Teaching and Learning Guide for: Environmental Economic Geography
Authors: Hayter Roger 
Published: May 2009

Introductory ParagraphEconomy and environment have often been debated, not least by politicians seeking election, as two separate, conflicting realms in zero sum relationships to one another; voters must choose between economy or environment. Likewise, modern (post‐1960) economic geography largely sub‐disciplined itself around an interest in employment (e.g. industrial geography) or in nature (e.g. environmental geography). Fortunately, the nature of the debate is changing rapidly and political, business and environmental leaders have recognized that economic development and environmental sustainability, the two central challenges facing the world in the twenty‐first century, depend on each other as potentially mutually compatible imperatives. Recognition that economic evolution is driven by innovations of all kinds that restructure relations between economy and environment supports this view. If these restructurings have been overwhelmingly negative for the environment in the past, a re‐calibration of institutional and technological innovation towards a Green Paradigm that seeks to realize positive sum relationships between economy and environment is feasible. Moreover, a Green Paradigm needs to be both global in scope and sensitive to geographically uniqueness. Economy–environment relationships are distinctive in particular places and connected across space; climate warming, for example, is a global phenomenon in which processes and outcomes are locally varied. The vital role for environmental economic geography is to assess how place and space influence economy–environment relations that are site‐specific, globally interdependent and multi‐scalar, and to prescribe (local–global) relations that will realize economic and environmental values. Normatively, with respect to the achievement of economic and environmental values: How should innovation systems be organized globally and locally? What is the proper distribution of economic activities? How should cities and resource peripheries be remapped? How should value chains that directly and indirectly link multi‐faceted (resource, manufacturing and service activities) activities in the supply of goods and services for consumers best be organized locally and globally? These are some of the fascinating questions facing environmental economic geography.Annotated Suggestions for Readings1. Freeman C. 1992 ‘A green techno‐economic paradigm for the world economy’ in The Economics of Hope Freeman, C. Pinter, London, pp. 190–211. Freeman demonstrates how environmental impacts are affected by the innovation choices made by society and that a Green Techno‐economic Paradigm (TEP) is a realistic hope.2. Freeman C. and Louça F. 2001 ‘The emergence of a new techno‐economic paradigm: The age of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in Freeman C. and Louça F. As Time Goes By, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 301–335. Part Two (pp. 139–372) explains the major features of the five TEPs since the late eighteenth century, emphasizing the role of innovation in economic evolution. The cited chapter focuses on the present TEP.3. Clapp, R. A. (1998). The resource cycle in forestry and fishing. The Canadian Geographer 42: 129–144. Reveals the powerful tendencies for even sustainable resources to boom and bust.4. Hendricks, B. (2008). The Green Road to Economic Recovery http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/09/hendricks_testimony.html (accessed September 2008). Testimony before the US House Select Committee on Energy Interdependence and Global Economy to argue that investment in attempts to reduce climate warming can rejuvenate the economy.5. Hayter, R., Barnes, T. and Bradshaw, M. J. (2003). Relocating resource peripheries to the core of economic geography's theorizing: rationale and agenda. Area 35: 15–23. A plea to examine resource peripheries as sites where environmental, cultural, industrial and political values are often in conflict.6. Florida, R. (1996). Lean and green: the move to environmentally conscious manufacturing. California Management Review 39: 80–105. An assessment of how manufacturing firms in the US are responding to environmental imperatives.7. Maack, M. H. and Skulason, J. B. (2005). Implementing the hydrogen economy. Journal of Cleaner Production 14: 52–64. A review of Iceland's experiment to become the world's first hydrogen economy.Focus Questions1. How realistic is a green TEP? Or, what are the possibilities for positive sum games between economic development and environment around the globe, especially for poor countries.2. In your home nation, region and community assess shifts towards positive sum relationships between economic development and environment. Are there contradictory trends?3. How are environmental priorities creating jobs in your nation, region or community? What is the potential of ‘environmental industries’ in the ‘south’ (developing countries)?4. What are innovation systems, what is their (evolving) geography and how are they addressing environmental priorities?5. What is the case for dispersing innovation efforts and priorities in relation to the environment among regions and centres within countries and, globally, to developing countries?6. Assess how environmental imperatives encourage localized clusters of economic activities within value chains. Can environmental imperatives support the globalization of value chains?7. Assess the meaning of a ‘proper distribution of industry’ in economic, social and environmental terms. Answer in terms of a particular geographic scale of your choosing.8. Remapping for a Green Paradigm implies reorganizing patterns of land use to ensure environmental as well as economic imperatives are met. What are the implications of a green TEP for the internal structure of cities? What are the implications for resource peripheries?9. Assess Iceland's attempts to be the world's first hydrogen economy. As a tiny, geographically peripheral nation are there general lessons to be learned from the Iceland case in terms of policy approach and the geography of a Green TEP?10. Environmental economic geography is a message of hope. Is there a place for hope in ‘hard‐headed’ theorizing and analysis? (Compare institutional with Marxist and neoclassical approaches.)Bulleted Outline (that demonstrates how the article/topic might connect to related material in lectures or discussions).

Relevant to debates on environment and economy by emphasizing possibilities for positive sum games on the basis of a ‘reasoned history’ of economic evolution.
Extends the thinking about the potential of institutional approaches to economic geography.
Provides context for discussions of the ‘Green Corporation’ and ideas about social responsibility and business ethics.
Provides context for discussions of role of state and consumers in influencing change.
Relevant to discussions of how policy and regulations can stimulate long term change.
Provides context for debates on the development of poor countries and their concern that environmental imperatives are counter to their economic goals.
Provides inputs to a re‐integration of environmental and economic geographies.
Emphasizes the importance of geography (as well as time) in understanding economic evolution.

Tables and Illustrations Table 1: Characteristics of Techno‐economic Paradigms (attached)

Characteristics of Techno‐economic Paradigms

Long wave (key factor industries)
Main carrier branches and infrastructure
Other industries growing rapidly from small base
Source of productivity improvement
Key organizational features and typical entrepreneur

1. Early mechanization 1779s–1830s (cotton, pig iron)
Textiles, textile chemicals, textile machinery, iron working and castings water power, potteries.  Canals, turnpike roads
Steam engines machinery
Mechanization and factories create scale economies not possible in traditional industry
Entrepreneurs and small firms.  Local capital. Arkwright

2. Steam power and railway 1830s–1880s (coal, transport)
Steam engines, steamships, machine tools, iron, railway equipment. Railways, world shipping
Heavy engineering
Steam engine and new transportation systems enhance mechanization possibilities
Limited liability joint stock companies. Stephenson

3. Electrical and heavy engineering 1890s–1930s (steel)
Electrical engineering, electrical machinery, cable and wire heavy engineering, armaments, steel strips heavy chemicals, synthetic dyestuffs. Electricity supply and distribution
Autos, aircraft, telecommunications, radio, aluminum consumer durables, oil, plastics
Cheap steel superior engineering material to iron. Belts, pulleys are driven by onesteam engine replaced by more flexible unit and group drive for electrical machinery, overhead cranes and power tools allowing improved layouts. Standardization facilitates world‐wide operations
Giant cartels, trucks. Middle management. Stable utilities. Krupp

4. Fordist mass production 1930s–1980s (energy–oil)
Autos, trucks, tractors, tanks, armaments, aircraft, consumer durables, process plant, synthetic materials, petrochemicals. Highways, airports, airlines
Computers, radar, NC machine tools, drugs, nuclear weapons and power, missiles, micro‐electronics
Flow processes and assembly line extend scale economies beyond batch production. Standardization of components. New industrial spaces.
Oligopolies, MNCs.  Subcontracting based on arms length vertical integration Ford

5. Information and communication 1980s–(‘chips’)
Computers, electronic capital goods, software, telecommunications, optical fibres, robotics, FMS, ceramics data banks information services, digital telecommunications network. Satellites
‘Third generation’ biotechnology products and processes, space activities. Fine chemicals SDI
FMS, networking and economies of scope. Electronic control systems. Networking of design, production and marketing. Systemation.
Networks of large and small firms. Quality, control, training. JIT. Kobayashi

Source: Hayter, R. 1997 Dynamics of Industrial Location, London: Wiley, p. 28.

Table 2: Techno‐economic Paradigms and the Environment (attached)

Techno‐Economic Paradigms and the Environment

Techno‐economic Paradigm
Environmental Phase
Scale of Impacts
Enviro‐Policy/Industry Strategies

Mechanical, 1760s–1820s
Frontier Economics
Local
Laissez‐faire, environment as free good; pollution as externality. Robert Owen's social reforms, and improved housing for workers, (also evident in New England), are isolated, ‘utopian’ initiatives

Steam, 1820s–1870s
Frontierism, Awareness
Regional
Ditto – but Alkali Acts (UK) of 1860s signalled government recognition of pollution as public bad.

Electrical, 1870s–1920s
Frontierism, Awareness
National
Policy initiatives to: a) preserve enviro‐values (Yellowstone National Park, 1872), and b) improve living conditions of workers, e.g. garden cities. Industry attitudes remain same.

Fordism, 1920s–1970s
Amenity and Protection
Global
Amenity (clean air, gardens, parks) is systemic feature of urban/regional planning, including bans on home coal fires. ‘Environment’ is location factor for firms. But mass production and consumption creates fears for ‘limits to growth’ and ‘Silent Spring’ becomes metaphor of enviro‐ catastrophe.

ICT, 1970s–2020s
Resource Management
Global
Rapid escalation of legislation to reduce pollution; biodiversity becomes priority; Montreal/Kyoto protocols seek global responses. Green consumer appears. Recycling expands, industry develops technologies to reduce enviro‐impacts (e.g. EVs); ecocertification.

Green
Eco‐development
Local
Dematerialization of the economy, industry internalizes environmental values (extends ecocertification, take back policies, sell services rather than goods), and sustainability is defined. Environment is R&D priority

Basic Source: Hayter, R. and R. B. Le Heron 2002 Industrialization, Techno‐economic Paradigms and the Environment In Knowledge, Industry and Environment, eds R. Hayter and R. B. Le Heron. London: Ashgate: p. 15.

Figure 1: Development and Sustainability in Draper, D. (1998). Our Environment. Scarborough, ON: International Thompson Publishing, p. 17.(a) The resource cycle in forestry. Question: Explain the dynamics of the resource cycle. (b) The economic cycle superimposed on the resource cycle. Question: Is sustainable resource use possible? Source: A. Clapp 1998: 138.imagePractical exercises:1. In terms of the organization of production TEPs are summarized in terms of several key dimensions, notably basic factor industries, lead industries, newly emerging industries, transportation and infrastructure, productivity principles, and innovative forms of business, labour and R&D organization. Construct a table of a Green TEP that illustrates these dimensions.2. In the Von Thünen model, agricultural land uses are arranged around markets according to the principle of location rent. As the original model noted, if transportation costs are relatively significant there is a tendency to organize land uses in zones around markets; with increasing distance from markets farmers need to modify their land choices and intensity of farming to offset increased transportation costs. As transportation costs decline in relative terms, significant relationships between land use patterns and intensity with distance from markets are undermined and other factors are more important in shaping location rent. However, environmental considerations are traditionally ignored in these analyses. Given the prevailing technologies, assess how the incorporation of the environmental costs of transportation might affect land use patterns with distance around markets. How might environmental considerations affect decisions to intensify farming (for example, through application of fertilizers) with distance from markets? How might innovations in transportation affect your conclusions.3. In a traditional neoclassical model, residential land use choice is presented as a trade‐off between higher priced land in high density neighbourhoods with low transportation costs near city centres, or low priced land and higher transportation costs in the suburbs. How can environmental considerations be incorporated in these trade‐offs from an individual's perspective. From an environmental perspective, should city planners push for subsidized mass transit to the suburbs and/or higher densities in the centre?4. Construct a simple value chain for a drink (e.g. coffee) or food (e.g. banana) you routinely consume. Can you assess the ecological footprints of this value chain, in total and at the beginning and end of the chain?5. GDP per capita is often used as an index of economic growth and energy use per capita as index of environmental impact. Construct a graph or maps that show the relationship between per capita GDP and per capita energy use on a global scale. Does this relationship prove an inevitable trade‐off between economy and environment?