Three persistent myths in the environmental debate

Three persistent myths in the environmental debate

Throughout the last three decades of working on environmental and resource problems I have encountered three persistent myths: (1) environment conflicts with employment; (2) production must grow to create scope for financing environmental conservation; and (3) although society would like to save the...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Ecological economics 1996-08, Vol.18 (2), p.81-88
1. Verfasser: Hueting, Roefie
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Employment
Growth
Sustainability
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 88
container_issue 2
container_start_page 81
container_title Ecological economics
container_volume 18
creator Hueting, Roefie
description Throughout the last three decades of working on environmental and resource problems I have encountered three persistent myths: (1) environment conflicts with employment; (2) production must grow to create scope for financing environmental conservation; and (3) although society would like to save the environment, it is too expensive. Testing these three propositions, individually and mutually, leads to the conclusion that as long as they dominate the environmental debate, the world will drift ever further away from environmental sustainability.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/0921-8009(96)00031-6
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_15936676</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>0921800996000316</els_id><sourcerecordid>15936676</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c477t-f2948b03b611cab096d4ebb2c4bf442eb468d0a950042e1d5ebca79655151e1c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UE1LxDAUDKLguvoPPPQkeqjmtWnaXARZ1BUWvKznkKSvNNIvk-zC_ntTVvZoYJK8vJkhbwi5BfoIFPgTFRmkFaXiXvAHSmkOKT8jC6jKPOVA-TlZnCiX5Mr770jiXOQLkm1bh5hM6Lz1AYeQ9IfQ-sQOSWgxwWFv3Tj0saG6pEatAl6Ti0Z1Hm_-ziX5envdrtbp5vP9Y_WySQ0ry5A2mWCVprnmAEZpKnjNUOvMMN0wlqFmvKqpEgWlsYK6QG1UKXhRQAEIJl-Su6Pv5MafHfoge-sNdp0acNx5CYXIOS95JLIj0bjRe4eNnJztlTtIoHIOSM7Ty3l6KWIxByRn2fooczihOWkwLjN28WUvcwVV3A7zRURprmxEFjFFVNGzkm3oo9Xz0QpjHnuLTnpjcTBYW4cmyHq0___lF2FVhMY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>15936676</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Three persistent myths in the environmental debate</title><source>RePEc</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Hueting, Roefie</creator><creatorcontrib>Hueting, Roefie</creatorcontrib><description>Throughout the last three decades of working on environmental and resource problems I have encountered three persistent myths: (1) environment conflicts with employment; (2) production must grow to create scope for financing environmental conservation; and (3) although society would like to save the environment, it is too expensive. Testing these three propositions, individually and mutually, leads to the conclusion that as long as they dominate the environmental debate, the world will drift ever further away from environmental sustainability.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0921-8009</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-6106</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/0921-8009(96)00031-6</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Employment ; Growth ; Sustainability</subject><ispartof>Ecological economics, 1996-08, Vol.18 (2), p.81-88</ispartof><rights>1996</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c477t-f2948b03b611cab096d4ebb2c4bf442eb468d0a950042e1d5ebca79655151e1c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c477t-f2948b03b611cab096d4ebb2c4bf442eb468d0a950042e1d5ebca79655151e1c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(96)00031-6$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3549,4007,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://econpapers.repec.org/article/eeeecolec/v_3a18_3ay_3a1996_3ai_3a2_3ap_3a81-88.htm$$DView record in RePEc$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Hueting, Roefie</creatorcontrib><title>Three persistent myths in the environmental debate</title><title>Ecological economics</title><description>Throughout the last three decades of working on environmental and resource problems I have encountered three persistent myths: (1) environment conflicts with employment; (2) production must grow to create scope for financing environmental conservation; and (3) although society would like to save the environment, it is too expensive. Testing these three propositions, individually and mutually, leads to the conclusion that as long as they dominate the environmental debate, the world will drift ever further away from environmental sustainability.</description><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Growth</subject><subject>Sustainability</subject><issn>0921-8009</issn><issn>1873-6106</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1996</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>X2L</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UE1LxDAUDKLguvoPPPQkeqjmtWnaXARZ1BUWvKznkKSvNNIvk-zC_ntTVvZoYJK8vJkhbwi5BfoIFPgTFRmkFaXiXvAHSmkOKT8jC6jKPOVA-TlZnCiX5Mr770jiXOQLkm1bh5hM6Lz1AYeQ9IfQ-sQOSWgxwWFv3Tj0saG6pEatAl6Ti0Z1Hm_-ziX5envdrtbp5vP9Y_WySQ0ry5A2mWCVprnmAEZpKnjNUOvMMN0wlqFmvKqpEgWlsYK6QG1UKXhRQAEIJl-Su6Pv5MafHfoge-sNdp0acNx5CYXIOS95JLIj0bjRe4eNnJztlTtIoHIOSM7Ty3l6KWIxByRn2fooczihOWkwLjN28WUvcwVV3A7zRURprmxEFjFFVNGzkm3oo9Xz0QpjHnuLTnpjcTBYW4cmyHq0___lF2FVhMY</recordid><startdate>19960801</startdate><enddate>19960801</enddate><creator>Hueting, Roefie</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>DKI</scope><scope>X2L</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19960801</creationdate><title>Three persistent myths in the environmental debate</title><author>Hueting, Roefie</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c477t-f2948b03b611cab096d4ebb2c4bf442eb468d0a950042e1d5ebca79655151e1c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1996</creationdate><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Growth</topic><topic>Sustainability</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Hueting, Roefie</creatorcontrib><collection>RePEc IDEAS</collection><collection>RePEc</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Ecological economics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Hueting, Roefie</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Three persistent myths in the environmental debate</atitle><jtitle>Ecological economics</jtitle><date>1996-08-01</date><risdate>1996</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>81</spage><epage>88</epage><pages>81-88</pages><issn>0921-8009</issn><eissn>1873-6106</eissn><abstract>Throughout the last three decades of working on environmental and resource problems I have encountered three persistent myths: (1) environment conflicts with employment; (2) production must grow to create scope for financing environmental conservation; and (3) although society would like to save the environment, it is too expensive. Testing these three propositions, individually and mutually, leads to the conclusion that as long as they dominate the environmental debate, the world will drift ever further away from environmental sustainability.</abstract><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/0921-8009(96)00031-6</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0921-8009
ispartof Ecological economics, 1996-08, Vol.18 (2), p.81-88
issn 0921-8009
1873-6106
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_15936676
source RePEc; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)
subjects Employment
Growth
Sustainability
title Three persistent myths in the environmental debate
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T08%3A30%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Three%20persistent%20myths%20in%20the%20environmental%20debate&rft.jtitle=Ecological%20economics&rft.au=Hueting,%20Roefie&rft.date=1996-08-01&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=81&rft.epage=88&rft.pages=81-88&rft.issn=0921-8009&rft.eissn=1873-6106&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/0921-8009(96)00031-6&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E15936676%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=15936676&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=0921800996000316&rfr_iscdi=true