Can directing existing subsidies on sustainable production to consumers in the form of a green income enhance a transition to sustainable development?
A case for the democratization of environmental politics
MSc Political Science Student: Thayana Tavares Ribeiro de Barros Correia
Student number: 12168858 Lecturer: Robin Pistorius Second Reader: Dr. Mehdi Amineh Date: Friday, 21st of June 2019
Table of contents
Introduction 4
1.1 Justification 6
2. Literature Review 7
2.1 A review of environmental politics 7
2.1.1 Inequalities embedded in the emergence of environmental problems 8 2.1.2 Assessing the complexity of Environmental problems 11 2.1.3. Swimming upstream - social relations and environmental politics 13
2.1.4. Summary 14
2.2 Pro-environmental policies and social relations 15
2.3 Further problematization and contextualization of our environmental politics review 22
2.4 Conclusion 23
3. Methodology: how will we analyze if directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income can enhance a transition to sustainable development? 24
3.1. Data 25
3.2. Building elucidations beyond the analysis of environmental politics to test specific
logical hypotheses - a reader’s guide. 26
3.3 Research question: How can directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income enhance the transition to sustainable development? 27
3.4. Policy proposition explained 28
3.5. Expected results and hypotheses 29
3.6. Limitations 31
4. A stimulus for sustainable production 32
Hypothesis: Directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income can enhance sustainable production by encouraging a stable demand of sustainable
products. 32
4.1 Price-based mechanisms 32
4.2 Rights-based mechanisms 33
4.3 The alternative: directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income to
enhance sustainable production 33
4.4. “Rights-based mechanism” vis-a-vis “Price-based mechanism” policies to stimulate
sustainable production 34
4.5 Infant industry 34
4.6 The impact of subsidies and quotas on welfare maximization 35 1
4.7 Summary 36 5. A stimulus for sustainable consumption and sustainable lifestyles 38
Hypothesis: The incentive for sustainable consumption can encourage sustainable consumption and foster the adoption of sustainable lifestyles 38 5.1. Analysis of behavior, lifestyle and consumption change to achieve sustainability 38
5.2. Towards a theory of social practice 40
5.3. The embeddedness of consumption practices and lifestyles 42 5.4. The proposition of directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income 42 5.5. Using a green income to change consumption practices 43
5.6. Summary 44
6. Quasi-similar case analysis 44
6.1 Discussion 46
7. A stimulus for the eradication of poverty 47
Hypothesis: directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income can enhance poverty eradication by working; in practice as an extra income 47 7.1 Alaska - Extra income distribution due to the creation of the Alaska Permanent Fund 47 7.2 Iran - Targeted Subsidies Reform - policy of extra income in replacement of subsidies to
the energy industry. 50
7.3 Summary 52
8. Discussion 52
8.1 Possible policy outcomes 52
8.2. Operationalization and possible limitations 54
Conclusion 56
References 58
Appendix 1: Figures 63
Appendix 1.1: CO2 emissions per capita in 2016 63
Appendix 1.2: Annual CO2 emissions by world region 64 Appendix 1.3:share of global cumulative CO2 emissions 65
List of Figures
Figure 1: Percentage of CO2 emissions by world population per income group 9 Figure 2: Contributions to greenhouse gasses emission by category in 2016 15 Figure 3: Eletricity’s share of household's consumer spending by income group in Germany 16 Figure 4: Households’ electricity expenditures in 2013 by income groups in Germany 17 Figure 5: Median income, utility bills, energy burden and unit size for households per income type, ownership, and head of household race in 17 cities in the US 18 Figure 6: Income distribution of PV adopters by install year in 13 US states 19 Figure 7: Distributional effects of four major US tax credits 20 Figure 8: Number and type of vehicles per race of household respondent in the US 21 Figure 9: Examples of Theoretical Approaches to Write a Dissertation 24 Figure 10: Visual explanation of policy suggestion of directing sustainable production subsidies
to consumers 29
Figure 11: Expected results 31
Figure 12: Percentage of households with and without e-portemonnee municipalities that
participate in the online test 47
Figure 13: Alaska permanent fund dividend as a percentage of resident’s personal income 49
Figure 14: consumption of energy in selected countries 50
List of concepts and abbreviations
OECD Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development UN United Nations
EU/ EU 28 Europe Union
UK United Kingdom
WWF World Wide Fund for Nature
OXFAM Confederation of 20 independent charitable organizations for global poverty eradication founded in 1942
Abstract
From the ambition to influence environmental policy making, the research at hand analyzes how directing existing sustainable production subsidies to consumers can enhance a
transition to sustainable development. While existing subsidies policies try to encourage consumers’ choice and sustainable producers’ competitiveness by changing prices, assigning the right to consumers to buy sustainable products (through receiving the subsidy) creates a new market for sustainable products. A new market with a guaranteed demand encourages investments in sustainable production and leaves the management of prices to the market. As this also influences the common social practice of consumption, it has the potential to
encourage the adoption of sustainable lifestyles. It also strengthens consumer power at the bottom part of society who have so far been hindered due to often higher prices of sustainable products. As is argued, this could bring democratization to environmental politics. An
argument that is reinforced by the findings of cases where an extra income equally distributed to the entire population reflected in poverty eradication among vulnerable groups. As it asserted that to enhance a transition to sustainable development, a policy should take into account inequalities that constrain democratic participation and try to overcome them, we hope that our policy suggestion can inspire further considerations of social justice within environmental policy-making.
Introduction
Over the past decades environmental issues have steadily moved into the heart of political discussions worldwide. As such, it has reached the everyday lives of billions of people. People who long for better lives and to be listened to by decision makers whose are shaping our collective future. The yellow vests protest in France where thousands demonstrate their resentment with the disproportionate burden ecological taxes placed on them should be a wake up call for environmental politics’ epistemic community. As Aristoteles (1998) reminds us, politics is the art of a dialogue in the attempt of human beings to improve their lives and society. We assert that environmental politics is no different. The task to reform society to take into account social and environmental costs is a hard one. As such, to understand its ethical and social consequences so as to empower and engage ordinary people to achieve a better life and a better world is foremost if you want to influence decisions being made on our behalf.
The research at hand is built upon the motivation of understanding how environmental politics impact the everyday lives of ordinary people, and how this understanding might influence policy making and academic discussions. As such, we begin with a literature review of environmental politics to introduce important concepts and the context in which the discussions take place. This review is followed by an analysis of pro-environmental policies in vogue. From a problematization of how environmental politics has reached peoples’ lives, a policy suggestion that aims at better conciliating ecological, social and economic concerns will be presented and analyzed.
The policy suggestion is to direct existing sustainable production subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income. In which, income stands for receiving the
subsidies and green stands for using the subsidies for the consumption of sustainable products. Hence, the research question: How can directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income enhance a transition to sustainable development?
Because we follow the UN Agenda 21 (1992) recommendation to promote policies that encourage sustainable production, consumption and poverty eradication through multiple stakeholder engagement, with special attention to involvement of the bottom part of societies, the research question will be answered through three sub questions:
How can directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income promote sustainable production? Discussed in chapter 3;
How can directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income encourage sustainable consumption and lifestyles? In chapter 4;
How can directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income spur poverty eradication? In chapter 6;
UN Agenda 21 also encourage the investigation of new solutions to address the new ecological problems modern society faces (ibid). However, to take this opportunity implies in a shortage of empirical cases to rely on, which constraints our findings into a theoretical level.
Nevertheless, we assert that rather than achieving social proof, this thesis aims at intriguing the reader with discussions of the validity of policies that truly take into account the interconnectedness of social, economic and environmental dimensions of a transition to sustainable development. A transition that should be promoted through multiple stakeholder engagement. And that devotes special attention to the bottom part of society, so as to not not reproduce social relations of domination that lead to environmental degradation in the first place. This is where the true relevance of our social scientific work lies. With the creation of knowledge of a novelty policy, the research at hand hopes to influence policy making and discussions to take the opportunity to bring about democratization to further environmental politics legitimacy and feasibility in its very hard task of changing the world.
1.1 Justification
From the acquired knowledge about the risks modern lifestyles pose to the environment, societies now face the challenge to adapt to a more sustainable path. How will humanity adapt its lifestyle so as to protect the environment and themselves from the shortage of natural resources? A variety of arguments and strategies have been put forward, ranging from broader philosophical considerations concerning the responsibilities of humans towards nature to more practical economic calculations of environmental input to national economies (Connelly et al, 2003, chapter 4). This variety of arguments has led to a diversity of policy proposals. To name a few, the creation of tariffs on dirty industries and practices, the establishment of subsidies to encourage more sustainable modes of production and the promotion of awareness campaigns, etc. The research at hand does not deviate from this line of investigation. From arguments put forward in chapter 1, a policy suggestion will follow. Our experimental thought is motivated by Agenda 21 recommendation of promoting innovative sustainable policies that
advance multiple stakeholder engagement and conciliate economic, social and ecological dimensions so as to change unsustainable practices of consumption and production and to eradicate poverty.
To In’t Veld (2016, p. 856), one of the characteristics of contemporary societies, which he calls reflexive societies, lies in the ability to reorient themselves in order to adapt to new knowledge acquired. For instance, the knowledge of environmental problems would lead individuals and systems to find solutions to promote the adaptation of societies to sustainability. To the author, knowledge enables individuals and systems to reflect upon their actions and organization, hence the concept of reflexive society (ibid).
Since knowledge enables reflection, knowledge has become central to policy-making. In In ‘t Veld’s wording policy-making became “evidence or knowledge-based” (ibid). As she explains, policy makers resort to scientific knowledge to create an “objective truth” in order to gain legitimacy and effectiveness among citizens of contemporary societies who have been increasingly characterized by individualization (Ibid). As a way of illustration, we can think of how economic calculations of environmental inputs to production, such as patterns of rain to agriculture, can be used to build an “objective truth” regarding the necessity of national economies to adapt in order to protect the environment. For instance, Elinor Ostrom (1990), showed a number of examples in which communities faced by the knowledge of environmental problems have chosen to manage fisheries, forests and water basins in a sustainable fashion.
Nevertheless, In ‘t Veld (2006, p. 856) ponders that scientific knowledge is by its very structure always fragmented, abstract, partial, conditional and immunized by validity and methodology that protects it against criticism. While scientific knowledge never directly relates to action, policy making is concrete and directly affects everyday lives. She highlights that: “every application of social scientific knowledge for the purpose of policy implies an element of risk” (Ibid), which demands a translation from the scientific sphere to the transdisciplinary world of policy-making.
As knowledge has become central to policy making, the knowledge of environmental problems and its translations into the political world will be analyzed in the following chapter. The aim is to use the literature review to initiate self-reflection so as to investigate how we could contribute to the goal of the UN to build a sustainable future that is inclusive for people and planet. Knowledge will be used to (1) enable reflection and to (2) influence policy making in environmental politics. To clarify even further: (a) analyzing the knowledge of environmental problems and its translations into the political world, (b)
reaching a conclusion that social relations that led to environmental degradation should be changed, (c) a suggestion to spur a transition to sustainable development will be offered.
Having justify our approach, and clarifying that the overall objective is to influence environmental politics with the creation of knowledge: the knowledge of how directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income can enhance a transition to sustainable development, we now turn to a review of environmental politics.
2. Literature Review
As was stated under (a), section 1.2 will perform a brief introduction to the field, which will be followed by an empirical analysis of environmental policies in vogue, in section 2.2.
2.1 A review of environmental politics
To introduce the field to the reader, the nature of environmental problems and important concepts are illustrated and contextualized.
To introduce the reader into the emergence of ecological problems, let us take the main challenge of environmental politics: climate change. Global warming has been increasing due to greenhouse gas emissions accelerated by human activities since the industrial revolution. However, even though human activity in aggregation has led to over accumulation of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, different human activities differ in their impact on global warming.
2.1.1 Inequalities embedded in the emergence of environmental problems
For instance, the emissions of greenhouse gasses vary widely per historical period, per country, or even per capita (see graphs 1, 2, 3 in appendix). Hence, another important concept in the field is the “ecological footprint”, which measures “the amount of the environment resources necessary to produce the goods and services to support a particular lifestyle” . 1
To exemplify this wide variation, take China’s case, where consumption and emission of greenhouse gasses has been increasing extremely fast (see appendix 1, 2, 3).
1 Definition by World WildLife fund or WWF org on:
<https://wwf.panda.org/knowledge_hub/teacher_resources/webfieldtrips/ecological_balance/eco_footprint/> Retrieved on 15/06/2019
Although China in recent years has been the biggest emitter in the world, cumulatively, the U.S. has emitted more, but yet not as much as Europe (EU28 and the U.K). Notwithstanding, the figures still changes if we look at it by ecological footprint. From this perspective, the Chinese contributions to environmental degradation are not as impressive. (see appendix 1). The same goes for India, the second country in population in the world, which in general numbers figures as a big emitter. However, if emissions per capita are observed, Indians contributions are quite small. In contrast, take Denmark’s case. Although in general numbers, as country with very small population, Denmark barely figures as a bigger emitter, comparing ecological footprint index, the Danish figures as one of the populations that most contribute to environmental degradation. The same goes for the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Qatar (see appendix 1).
Even further, the inequality in human activity that lead to environmental degradation is highlighted by the fact that today richer industrialized countries have achieved development through the consumption of natural resources in the past, constraining the possibilities of development for poorer countries. More strikingly, ecological footprint (consumption of natural resources) in richer countries continues to be much larger than in developing countries. As shown by Hurrell et al (2012) “the emissions of even the richest 2–10 percent of India’s population today are, at least on some accounts, still lower than those of America’s poorest 10 per cent”. This embedded inequality in environmental politics is represented in the concept of the North (richer industrialized countries) – South (developing countries) divide. Notwithstanding, there is also inequality in the consumption of natural resources within countries. For instance, Anil Agarwal and Sunita Narain of India’s Centre for Science and Environment emphasis that to treat all emissions alike would penalize “subsistence” activities (e.g. agricultural subsistence) as severely as “luxury” ones (a car trip to a holiday) (Martello et al, 2002, p. 11). While UN Agenda States that “special attention should be paid to the demand for natural resources generated by unsustainable consumption” (Agenda 21, ch 4, 4.5), due to “excessive demands and unsustainable lifestyles among the richer segments, which place immense stress on the environment” (ibid), such as can be seen in the graph below, retrieved from Oxfam report (2015).
Figure 1: Percentage of CO2 emissions by world population per income group 2
Although environmental problems emerged and are process in this context of embedded inequality, in Newell’s opinion little attention is given “to the particular nature of environmental problems and the political and material relations which create them and within which they are managed” (Ibid, p. 509). To illustrate this critique, he asserts that the adoption of problem-solving perspective by the field of international relations when analyzing environmental problems, do not allow for the investigation of the cause of the problem, but allocate too much attention in the consequences, which, contrastingly with the name of the perspective, would not solve the problem.
To clarify Newell’s critique on the adoption of problem-solving approaches by the field of IR, let us take a tale Manchanda (2014) used in his presentation on a TED talk in 2014 . In a similar fashion, Manchanda criticized doctors’ adoption of problem solving3
2 Oxfam (2015) Extreme Carbon Inequality: Why the Paris climate deal must put the poorest, lowest emitting and
most vulnerable people first. Retrieved on 17/06/2019 from:
<https://www-cdn.oxfam.org/s3fs-public/file_attachments/mb-extreme-carbon-inequality-021215-en.pdf>
3 Manchada, R. (2014, july 15th). What make us get sick? Look upstream [TED.com]. Retrieved on 16/06/2019
from <https://www.ted.com/talks/rishi_manchanda_what_makes_us_get_sick_look_upstream>
approaches that put too much emphasis on consequences rather than on the causes of their patients problems. Manchanda takes us to a river near a waterfall, a paradise-like place in a sunny afternoon where three doctors pass by. Suddenly, they spot kids floating downstream in the direction to the edge of the waterfall. Immediately, they rush into the river. The first doctor stays closer to the edge of the waterfall to try to save as many kids as possible from falling. The second doctor stays a bit more upstream, to try to take as many kids as possible from getting into the verge while at the same time trying to push some trees or rocks into the river in an attempt to constrain the current from bringing kids down the waterfall. They both manage to save some lives, but the kids just keep coming down the river. Then, they both look at the third doctor who is swimming up the river and taking some kids along the way with her, and they ask her: What are you? She answers: I will swim upstream to see who or what is throwing these kids down the river. To Manchanda, medicine’s approaches fails us by stopping at the second doctor’s level: some patients are saved, but the diseases are not prevented from occurring in the first place. In the tale: some kids were saved, but more kids just kept coming down the river.
Similarly, Newell criticized environmental problem solving approaches by not swimming upstream, or not focusing on the causes of environmental harm. For example, he argues how international relations debates continue to center on how to motivate self-interested states to act in ways which protect and enhance the environment, even though other actors, such as markets, are considered too important to meddle (2008, p. 508). Differently, the author suggests that pro environmental analysis should focus on investigating “which social relations make environmental degradation possible” (ibid, p. 509). In allusion to our tale, which social relations makes kids to be thrown down the river possible? Newell argues that focusing on causation requires us to look at a broader range of actors and structures that sustain environmental harm, which in turn allows us to identify networks of interests and power relations that inter-state responses need to reform. Another advantage is that a focus on causality enables the advancement of governance practices in areas that were traditionally considered out of bounds (ibid). To advance on governance practices in areas considered ungovernable is particularly relevant for environmental issues because they not only emerged from the knowledge of new ecological problems, which quite obviously would demand new solutions. But as well because they are characterized by complexity.
2.1.2 Assessing the complexity of Environmental problems
Environmental problems are complex because they link the management of complex natural ecosystems, as well as their interaction with a complex range of human activities (Dryzek, 2013, p. 10). As the more complex a problem, the more elements, and the more 11
interactions between these elements, which also increases “the number of plausible perspectives upon it - because the harder it is to prove any one of them wrong” (ibid).
To illustrate this diversity of plausible perspectives, Dryzek framed his overview of the last 50 years of environmental politics in a discourse analysis. Discourses might be said to represent a translation of environmental problems into the political world. They are defined as systems of representations (O’Brien et al, 2007, p. 78), or represent a particular standpoint which impacts which issues are to be solved, which solutions and which agents (institutions and social participation) have the responsibilities and capacities to manage those problems. In short: “discourses influences how problems are framed (ibid). In Dryzek’s own words: “A discourse is a shared way of apprehending the world” (2013, p. 9). As a shared way of understanding, discourses are embedded in assumptions and help to legitimate knowledge (ibid).
As discourses “influence how problems are framed” (O’Brien et al, 2007, p. 78), it impacts on different perspectives about how (or who) should adapt in the face of acquired knowledge of environmental problems. Dryzek illustrate the difference between four main discourses, namely: limits and survival, environmental problem solving, sustainability, and green radicalism. To put it simply, limits and survival foresees a radical change of societies. The expansion of consumption of industrial societies will inevitably exceed the Earth's stock of natural resources, unless a radical change in its organization changes it. An illustration is the concept of the Earth as a spaceship, as a whole life-support system that if not maintained would lead to the death of its crew (ibid, p. 42). Hence survival and limits. A radical change is necessary for survival because increasing consumption threatens the
limits of Earth’s carrying capacity. Carrying capacity is a concept in biology that defines the maximum population of a species that an ecosystem can support in perpetuity (ibid, p. 27). In contrast, environmental problem solving prioritizes “adjustment to cope with environmental problems” (ibid). To what extent this adjustments should be made varies. The illustration of environmental problem solving is somewhat less missionary, or as the author puts it, of a “less heroic struggle” (ibid, 73). As the name implies, it differs between regulatory mechanisms within existing social-economic systems to address environmental issues, which end up by constraining their concerns and actions regarding global limits (ibid)
The other two discourses, sustainability and green radicalism, share the route of finding alternative solutions. While sustainability, has a conciliatory illustration. To reconcile economic, environmental and social issues requires imaginative alternatives in local and global approach. Green radicalism has a more radical approach. It “rejects the basic structure of industrial society” (ibid, p. 15). To change the basic structure, approaches 12
vary in their focus, or on changing people’s consciousness or on enhancing changes through green politics.
The aforementioned discourses presented by Dryzek helps to exemplify our discussion on how the knowledge of environmental problems can be framed and translated into the political world in different ways. Discourses, or shared knowledge helps building a consensus conditioning hierarchies of actions, interests and values in society, for example, conditioning which of those should be advanced or suppressed (Foucault, 1980 apud Dryzek, 2013, p. 10). To comprehend this dynamic between knowledge and power that translates into different discourses is especially important in the field of environmental politics because of its complexity.
Take for example, how the limits and survival discourse approaches complexity of environmental problems. Joseph Tainter asserted that in general societies fix new problems by creating new functions and institutions, adding a layer of complexity to their sociopolitical system (1988). However, the higher the complexity and layers added, the lesser the “marginal benefits” of those extra layers of complexity, which implies that new problems will more rapidly be prone to instability and collapse (ibid). Given the imminent collapse, an elite coordination should engender a radical change towards sustainability (Dryzek, 2013, p. 41). Then, for the limits and survival discourse, the complexity of environmental issues require hierarchical relations (often authoritarian) to solve the tragedy of the commons (ibid), in which the result of the aggregation of individuals pursuing their own interests harms the common good of all individuals, leading to the depletion of natural resources (Hardin, 1968).
From the exposed above, the consequence of depletion of natural resources is central to the discourse of limits and survival. However, the study of the causes is somewhat constrained by the assumption of free riding behavior in the tragedy of the commons concept. In other words, free riding behavior is assumed as evidence of collective action failure. In a similar fashion, according to Newell’s (2008, p. 526) critique, international relations adoption of problem solving approaches assume “evidence of a governance failure or absence of coordinated inter-state action” (ibid) which lead them to focus on states or international institutions to find the source of environmental harm.
Alternatively, a focus on causes would require a change in the ontology of environmental problems analysis. In other words, it would require us to look at a broader range of actors and structures, or to not look at environmental issues as “manageable in their own terms, but as the products of existing patterns of political and social power” (ibid).
By its nature, environmental complexity can be governed by understanding the social relations that made degradation possible. Newell argues that understanding the nature of environmental politics (here, its complexity and inequalities) to find effective political interventions obliges us to “to think outside traditional and convenient theoretical parameters” (2008, p. 511). In allusion to our tale, environmental politics should involve the technique of swimming upstream.
2.1.3. Swimming upstream - social relations and environmental politics
Due to its unequal and complex nature, advances on the governance of environmental problems can be fostered through an analysis of the social relations that made/make environmental degradation possible.
However, Eriksen et al (2015, p. 523) bring up concerns over an under-theorization of political and social mechanisms in current policies to trigger social change due to the urgency of climate change. As they explained, this under-theorization might assume that social change or adaptation to climate change is beneficial and technical, when in fact, what is seen as a positive change, or beneficial adaptation to one group, may be perceived as a negative change, or mal-adaptation to another group (ibid). From this concern, the authors argue in favor of the study of the “relational dynamics of vulnerability” in how we frame climate problems and adaptation in order to change patterns of social relations that lead to environmental degradation. To them, environmental politics have the potential to avoid the reproduction and intensification of vulnerability. Its complexity highlights how knowledge can be framed differently, bringing into view the subjectivities in different knowledge-framings. Subjectivities can be understood as societal hegemonic assumptions individuals are subjected to. Then, the insight lies in the argument that knowledge of environmental problems can not only strengthen subjectivities, but may as well contest them. Thus, Eriksen et al suggested that environmental politics if engaging with multiple knowledge of problems and adaptation can question assumptions and inequalities embedded in social relations, opening up a window of opportunity to identify how power relations can be challenged, or how emancipatory subjectivities can be fostered. More importantly, the recognition of the existence of multiple knowledges allows powerless vulnerable groups to change hegemonic subjectivities that frame them as victims or villains, which have the potential to allow them to also take part in the management of adaptation process.
For example, sharing a similar concern regarding under-theorization of social and historical relations in environmental politics, Goswami (2013) argued how postcoloniality can foster an historical era as well as a conceptual achievement in which heterogeneity is necessary for meaning and hopefulness. Rather than framing differences as “oppositional,
antagonistic, and perpetually ex post facto”, legitimizing a technocratic mentality to engendered historical progress and socio-cultural learning or evolution, a postcolonial political morality opens up the opportunity to recognize the intrinsic value of heterogeneity, which would include other races as well as nature. It also counters the “belief that only militarism, cruelty, and compulsion are able to make a world” (ibid). In the author’s own wording: “A profound failure of the political imagination has led to proprietary relationships with colonial history. Instead, a postcolonial ethos ought to move beyond the naturalness of the nation-state as the essential basis of creating a political culture”. Then, in postcoloniality, empathy with others humanizes the man and contests the “colonial fantasy of the conquest of nature” in an ethnic (human) absolutism. Thus, a racial theorization that questions assumptions and inequalities embedded in social relations could foster emancipatory subjectivities to celebrate heterogeneity with nature and vulnerable groups as in the postcolonial concept and era.
2.1.4. Summary
In this section we introduce the field of environmental politics to the reader, showing how environmental problems are embedded with unequal social and material relations. As well, as stated under (a) in section 1.1, different translations of the knowledge of environmental problems into the political world were analyzed. It was further argued that a combination of the complexity and embedded inequality nature of environmental problems offers us an historic opportunity. Because they bring into view inequalities and the existence of multiple knowledges, power relations and hegemonic assumptions can be contested in order to foster emancipatory subjectivities. Reaching this conclusion, we turn to analyze environmental politics in vogue.
2.2 Pro-environmental policies and social relations
For an empirical analysis of social relations in environmental politics, policies on energy and transportation will be reviewed. These sectors hinges on the entire population, which allows for an analysis of their social impact, especially with regards to the bottom part of society. Another important factor for choosing these sectors derives from the fact that energy and transportation are the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions, which are the prime cause of global warming (see Figure 2 below). As such, they constitute a considerable portion of pro-environmental policies, implying ample data availability.
Figure 2: Contributions to greenhouse gasses emission by category in 2016 4
For instance, in Germany, Neuhoff et al (2013, p. 46), studied the percentage of household spending on electricity along with subsidies the German government offered to producers of renewable energy. They found that although energy use increases with net income, it increases in a disproportionately lesser degree. Hence energy bills consume considerably higher percentages of low income household expenditure (Figure 3) This alongside with the tax paid to finance subsidies to producers of renewable energy (figure 4). As Paulos (2017) explains, energy costs do not vary as much as household incomes, which in turn means that it consumes a larger proportion of the poorest people’s income.
4 Olivier, J., Schure K., and Peters, J. (2017) Trends in global CO2 and total greenhouse gas emissions - 2017
Report In PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. Retrieved on 17/06/2019 from:
<https://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/files/cms/publicaties/pbl-2017-trends-in-global-co2-and-total-greenhouse-gas-emis sons-2017-report_2674.pdf>
Figure 3: Eletricity’s share of household's consumer spending by income group in Germany . 5
Neuhoff et al (2013, p. 47) showed that while the lowest 5% income group spends 6.9 percent of its net income on energy and 1.52 percent on financing renewable energy subsidies, the higher 10th decile group spends 1.15% and 0.28% respectively, as can be seen in the graph below (Figure 4), retrieved from the study.
5 Neuhoff, K., Bach, S., Diekmann, J., Benznoska, M., & El-laboudy, T. (2013). Distributional Effects of Energy
Transition: Impacts of Renewable Electricity Support in Germany. Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, 2(1), 41-54. Retrieved on 17/06/2019 from <http://www.jstor.org.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2048/stable/26189443>
Figure 4: Households’ electricity expenditures in 2013 by income groups in Germany 6
Comparably, in the U.S., the American Council for Energy Efficiency (2016) in a report found that in the 48 largest US cities studied, low income families spend a higher percentage of their income on energy bills. Based on US Census Bureau’s 2011 and 2013 American Housing Survey, researchers found that while the median energy spending was 3.5 percent, the median low-income household energy spending was more than twice as high at 7.2 percent. In which, the lowest quarter of low-income households have an even greater energy spending of 14 percent in 17 of the cities studied, as can be observed in the table below.
6 Neuhoff, K., Bach, S., Diekmann, J., Benznoska, M., & El-laboudy, T. (2013). Distributional Effects of Energy
Transition: Impacts of Renewable Electricity Support in Germany. Economics of Energy & Environmental Policy, 2(1), 41-54. Retrieved on 17/06/2019 from <http://www.jstor.org.proxy.uba.uva.nl:2048/stable/26189443>
Figure 5: Median income, utility bills, energy burden and unit size for households per income type, ownership, and head of household race in 17 cities in the US . 7
Moreover, the US Department of Energy in a report about the income trends of solar energy adopters found that across 13 states studied , the median income of all solar energy8 customers is $32k (54%) higher than all households’ median income in the sample. In the figure below retrieved from the study, income is distinguished by percentile (dark blue represents the highest while light blue represents the lowest). The green circles represent the middle class while red circles stand for income below poverty level . According to the9 10 report higher income customers represented earlier adopters, hence their increasing participation prior to 2010 and increased participation of moderate income after this period. Nevertheless, the report found that differently from other income groups where the
7 Drehobl, A. and Ross, L. (2016)Lifting the High Energy Burden in America’s Largest Cities: How Energy
Efficiency Can Improve Low Income and Underserved Communities. Retrieved on 17/06/2019 on
<https://assets.ctfassets.net/ntcn17ss1ow9/1UEmqh5l59cFaHMqVwHqMy/1ee1833cbf370839dbbdf6989ef8b8b4/Li fting_the_High_Energy_Burden_0.pdf>
8 Which stands for “89% of all residential systems in the 13 states covered, and 61% of all U.S. residential systems
installed cumulatively through 2016” (p.7)
9 “The Pew Research Center defines “middle class” households as those with incomes of 67% to 200% of the U.S.
median household income ($53,889 in 2016)” (p.17)
10 The red circle is defined as below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), which was equal to $20,420 for a
3-person household in 2016. (p.17)
value of the house more-or-less corresponded to income, “in the lowest income quintile, the home-value distribution is flat, suggesting a relatively high share of these customers may not, in fact, be “lower income”. (p.21).
Figure 6: Income distribution of PV adopters by install year in 13 US states . 11
Additionally Borenstein and Davis (2016, p. 191) question distributional impacts of policy measures in the US that aim at fostering a transition to clean energy. The authors analyzed the income of beneficiaries of four major US federal income tax credits, which 12 have given a total of 18 billion US dollars to households since 2006 (ibid, p. 192). In their overview they compare the average income of those who received credits with the larger
11 Galen L Barbose, Naïm R Darghouth, Ben Hoen, Ryan H Wiser (2018) Income Trends of Residential PV
Adopters: An analysis of household-level income estimates. LBNL Report Number LBNL-2001146. U.S. Department of Energy National Laboratory. University of California. Retrieved on 16/06/2019 from <https://emp.lbl.gov/publications/income-trends-residential-pv-adopters/>
12 The programs are: Non-business Energy Property Credit (NEPC), the largest amount of $13.7 billion, for
residential energy-efficiency improvements. Neither renters or landlords are eligible. Secondly in amount, $3.5 billion, is the Residential Energy Efficient Property Credit (REEPC), for homeowners who install residential solar panels, solar water heating systems, and fuel cells. Thirdly and fourthly in amount some up to $900 million and are the Alternative Motor Vehicle Credit (AMVC), for purchases of alternative fuel vehicles. And the Qualified Plug-In Electric Drive Motor Vehicle Credit (PEDVC) for electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid vehicles purchased beginning in 2009.
sample of annual income categories of the US population data. They also compare the distributional effects of these taxes with other major US tax credits. The authors found that not only higher income groups are those that benefited the most from tax credits to clean energy, but as well that these policies had a higher concentration effect than other major US tax credits, as can be observed in the table below retrieved from the study, in which 0 means perfect equality, 1 perfect inequality and negative is when more than 50% of the credits are received by the 50% bottom income group (ibid, p. 210). More strikingly, the authors explain that those other major US taxes are exclusions or deductions which are mechanically correlated with increasing marginal taxes, such as deductions from mortgages or exclusions from employer-sponsored health insurances. Which means that they are more relevant to those who would already pay a higher tax (ibid, p.211). Regarding the Foreign tax credit, it is applied for investment earnings, so “mostly relevant to wealthy taxpayers with investments abroad”, hence the high concentration index (ibid).
Figure 7: Distributional effects of four major US tax credits . 13
13Borenstein, S. and Davis, L. (2016) The Distributional Effects of US Clean Energy Tax Credits In Tax Policy and
the Economy 2016 30:1, 191-234. Retrieved on 17/07/2019 from: <https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/685597>
The study revealed that from tax credits to promote clean energy adoption, the top income group received about 60% while the three bottom income groups combined received only 10% of all credits. Such a concentration was even higher regarding the incentives for electric vehicles, which distributed 90% of all credits to the top income group. Furthermore, the authors point to the work of Dubin and Henson (1988) who studied the distributional effects of energy efficiency tax credits in 1978, the Federal Energy Tax Act, and found a concentration effect of .57. These authors used the same data and found a concentration of income index of .42. Similarly, Borenstein and Davis (2016, p. 191), found a higher concentration of income of 0.59, which in their wording reflects “the widely discussed increase in the concentration of income in the United States over the last several decades”, suggesting a possible correlation between the energy efficient credit taxes and the steady rise of concentration of income into the top US’ income group since 1970 (Piketty and Saez, 2014).
In parallel, the U.S. Department of Transportation in it’s 2017 National Household Travel Survey (NHTS) showed that about two-thirds of households with electric vehicles have incomes higher than $100,000. On top of that, in the table below retrieved from the same survey, we can observe a concentration of electric vehicles between White-Americans, while African-American households account for 1.2 percent and all minorities together with less than 15 percent of vehicles eligible for the credit.
Figure 8: Number and type of vehicles per race of household respondent in the US. 14
14 Retrieved on 17/06/2019 fron <https://nhts.ornl.gov/tables09/ae/work/Job75644.html>
This context may partially reflect the findings of the American Energy Alliance nationwide research with 1002 likely voters that “a sizable majority of voters (72%) said they did not trust the federal government to make decisions about what kinds of cars or transportation technologies should be subsidized or mandated.” And that, “despite a generally positive attitude towards electric vehicles (...) About two-thirds (67%) of respondents thought that they should not pay for people to buy electric vehicles” (American Energy Alliance, 2018).
It may also partially reflect the growing criticism in the literature of environmental politics against approaches that fail “to address pressing issues of social justice” (Hajer, 1995, p. 32). Authors such as Dryzek (2013), Bakari, (2014), Hajer (1995), Weale (1992), Beck et al., (2014), Connelly (2003), among others, classify such policies in an environmental politics approach named Ecological Modernization (Hereafter EM). They in general criticize the largely technical (Connelly, 2003) and cost effective approach “to fix environmental problems” (Bakari, 2014). To Dryzek (2013), EM’s assumption is that we just need to be “sufficiently far-sighted in order for policies and business to have every incentive to embrace rather than resist ecological modernization” (Dryzek, 2013). Which, as explained by Bakari (2014), leads to the assumption that we can harness technological advances to serve environmental ends. To Connelly, the business partnership and focus on the overall environmental problems, not only neglects the discussion about social distribution of environmental goods and bads, but as well “may only be achievable through the export of polluting industries and the degradation of environmental resources in less-industrialized nations” (2003, p. 69).
2.3 Further problematization and contextualization of our environmental politics review
From the aforementioned developments, we can observe a scenario of growing concerns among academics and voters with the lack of consideration of social relations within environmental politics. The task of reforming social relations and the economy so as to internalise social and environmental costs is not an easy one. In the context of reforming the economy to achieve sustainability, we might consider the recent and ongoing ‘yellow vests’ protests in France. Which are protests that emerged from concerns about the disproportionate burden of government ecological taxes on the lower- and middle classes in a context of increasing cost of living and inequality in France (Smith, 2018). Protests started after the imposition of higher taxes on gas in the transportation sector.
This scenario is further problematize by another important aspect in contemporary life: the emergence or rather omnipresence of social media, in which individuals access other people’s lives, realizing that their dream to reach the high society are very far, due to
the observation that those that reach the high society did not reach it because they are super humans (such as movie stars, or smart scientists), but because they were already part of it. As Schumpeter provokes: “The aristocratic element continued to rule the roost right to the end of the period of intact and vital capitalism”, then, “we might well wonder whether it is quite correct to look upon capitalism as a social form sui generis or, in fact, as anything else but the last stage of the decomposition of what we have called feudalism”.
This state of affairs in which individuals have continuous access to other peoples’ lives (through social media), and realize they cannot reach the position they aimed because of structural inequalities, becomes as a state of relative deprivation ( described by Ted Gurr in 1970 as the discrepancy between what people think they deserve and what they actually get, “in short, the disparity between aspiration and achievement”apud Tadjoeddin, 2011, p. 316). Tadjoeddin showed that relative deprivation is considered as the micro-foundation for conflict because it “can stimulate general frustration or be used by conflict entrepreneurs as a unifying tool or as a means for group mobilization for collective action” (Tadjoeddin, 2011, p. 316). This may explain the rising popularity of extreme right wing political parties across the world which, coincidentally or not, are often also climate change deniers (e.g. Trump in the US, Bolsonaro in Brazil, Baudet in the Netherlands, among others).
From this problematization, we argue that environmental politics should take social justice questions such as gender, race and inequality at heart to, not only improve its efficacy, as argued in section 2.1, but as well, to improve its legitimacy and feasibility.
2.4 Conclusion
Following the problematization of the lack social justice consideration within environmental policies, the research at hand will focus on changing the social relations that lead to environmental degradation, rather than its consequences, or the problems themselves. Following the critique of Ericksen et al (2015, p. 523) on climate change adaptations, a promotion of multiple stakeholder engagement, especially from vulnerable groups, will be a point of concern. With respect to Dryzek’s environmental politics discourse overview, our analysis comes close to green radicalism and sustainability discourses that in a creative fashion look for changing social organizations to be more sustainable. As it will be explained in the next chapter, because our proposition aims at redirecting existing subsidies to consumers, to more effectively conciliate economic, social and environmental dimensions, our approach approximates to the sustainability discourse. In short, we swim upstream.
3. Methodology: how will we analyze if directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income can enhance a transition to sustainable development? The objective and research question of this thesis determined the method and type of study employed. Taken for example, Winstanley (2012, p. 18) table below, because our objective is to contribute to solving the problem of environmental degradation, or to contribute to strategies on how to spur sustainable development, the method is theoretical analysis and the type of study is non-empirical with examples.
Figure 9: Examples of Theoretical Approaches to Write a Dissertation 15
As the research question is a “how” question that demands explanation, how our proposition can spur sustainable development, According to Taylor (1989, p. 30-33), our “how” question is more close to methods of enquiry of those in natural science in which “why” and “how” questions are closely related. Taylor offers 5 types of explanation. Explanation of the (1) cause of a phenomenon, of the (2) reasons or intentions of those responsible for some action, of the (3) functions something have within a larger system of which it is a part, (4), of the effects of abstracts rules, codes or laws in a system and (5) of “what combinations of conditions or premisses allow us to infer a logical conclusion”.
Because this research purpose is to enhance strategies for a transition to sustainable development, the type of explanation will be as stated under (5), what combinations of conditions or premises allow us to infer a logical conclusion, or allow us to infer that a policy strategy can spur a transition to sustainable development. To explain how, or why directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income can enhance a transition to sustainable development, the analysis of combinations of conditions and premisses in
15 Winstanley C (2012) Writing a dissertation for dummies. For Dummies, UK Edition, London.
theory will be employed, with examples from cases studies. Case studies have been chosen to support theoretical findings because they answer a “how” question. Secondly, they are suitable for when the study phenomenon is inserted in real context, where the boundaries between context and phenomenon are not yet clear (YIN, 2005).
According to Keohane and Verba (1994), the purpose of a scientific research is to have the ability to perform inference, or to have the ability to provide elucidations beyond the conclusions gained from the observation of a phenomenon. Similarly, the conclusions of the study and the observations resulting from environmental theories and policies in chapter 1, make it possible to perform elucidations; in the form of our proposition of an innovative policy, as will be discussed in section 3.2. In short, a deductive approach will be employed. From broader generalizations and theory building in chapter 2, we will test specific logical hypothesis in chapter 4,5,7.
The authors also assert that the value of academic research lies in the identification of patterns and regularities or in the establishment of relational and directional hypotheses. For this reason, in section 3.5, we explain the expected relational (spillover effects) and directional hypothesis (direct effects) of our analysis. Theories and examples of cases will be employed to reinforce the observation of patterns and regularities within our proposition. To further the validity of our theoretical findings, we will resort to classical authors and a solid body of theories in the field of respective hypotheses. Although this represents a great limitation to the validity of the research findings, it is argued that the relevance of the theoretical findings should not be overthrown, further discussion follows in section 3.6 and 8.1.
3.1. Data
Theories and articles selected in this research were retrieved from the UVA repository, the Google scholar search engine and indications from the supervisor. The research was conducted in English, with a certain, although a small portion of the searches was performed in French, Portuguese and Dutch. I recognize that language itself implies a limitation to the broadening of my analysis. For example the fact that most of the texts used as references in this thesis come from very specific regions in the world, namely western Europe and the United States. Moreover, although I tried to resort to at least gender equality in my references, a considerable gap can still be observed.
I resort to primary and secondary resources to support my analysis. I will perform a thorough literature review to contextualize my research and indicate how it can contribute to the field of environmental politics. The performance of a thorough literature review has
been chosen due to the nature of my subject area, which spans a variety of scientific disciplines, hence requiring diverse sources of information.
3.2. Building elucidations beyond the analysis of environmental politics to test specific logical hypotheses - a reader’s guide.
The theoretical contributions and the empirical analysis above pave the way for our investigation on how we can contribute to enhancing a transition to sustainable development. To clarify even further, the following readers guide (1-10) is offered:
I. The objective of the research at hand is to contribute with investigations on how to enhance a transition to sustainable development. Building from the following:
A. Newell’s argument that understanding the nature of environmental problems obliges us “to think outside traditional and conventional theoretical parameters” in section 2.1.2
B. Eriksen et al’s (2015) argument that environmental politics offers a window of opportunity to engender emancipatory subjectivities in section 2.1.3; and C. In’t Veld’s (2016, p. 856) argument that policy making has become
“knowledge-based” in section 1.1;
II. The ambition is to produce innovative knowledge to influence policy making that aims at fostering a transition to sustainable development. To this end we apply:
A. Newell’s argument that we should analyze the causation rather than the consequences of environmental degradation, namely the social relations that made/make it possible, in section 2.1.2;
B. Eriksen et al’s (2015) argument that vulnerable groups/societies should be engaged and not considered as villains or victims so as to not reproduce domination in section 2.1.3;
III. this research will not focus on state, institutions or norms that fail at protecting the environment. Rather, it will aim at changing social relations that lead to increasing consumption and consequently depletion of natural resources, by fostering stakeholder engagement with special attention to the policy effect on the bottom part of society.
IV. As trade connects local consumption to global markets, consumption and production influence locally and are influenced globally, which also raises questions of justice regarding the distribution of wealth, power and resources (Hurrell et al, 2012) in a context of persistent poverty and increasing inequality in living
standards . And as “special attention should be paid to the demand for natural16 resources generated by unsustainable consumption” (Agenda 21, ch 4, 4.5), given “excessive demands and unsustainable lifestyles among the richer segments, which place immense stress on the environment” (ibid),
V. The UN Agenda 21 recommendation to promote a transition to sustainable development by fostering sustainable production and consumption and poverty eradication through stakeholder engagement will be followed. The result is that:
A. thinking outside traditional and convenient/conventional theoretical parameters to influence (with the creation of knowledge) policy making in the direction of promotion of emancipatory subjectivities
B. Pursuing the aim of changing social relations that lead to environmental degradation in the context of extreme inequalities in the consumption of natural resources and connection of production and consumption locally to global markets,
VI. we will study if the following suggested policy can foster a transition to sustainable development:
VII. Suggested policy: To direct existing subsidies on production to consumers in the form of a green income. In which, income stands for receiving the subsidies and
green stands for using the subsidies for the consumption of sustainable products.
Hence, green income and the following research question:
3.3 Research question: How can directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income enhance the transition to sustainable development?
As the objective is to enhance a transition to sustainable development, we follow the UN Agenda 21 recommendation to promote a transition to sustainable development by fostering sustainable production and consumption and poverty eradication. For this reason, and for the reasons above, the Research Question will be answered through the answering of the following three sub-questions:
16 According to Schwartz et al (2010, p. 43): “As late as 1800, Asia per capita income was roughly equal to that in
Europe and North America as a bloc, with the richest country having no more than twice the per capita income of the poorest (Bairoch, 1976,1988; Pomeranz, 2000). By the end of the 1800s. However, britain and settler societies like the United States, Australia, Canada, and Argentina had a per capita income 10 times those in Asia and India. By 2005, on a per capita basis, the developed countries were about 20 times richer than the non-oil exporting Third World, even after adjusting for purchasing power parity, and despite rapid industrialization in China (World Bank, 2008:4)”.
1) How can directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income promote sustainable production?
2) How can directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income promote sustainable consumption?
3) How can directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income promote poverty eradication?
VIII. The expectation is to further argue that, in the context of
A. inequalities in social relations between and within countries; emergent critique of the lack of social considerations of pro environmental politics; and increasing power of climate deniers, as was problematized in section 2.3, IX. with the creation of knowledge of a policy outside traditional and convenient
theoretical parameters to change social relations, we can bring about democratization to environmental politics because our proposition also has the potential to engage the bottom part of society.
X. Hence, this thesis title and subtitle: Can directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income enhance a transition to sustainable development? A case for democratization of environmental politics.
3.4. Policy proposition explained
To explain our policy proposition, we begin with explaining how in general subsidies policies work to-date, or in the figure: the “state of the art”. In the “state of the art” figure, subsidies policies offer an incentive to producers to jump into sustainable production even in the existence of competitive unsustainable production (which are represented by black arrows in both figures).
Our proposition (in the figure the: “model”) suggests to direct the same subsidies to consumers. Then, consumers, rather than producers, are brought into the center of the subsidies policies discussion. While in the “state of the art” figure, the incentive (green arrow) is pointing at the producer, in the second figure, the incentive (green arrow) is pointing at the consumer. It is argued that changing the direction of the subsidy (red arrow) changes the logic behind its stimulus. The logic of the subsidies stimulus are, for clarity, in a few words explained in the boxes. The below illustration serves only to briefly introduce the alternative policy. The mechanism of stimulus and logic behind it will be explained in detail in chapter 3.
In the state of the art figure, subsidies to producers aim at fostering sustainable production to enhance consumers’ option to buy sustainable products (green arrows). While in the model figure, subsidies to consumers aim at stimulating (green arrows) sustainable production and producers by guaranteeing a stable demand for their investments, even in the context of competition from unsustainable production (black arrows).
Figure 10: Visual explanation of policy suggestion of directing sustainable production subsidies to consumers. 17
3.5. Expected results and hypotheses
The figure below illustrates the expected results of our argumentation. Or in the words of Keohane and Verba (1004), illustrates the establishment of relational (blue
17 Made by the author
arrows) and directional hypothesis (orange arrows). The general hypothesis is that directing subsidies to consumers (orange arrow) can influence (orange arrows) the three, consumption patterns, sustainable production and poverty.
In the figure, the status quo that lead(s) to environmental degradation and social exclusion are represented by the black arrows. Rising consumption patterns influence and are fed by unsustainable production, which is based on environmental degradation and social exclusion, leading/maintaining (or not eradicating) poverty. Also, the poor have to rely on often cheaper unsustainable production (black arrows). Then,
1. One hypothesis is that the alternative can enhance sustainable production by encouraging a stable demand to sustainable products (orange arrow), which will be in detailed discussed in chapter 3.
2. Another hypothesis is that it can influence consumption patterns in the direction of fostering the consumption of sustainable production (orange arrows). (chapter 4)
3. The third hypothesis is that it can eradicate poverty towards social justice, by working in practice as an extra income to the poor, who would also be able to consume from sustainable production (orange arrows) (chapter 6).
These are the direct effects. Nevertheless, we will argue for possible spillover effects, or relational hypothesis (blue arrows).
1. The relational hypothesis is that a change in consumption patterns can trigger the adoption of sustainable lifestyles, which will reinforce even more a change in consumption patterns to sustainable production. Then, sustainable production will reinforce social justice, because it internalises environmental and social costs (chapter 4 and 7).
The green arrows in the green circle stand for the embeddedness of sustainable lifestyles and promotion of equality and fairness in the transition to sustainable development, as argued in section 2.3.
Figure 11: Expected results 18
Thus the expectation is to show that directing subsidies to consumers can trigger the three social changes (represented by the black dotted arrows): from poverty to social justice, from unsustainable consumption to sustainable consumption and production, even from the poor.
It will be discussed that if the three hypotheses can be achieved, the suggested policy can bring about democratization in environmental politics, once it allows the poor consumer to also take action in the transition to sustainable development.
3.6. Limitations
As a theoretical thesis, our findings will have severe limitations. Following In ‘t Veld (2016, p. 856), it is reasserted that every translation of knowledge to the political world involves an element of risk, which includes a translation of our proposition to world politics.
First, our findings will be theoretical. Although “without theory, there is no practice” (p. Chidi et al, 2012, p. 263), we follow Albert Einstein’s statement that “as far as our propositions are certain, they do not say anything about reality, and as far as they do say anything about reality, they are not certain” (Schumpeter [1936] 1991). Rather than reaching social proof, it is argued that the more important value of this thesis will be to generate discussions in the environmental politics field (academic and political) of the validity of promoting policy making which truly takes into account the interconnectedness
18 Made by the author
of the social, economic and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, in which a transition should encompass a change in unsustainable patterns of consumption and production and on poverty through stakeholder engagement, with special attention to the bottom part of society so as to take the opportunity of fostering emancipatory subjectivities and not to reproduce social relations of domination that lead to environmental degradation in the first place. The findings will also have limitations because they rely on findings from quasi-similar cases. This is why we hope to trigger the reader with our innovative policy with the aim of strongly encouraging further research on the matter.
4. A stimulus for sustainable production
Hypothesis: Directing subsidies to consumers in the form of a green income can enhance sustainable production by encouraging a stable demand of sustainable products.
Following Agenda 21, sustainable production which takes into account social and environmental costs should be promoted in order to achieve a transition to sustainable development (Agenda 21, ch. 4.17, c). Because our proposition is to direct existing subsidies on sustainable production to consumers in the form of a green income, we begin by analyzing if our suggested alternative can enhance the existing stimuli in place to sustainable production.
In an overview of existing policies to promote sustainable production, Connelly et al (2003, p. 167) describe two main strategies, namely ‘rights-based mechanisms’ and ‘price-based mechanisms’. Price-based mechanisms change economic behavior by altering the price of existing goods and services, while rights-based mechanisms change behavior by altering rights. Whereas the former rely on existing markets, the latter, by altering rights, create new markets (ibid). By way of illustration, the authors explain how green taxes and subsidies are examples of “price-based mechanisms” and quotas and tradable permits examples of ‘rights-based mechanisms’. To clarify these strategies even further, let us dive into this distinction.
4.1 Price-based mechanisms
The internalisation of social and environmental inputs to production costs will most probably result in goods and services with higher prices than products from unsustainable production. To promote sustainable production, price-based mechanisms such as subsidies and taxes have the aim to cover part of those extra costs to allow sustainable goods and services to reach the market with competitive prices. Both policies’ strategies change the 33
