wastematerial flowsas a source
forenergyandas a construction materialfororganisms. Theonlyexternal inputto
thesystemas a wholeis the(infinite)
solarenergyandthesystem is materially
closed.
theenergy
Eventually, willbereleased as wasteheatintoairandintowaterfrom which
itradiates
backtospace.

85
INDUSTRIAL ECOLOGY FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Economic Economic
actor ■
1111111iiiii11iiia actor
Energyand A B
raw Wastesand
materials emissions
andenergyflows=
"Waste material
Economic
niiiiiiiiiiini actor [lllllF
C
FIGURE2. Simplified flowofmatter andenergy intheindustrial ecosystem(IE) vi-

sion.Theflowofmatter in an industrialecosystem is cyclic.Producers,consumers
andrecyclers
area system inwhich theactorsutilise eachother's wastematerial
flows
andwasteenergyflowsas wellas local/regional renewable naturalresources
reducing
thevirgin
inputtoandthewasteandemission output from theindustrial
systemas a
whole.Thesystem reliesondiversity intheactors involved, which sustains
thesystem
incaseofdisturbance,
oninterdependency incooperation (e.g.,inrecycling
andenergy
andonlocality
cascading) inthesystem arrangement. Thearrows within
thesystemare
thanthearrows
larger toandfrom thesystem illustrating thecontribution
ofcoopera-
tiverecycling
andenergy cascading. Inthisvision, itis moreimportant tofocusonthe
network
local/regional system asa wholethan simply onanindividual system
component
ofthesystem.
Practicalapplications
The visionof theindustrial ecosystemconceptin figure2 is veryambitious.
The concepthas becomepopular,becauseofthenaturalecosystem analogyor
metaphor as its source.The example ofthe Kalundborg industrial
ecosystemin
theDanishcity/town, knownas thelocal/regional industrialsymbiosis(Ehrenfeld
and Gertler, 1997; Gertlerand Ehrenfeld, 1996;Tibbs,1992; Chertow, 2000;
ErkmanandRamaswamy, 2003),has also 'aired'theconcept.
In theglobalmarket economy, theflowsofproducts andtheirmaterialand
energy flows extend over local,regional, national andcontinental The
borders.
idea of a 'closed loop' systemis, then,veryabstract eventhoughone would
'only'try and achieveit in a smalllocal system. arguethatthelocal/regional
I
application is theonlypossibility when studying theconceptofIE, andas noted,
also thisis verydifficult as a focuspoint(e.g. becauseofglobalisation).
Therearepracticalcase studieson regionalorlocal industrial, firmoractor
networks, industrialecosystems or industrialsymbiosis(Cote andHall, 1995;
CoteandCohen-Rosenthal, 1998;Gertler andEhrenfeld, 1996;Ehrenfeldand
Gertler,1997; Schwarzand Steininger, 1997; Baas, 1998; 2001; Korhonen,
2001b;Korhonen etal.,2002; Chertow, 2000; 2002). In thesedocumented IEs,

86
JOUNIKORHONEN
thecooperative actorswithinthesystemboundaries use each other'smaterial

andenergyflowsincluding by-products and wastes.The visionis toreducethe
totalinputflowandthetotaloutputflowto andfrom system.Raw material
the
costs,energy andtransportation costsontheinputsideandtheemissioncontrol,
wastemanagement orlandfill costson theoutputsidearereducedandcontrol-
led.Greenmarket opportunities arecreatedwhilecostsarisingfrommeasures
requiredinenvironmental legislation arereducedinthishighlyidealised'win-
win'3vision(Korhonen, 2002a). One can arguethatthepotential contribution
ofthisvisiontothecommonindustrial environmental management approaches
andtoolsis thefocuson thesystemas a whole,insteadofonlyon an individual
systemcomponent (Korhonen,2002a). Such a focusis relevantforfirmnet-
workmanagement (Roome,2001) andfor'inter-organisational environmental
management' (Sinding,2000).
WhenlookingatIE as anemerging field,notas a specificconcept,
scientific
we findmanypracticalcase studiesfocusingon physicalflowsof matter and
energy.But thesestudiesare usuallyotherthanlocal industrial ecosystems.
Thispaperarguesthattheyoffer verylittleforthetheory buildingfortheyoung
fieldof industrial ecology.Such studiesdo notapplythetheoretical concept,
thatis thenatural ecosystem analogyormetaphor-derived conceptinindustrial
systems. Ifone askswhatis thespecificanduniquecontribution ofthefieldof
industrialecologyto sustainability, I wouldanswerthatit is notthefocuson
materialand energyflows.Rather,thesystemsapproachto thematerialand
energyflowsderivedfromthenaturalecosystemmetaphor or analogy(for
discussionon metaphors vs. analogies,see Ehrenfeld, 2003) as in figure2, in
turn,can be thecontribution.
For example,environmental lifecycleassessment(LCA) forming a large
partofthecases publishedinthefieldofindustrial ecology,has a muchlonger
conceptualhistory thanthatof thespecificindustrial ecosystemconcept.The
fieldofindustrialecology has evolved and gathered environmental
other science,
environmental engineering, industrial environmental technology, management
andenvironmental policyconceptsandmethods underitandso established itself
as an emerging scientificfield.I arguethat,inthisprocess,thetheory building
thatwouldhelpIE tobecomea fieldthatcanoffer something uniqueformaking
progress insustainable development andthatwouldhelpIE to'standout'among
themanyotherrelatedfieldssuchas cleanerproduction (CP), materialflow
analysis(MFA), lifecycleassessment (LCA) andpollutionprevention (which
all havetheirownjournalsandsocieties),has beenignoredto a largeextent.
TheJournalofIndustrial Ecology(Yale/MIT)readsonthebackcover:'The
fieldencompasses(i) material andenergy flowstudies("industrialmetabolism"),
dematerialization anddecarbonisation, technological changeandtheenviron-
ment,life-cycle planning, designandassessment, designfortheenvironment,
extendedproducer responsibility ("product stewardship"), eco-industrial
parks
("industrialsymbiosis"), product-orientated environmental policy,and eco-ef-

87
'
ficiency.LC A,extendedproducer designfortheenvironment
responsibility, or
areusuallyappliedinpracticeto individual
eco-efficiency products,processes
or firms/organisations,
thatis,on individual
systemcomponents. Hence,these
toolsareusuallynotappliedtoentiresystems thatcouldbe logicallyanalysed
againstthevisionderivedfromtheecosystemmetaphor in figures1 and 2.
The conceptsthathave been appliedto individualsystemcomponents have
eitherbeendevelopedearlierthantheconceptof theindustrial ecosystemor
in separation
fromit.
Theobjective
I willfocuson theindustrial
ecosystem 1 and
conceptanditis basedon figures
2, on thenatural
ecosystemmetaphor derivedconcept.The researchobjective
is as follows:Thistheoretical
paperevaluatesthecontributionoftheindustrial
ecosystem conceptto theecologicallysustainabledevelopment I
of industry.
believethatthisfocusontheconceptoftheindustrial ecosystemcancontribute
tothetheory buildingofthefieldofindustrial
ecology,tohelpthefieldtostand
outfromotherfieldsanddevelopitsownuniquecontribution.
2. METHODOLOGY AND MATERIALS
The literatureon IE beganwiththe1989Scientific AmericanarticlebyFrosch

andGallopoulos(Erkman,1997;denHond,2000; Chertow, 2000,Korhonen,
2001a). Butthetermhasbeenusedbefore, andevenforsimilarpurposes(e.g.,
Koeniget al., 1972,Koeniget al., 1974; Bennetand Chorley,1978,see also
discussionbyErkman,1997andEhrenfeld andGertler, 1997).
The searchwordsand terms'industrial ecology','industrialecosystem',
'industrialsymbiosis', parks'and'industrial
'eco-industrial recyclingnetwork'4
wereapplied,becausethesearepractically theonlytermswithwhichitis pos-
sibletofindarticlesinwhichthespecificconceptoftheindustrial ecosystem is
studied(see thediscussionabove).
Themainliterature sourcesareshownintable1. Twojournalsexist:Journal
ofIndustrialEcology(JIE)andProgressinIndustrial Ecology-AnInternational
Journal(PIE). Therearetwopublishedspecialissueson IE, Proceedings ofthe
NationalAcademyofScience(1992) and theJournalof CleanerProduction
(JCP)doublespecialissue(1997,JCP5: 1-2) as wellas a roundtable discus-
in
sion CaliforniaManagement Review(2001,Vol.43, No.3). Another special
issueofJCPis forthcoming (2004) andBusinessStrategy and theEnvironment
(BSE) is also goingto publishan IE specialissue(2004).
Up tonow,JIEandJCPhaveclearlybeenthemostimportant sourcesforIE
literature(denHond,2000). Although BSE has publishedonlyfewIE articles
so far,ithasbeenincludedamongthemainsources,becauseoftheforthcoming

88
JOUNIKORHONEN
specialissue andbecausemanyIE-relatedthemesare coveredin thejournal,

e.g.,thespecialissueon networks (vol 10,number 2, 2001).5Notealso thatthe
publishedcall forpapersforPIE (andthefirst issue,whichis probablyoutby
now)has a clearbusinessormanagement focus.EcologicalEconomicscovers
manythemesimportant forIE, e.g.,materialandenergy flowconcepts,analysis
andmeasurement.
The literatureanalysisis dividedintotwocategories: The physicalflowsof
matter andenergy1) and thestructural andorganisationalcharacteristics
and
properties2).
Books Journals
Socolow,R.,Andrews, C, Berkhout, F.and Journal ofCleanerProduction.1992—
Thomas, V.(eds.)1994. Industrial
EcologyJournal ofIndustrial 1997—
Ecology.
andGlobal Change oftheNational
Proceedings Academy of
B.& Richards,
Allenby, D.,J.(eds.)1994. Vol.89.1992.
Sciences,
TheGreening ofIndustrial Ecosystems. Journal ofCleanerProduction(double)
R.,U.& Simonis,
Ayres, U.,E. (eds).1994. issue.
special Vol.5.,No.1-2.1997.
Industrial
Metabolism onIEoronrelated
Articles themesinother
Graedel& Allenby, 1995. Industrial
Ecology. journals, 1989-,e.g.,Business
Strategy
Ayres,R.,U.& Ayres, L. 1996.Industrial andtheEnvironment and
1992-2003
Ecology EcologicalEconomics 1996-2003.
D.,J.(ed.)1997.TheIndustrial
Richards,
GreenGame
Benyus,J.M.1997. Biomimicry
Abeetal.,1998. Business Ecology.
1999a.
Allenby, Industrial Ecology.
Korhonen,J.2000a. Industrial Ecosystem
Chertow,M.(ed.)2002.Developing
Industrial
Ecosystems: Approaches, Cases,
andTools
R.,U.& Ayres,
Ayres, L.,W.2002.A
Handbook ofIndustrial Ecology
Erkman,S. & Ramaswamy, R.2003.Applied
Industrial
Ecology - ANewPlatform for
PlanningSustainable Societies.
Bourg,D. & Erkman, S. (eds.)2003.
onIndustrial
Perspectives Ecology.
J-R
Snakin, 2003.Wood energy andgreen-
housegasemissions intheheating energy
systemofNorth Karelia, Finland:An
industrial
ecology approach.
V.2004.Industrial
Niutanen, ecosystemcase
studies.
Otherrelatedbooks (theauthor's opinion)
TABLE1. Thematerials
ofthestudy.6

89
3. THE INDUSTRIAL ECOSYSTEM CONCEPT FOR ECOLOGICALLY

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Flowsofmatter
and energyinIE
In theoften-cited Froschand Gallopoulos(1989) article,thelinearindustrial
materialandenergy'throughput' flowwas identified as themainchallengeof
industrial
environmental management. Throughput starts fromnatureandends
up in nature.Industrial systems relyon non-renewable andemissionintensive
fossilfuelswhilegenerating unutilisedwastesdumpedtonature. Approximately
80% of theworld'senergyconsumption is basedon fossilcoal, oil or natural
gas (Williams,1994).
The NationalAcademyof Scienceof USA organiseda colloquiumon IE
in 1991,thefirst majorforumforIE. In theintroductory paper,Jelinski et al.
(published in 1992) definedthree conceptual flow models forIE development/
evolution;typeI,II andtypeIII ecology.Theconcepts showanimmature (young)
linearthroughput ecosystem flowmodel,a semi-cyclical material flowanddevel-
opingenergy cascadeanda mature(old) materially closedecosystem thatonly
emitswasteheattosurroundings (or,eventually,infraredradiation tospace)after
advancedenergy cascadestructure relyingoninfinitesolarenergy. Accordingly,
unfortunately, industrialsystems are somewhere between I andII.
AyresandAyres(1996) continued withthisidea showing, e.g.,thecarbon-
in
oxygencycle ecosystems as an example model of the system overallsustain-
Plants
ability. use carbon andproduceoxygen waste, which is used byanimals
thatproducecarbondioxide(C02) as a metabolicwaste.Ring(1997) showed
howgreenplantsinecosystems actas decentralisedpowerplantsproviding the
foodwebwithsolarenergyderivedenergycascadessecuringefficient utilisa-
tion.Gengand Cote (2002) highlighted thecrucialroleof decomposersand
in
scavengers processingecosystem waste materials.Korhonenet al. (2001;
2000a) dividedtheforestecosystem materialandenergyflowsintocategories
ofmatter,basecation(BC) nutrients, energy andcarboncomparing thesetothe
sameflowsin theforestindustry arguingthatindustrial systemsshouldlearn7
fromnatureto movetowardsustainability.
Basedonthisevidenceintheliterature onIE, itis straightforward toconclude
thatthecyclicalmaterialflowand thecascadingenergyflow,therelianceon
sustainableuse of renewablesand wasteutilisation constitute thefoundation
oftheIE concept'smaterialandenergyflowthesis.Korhonen(2001a; 2000a)
termedthisflowmodelas 'roundput'as opposedto thedominantindustrial
'throughput'.
oftheIE materialand energy

Whatis thecontribution flowmodel?
an insightful
Desrochers(2002a; 2002b;2001) has presented andprovocative
that and
critiquearguing recycling inter-industry recyclinghave existedfora

90
JOUNIKORHONEN
longtime.Korhonen andSnakin(2003) showedthattheircase study, a regional

heatingenergysystem, simplyhadtorelyon renewable biomassorwoodfuels
beforefossilfuelswereavailable.Itis clearthatbeforetheindustrial revolution
andthefossilfuelerathiswas moreorlessthecase all overtheworld:The use
of wastesand renewableflowsderivedfuelswas theonlyavailablesolution
to fulfilthesocietalenergydemand.Williams(1994) maintains thatbiomass
was dominant inglobalenergyuse andconsumption through themiddleofthe
nineteenth century.
The conceptor themethodof recycling as suchcontributes littlein terms
ofa newcontribution All thosewhoarefamiliar
to sustainability. withthermo-
dynamicsor entropy are alreadyfamiliarwithrecycling (Korhonen,2000a).
Recyclingis mucholderthanthelasttenor fifteen yearsofthe'history ofthe
IE concept'.
The contribution oftheIE material andenergyflowtheory arisesoutofthe
systemsapproachinherent intheconceptthatuses natureas a model.Biologi-
cal ecologyis a formofsystems analysis.Itradicallydepartsfromthemajority
ofindustrial environmental management toolsthatfocuson individualsystem
components, insteadofon entiresystems thatconsistofmanydifferent system
components. Substanceflowanalysis(SFA) studiestheflowof an individual
substance, say,cadmium, environmental lifecycleassessment, theenvironmental
interventions ofanindividual product,say,ofa newspaper, whileenvironmental
management systems (EMS), e.g.,EU Eco-Management andAuditing Scheme
(EMAS) or theInternational Standardisation Organisation (ISO) ISO 14001
standard concentrateon an individual firm.
'Problemdisplacement' orproblemshifting fromone partofthesystemto
another partmayoccurifa holisticsystems approachis notused(Janicke, 1990;
JanickeandWeidner, 1995;Ayres,1994;Rejeski,1997;Pento,1998a; 1998b;
Anderberg, 1998; Korhonenand Pento,1999a; Korhonen, 2000b). Consider
thatproduction wastescan be shiftedtoconsumption wastes,becauseofemis-
sions focusedinsteadof productfocusedenvironmental policy(Anderberg,
1998;Rejeski,1997;see Socolow,1994).Emissionsandwastesare 'recycled'
betweendifferent environmental medium,becauseof singlemediumfocused
legislationandpolicy,e.g.,betweenair,landandwater(Ayres,1994).Wastes
aretransformed fromone formto another, becausetheentirelifecycleis not
measured(Pento,1998a; 1998b; Korhonen,2000b).8One may transfer the
environmental problemfromtheinputsidetotheoutputsideofindustrial pro-
duction, e.g. notehowa shiftfromnon-renewable torenewablefuelsinenergy
production cancreatea heavymetalcontaining wastematerial flowreleasedto
theecosystemas wood wastederivedfuel-based energyproduction produces
cadmiumcontaining incinerationash (Rantaet al., 1996).9
Thereis merit intheIE theory,becauseitlooksatentiresystems, notsimply
individualsystemcomponents. Recycling, in itself,is nota contribution.

91
Thestructural
and organisational
characteristics
Themorestructural andorganisational characteristics andproperties ofIE theory
includediversity,10connectance, interdependency, cooperation, community, ad-
aptation, andlocality(AllenbyandCooper,1994;GraedelandAllenby,1995;
Ring,1997;Benyus,1997;Pizzocaro,1998;HardyandGraedel,2002;Templet,
1999;Ehrenfeld, 2000; 2003; Korhonen, 2001a; Korhonen, 2001b).
The firsttextbook on industrial ecology (Graedel and Allenby,1995)anda
1996 article(Graedel)suggestedthattheecosystemmaterialandenergyflow
evolutionfromtypeI to typeIII also showstheevolutionfroma system, in
whichinterdependency betweenorganismsis low to a systemin whichthis
interdependency or cooperation betweenecosystem components is high.Sus-
tainableecosystems and sustainable regional industrial systems 'islandsof
or
sustainability'(IOS) are systems with more complexity and networking than
in unsustainable systems (Wallner, 1999; Wallner et al., 1996). Diversityof
thesystemintermsoftheactors,or 'processunits'(PUs) involvedis higherin
sustainable systems thaninunsustainable systems.
Itcanbe argued,thatthedominant socialparadigm (DSP), toa largeextent,
highlights over
competition cooperation (Ehrenfeld, 2000; 1997).Traditionally,
theonlycorporate socialresponsibility in neoclassicaleconomics-based busi-
nessparadigmhas beento makeprofits andcompetein themarkets (Hussain,
1999;Ahmed,1998;see Friedman, 1962).Ehrenfeld maintains thatorganisms
inecosystems compete,butnotin a wayfirms in an industrial systemdo. The
overallcondition ofcooperation in
prevails ecosystems. Accordingly, IEs should
also be cooperative.Hardyand Graedel(2002) analysedfoodweb connect-
ancevaluesagainstdatagathered fromseveraleco-industrial parkorindustrial
ecosystem/industrial symbiosis case studies (see Chertow, 2002) and founda
correlation.They did not find evidence on the relationship of resource orenergy
efficiency and connectance in food webs or in IEs.
One ofthereviewers ofthispapernotedthatitis important toacknowledge
that,inindustrial systems, cooperation andcompetition arenotnecessarily ex-
clusiveoreachother'ssubstitutes (alternatives). Forexample,inclustertheory
(see Porter,1998),cooperation andcompetition arecomplementary features.
Ecosystems arediversesystems interms oftheactorsinvolved, e.g.,species
diversity,whichalso meansdiversity ininformation (Ring,1997).Theuseofa
one-dimensional monetary valueineconomicsystems reducesthediversity of
information feed-backs. It is difficult toquantify qualitatively different things,
consider themonetary valueoftheenvironment ineconomicsscience(Costanza,
etal.,1998).Incomplete quantitative information onecosystem qualitative features
may lead to suboptimal policy solutions in terms of biodiversity (Ring,1997).
In nature,whencertainspeciesdepart(ordie),thesystem is abletorecoverand
adaptthrough diversity inthespecies,organisms andintheirgeneticvariance
andinformation. Coralreefsortropicalrainforests areexamples.

92
JOUNIKORHONEN
Templet(1999) founda positiverelationbetweeneconomicsystemdiver-

sityandenergyefficiency. Diversity was measuredin termsof thenumber of
and
economicsectorsusingenergy equitability energy of flows between them.
The developedcountries weremorediverseandmoreefficient in theirenergy
use whencomparedto thecountries in thedeveloping world with lowdiversity.
The thirdworldeconomies can be arranged around the production of certain
individual keyproducts, e.g.,timber, or
sugar coffee, orraw material intensive
agricultural andforestry products etc. Such structures arevulnerable to external
andinternal changes.11The structures lackdiversity thatcould enhance adapta-
tion(Korhonen, 2002b).
Some authorshavesuggested thatgrowth does notnecessarily havetoend
to achievesustainability ifdiversity oftheeconomicsystem increases (see Al-
lenbyandCooper,1994).Rather, morediverseandequaldistribution ofgrowth
amongtheeconomicsectorsinside,e.g. a certainnationaleconomy, couldbe
important. ItseemsthatforAllenbyandCooper,theoverallsystem quantitative
growthis different thanthenewdistribution of growthwithinand insidethis
system, i.e.,development. Daly(1996) arguesagainstthequantitative growth of
thephysicaleconomy. The economicsystemis a subsystem oftheparentnon-
growing ecosystem. InDaly,development is morequalitative thanquantitative,
e.g.,development ofeducation, community andservices.
Adaptationis anothersystemcharacteristic or property thathas beenof-
feredin theindustrial ecologyliterature (Korhonen,2001b; 2002a; 2002c).
Forexample,thesuccessofa co-production plantofheatandelectricity (heat
andpower,CHP) participating in a local IE, can be basedon theabilityofthe
CHP plantto adaptto itsexternalmaterialandenergyflowenvironment. The
decomposer/scavenger metaphor was usedforinspiration andcreativity inthe
studyofCHP plantsinindustrial ecosystems (Korhonen, 2001b;2002a;2002c).
Theseareabletoa) usewastesfromotherecosystem actorsandb) processthese
wastesintoa formthatcanbe usedagainbygreenplants.A CHP plantwiththe
fuelcombustion technique offluidised bedburning (FBB) can use fossilfuels,
butalso otherfuelssuchas peat,low gradeforestresiduesfromcuttings, pulp
millwastes,papermillwastes,otherwoodwastes,agricultural wastesandeven
sludgeafterthewatercontenthas beenreduced.Because CHP combinesthe
production ofheatandpower,itcan providea) industrial actors,b) primary or
agricultural producers andc) residential householdswithelectricity, industrial
processsteam,district heator heatto be usedbyhorticulture or,forexample,
tomelttheice-covered citystreets duringwinter times.Energyis derivedfrom
wastefuelsi.e. integrated wastemanagement andenergyproduction.
Itseemsthattheabovecharacteristics ofdiversity, interdependency andadap-
tationareveryclosetoeachother. However,itis important tomakea distinction
betweendiversity and interdependency (Korhonen,2000a; 2004a). Diversity
in theactorsinvolvedin culturalor economicsystemsleads intodiversity of
interests,preferences andvalues,whichcanbe conflicting. Theuseofdiversity

93
as a normativeprinciple inIE toachieveinterdependency orcooperation orad-

aptationbetween the actorsinvolved, in
e.g., recycling networks orcooperative
wasteutilisation,is therefore,
anything butstraightforward.
Also theecosystem characteristic
orproperty oflocalityhasbeendiscussed
in theliteratureon industrial ecology,ecologicaleconomicsand sustainable
development (Benyus1997;AllenbyandCooper,1994;Wackernagel andRees,
1997;Korhonen, 2001a;2004a). The globaleconomygeographically separates
production and consumption. This consumesenergyand createsemissions.
The inter-regionaland inter-nationalproductlifecyclesare difficult to trace,
monitor andmanage.The abovepapershighlighted thatecosystems tendtobe
arranged locally(ofcourse,thereareexceptions, see Graedel,1996)toreduce
use.
energy Ecosystems remain within thelocal carrying capacity.Economic
systems import andexportsubstituting technology orimported non-renewables
forlocal renewablesandforlocal carrying capacity(Koeniget al. 1972).The
ecologicalfootprint (EFP,Wackernagel andRees, 1997) oflargemetropolitan
citiesextendsovernationalandcontinental borders.
Whencomparing ecosystems andeconomic systems interms ofthelocalvs.
globalquestion, 1 an tax
Ring( 997) proposes ecological reform inthatitcanhelp
environmental policiestogainfromecosystem principles.Taxeson fossilfuels
can reducetransportation andpromote theuse ofrenewableandwastefuels.
Whatis thecontribution
ofIE structural
and organisational
characteristics?
Competition, massproduction, growth andglobalisation prevailinthedominant
socialparadigm (Ehrenfeld, ; 2000)andinthedominant
1997 neoclassicaleconom-
icsscienceparadigm (Korhonen, 2002b).Thecharacteristics ofinterdependency,
community andcooperation, e.g.,inrecycling andenvironmental management,
couldbe enhancedin economicand industrial systems.Energyuse couldbe
reducedthrough locallyintegrated production andend-consumption.
However, it is not clearwhether these constructs or structural andorgani-
sationalprinciplesand systemproperties can be assignedto themeritof the
industrialecosystem concept.The importance oflocal solutionshas longbeen
as
regarded high, note theLocal 21.
Agenda Networking and inter-organisa-
tionalcooperation has beenpresented as important forsustainability in many
documented studies(Roome,2001; Sinding,2000).
I arguethattheindustrial ecosystem concept'scontribution tosustainability
theory can arise from systems analysis,inwhich themanyconcepts andprinciples
can be considered together,and not only as scattered around and placedunder
differentconceptual frameworks and fields.
The is an
ecosystem important source
forinspiration andcreativethinking. Ecologyandbiologyhavea longtradition
in systemsanalysis,whileenvironmental policyandcorporate environmental
management areveryyoungfieldsmainlyusingapproaches andtoolsthatfocus
onindividual system components oronanindividual system ata time.
principle

94
JOUNIKORHONEN
Recycling, diversity,
cooperation andlocalitycanbe studiedsimultaneously and
evaluatedtogether A
as each other'scomplements. recycling system that
con-
ductsrecycling overlongtransportation sustainable.
distancesis notnecessarily
A recycling systemthatonlyrecyclesbetweenfewparticipants, i.e.,showslow
is notnecessarily
diversity, a contribution.
Diversity,on theotherhand,does
notmeanthatthereis cooperation.
In sum,thecontribution of IE structural
andorganisational principlesand
propertiesincludesthefollowing:
arestudiedundera singleholisticframework
1. The principles in whichsev-
eralsystemsprinciplesserveas each other'scomplements
andare studied
notas isolatedfromeachother.
together,
2. The structural
andorganisational
principlesextendIE analysisbeyondthe
andenergy.
physicalflowsof matter In thisway,itcan be possibleto start
andstudyalso thehumandimensionof IE.
3. Thishumandimension constitutes
thedriver
ofmaterial
andenergy and
flows,
bystudying it,natural
science and and
engineering inventory-typematerial
andenergyflowanalysiscanbe better connected
topractical
decision-mak-
ing,policyinstruments and strategic
management systems.
4. SIX CONTROVERSIES IN THEORY BUILDING
I present
sixcontroversies
andarguethatthesecontroversies
arechallengesand
tasksthatneedtobe addressedin industrial
ecologytheory
building.
4.1 Systemversusitsboundaries
Physicalflowsof matter andenergyextendoverproduct, process,firm, local,
regionalornationalboundaries andborders. Considertransboundary pollution
or importsandexportsof physicalproducts andtheassociatedenvironmental
impactsofthelifecyclesoftheproducts. In theglobalmarket economy, there
simplydoes notexista totallyclosedlocal IE. Above,thesystems approachin
IE was seenas importanttoreduceproblemdisplacement andproblemshifting
fromone partof thesystemto another part.But thefact thatall systemshave
boundariesstillremains.
The success of wasteutilisationin the Styriaprovince/region industrial
recyclingnetwork in Austria
with a population of 1.2 million
was describedin
SchwarzandSteininger (1997), butthe authors didnot the
study inter-regional
importandexportflows(see Desrochers, 2002a). Theynote(p. 50) 'Material
flowsfromthenaturalenvironment to therecycling structuresand vice versa
werenotrecorded.' TheStyriastudyhadmanypaperindustry plantsinit.I have
notworkedwiththiscase,butitcan be assumedthattheuse ofnon-renewable

95
andemissionintensive fossilfuels,at least,in absoluteterms,in sucha large

system of 1.2 millionpeople,is significant. Thestudyidentified (p. 52) 16types
ofwaste.Theamount offlowsthatweretreated orrecycled wasgiven.However,
thestudydidnotpresent howmuchenergywas usedintreatment orrecycling.
Recycling too consumes energy(Daly, 1996;Ayres,2004).
Another case studyforthelocal/regional industrial symbiosis or industrial
ecosystem approach is the Jyvaskyla city industrial ecosystem in Finland (Ko-
rhonen2002a).Jyvaskyla hasreduceditsemissionsthrough cooperative waste
utilisation. Butthesystem stillusesfossilfuels,whichareimported, non-renew-
able andemissionintensive. Jyvaskyla uses domestic peatup to around 70%,
whichatmost,canbe defined as a veryslowlyrenewable fuel(see Lappalainen
andHanninen,1993;Savolainenet al., 1994;Selin,1999;Korhonen, 2001b).
The famousKalundborgindustrial symbiosisor industrial ecosystemin
Denmarkhas beendocumented in manyscientific articlesand bookchapters
during the last 10 or 15 years(Ehrenfeld Gertler,1997,see Gertlerand
and
Ehrenfeld, 1996;Tibbs,1992).A coal-fired powerplantand an oil refinery, a
pharmaceutical plantand a plaster board manufacturer and other actors recycle
wastesincooperation. Butagain,thesystem usesimported, non-renewable and
emissionintensive fossilresources/fuels andis notclosed.Desrochers (2002,p.
4
52) statesthatInshort, Kalundborg is a typicalindustrial cityinthatitis a nexus
oftradewhosefirms import andexportnumerous components andproducts on
a muchlargergeographical scale.'
Korhonen(2001c) and Korhonenet al. (2001) studiedtheFinnishforest
industry IE. Approximately 70% ofthefuelsusedinthislargenationalindus-
trialbranchareindustry's ownwastefuels.Further, 94% ofthefuelsusedare
usedinCHP (see also Kauppiet al., 1992;Verkasalo,1993).Korhonen(et al.,
2001,p. 158) pointedoutthatThe presented forestindustry systemhas some
important features, which are similar to the way in which matter and energy
flowin theforest.'and further energyproduction is organizedeffectively
byusingtheco-production methodof heatandelectricity, i.e.,utilising waste
at different levels. ' et al. 200 1 1 CHP has been
energy quality (Korhonen , , p. 58).
applied on a large national scale in only threecountries in theworld, Denmark,
The Netherlands andFinland(Korhonen, 2001b).
Buttheauthorsdid notstudythequantitative environmental implications
ofthefactthat90% ofthepaperproducedinFinlandis exported, e.g.,toGer-
many. The articledid not study the fact that paperrecovery projectsinGermany
facedifficult problems with the cadmium intensive de-inking sludgecreated
inde-inking andrecycling processes of recovered waste papers(Pento,1998a;
1998b).Moreover, thestudydid notaddresstheeffects on forestbiodiversity
occurring because partof the birch inputs used in the Finnish forestindustry
comefromRussianforests, where forestcertificationnotis as well developed
as itis inFinland.

96
JOUNIKORHONEN
The IE potential
of usingpaperindustry,paperrecycling processand for-
estindustryenergyproductionwastes,e.g.,fibre
sludge,de-inkingsludgeand
incinerationash,forbuildingcoverlayers forold was
landfills presentedin
NiutanenandKorhonen(2002):
Arguably, is preferable
thismethod toexisting ofnatural
practices clayusefor
landfill becauseit(1) substitutes
building, natural
non-renewable clay,(2) con-
sumeslessenergy andgenerates lessCommissionsthantheuseofnatural clay,
and(3) eliminates
considerableamountsofwastesfrompaperproduction, paper
consumption andfromforest industryenergy (p. 39)
production,
The studydid nottakeintoaccount,norcalculate,thefactthatpaperindustry
The wastesof paperproduction
is veryenergyintensive. thatare utilisedfor
landfillcoverlayerswouldnotappear without
papermanufacturing and the
energyuse of thismanufacturing.
ThequestionorthechallengeforIE is,Wheretodrawthesystem boundary
ofa materialandenergyflowstudyorwhataretheboundaries ofan industrial
ecosystemin a global marketeconomy?Physicalflowsalwaysextendover
organisationaloradministrative
boundaries andwe liveintheeraofglobalisa-
tion.
42 Systemvs.itscomponents
The focusin IE is on manydifferent systemcomponents, theirrelationsand
interactions(figure2). This departs from the traditionalmedium (air,wateror
land)-focused policy,flow or
(SFA), product(LCA) process/firm/organisation
(EMS)-focusedapproaches andtoolsofenvironmental management (Korhonen,
2002a). But itseems that sometimes theIE visionis conflicting
whencompared
to thebasicobjectivesofdematerialisation orpollution prevention.Why?
Considera local/regional industrial
ecosystemprojectthatstrivestoward
reducing orcontrolling theenvironmental burdenofthesystemas a whole,in-
steadofthatofan individual systemcomponent. Wallneretal.,(1996,p. 1765;
see Wallner,1999)arguethat'theelements ofthesystem generatetheoutcome
or the'character'of thesystem.This character is something totallynew,and
cannotbe foundin anysinglecomponent.' Consideran EMS of a singlefirm.
Itcan be assumedthatwhena certainindividual firm adoptsan EMS, ittriesto
control,minimise or reduce itswastegeneration, e.g. becauseofsocietalpres-
sure.It wouldseem verystrangeifthefirmwoulddeliberately and publicly
seekto increaseitswastegeneration through an EMS. Now,in theIE vision,
theobjectiveis to reducetheenvironmental burdenof theindustrial system
as a whole.Situations mayoccur,in whichitis beneficial forthisaimthatan
individualfirmmaintains, orevenincreases,itswastegeneration tobe able to
supplytheotheractorswithimportant wasterawmaterials and wastederived

97
fuels.Theotheractorscanperhapssubstitute
forimported,
non-renewable and
emissionintensivefossilfuels.
Thissystemvs.system componentconflict
mustbe takenintoaccountcare-
when
fully, bridgingIE tothemore used
commonly environmental management
andpolicytools.The twoapproachesmustbe seenas complementary inorder
to providethedecision-makerwithconsistent
information.
4. 3 Growth
vs.efficiency
The 'reboundeffect'in energypolicyliterature (Berkhout et al., 2000) is im-
to
portant study. Increases in fuel efficiencymay lead to reduced production
costs.The reducedcostsaffectthepricesof end-products thatgo down.The
purchasing powerof consumersincreases.The overallenergyuse increases,
becauseconsumers buymoreor directtheirbuyingto moreenergyintensive
products. the
Now, negativeenvironmental effect ofgrowth exceedsthegains
achievedthrough efficiency.
Eco-efficiency meansproducing thesameamountofproducts as beforebut
withlessresourceuse orlesswastesandemissions(FiggeandHahn,2001; see
Karvonen, 2001). Theso calledDevon'sparadox',after WilliamStanleyJevons
and his examination of the'Coal Question'of 1865 (Mayumiet al., 1998),12
describesa similarproblem.Humanbehaviour is 'addicted'totechnology and
'increaseinefficiency inusinga resourceleadstoincreased useofthatresource
rather thanto a reduction in itsuse' (Mayumiet al., 1998,pi 16). Mayumiet
al. (1998) notethatthedoublingtheefficiency offoodproduction perhectare
overthelast50 yearsdidnotsolvetheproblemofhunger, becausepopulation
andproduction increased(see, Giampietro, 1994).
Asnotedabove,theoften-cited Kalundborg industrial symbiosis orindustrial
ecosystem case relieson two key actors
thatuse fossil If
fuels. the eco-efficiency
ofsuchsystems, e.g.,rawmaterial cutsdownproduction
efficiency, costs(less
resources neededtoproducethesameamountofproducts as before),thereis a
riskthatreducedpriceslead intoincreasing demandoftheproducedproducts.
Theincreased consumption, the
i.e., negativegrowth mayexceedtheen-
effect,
vironmental of
gains eco-efficiency. The absolute amount ofemissions generated
andresourcesusedstillincreasesdespitethiswouldhappen'efficiently'.13
A regionalIE studyon theenergyproduction techniqueof CHP provides
another and
example(Korhonen Snakin, 2001; Snakin,2003).InCHP,highfuel
efficiency of around 80-85% is reached,when producing bothelectricity and
heat(derivedfrom'waste'electricity), whilein isolatedelectricity production,
40-45% efficiencies areachieved.The studyindicatedthatevena large-scale
CHP application willnotsolvethegreenhouse gasquestionoftheNorthKarelia
heatingenergysysteminEasternFinlandiftheamountofelectricity produced
in theregionincreasesovera certainlimitand partof thefuelbasis is stillin
emissionintensive fuels.

98
JOUNIKORHONEN
vs.thetargetsystem
4.4 Thebase/sourcesystem
Anothercontroversy is whether to focuson the'base system'vs. the'target
system' ofthe industrialecosystem metaphor (Bey,2002; 2001; 2000; 1999see
van derVoetet al., 2001; Levine,2001; 1999; Isenmann, 2003; 2002). Some
authors(Bey,2002. pp. 87, 91-92, Levine,2001; 1999; van derVoetet al.,
2001; see Isenmann, 2002) arguethat,indeed,therearemanyinconsistencies
whenusingtheindustrial ecosystem metaphor inindustrial systems. Theyrefer
tothesuperficial way in which nature is described when the metaphor is used.
Forexample,in thenaturalecosystem, organisms eat each other, while in the
humaneconomicsystem, theeconomicactorsdo noteateachother(Bey,2002).
Butthequestionis,Whatdo thesekindsofcriticalobservations contribute to
sustainable development or should we be
actually focusing on more important
things?
Below,Bey's (2002; 2001; 2000; 1999) veryintensive critiquetowardIE
and towardsomeof itsmostoften-cited papers given an exampleof the
is as
base or thesourcevs. thetargetsystemor theapplication systemcontroversy.
Bey (2002,p.84) notesthat'[i]n thefollowing, threearticlesfromthedomain
of industrial ecologicalresearchare examinedforevaluationof theiruse of
natural imagery inIndustrial Ecology,particularly thefounding ideaofcompar-
ing natural systems with industrial or economic ones'. Bey's focus ofcritiqueis
on textsbyAllenbyandCooper(1994), Cote (2000), Schwarzand Steininger
(1997) as wellas theSocolow'soften-cited text(1994).
The core of Bey's veryharshcritique,which,at times,is presented in a
destructive manner, is thatthereis a riskor realdangerin theapplicationof
theecosystemmetaphor in industrial systemsifbased on vagueand unclear
of
understandingecosystems. I have greatdifficulty in understanding thiscri-
tique.Socolow's often-cited text'Six perspectives fromindustrial ecology'
is targeted. In Socolow (1994, p. 4, 12-14), theimportance of thefirmand
thefarmare acknowledgedalongside('equal footing'in Socolow,p. 4) the
household/consumer/voter. ButBeyseemstoreadthisdifferently andheargues
thatthefirmandthefarmarehumanexosomaticinstruments (to use theterms
ofGeorgescu-Roegen, 1971; 1990;see Costanzaet al., 1997).Therefore, they
shouldnotbe themainfocusinIE. The primary andthemainfocusshouldbe
on thephysicalflowsofmatter andenergymobilisedbythefirmandthefarm
andtheconsumer/voter. Thisis reasoned,because,innature, 'The organicpar-
ticipants are thus theembodiments (italics inthe original) ofthe biomass/energy
flows...'(Bey,2002,p. 91).
In thetargetsystem,thesituationis different thanin thebase systemof
theIE metaphor. maintains that ' . . .resources and
Bey energyarepassedon by
participants of theresource-centred economic system,as theparticipants do
notembodythem.'(pp.91-2) Bey writesthat'The individual firmandfarmas
economicagents,Socolowmaintains, shouldtakea central positioninindustrial
ecosystem restructuring' (2000,p. 26). This is seen as problematic andtheauthor

99
presents a critique:'It is theresourcesflowswhichmustbe manipulated into

cyclicalform and possibly constrained inorder to attainecologicalsustainability,
theexistenceofthefirmandfarmis secondary to that'(2002,p. 92).
Bey is also troubled,because of his interpretation of Socolow in that
'[e]levating "firms and farms" to centralactors the
negates integration ofpro-
ducers, consumers and recyclers, as found in all natural systems.According to
Socolow's postulate, it is materialand resourceflowsin production systems
thatmakeup themainbodyofworkinIndustrial Ecology'(2000,p. 26). In an
articlewitha provocative title'Quo VadisIndustrial Ecology?- Realigning the
Discipline with its Roots',Bey suggests what he sees as an alternative
position
anda positionthathehascreatedthrough hiscriticalworkin'reading'industrial
ecologyliterature in that'[a]n extendedsystemsanalysis,reconceptualised as
anintegrated ecosystem approach, wouldincludeflowsbetweenproduction and
consumption systems inthefashionofecologicalsuccession'(2001,p. 38); and
Bey also statesthat'Socolow's positionofthecentrality ofthefirmandfarm
showsthecontradiction betweenIE's aimsanditsmethods'(2000,p. 26).
ThetypeofcritiquebyBey (2002; 2001; 2000; 1999)towardtheuse ofthe
naturalecosystem metaphor inIE canbe foundinothertextsas well,although,
I haveto say,notpresented in sucha radicalwaynorbased on suchreading
ofthefocusofthecritique14 (e.g. theoriginalworkofSocolowwhichis under
attackin Bey's critique).Let us now look morecloselyat whatis/isnotthe
contribution of thiscritique.The JournalofIndustrialEcologyreadson the
backcover(1997,Vol. 1, Number4) 'Industrial ecologyis a rapidlygrowing
fieldthatsystematically examineslocal,regional, andglobaluses andflowsof
andenergy inproducts, industrial andeconomies.'
materials, processes, sectors,
Socolow'stext(1994,pp. 4, 12-14),underthesubtitle of'CentralityoftheFirm
andtheFarm',clearlystatesthatthefirm andthefarmshouldreceive'an equal
footing'(p. 4) withthehousehold/consumer/voter. Socolow(p. 4) looksat the
of
legacy policy and legislation andwrites:
Thefocus ofattention
haslongbeenonproduction facilities-conveniently
farfrom
thepoint ofconsumer involvement.
Bycontrast, industrial
ecologyemphasizes
themanagement ofproductsthroughouttheirusefullifeandbeyond, andcalls
attention
todispersedsources suchasagricultural
ofpollution, chemicals,house-
holdwastes, andthechaff from
resulting theexpected degradationofproducts
likeoutdoor paints,
roofing andbrakelinings.
materials, Theimportanceofthe
consumer isunmistakable.
Rage attheindustrial
producer in
recedes significance
as a driverofpolicy.
Socolow (1994,p. 11) highlights that'Industrialecologyseeksa unifying
analysis, basedontotalflowsofmaterials( italicsintheoriginal) , thattreatson
a common footingall sources, all transportmedia,and all receptors'Further,
hesuggests (pp. 12-14)integration andconsumption
ofproduction withspecific
serviceindustries thatwouldenhancewasteutilisation byservingas mediating

100
JOUNIKORHONEN
actorsbetweenproduction andconsumption (likeecosystem decomposers). He

arguesfor renewable energy flowsto substitutefor fossilfuel stocks.
Now,one findsthatIE alreadyhas itsmainfocuson theflowsof matter
andenergyas wellas on a systems approachthatwouldstudybothproduction
andconsumption. Erkman wrote theJournalofCleanerProduction
in double
IE that4... all authors more
specialissueina historical reviewon (1997,p.1-2)
orlessagreeonatleastthreekeyelements ofthe industrialecology/metabolism
perspective'. Thesecondpointwas 'Itemphasizes thebiophysical substratum of
humanactivities, i.e.,thecomplexpatterns ofmaterial flowswithin andoutside the
industrial
system, incontrast withcurrent approaches whichmostly consider the
economyin termsofabstract monetary units,oralternatively energyflows'.
The textssuchas Socolow's do highlight theimportance of materialand
energyflows,e.g., recyclingof matterand use of renewablefuelsand take
intoaccountproducers, consumersand recyclers.Based on this,one could
arguethatthefocusof IE, indeed,is on materialand energyflowsbetween
producers,consumers andrecyclers andbetweentheindustrial systemandthe
naturalecosystem. Butstill,inhiscritiqueandinhiswayofreadingindustrial
ecologyliterature, Bey evengoes as faras writing a subtitleThe Kalundborg
foodwebincludesonlythesupplyside' (1999,p.1) andwhenhepresents three
areaswhereindustrial ecologyhas accordingto himbeenfallingshortof the
naturalecosystemmetaphor applied(p.l) one of theseareasis 'an obsession
withmanufacturing'. The Kalundborg case has been studiedperhapsin over
100 articlesandbookchapters duringthelasttenyearsor so andeverybody is
familiarwiththecase. Therefore, I am onlycitingErkmanand Ramaswamy,
(2003,p. 11) whentheydescribetheKalundborg participants to include'[t]he
townofKalundborg, whichreceivesexcessheatfromAsnaes(a powerstation)
foritsresidential district heatingsystem.'Now,howcanone statethatKalund-
borg does not include consumers orhouseholds?
In thisrespect,thecritiquetowardtheuse of themetaphor in thetarget
that
system, is, the industrial system, based on a superficial or false interpreta-
tionofthebase system, thatis,theecosystem, is notalarming. In fact,itis the
kindof critiqueliketheabove,whichis falseand wrong.The argument that
thefocuson exosomaticinstruments neglectsmaterialand energyflowsin
IE does nothold.In fact,thefocuson thefirm, thefarmandtheconsumeris
critically
important forIE andshouldbe further strengthened (Korhonen, von
Malmborg, Strachan andEhrenfeld, 2004; Cohen-Rosenthal, 2000).Thisis the
veryfeature thathas receivedtoolittleattention. The mostemphasishas been
andis directedtowardmaterialandenergyflowinventories andanalysissuch
as substanceflowanalysis,lifecycle assessment, materialand energyflow
analysisetc.(themainbodyof articlespublishedin JIE).Naturalecosystems
andhumaneconomicsystems arefundamentally different.
Naturalecosystems
relyon geneticinformation andculturalsystemson culturalinformation, e.g.,
money,written texts,video,internet, oral or cell phonecommunication and

101
notonlyon information transferinreproduction (Nortonetal., 1997).It is just

thesecultural characteristics ofthefirm, thefarm andtheconsumer, e.g.,greed
and over-consumption of physicalproductsinsteadof increasing relianceon
servicesandnonmaterial goods,thatneedtobe influenced. Onlythrough affect-
the
ingtheagentsdriving flows, taking and theirvalues,interests,preferences
and behaviourundercarefulconsideration, can theflowsbe directedtoward
recycling andcascadingorcan we reduceouruse oftheflows.
Is theclaimedfalseinterpretation ofthebasesystem badintermsofsustain-
ability?I doubtthis.Afterall, we aretalkingabouta metaphor. The powerof
metaphors is thattheyareflexible, evenunclearandvaqueattimes.Thepower
ofthemetaphor is also inthoseaspectsthatitfailstoshow(BoonsandRoome,
2000). Whenone statesthatsomebodyis 'stupidas a donkey',one does not
havetoknowtheIQ ofthedonkeytogetone'smessagethrough. Withtheabove
example,themetaphor helpedus tolearnthatitis goodtofocuson thehuman
actorsandtheirorganisations, notsimplyon thephysicalflowsof matter and
energy, whenusingtheindustrial ecosystem metaphor inthetargetsystem, the
industrialsystem. Infact,itseemsthattoomuchenergy hasbeendevotedtostudy
onlytheengineering ornaturalscience-type materialandenergyflowanalysis
in thefieldof IE. The human-dimension of IE or theimportance of thefirm,
thefarm,theconsumerand therecycler(Cohen-Rosenthal, 2000; Ehrenfeld,
2000) is currently thetheme,whichis neglected(Korhonen, von Malmborg,
StrachanandEhrenfeld, 2004).
Whatis important is nottoaskarewe abletodescribeina perfect wayhow
natureworkswhenconsidering thecontribution of IE to sustainabledevelop-
ment.Rather, onemustaskhowcanwe use theinsights ofIE tobetterpreserve
nature andchangeindustrial systems ina waythattheirenvironmental burdenis
reduced?It willbe veryimportant toremember whatis thegoal ofIE. It is the
ecologicallysustainable development ofthetargetsystem, notwhether indus-
trialecologistsareabletodescribeina perfect wayhownature, thesource/base
systemofthemetaphor, worksandthenapplyitsoperating modelin a perfect
wayin industrial systems. Industrial ecologyis differentthanecologyorbiol-
ogy.Ehrenfeld (2003) arguesthatmetaphors cannotbe wrongor right.They
can onlybe usefulornotuseful.
vs.objective
4.5. Normative
Thequestionhasbeenraised,whether orobjective(Boonsand
IE is normative
Roome,2000; see discussioninAllenby,1999c)andwhether IE is prescriptive
or descriptive(Korhonen,2004a). For thepurposesof thispaper'smessage
normative
andsimplification, meansa 'should'.Objectivemeansneutral. It is
truethatsustainable
development has becomea 'should'in theenvironmental
discussionsalthoughitsmeaningis widelydebated.It is 'good' orfashionable
to committothecause.BoonsandRoomenote(2000,p. 51) that:

102
JOUNIKORHONEN
... as faras thespecific

metaphor ofindustrial atleast
ecologyis concerned,
oneofitsdominant is basedonthenormative
definitions thatindustrial
notion
ecosystems shouldbemadetofunction inthesamewaythat natural
ecosystems
operate and
(Frosch Gallopoulos, 1989)...
The famousarticleto whichtheyreferreads:
... thetraditional
modelofindustrial - inwhich
activity individual
manufacturing
processes takeinraw and
materials generateproductsbesoldpluswastetobe
to
disposed of- shouldbetransformed model:anindustrial
intoa moreintegrated
ecosystem and
(Frosch Gallopoulos, 1989,p.95).
But thedifferent IE principlesare notclearin termsof theircontribution to
sustainabledevelopment, e.g. theabove notedcase of diversity. The rebound
effect,Jevon'sparadoxorproblemdisplacement can actualiseinrecycling and
cascading.Recycling means recovery, perhapsincreasingtransportation, fuel
use and emissions.Korhonen(2001b) notedthatlong-term cooperation rela-
tions(or interdependency) may turn intounhealthy dependencies or in 'lock
ins',e.g.,investments thattieupthefundsoftheorganisation, requirelongpay
backtimesandinthiswayhamper(eco)innovation.
On theotherhand,IE can be usedas a more'neutral'studyhypothesis, not
as an absoluteshould.IE principles do illustrate
important characteristicsof
anylivingsystem. It is important to considermaterial and energy flows and
thestructure ofthesystemintermsoftheactorsorcomponents ofthesystem,
theirrelationsand thelocationof thesystem.But whether theactorsshould
cooperate,whether thereshouldbe manydifferent actorsinvolved(diversity)
andwhether theactorsshouldrecycleoralwaysremainas locallyplacedis,at
most,a hypothesis anda questionforresearch.
4.6. Toolsvs.culture
Because of thefocuson thephysicalflowsof matter and energy, IE is often
criticisedofbeingtootechnical, instrumental ordescriptive (Ehrenfeld, 1997;
2000). Someauthors arguethatsustainability
management andtoolsusedinitor
incorporate environmental management aremerely maintaining andevenmaking
stronger thedominant unsustainable
neoclassicaleconomicsparadigm (Welford,
1998a;Springett, 2003; Heiskanen, 2002). Welford (1998a) arguesthateco-ef-
ficiency triestojustifyeconomicgrowth byusingstandard economiclogicand
thisis dangerous forsustainability.
Springett(2003) findslack ofcriticaltheory
perspectives in themanagement discourse on Heiskanen
sustainability. (2002)
observesthatLCA is normally usedto implement thepresetgoals althoughit
wouldalso havethepotential to actuallyshapeandconstruct thegoals.
LCA couldbe usedto studyandrevealsustainable development questions
ofequityandfuturity (Welford,1998b).BecauseLCA looksattheentirelifeof
a product, itcan identifyunsustainablepracticesalso in thethirdworldcoun-

103
tries.The developingworldcan be used as thesinkor thesourceof products

refinedin and drivenby thedevelopedcountries. Because also theuse phase
oftheproductlifeis studied,theimportant sustainabledevelopment principle
of futurity maybe consideredin LCA. The lifeof a consumerproduct, say,a
car, and its environmental
impactscan extendovernationaland continental
borders, butalso overmanydecades.One ofthereviewers ofthispaperagreed
thatitis important tonotetheissueofpointvs. non-point sourcesofpollution;
thefirmmaybe an easiertarget forpolicythanthegeneralcar-owning public.
The naturalecosystem metaphor inIE has a potential
to inform us ofradically
new worldviewsforsustainable development e.g. fromglobalto lo-
culture,
cal, and movethedebatebeyondtechnical, instrumentalor descriptivetools
andtechniques.
5. CONCLUSION
This theoretical articleconsideredthe sustainabledevelopment potentialin

theconceptofindustrial ecosystem.I believethisconceptis important forthe
theory building oftheemerging scientific ecology.I foundsix
fieldofindustrial
controversies thatneedto be addressedin thetheory building.The industrial
ecosystem is a provocativeconcept.Hopefully,IE doesnotbecome'justanother
tool'intherapidly growing toolboxofsustainable
development. I inviteallthose
whoareinterested in industrial
ecologytorespondto thisarticle.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wanttothank theinsights
andcontributions
ofall friendsthathavehelpedmewhen
workingwith inIndustrial
Progress Ecology-AnInternational with
Journal, theJournal
ofCleaner Production issue
special 'Applicationsof Ecology' withthe
Industrial and
Business andtheEnvironment
Strategy specialissue'BusinessandIndustrial
Ecology'.
Thesupport fromtheAcademy ofFinlandRegional Industrial
Ecosystem
Management
(RIEM,projectnumber 53437)isgladlyacknowledged. I greatly
valuethesupport
from
theEmilAaltonen Foundationandfrom allthosewhohavehelped metoworkwith the
11thAnnualInternationalSustainable
Development Research 6-8 June,
Conference,
Finland
Helsinki,
NOTES
1SeeJelinskietaL,
1992;Tibbs,1992;Graedel 1995;Graedel,
andAllenby, 1996;Ayres
andAyres, 1999a;b;c;Ehrenfeld,
1996;Allenby, 2001;Korhonen,
2000;Harte, 2001a.For
seeO'Rourke
reviews, 1997;denHond,2000;Chertow,
etal.,1996;Erkman, 2000.

104
JOUNIKORHONEN
2Journal Industrial EcologyandProgress inIndustrial Ecology:AnInternational

of
Journal.
3Fordiscussion onthebusiness-environment win-win rhetorics, seePorterandvander
Linde,1996;Walley andWhitehead, 1996.
4Alsoother 'industrial metabolism'.
relevant texts werescanned, e.g.,thoseentitled
5Notealsothat theFrosch andGallopoulos 1989article inScientificAmerican isnumber
24inthelistofmostcommonly citedpapers inBSE(Dobersetal.,2000).ForIE articles
inBSE see,Bey2001;BoonsandBerends 2001;Andersen 1997;vanLeeuwen etal.,
2003;Ammenberg andHjelm,2003.
6Thesearethemostimportant materials usedinthisarticle. Theauthor is awareof
Industrial
Ecology byManahan andthesecondedition ofGraedel andAllenby (2002)
Industrial
Ecology, butthesearenotavailable fortheauthor atthetimeofwriting this
article.
7Seethediscussion lateroninthepaperonthisdifficult Is industrial
question: ecology
or
descriptiveprescriptive?
8See Korhonen andPento,1999a;Korhonen andPento,1999b.
9Oneofthereviewers ofthispaper Iffishingiscontrolled,
suggested yetanother example.
thefishing aremovedtoanother
activities location andthiscomplicates theassessment
ofanindividual project'scontribution tosustainability.
10TheclassictextofOdum(1969) economic andecosystems and
compares systems
is commonly accepted as beinginfluential inIE-type theory inthebackground, butis
notregarded as anIE article as such.TheOdumpaper, forexample, compares different
approaches andtheir contradictions tostudy ecosystem diversity.
11Oneofthereviewers ofthispaperremarked thatthispoint hastobeseeninthecontext
ofthelong-term decline incommodity prices.However, I amunabletoexpand onthis
pointinthetheory building ofthispaper, buthopetodo so infuture papers.
12Jevons,1990(nottheoriginal W.Jevons). See alsoGeorgescu-Roegen, 1971;1990.
13This isderived from that loadedboats
expression Daly's(1996)expression optimally
cansinkoptimally.
14I amnota native butifI remember there is a sayinginEnglish
speaker, correctly,
language whichgoessomething like'building a straw manandsetting thestraw man
onfire'.Themessage ofthissaying is thatitis notscientific anditis reallya form of
poorresearch tofirstconstruct andcreate thefocusofyourcritique whileonlyafter this
presentingyourcritique.
REFERENCES
Abe,J.M.,Dempsey,RE. andBasset,D.A. 1998.Business YourOr-

Ecology:Giving
ganisationtheNatural
Edge.Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Ahmed, M.M.1998.'Cultural
andcontextual inbusiness
aspects ethics:
Threecontro-
versiesandonedilemma'.JournalofTransnational
Management 4
Development,
(1): 111-29.

105
Allenby, B. 1999a.Industrial Ecology:PolicyFramework andImplementation. New

Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Allenby, B. 1999b.'Earthsystems engineering: Theroleofindustrial ecologyin an
engineered world'.Journal ofIndustrial Ecology 2 (3): 73-93.
Allenby, B. 1999c.'Industrial EcologyandCulture'. Industrial Ecology, 3(1): 2-4.
B. and
Allenby, Cooper, W. E. 1994. 'Understanding industrial ecology a biological
from
systems perspective'.TotalQuality Environmental Management, Spring:343-54.
Allenby,B. and Richards,D.J. 1994. The Greening ofIndustrial Ecosystems.Washington,
D.C.: National Academy Press.
Ammenberg, J.andHjelm,O. 2003.'Tracing business andenvironmental effects of
environmental management systems: A study ofnetworking smallandmedium-
sizedenterprises usinga jointenvironmental management system'.Business and
theEnvironment, 12(3): 163-74.
Anderberg, S. 1998.'Industrial metabolism andthelinkages between economics, ethics
andtheenvironment'. Ecological Economics, 24:312-17.
Andersen, 0. 1997.'Industrial ecology andsomeimplications forruralSMEs'.Business
Strategy and the Environment, 6 (3): 146-52.
Andrews, C. 2001.'Building a micro-foundation forindustrial ecology'.Journal of
Industrial Ecology,4 (3): 35-51.
Ayres,R.U.2004.'Onthelifecyclemetaphor: where ecology andeconomics diverge'.
Ecological Economics, 48: 425-38.
Ayres,R.U. andAyres, L.W.2002.A Handbook ofIndustrial Ecology.Cheltenham:
Edward Elgar.
Ayres,R.U.1994.'Industrial metabolism: Theory andpolicy'. InAyres,R.U.andSimonis,
U.E.(eds),Industrial Metabolism: RestructuringforSustainable Development. Tokyo:
United Nations University Press, pp.3-20.
Ayres,R.U. andAyres, L. 1996.Industrial Ecology:Towards ClosingtheMaterials
Cycle.Cheltenham: Edward Elgar,pp.278-80.
Ayres,R.,Schlesinger, W.H.andSocolow, R.H.1994.'Humanimpacts onthecarbon
andnitrogen cycles'.In Socolow,R.,Andrews, C, Berkhout, E andThomas, V.
(eds),Industrial EcologyandGlobalChange.Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press,pp.121-56.
Baas,L. 2001. 'Developing anindustrial ecosystem inRotterdam: Learningby... what?'.
Journal ofIndustrial Ecology, 4 (2): 4-6.
Baas,L. 1998.'Cleanerproduction andindustrial ecosystems, a Dutchexperience'.
Journal ofCleanerProduction, 6: 189-97.
Bennet, R.J.andChorley, R.J.1978.Environmental Systems: Philosophy,Analysis and
Control. London: Methuen.
Benyus, J.M.1997.Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired byNature. NewYork:William
Morrow andCompany, pp.238-84.
Berkhout, P.H.G., Muskens, C. andVelthuijsen, J.W2000.'Defining therebound effect'
.
Energy Policy, 28:425-32.

106
JOUNIKORHONEN
Bey,C. 2002.'"Moreheatthanlight". Employing industrial ecology's metaphor pro-

ductively'. The 2002 International Sustainable Development Research Conference
Proceedings. Shipley, WestYorkshire: ERPEnvironment, pp.83-96.
Bey,C. 2001.'Quo vadisindustrial ecology? Realigning thediscipline withitsroots'.
Greener Management International. GMI34,Summer 2001,pp.35-42.
Bey,C. 2000.QuoVadisIndustrial Ecology? Realigning thediscipline withitsroots'.
The2000Eco-Management andAuditing Conference Proceedings. Shipley,West
Yorkshire: ERPEnvironment, pp. 24—9.
Bey,C. 1999.'Corporate strategiesforindustrial ecosystems: Acritique ofcurrent theory
andpractice'. Paperpresented at the 8th Business Strategy and the Environment
Conference, University ofLeeds,pp.1-5.
Bourg, D. and Erkman, S. (eds)2003.Perspectives onIndustrial Ecology. Sheffield,
UK: Greenleaf.
Boons,F.andBerends, M. 2001. 'Stretching theboundary: thepossibilities offlexibility
as an organisational capability in industrialecology'.Business Strategyandthe
Environment, 10(2): 115-24.
Boons,F.andRoome, N.2000.'Industrial ecology as a culturalphenomenon: Onobjec-
tivityas a normative position'. Journal ofIndustrial Ecology, 3: 49-54.
Brand,E. anddeBruijn, T. 1999.'Shared responsibilityattheregional level:Thebuilding
ofsustainable industrialestates'. European Environment, 9: 221-31.
Burstrom, F.andKorhonen, J.2001. 'Municipalitiesandindustrial ecology: Reconsidering
municipal environmental management'. Sustainable Development, 9(1): 36-46.
CaliforniaManagement Review. 2001.'ARoundtable'. Vol.43,No.3.
Chertow, M. (ed.) 2002.Developing IndustrialEcosystems: Approaches, Cases,and
Tools.NewHaven,CT: YaleSchoolofForestry andEnvironmental Bul-
Studies,
letinSeries.
Chertow, M. 1998.'Eco-industrial parkmodelreconsidered'. Journal ofIndustrial
Ecology, 2 (3): 8-10.
Chertow,M.R.2000.'Industrial symbiosis: Literatureandtaxonomy' .Annu. Rev.Energy
Environ., 25:313-37.
Cohen-Rosenthal, E. 2000.'A walkonthehuman sideofindustrial ecology'. American
Behavioral Scientist,44 (2): 245-64.
Costanza, R.,Cumberland, J.,Daly,H.,Goodland, R. andNorgaard, R. 1997.AnIntro-
duction toEcological Economics. BocaRaton:St.LuciePress,pp.104-6.
Costanza, R.,d'Arge, R.,deGroot, R.,Farber, S.,Grasso, M.,Hannon, B.,Limburg, K.,
Naeem,S.,O'Neill,R.V.,Paruelo, J.,Raskin,R.G.,Sutton, P.andvandenBelt,M.
1998.'Thevalueoftheworld's ecosystem services andnatural capital'.Ecological
Economics, 26:3-16.
Costanza, R. andDaly,H. 1992.'Natural capitalandsustainable development'. Con-
servation Biology, 6(1): 37-46.
Cote,R. 2000. 'Exploring theanalogyfurther'. Journal of Industrial Ecology,3:
11-12.
Cote,P.andCohen-Rosenthal, E. 1998.'Designing eco-industrial parks: a synthesisof
someexperience'. Journal ofCleanerProduction, 6: 181-8.

107
Cote,R.andHall,J.1995.'Industrial parks asecosystems'. Journal ofCleaner Produc-

tion,3: 41-6.
Daly,H. 1997.'ReplytoSolow/Stiglitz'. Ecological Economics, 22 (3): 271^4.
Daly,H. 1996. Beyond Growth: The Economics of Sustainable Development. Boston:
BeaconPress.
denHond,F.2000.'Industrial ecology: A review'. RegEnviron. Change, 1:60-69.
Desrochers,P.2002a.'Regional development andinter-industryrecycling linkages:some
historicalperspectives'.Entrepreneurship andRegional Development, 14:49-65.
Desrochers, P.2002b.'Natural capitalist'sindictment oftraditional A reap-
capitalism:
praisal'.BusinessStrategy and the Environment, 11 (4): 203-20.
Desrochers, P.2001.'Citiesandindustrial symbiosis: Somehistorical and
perspectives
policyimplications'.Journal ofIndustrial Ecology, 5: 29-44.
Dobers,P.,Strannegard, L. andWolff, R. 2000.'Union-jacking theresearch agenda:
A study ofthefrontstage andbackstage ofBusiness Strategy andtheEnvironment
1992-1998'. Business Strategy andtheEnvironment, 9: 1-23.
Ehrenfeld,J.2003.'Putting thespotlight onmetaphors andanalogies inindustrial
ecol-
ogy'.Journal ofIndustrial Ecology, 7: 1-4.
Ehrenfeld,J.R.2000.'Industrial ecology: Paradigm shiftornormal science?'American
Behavioral 44 (2): 229-44.
Scientist,
Ehrenfeld,J.2000.Personal communication.
Ehrenfeld,J.1997.'Industrial ecology: A framework forproduct andprocess design'.
Journal ofCleanerProduction, 5: 87-96.
Ehrenfeld,J.andGertler, N. 1997.'Theevolution ofinterdependence atKalundborg'.
Journal ofIndustrialEcology, 1:67-80.
Erkman, S. andRamaswamy, R. 2003.Applied IndustrialEcology: ANewPlatform for
Planning SustainableSocieties. Bangalore: AicraPublishers.
Erkman, S. 1997.'Industrial ecology: A historicalview'.Journal ofCleanerProduc-
tion,5: 1-10.
F andHahn,
Figge, T.2001. 'Sustainable valueadded:Measuring corporate contributions
In:The2001Business
tosustainability'. StrategyandtheEnvironment Conference
Proceedings. Shipley,WestYorkshire: ERPEnvironment, pp.83-92.
Friedman,M. 1962.Capitalism andFreedom. Chicago:University ofChicagoPress.
Frosch,D. 1989.
andGallopoulos,N. 'Strategies formanuf acturing'. American,
Scientific
261(3): 94-102.
Geng,Y.andCote,R.2002.'Scavengers anddecomposers inaneco-industrial park'.The
International Journal ofSustainable Development andWorld Ecology, 9: 333^0.
Georgescu-Roegen, N. 1990.'Production process anddynamic economies'. In: Baran-
zini,M. andScazzieri, R. (eds),TheEconomic Theory ofStructure andChange.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.198-226.
Georgescu-Roegen, N. 1971. The Entropy Law andtheEconomic Process. Cambridge,
MA:Harvard University Press.
N. andEhrenfeld,
Gertler, J.R.1996.'A down-to-earth approach tocleanproduction'.
Technology Review, February-March: 48-54.

108
JOUNIKORHONEN
Giampietro, M. 1994.'Sustainability andtechnological development inagriculture:A

critical of
appraisal genetic engineering'. Bioscience 44,(10): 677-89.
Graedel,T.E.1996.'Ontheconcept ofindustrialecology'. Annu. Rev.Energy Environ.,
21:69-98.
Graedel,T. E. andAllenby, B.R. 1995.Industrial Ecology. NewJersey: Prentice Hall,
pp.8-10,93-96.
J.2001.In:'Business
Harte, as livingsystem: Thevalueofindustrial ecology - Around-
tablediscussion'. California Management Review,43 (3): 16-25.
Hardy,C. andGraedel, T.2002.'Industrial ecosystems as foodwebs'.Journal ofIndus-
trialEcology, 6 (1): 29-38.
Heiskanen, E. 2002.'Theinstitutional logicoflifecyclethinking'. Journal ofCleaner
Production, 10:427-37.
Hussain,S.S. 1999.'Theethicsof"goinggreen": Thecorporate socialresponsibility
debate'.Business Strategy andtheEnvironment, 8,203-10.
Isenmann, R. 2003.'Further effortstoclarify industrialecology's hidden philosophy of
nature'. Journal ofIndustrial Ecology, 6: 27^48.
Isenmann, R.2002.'Industrial ecology: paradigmaticshiftofunderstanding nature'.The
2002International Sustainable Development Research Conference Proceedings.
Shipley, WestYorkshire :ERPEnvironment, pp.261-70.
Jelinski,
L.W.,Graedel, T.E.,Laudise, R.A.,McCall,D.W.andPatel,C.K.N.1992.'In-
dustrialecology: and
Concepts approaches'. Proceedings oftheNational Academy
ofSciences, 89:793-7.
Jevons,F. 1990.'Greenhouse: A paradox'. Search, 21: 171-2.
M.andWeidner,
Janicke, H. 1995.'Succesful environmental policy:Anintroduction'. In
Janicke andWeidner (eds),Succesfull Environmental Policy:A CriticalEvaluation
of24 Cases.Berlin: Sigma,pp.13-15.
M. 1990.StateFailure.Cambridge:
Janicke, PolityPress, pp.44-54.
Karvonen, M-M.'Natural versus manufactured capital:Win-lose orwin-win?. A case
study oftheFinnish pulpandpaperindustry'. Ecological Economics, 37:71-85.
Kauppi,RE.,Mielikainen, K. andKuusela, K. 1992.'Biomassandthecarbon budget
oftheEuropean forests'. Science, 256:70-74.
Koenig,H.E., Cooper, WE.andFalwey, J.M.1972.'Engineering forecological,sociologi-
calandeconomic compatibility'. IEEE Trans. Sys.ManCybern., SMC-2,319-31.
Koenig,H.E.,Cooper, WE.andFalvey, J.M.1974.'Engineering forecological,
sociologi-
calandeconomic compatibility'.In:Daez,D. andPantell, R.H.(eds)Environmental
Modelling: Analysis andManagement. Stroudsberg, PA:Dowden, Hutchenson and
Ross,pp.330-42.
Korhonen, J.2004a.'Theory ofindustrialecology'. Progress inIndustrialEcology -An
International Journal, Vol.1,Numbers 1-3.
Korhonen, J.2004b.'Industrial ecology inthestrategicsustainable development model:
Strategic applications ofindustrialecology'. Journal ofCleaner Production,special
issue'Applications ofIndustrial Ecology', Vol.12,Issues8-10.

109
J.2004c.4Do wereally
Korhonen, needthedebate onthenatural ecosystem metaphor in
technologymanagement andsustainable development literature?'
CleanTechnologies
andEnvironmental Policy. Accepted forpublication (March5,2004).
Korhonen,J.2003.'On theethicsofcorporate socialresponsibility: Considering the
paradigm ofindustrialmetabolism'. Journal ofBusiness Ethics, 48 (4): 301-315.
J.,Savolainen,
Korhonen, I. andOhlstrom, M.2004.'Applications oftheindustrial ecol-
ogyconcept ina research project: Technology andclimate change(CLIMTECH)
researchinFinland'.Journal ofCleanerProduction, specialissue'Applications of
Industrial
Ecology', Vol.12,Issues8-10.
Korhonen,
J.,Huisingh, D. andChiu,A.S.F.2004.'Applications ofindustrial ecology'.
Journal ofCleanerProduction, specialissue'Applications ofIndustrial Ecology',
Vol.12,Issues8-10.
Korhonen,J.andStrachan, P.2004.'Toward progress inindustrial ecology'.Progress
inIndustrialEcology - AnInternational Journal. Vol.1,Numbers 1-3.
J.,vonMalmborg,
Korhonen, F, Strachan, PA. andEhrenfeld, J.E.2004.'Management
andpolicyaspectsofindustrial ecology: Anemerging research agenda'.Business
Strategyand the Environment, 13 (5).
J.2002a.'Twopathstoindustrial
Korhonen, ecology: Applying theproduct-based and
geographical approaches'. Journal ofEnvironmental Planning andManagement,
45: 39-57.
J.2002b.'Thedominant
Korhonen, economics paradigm andcorporate socialresponsibil-
ity'.Corporate SocialResponsibility andEnvironmental Management, 9: 67-80.
Korhonen,J.2002c.'A material andenergy flowmodelforco-production ofheatand
power'.Journal ofCleanerProduction 10:537-44.
Korhonen,J.2001a.'Fourecosystem principles foranindustrial ecosystem'. Journal
ofCleanerProduction, 9 (3): 253-9.
J.2001b.'Co-production
Korhonen, ofheatandpower: Ananchor tenant ofa regional
industrial
ecosystem'. Journal ofCleanerProduction, 9 (6): 509-17.
Korhonen,J.2001c.'Regional industrial ecology: Examples from regional economic
systems offorest and
industry energy supply in Finland'. Journal ofEnvironmental
Management, 63:367-75.
J.2000a.Industrial
Korhonen, Ecosystem: Using theMaterial andEnergy FlowModelof
anEcosystem inanIndustrial System (Ph.D.thesis). University ofJyvaskyla, School
ofBusiness andEconomics, Jyvaskyla Studies inBusiness andEconomics 5.
J.2000b.'Completing
Korhonen, industrial ecology cascadechaininthecaseofa paper
SME
industry: potential inindustrial ecology'.Eco-Management andAuditing, 1:
11-20.
Korhonen,J.andSnakin, J-P.2003.'Industrial ecosystem evolution ofNorth Karelia
heatingenergy system'.Reg.Environ. Change, 3: 128-39.
J.andSnakin,
Korhonen, J-P2001. 'Ananchor tenant approach tonetwork management:
Considering regionalmaterial andenergy flownetworks'. International Journal of
Environmental Technology andManagement, 1:444-63.
J.,Niemelainen,
Korhonen, H. andPulliainen, K. 2002.'Regional industrial recycling
network inenergy supply: Thecase ofJoensuu city,Finland'.Corporate Social
ResponsibilityandEnvironmental Management, 9: 170-85.

110
JOUNIKORHONEN
Korhonen, J.,Wihersaari, M.andSavolainen, 1.2001. 'Industrial ecosystem intheFinnish

forest industry: Using the material and energy flow model ofa forestecosystem in
a forest industry system*. Ecological Economics, 39 (1): 145-61.
Korhonen, J.,Wihersaari, M. andSavolainen, I. 1999.'Industrial ecology ofa regional
energy supply system: ThecaseofJyvaskyla region,Finland'. Greener Management
International, 26:57-67.
Korhonen, J.andPento, T. 1999a.'Combining input-output economics andenvironmental
lifecycleassessment: Industrial ecology ofa printing paperindustry'. International
Sustainable Development Research Conference 1999 Proceedings. Leeds:ERP
Environment, pp.195-201.
Korhonen, J.andPento, T. 1999b.'Theeffects ofUK paperrecovery policy:Consider-
ingthebarriers ofindustrial ecology'.Waste andWater Conference 99Proceedings.
Copenhagen, pp.27-8.
Lappalainen, E., andHanninen, P. 1993.ThePeatReserves ofFinland(inFinnish).
Espoo:Geological Survey ofFinland, Report ofInvestigation 117.
Levine, S.H. 2001. 'Production systems industry ecology:Somecomparisons
in and
relevant to industrial ecology'.TheFirstWorld Conference ofTheInternational
Society forIndustrial Ecology(ISIE) Proceedings. Leiden,TheNetherlands, No-
vember 12-14.
Levine,S. 1999.'Ecological modelsandproducts: A population ecology perspective'.
Journal ofIndustrial Ecology, 3 (2): 47-62.
Manahan, S. 1999.Industrial Ecology. London: LewisPublishers.
Mayumi, K.,Giampietro, M. andGowdy, J.M.1998.'Georgescu-Roegen/Daly versus
Solow/Stiglitz revisited'. Ecological Economics, 27 (2): 115-18.
Niutanen, V.2004.Industrial Ecosystem Case Studies:ThePotential ofMaterial and
Energy FlowRoundput inRegional Waste Management. Academic Dissertation(Ph.D
thesis). University ofJoensuu, Faculty ofSocialSciences.
Niutanen, V.andKorhonen, J.2002.'Management ofoldlandfills byutilisingforestand
energy industry wasteflows'. Journal ofEnvironmental Management, 65:39-47.
Norton, B.,Costanza, R. andBishop, R.C. 1997.'Theevolution ofpreferences - Why
"sovereign" preferences maynotleadtosustainable policiesandwhattodo about
it'.Ecological Economics, 24: 193-211.
Odum,E.P.1969.'Thestrategy ofecosystem development'. Science,164:262-70.
Oliver,D.W.,Canniff, J.andKorhonen, J.2002.ThePrimal, TheModern andtheVital
Center: A Theory ofBalancedCulture ina LivingPlace.Brandon, VT: Holistic
Education Press(Foundation forEducational Renewal).
0'Rourke,D., Connelly, L. andKoshland,C. 1996.'Industrial ecology:Acriticalreview'.
International Journal ofEnvironment andPollution, 6: 89-112.
Pento,T. 1998a.'Theeconomic theory ofenvironmental lifecycleinventory In
models'.
J.M.Baldasano andH. Power(eds),Environmental Engineering andManagement.
WITPress,pp103-112.
Pento, T. 1998b.'Integrating environmental management instruments:Material flow
analysis'. In: B. Nath, L. Hens, P. Compton and D. Devuyst (eds).Environmental
Management in Practice:Instruments forEnvironmental Management. London:
Routledge, pp.241-53.

Ill
Pizzocaro, S. 1998.'Stepsto industrial ecology:Reflections on theoretical aspects'.

TheInternational Journal ofSustainable Development andWorld Ecology, 5 (4):
229-37.
Porter,M. 1998.'Clusters andtheneweconomics ofcompetition'. Harvard Business
Review, November/December: 77-90.
Porter,M. vanderLinde1996.'Greenandcompetitive: Ending thestalemate'. In:R.
Welford andR. Starkey (eds),Business andtheEnvironment. London: Earthscan,
pp.61-77.
Ranta, J.,Isannainen, S. andWihersaari, M. 1996.'Recycling ofashinextensive uti-
lisation ofbiomass'. Biomass forenergy andtheenvironment. Proceedings ofthe
9thEuropean BioenergyConference. Pergamon Press/Commission oftheEuropean
Communities, Vol.1.,pp.706-11.
Rejeski,D. 1997.'Mars,materials, andthree moralityplays:Material flowsandenvi-
ronmental policy'.JournalofIndustrial Ecology, 1 (4): 13-18.
Ring,1.1997.'Evolutionary strategiesinenvironmental policy'.Ecological Economics,
23:237-50.
Roome, N. 2001.'Conceptualizing andstudying thecontribution ofnetworks inenvi-
ronmental management and sustainable development'. Business Strategy andthe
Environment, 10(2): 69-76.
Savolainen, I.,Hillebrand,K.,Nousiainen, I. andSinisalo,J.1994.Greenhouse Impacts
oftheUseofPeatand Wood forEnergy. TechnicalResearch Centre ofFinland.
Espoo,Finland: VTTResearch Notes1559.
Selin,P.1999.Industrial UseofPeatlands andtheRe-use ofCut-away AreasinFinland,
Jyvaskyla inbiological
studies andenvironmental science, no.79,myowntransla-
tion(originally inFinnish).
Sinding,K. 2000. 'Environmental management beyondtheboundaries ofthefirm: Defini-
tionsandconstraints'. Business Strategy andtheEnvironment, 9 (2): 79-91.
Snakin,J-P. 2003.Wood Energy andGreenhouse GasEmissions intheHeating Energy
System ofNorth Karelia,Finland: AnIndustrial Ecology Approach (Academic Dis-
sertation). UniversityofJoensuu, Faculty ofForestry.
Socolow, R. 1994.'Six perspectives from industrialecology'.In:R. Socolow, C. An-
drews, F. Berkhout. andV.Thomas(eds),Industrial Ecology andGlobalChange.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.3-16.
Socolow, R.,Andrews, C, Berkhout, F.andThomas, V.(eds).1994.Industrial Ecology
andGlobalChange. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,pp.121-56.
Springett,D. 2003.'Businessconceptions ofsustainable development: A perspective
from critical theory'.BusinessStrategy andtheEnvironment, 12(2): 71-86.
Schwarz, E. andSteininger, K. 1997.'Implementing nature's lesson:The industrial
recycling network enhancing regional development'. Journal ofCleanerProduc-
tion,5 (1-2):47-56.
Templet, P.,H. 1999.'Energy, diversity anddevelopment ineconomic systems:An
empirical analysis'.EcologicalEconomics, 30:223-33.
Tibbs,H.B.C.1992.'Industrial ecology: Anenvironmental agendaforindustry'. Whole
EarthReview, Winter: 4-19.

112
JOUNIKORHONEN
VanderVoet, E.,Huele,R.andStevers, R.2001. 'Industrialecology:thebiosphere-tech-

nosphere analogy appliedtoevolutionary processes'. TheFirstWorld Conference
oftheInternational SocietyforIndustrialEcology Proceedings, Leiden, November
12-14,2001.
vanLeeuwen, M.G.,Vermeulen, W.J.V.andGlasbergen, R2003.'Planning eco-industrial
parks:Ananalysis ofDutchplanning methods'. BusinessStrategyandtheEnviron-
ment, 12(3): 147-62.
E. 1993.'Forest
Verkasalo, industryas a producer andconsumer ofwood-based energy
inFinland'. SilvaFennica26 (2): 123-31.
Wackernagel, M. andRees,W. 1997.'Perceptual andstructural toinvesting
barriers in
naturalcapital:Economics from an ecologicalfootprint perspective'.Ecological
Economics, 20:2-24.
Walley,N. andWhitehead, B. 1996.'Itis noteasybeinggreen'.In:R. Welford andR.
Starkey (eds),BusinessandtheEnvironment. London:Earthscan, pp.36-44.
Wallner,H.P.,1999.'Towards sustainabledevelopment ofindustry:Networking, com-
plexityandeco-clusters'.Journal ofCleanerProduction, 7(1): 49-58.
Wallner,H.P.,Narodoslawsky, M. andMoser, F. 1996.'Islandsofsustainability: A bot-
tom-up approach towardssustainable development'. Environment andPlanning A,
28: 1763-78.
WCED (World Commission on Environment andDevelopment) 1987.OurCommon
Future. NewYork:Oxford UniversityPress.
Welford,R. 1998a.'Corporate environmental management, technology andsustainable
development: Postmodern perspectivesandtheneedfora critical research agenda'.
Business Strategy andtheEnvironment, 7(1): 1-12.
Welford,R. 1998b.Corporate Environmental Management I. London:Earthscan, pp.
138-47.
Welford,R. 2002.'Globalisation, corporate socialresponsibility andhuman rights'.
Corporate Social Responsibilityand Environmental Management, 9(1): 1-7.
Williams,R. 1994.'Rolesforbiomass energyinsustainable development'. In:R. So-
colow,C.Andrews, F.Berkhout andV.Thomas (ed.).Industrial
Ecology andGlobal
Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,pp.199-228.


Industrial Ecology For Sustainable Development - Six Controversies in Theory Building

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Industrial Ecology For Sustainable Development - Six Controversies in Theory Building

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Industrial Ecology for Sustainable Development: Six Controversies in Theory Building

Author(s): JOUNI KORHONEN

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

This articleis buildingthetheory forthescientific fieldof industrial

1. INTRODUCTION: SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AND

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

1994).IE comparesthenatural ecosystem andtheindustrial system bytracking

FIGURE1. Simplified flowofmatter andenergy inanecosystem. Theflowofmatter

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

FIGURE2. Simplified flowofmatter andenergy intheindustrial ecosystem(IE) vi-

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

thecooperative actorswithinthesystemboundaries use each other'smaterial

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

2. METHODOLOGY AND MATERIALS

The literatureon IE beganwiththe1989Scientific AmericanarticlebyFrosch

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

specialissue andbecausemanyIE-relatedthemesare coveredin thejournal,

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

3. THE INDUSTRIAL ECOSYSTEM CONCEPT FOR ECOLOGICALLY

oftheIE materialand energy

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

longtime.Korhonen andSnakin(2003) showedthattheircase study, a regional

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

Templet(1999) founda positiverelationbetweeneconomicsystemdiver-

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

as a normativeprinciple inIE toachieveinterdependency orcooperation orad-

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

4. SIX CONTROVERSIES IN THEORY BUILDING

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

andemissionintensive fossilfuels,at least,in absoluteterms,in sucha large

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

presents a critique:'It is theresourcesflowswhichmustbe manipulated into

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

actorsbetweenproduction andconsumption (likeecosystem decomposers). He

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

notonlyon information transferinreproduction (Nortonetal., 1997).It is just

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

... as faras thespecific

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

tries.The developingworldcan be used as thesinkor thesourceof products

This theoretical articleconsideredthe sustainabledevelopment potentialin

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

2Journal Industrial EcologyandProgress inIndustrial Ecology:AnInternational

Abe,J.M.,Dempsey,RE. andBasset,D.A. 1998.Business YourOr-

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

Allenby, B. 1999a.Industrial Ecology:PolicyFramework andImplementation. New

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

Bey,C. 2002.'"Moreheatthanlight". Employing industrial ecology's metaphor pro-

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

Cote,R.andHall,J.1995.'Industrial parks asecosystems'. Journal ofCleaner Produc-

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

Giampietro, M. 1994.'Sustainability andtechnological development inagriculture:A

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

Korhonen, J.,Wihersaari, M.andSavolainen, 1.2001. 'Industrial ecosystem intheFinnish

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM

Pizzocaro, S. 1998.'Stepsto industrial ecology:Reflections on theoretical aspects'.

This content downloaded from 62.122.72.154 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 22:34:19 PM