Clark University

Prospects for an Environmental Economic Geography: Linking Ecological Modernization and

Regulationist Approaches
Author(s): David Gibbs
Source: Economic Geography, Vol. 82, No. 2 (Apr., 2006), pp. 193-215
Published by: Clark University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30033058 .
Accessed: 07/04/2013 14:32
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Clark University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Economic Geography.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

EconomicGeography82(2): 193-215,2006.
http://www.clarku.edu/econgeography
z 2006 ClarkUniversity.

Prospects for an EnvironmentalEconomic Geography:

Linking Ecological Modernization and Regulationist
Approaches
DavidGibbs
ofHull,
ofGeography,University
Department
Hull HU6 7RX,UnitedKingdom
d.c.gibbs@hull.ac.uk
Abstract: Althoughthe "new"economicgeographyhas exploredlinksbetween
and political
traditional
areasofstudyand cultural,
thesubdiscipline's
institutional,
withinthe
underresearched
issues remaincomparatively
realms,environmental
is ofkeyimporThis articlecontendsnotonlythattheenvironment
subdiscipline.
but also thateconomicgeographerscan make an
tance to economicgeography,
notjusta better
to environmental
contribution
debates,through
providing
important
Rather
but
also
better
theoretical
and
policyproscription.
understanding,
analysis
is to suggestpotentialcreative
the intention
thanclaimnew intellectualterritory,
withthoseinsightsfrom
forlinkingeconomicgeography's
strengths
opportunities
In particular,
thisarticlefocusesuponlinking
othertheoretical
insights
perspectives.
with
fromecologicalmodernization
sociologists,
developedbyenvironmental
theory,
approaches.
regulationist
environment,
regulaecologicalmodernization,
Key words: economicgeography,
tiontheory.

havedeveloped
Few economic
geographers
withenvironmental
a seriousengagement
issues.(Dicken2004,17)
As the quotation fromPeter Dicken
has rarelybeen an
theenvironment
attests,
for
the majority of
important subject
economic geographers.There have been
to addresstheissue
somesporadicattempts
in the past (Walker,Storper,and Gersh
1979; Stafford1985), as well as a growing
numberofmorerecentcontributions
(see,
e.g., Angel2000; Bridge2000; Bridgeand
McManus2000;Hudson2001;Gibbs2002),

have notbeen translated

but theseefforts
intoa majorresearchfocusforthe subdiscipline (see Angel 2000 on the historical
rootsof thisneglect).Althoughthe "new"
economicgeographyhas made important
and
foraysintothe cultural,institutional,
political(Yeung2003; see also the articles
in Environmentand PlanningA, vol. 33,
2001, and Antipode,vol. 33, 2001), environmentalissues remain comparatively
withinthe subdiscipline.
underresearched
a numberofkeyreasons
Thereare,however,
whyeconomic geographersmaywant to
agenda.First,
engagewithan environmental

This articledrawsupon researchfundedby the Economic and Social ResearchCouncil (Grants

R000237997 and R000239428). An earlierversionwas presentedat the conferenceEnvironmental
of Cologne,23-28 May 2004. I am
EconomicGeography:Stateof the Artand Prospects,University
to presentthepaper at
to DietrichSoyezand ChristianSchulzforgivingme the opportunity
grateful
toArthur
I
alsograteful
on
it.
am
their
comments
for
andtotheconference
thatconference
participants
reviewers
on a revisedversionofthearticle.Threeanonymous
Mol and Rob Kruegerfortheircomments
andthose
fortheirsuggestions
critiqueofthearticle,and I am grateful
provideda helpfulandinsightful
the article.All errorsand omissionsremainmy
of HenryYeung on expandingand restructuring
responsibility.

193

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

GEOGRAPHY
APRIL
2006
ECONOMIC
mineralresourcesand a hostof consumpforfuture
thereare important
implications
tion
researchineconomicgeography
goods (Harris and Udagawa 2004).
consequent
to
environmental
In
relation
(2003) arguedthat
AlthoughSchoenberger
change.
upon
environmental
the
need
to
address
thispoint,thereis generalscientific
agreeproblems
in manyof thesecountrieshas opened up
mentthatwe are experiencing
majorenviforenvironmental
consultanronmentalchanges as a consequence of
opportunities
manufacturers
human activities,the most importantof
cies and pollution-control
which are enhanced atmosphericglobal
in a newformof"spatialfix"forcapitalism,
climate
sea-level
forthemostpart,theenvironmental
changes,
change,
impacts
warming,
and habitat
thanthe
have receivedmuchless attention
loss,deforestation,
biodiversity
The consequencesoftheseenvidestruction.
purelyeconomic consequences. Debates
ronmental
arealso relevantinthis
aroundglobalization
changesare likelyto havemajor
for
activities.
future
economic
with
a
implications
regard,
range of environmental
For example,climatechangecould have a
from
theexpansionofglobal
impactsarising
related
of
outcomes,
trade,
shifting
range
including
manufacturing
production,growing
increasedairlinetravel,and
patternsof agricultural
production,storm
consumption,
and flood damage (which has already
biodiversity
prospectingby transnational
(TNCs)1(Angel2000). Finally,
imposeda heavyburdenupontheinsurance
corporations
watershortages,
and
thereis the question of the relevanceof
sector),desertification,
workers.
increasedmovementofmigrant
thesubjectand theroleofeconomicgeogSecond, thereare implicationsforthe
raphersin policy-relatedresearch(Peck
1999). Despite the growingimportanceof
subdiscipline'sexistingobjects of study.
environmental
Thus, the causes of much environmental
policyand the incorporaare (at leastpartially)
aimsintopolicyat all
tionof sustainability
degradation
produced
that
have
been
studied
sectors
to
link
scales
economic, environby
extensively
spatial
the
most
economic
and
social
economicgeogmental,
outcomes,
Perhaps
by
geographers.
obviousof these sectorsis the automobile
have
been
absent
fromthese
raphers
largely
to carbonemissectorand itscontribution
debates,resultingin "an apparentdisconand capabilities
sions,but much high-technology-related nectbetweentheinterests
of economic geographyand many'realdevelopmentalso has negativeenvironmentalconsequences.Far frombeingthe
world'problems,"includingenvironmental
clean industriesof popular imagination,
degradation(Bridge 2002, 364). In total,
sectorsoflocalessuch
thehigh-technology
then,thereare good reasonswhyeconomic
as SiliconValleymaybe significant
shouldpaymuchgreaterattenpolluters
geographers
condiand mayprovideunhealthy
tionto environmental
issues in theirown
working
tions(Pellow and Park2002). Indeed, the
work.However,giventhata largebodyof
economicsuccessofsuchareas,as measured
researchon theenvironment
existsoutside
in conventionalgross domestic product
the subdiscipline(bothwithinand outside
(GDP) terms,whicheconomicgeographers
geography), does it matter whether
have soughtto analyzeand propose polieconomic geographerscontributeto the
inlessprosperous
ciesforreplication
debate? Can economicgeographersbring
regions,
lead to traffic
congestion,poor
frequently
anyadditionalinsightsintoenvironmental
air quality,groundwater
research?Ifso,whatis thedistinctive
contripollution,and the
loss of landscapeamenities.Similarly,
the
bution and insightsthattheycan make?
rapid growthof manyAsian economies,
which has also received attentionfrom
1The globalizationofwastedisposaland
economic geographers (Yeung and Lin
mayalsobe addedhere.Muchofthe
recycling
2003), is havingmajor impactsupon the
electronics
andplastics
wastefromtheUnited
forexample,
is increasingly
qualityof waterand air,the loss of habiKingdom,
disposed
in China,oftenunderenvironofor recycled
tats,andmineralextraction
(AngelandRock
hazardous
conditions
fortheworkforce.
2000),andtheincreaseddemandforoil and
mentally
194

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.82 No. 2

ENVIRONMENTAL
GEOGRAPHY
ECONOMIC

Whatarethebenefitsforthesubdiscipline?
How caneconomicgeographers
engagewith
thesedebatesboththeoretically
and empirIn
this
I
that
economic
article,
ically?
argue
can makean important
contrigeographers
butionbyproviding
notjusta betteranalysis
and theoreticalunderstanding,but also
betterpolicyproscription.
In so doing,my
aim is not necessarily"to claimnew intellectualterritory,"
but "to suggestpotential
creativeopportunities"
(Bridge2002, 372)
forlinkingeconomicgeography's
strengths
fromothertheoretical
withinsights
perspectives.As Soyez(2002,203) suggested
inrelationtoincorporating
environmental
perspectives, "a better understandingof other
domainsas wellas an integration
knowledge
of other disciplines' findings would
contribute
to broadenand deepen existing
approaches.Thus moreboundary-permeatingworklies ahead forIndustrial(and
As a modestbeginEconomic)Geography."
ning,in thisarticle,I explorethepotential
to linkworkin environmental
sociologyon
with
its central
ecologicalmodernization,
focusupontheeconomy-environment
interfrom
face,withworkineconomicgeography
a regulationist
Work
from
an
perspective.
modernization
has
ecological
perspective
in investigating
perhapsgone the furthest
theprocessesatworkand has provedinfluential in policy formulation (Carolan
2004). However,thewayin whichthe two
theeconomy-enviapproaches
conceptualize
differs.
AsAngel(2000,
ronment
relationship
is
610) argued,a keyarea forinvestigation
thecapacity
for,anddeterminants
of,reforms
ofexisting
andmodesof
production
systems
socialregulation
to bringaboutsubstantial
intheenvironmental
improvements
performanceoreconomic
(bothproduction
activity
andconsumption),
andto do so inwaysthat
othersocietal
goals,suchas improvesupport
mentsinsocialwelfare.
By combining elements of ecological
modernizationwithinsightsfromregulationistworkineconomicgeography,
we can
ofthesecapacgaina betterunderstanding
itiesand determinants.

195

I argue thatthisboundary-permeating
endeavorwillenableus to movebeyondthe
relativerigidities
ofbothecologicalmodernizationand regulationist
work,openingup
to explorethe potentialfor
opportunities
withindifferent
ecological sustainability
and
the
development
options
waysinwhich
thispotentialmaybe promotedthrough
whileseeingthelatteras a
policyinitiatives,
materialand discursiveprocess.It offersa
work
theoretical
wayto combinehigh-level
withineconomicgeography
withthe kinds
ofeveryday
interventions
andoutcomesthat
are examinedin ecologicalmodernization.
Combiningthesetwoapproacheswillopen
fordebateaboutthefuture
up opportunities
of economicactivities,
trajectory
avoiding
boththeoveroptimism
ofnormative
ecological modernizationapproaches and the
pessimismof somepoliticaleconomists.In
thismanner,we can beginto thinkthrough
theeconomicand societalforms,as well as
institutional
changes,thatare needed for
greaterecologicalsustainability.
Such an approachalso offersopportunities foreconomic geographersto engage
more substantivelywithenvironmental
debates.I suggestthatthereare a number
ofkeyconcernswithineconomicgeography
forwhichexisting
expertise
providesanentry
these
into
environmental
debates.For
point
at least
modernization,
example,ecological
in its strongerformulations,can offera
substantive
politicalchallengeto neoliberal
ideologies, and furtherworkin thisarea
could help to progresseconomicgeographers'well-developed
critiquesofneoliberalism and to promote more progressive
thereare opportunities
agendas.Similarly,
to examinehow existingobjects of study,
suchas theimpactsofglobalization,
articulate withshiftstowardecologicalmodernization.For example,recentworkon corporateproductionstrategiesand theirspatial
has revealedthatthedeveloporganization
ment of global productionstandardshas
performanceas
improvedenvironmental
standards
corporations
developfirm-based
thatexceed nationallegislation(Angeland
Rock 2005). It is in these kinds of areas
where economic geographers,withtheir

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

196

ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

insights
expertisein combiningtheoretical
withcarefulempiricalwork,have muchto
offerin exploringthe potentialforgreater
articulation
betweentheeconomicandenvironmentalspheres.
In the nexttwosectionsofthisarticle,I
outlinethe main argumentsof ecological
modernization research and present a
critique of ecological modernization
research.I thenexaminesome of the key
a regulationist
tobe gainedthrough
insights
followed
an
of
perspective,
by exploration
the potentialcontribution
of usingregulationistapproaches to rethinkecological
In the following
modernization.
sections,I
explorehow the linkagesbetweenthe two
approaches could be developed and the
value-addedthatmaybe gainedfromlinking
thetwoand providesomefociforpotential
empiricalwork.In the conclusion,I draw
the mainarguments
together.

Ecological Modernization
At theheartof ecologicalmodernization
is a relatively
viewofthepotenoptimistic
tial fortechnological change to lead to
solutions
forenvironmental
problems(Buttel
2000a). As Roberts and Colwell (2001,
424) observed,"ecologicalmodernisation
suggeststhatit is possibleto integratethe
goals of economic development, social
welfareand environmental
and
protection,
thatthrough
thisreconciliation
will
synergies
be generatedwhichcan be harnessedand
put to good use." The concept was first
developedinthe1980sbyHuber(1982) and
Janicke(1985). Huber (1982, 1985) argued
thatindustrial
societyshouldundergoa transitiontowardan ecologicallyrationalorganization of productionon the basis of a
betweentheeconomy
changedrelationship
and ecology.He termedthistransition
an
and,usinga biolog"ecologicalswitchover"
ical metaphor,stated that throughthis
caterprocess,"thedirtyand uglyindustrial
will
transform
into
a[n]
pillar
ecological
butterfly"(Huber 1985, 20). Ecological
modernizationenvisagesthe progressive
oftheinstitutions
modernization
ofmodern
basic
is
society-the
argument that the

APRIL 2006

ofmodernsocietycanbe
centralinstitutions
transformed
toavoidan ecologicalcrisis(Mol
and Spaargaren1993). It can be compared
toapproaches
basedon deep ecologyorecologismthatsee theneedfora thoroughgoing
and radicalrestructuring
ofsociety(see,e.g.,
An
ecologicalmodernizaBliihdorn2000),
tion approach would involve structural
change at both the macroeconomiclevel,
broadsectoralshifts
intheeconomy,
through
and the microeconomic
level,forexample,
throughthe use of new and clean technologiesbyindividualfirms(Gouldsonand
Murphy1997).Overtime,as Buttel(2000b,
30) observed,therewillbe a shifttoward
in the efficiency
of conver"improvement
sionofrawmaterialsintofinished
products
andto [a] reduction
inthequantity
andtoxiof
the
waste
stream
from
city
industry."
The concept of ecological modernizationhas been developed as both a theory
anda guideto morepragmatic
policyaction.
As a theoretical
concept,ithasbeen used to
analyzechangesto the centralinstitutions
in modem societythatare deemed necessaryto solvetheecologicalcrisis.In thisuse
of the concept,ecological modernization
represents a major transformation,or
Huber's "ecological switchover,"of the
to a different
process of industrialization
basisthattakesaccountoftheneedto maintainthesustenancebase. Theoretically,
thesocialdynamics
thesechanges,
that
behind
is theemergenceof actualenvironmentinducedtransformations
ofinstitutions
and
inindustrialised
socialpractices
are
societies,
intheecological
modernisation
encapsulated
theory.This theorytriesto understand,
andconceptualise
thenature,
extent
interpret
anddynamics
ofthistransformation
process.
(Mol2002,93)
indicates
thepossiEcologicalmodernization
crises
bilityof overcomingenvironmental
withoutleavingthepathof modernization
(Mol and Spaargaren1993). The assumption is thatprocesses of productionand
canbe restructured
on ecologconsumption
icaltermsthrough
theinstitutionalization
of
ecologicalaims (Mol 1994). This does not
factors
simplymean takingenvironmental

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.

82 No. 2

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

197

intoaccount,"butalsoensuring
thattheyare
nature"and elitistdecision-making
strucin
the
and
another
that
'anchored'
structurally
reproduction tures,
interpretation not
oftheseinstitutional
clustersofproduction
stresses
only
changes in productionand
and consumption"(Spaargaren,Mol, and
but does so throughgreater
consumption,
Buttel2000b,6).
and social
democratization,
redistribution,
Fromtheinitialformulations
inthe1980s,
justice.Hajerfurther
developedthesecond
a numberofapproacheshave developedin
of ecologicalmodernization,
interpretation
modernization
workof Beck (1992), as
on
the
(for
ecological
theory
drawing
reflexive
overviews,see Mol and Spaargaren2000;
ecologicalmodernization,
whereby
Mol,and Buttel2000a;Mol and
Spaargaren,
politicalandeconomicdevelopment
proceed
Sonnenfeld2000). Mol (1999) identified
on the basis of critical self-awareness
threebroad phases in the developmentof
involvingpublic scrutinyand democratic
thetheory.In thefirstphase,developedby
control.Christoff
these
(1996)characterized
Huber (1982, 1985) and Jinicke(1985),
twointerpretations
as "weak"and "strong"
therewas a heavyemphasison the role of
versionsof ecologicalmodernization(see
a criticalattitude
Table 1). The thirdphaseofworkon ecologinnovation,
technological
towardthe state,and a beliefin thepower
ical modernizationtheoryhas paid more
of market forces and actors to deliver
attention
to consumption
processesandhas
wasthatecologtodeal withcriticism
thatecologchange.Huber'sperspective
attempted
icalmodernization
offers
a wayoutofecologicalmodernization
is a Eurocentric
approach
ical crisisthroughmore industrialization, (Mol 1999). Fudge and Rowe (2001,
albeit with changed production and
1528-29)summedup thisthirdphaseas one
in which:
However,thisviewhas been
consumption.
foroveremphasizing
criticized
theindustrial
environmental
areconceptualised
andtechnological
and
the
problems
aspects neglecting
as challenges
for(preventative)
social,techsocial contextwithinwhichtheyoccur.In
and
economic
market
nical,
reform;
Huber's initial work, the ecological
dynamics
andeconomic
agentsareseenas increasingly
switchoveris a logical, necessary, and
thenation-state
is transformed
important;
inevitablestagein the developmentof the
towards
themoredecentralised
andconsenindustrialsystem.From thisperspective,
sualstyles
ofgovernance
whichcharacterise
technological developments are largely
socialmovements
ecologicalmodernisation;
autonomouslydeterminedand engender
theirrolesso thatreform
modify
ideologies
takepreference
withthe
overconfrontation
systemsand theirrelachangein industrial
tionswiththe social and naturalenvirontowards
state;andintergenerational
solidarity
ment. From a policy perspective, the
environmental
is assumed.
protection
dominantrole envisagedfortechnological
Ecological modernizationis also used to
changemeansthatin Huber'sapproach,the
describea morepragmatic
state has little role in redirecting the
politicalprogram
to redirectenvironmental
policymaking
processesofproductionand consumption.
The secondphase ofwork,fromthelate
(Huber 1985). Proponentsof ecological
modernization
havearguedthatthisprocess
1980sonward,placedlessemphasison techis alreadyatworkincountries
likeJapan,the
as a driving
force,had
nologicaldeterminism
a morebalancedperspectiveon theroleof
Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, and
Denmarkas materialflowshave become
stateand marketforcesin the process of
delinked
fromeconomicflows,
witha decline
and
modernization,
emphasized
ecological
intheuse ofnaturalresourcesandemissions
institutional
and culturaldynamics(Harvey
(Mol 2002). As a pragmatic political
1996;Mol 1999).For example,Hajer (1993)
proposedthatthereare twointerpretations program, ecological modernization
of ecological modernization:the initial
approaches suggestthatthisprocess will
ofHuber,
engender support fromprivate-sector
"techno-corporatist"
interpretation
whichemphasizesthe "economizationof
businesses,giventhatit can have benefi-

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

198

GEOGRAPHY
ECONOMIC

APRIL2006

Table 1
of"Weak"and "Strong"EcologicalModernization
Characteristics
'"Weak"EcologicalModernization

"Strong"EcologicalModernization

problems
Technologicalsolutionsto environmental

and economicstructure
Broadchangesto institutional
of societyincorporating
ecologicalconcerns
Open, democraticdecisionmakingwithparticipation
and involvement
dimensionsofthe
Concernedwiththeinternational
environment
and development

Technocratic/corporatist
stylesofpolicymakingby
economic,and politicalelites
scientific,
Restrictedto developednationswho use ecological
modernization
to consolidatetheirglobaleconomic
advantages
on politicaland
A single,closed-endedframework
economicdevelopment

A moreopen-endedapproachwithno singleview,but
withecologicalmodernization
multiplepossibilities
orientation
providing

Source:DerivedfromChristoff
(1996).

cialoutcomes(Hajer 1995;Harvey1996). It
is claimedthatbusinesscan gainadvantages
in a numberofways:throughgreatereffiandwaste
ciencyowingto reducedpollution
liabilfuture
financial
production;avoiding
costofthecleanup
ities,suchas thepotential
recruitment
ofcontaminated
land;improved
because of
and retentionof theworkforce
the creationofa betterworkenvironment;
the potentialforincreasedsales of more
friendly"productsand
"environmentally
services;and the sale of pollution-preventionand pollution-abatement
technologies
a shift
(Dryzek1997).As a politicalprogram,
toward ecological modernizationwould
involvea numberofinterrelated
measures:
the restructuring of production and
consumption toward ecological goals,
includingthe developmentand diffusion
ofcleanproduction
thedecoutechnologies;
plingof economicdevelopmentfromthe
relevantresourceinputs,resourceuse, and
theexploration
ofalternative
and
emissions;
innovativeapproaches to environmental
policy,such as "economizingecology,"by
placingan economicvalue on natureand
taxreform;
theintestructural
introducing
of
environmental
gration
policygoals into
other policy areas; and the invention,
ofnewtechnologies
adoption,and diffusion
and productionprocesses.(Mol 1999,171)
suggestedthat

iftheymoveawayfroma purehierarchical,
state-dictated
modelofenvironmental
change;
iftheyincrease
andinvolvement
of
flexibility
vianegotiations,
non-state
actors
market
mechanismsanddynamics,
and"self-regulation"
within
andif
boundaries;
legalandstate-set
ofenvironmental
thetechnological
dimensions
reform
do notremain
limited
toonlytechnoemissionor
logicaldevicesofone product,
production
processstep,butincludehigher
levels,production-consumption
aggregation
andorganisachainsandeconomic
networks,
tionaladaptationsofsocio-technological
complexes.

ofecologDespite thegrowing
importance
as botha theoryand a
ical modernization
fewgeograpragmaticprogram,relatively
phers,and even fewereconomic geograengagedin theecologphers,haveexplicitly
ical modernization
debate(foran exception,
see the special issue of Geoforum2000).
However,strongparallelswithecological
modernization
can be seen in the workof
Le
Heron (2002) and Hudson
and
Hayter
(2000, 2001). Hayterand Le Heron drew
upon researchbyFreeman(1992) on technoeconomicparadigms(TEPs) to develop
his suggestion
thata "greenparadigm"will
formthebasisoffutureeconomicdevelopment.This paradigm,theysuggested,will
involvebothtechnological
and institutional
changes.It willrevolvearoundthe demaof the economy,the internalterialization
ization
of
environmental
valuesbyindustry,
environmental
inenvironmental
reforms
policy
of the environment
canbe classified
as ecological
modernisation and the prioritization

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.82 No. 2

GEOGRAPHY
ENVIRONMENTAL
ECONOMIC

withinresearchand development(R&D),
as well as take-backstrategiesand a shift
rather
thanproducts.
towardsellingservices,
In Freeman's originaltheorization,new
TEPs arisewhentheeconomyis confronted
bycrisesthatcannotbe solvedbytheexisting
TEPs. However,farfrombeinga technoargument,in a similar
logicaldeterminist
manner to ecological modernization,
emphasisis placed on the developmentof
a set of matching institutional forms,
laborrelaincludingbusinessorganization,
international
and
R&D
structures,
tions,
regulatoryforms.While Hayter and Le
Heron (2002) did not use the term,there
are strongparallelsbetweentheirviewofa
greenTEP and ecologicalmodernization.
As theynoted,
In a greenTEP, environmental
imperatives
forsystemic
motives
becomeexplicit
change.
innovation
In a greenparadigm,
priorities
theuse of
to radically
areoriented
reducing
energyand materialsin transportation,
...
andmanufacturing
construction
systems
theresource
phaseoftheICT is
management
as
bythephaseofeco-development
replaced
of
definitions
recognise
productivity
ecological
valuesofnatureandseek
thenon-industrial
fortheideaof
definitions
toprovide
practical
andLe Heron
sustained
(Hayter
development.

2002,
20)

Hudson(2000,2001) developed
Similarly,
as a wayof
theidea of"eco-Keynesianism"
thecompeting
pressuresofgenerresolving
work,andprotecting
providing
atingprofits,
He arguedthatthis
thenaturalenvironment.
wouldbe "a radicallyreformist
attemptto
and socialsustaincombineenvironmental
abilitywhile respectingthe profitability
imperatives of a capitalist economy"
(Hudson2001,321). Althoughhis"sustainable eco-capitalism"has a muchstronger
emphasison socialjustice,as withecologinvolvesthe
it similarly
ical modernization,
of
clean
use
technologiesand
widespread
Other
friendly
production.
environmentally
havesimilarly
drawnimplicitly
geographers
upontheconceptsofecologicalmodernization. Soyez (2002), forexample,used the

199

for
as a synonym
termeco-modernization
modernization.
ecological
In total,then,it could be argued that
has a well-develecologicalmodernization
on
how
to conceptualize
oped perspective
and a
relationships
economy-environment
setofpolicyprescriptions
that,iftakenas a
of
whole,wouldengenderthedevelopment
a neweconomictrajectory.
Conceptsderived
have
fromworkon ecologicalmodernization
into
the
become
incorporated
certainly
if
their
actual
even
implepolicyagenda,
mentationhas been limitedand theyare
inTable
drawnfromthe"weak"conceptions
1 (Watts2002; Barryand Paterson2003).

Ecological Modernization: A
Critique
AlthoughI do not contendthatinstitutionalchangesand environmental
improvementshavenotoccurredorthatthechanges
advocatedby the proponentsof ecological
are notdesirable,thereare
modernization
a number of problems with ecological
of
as a theory.One criticism
modernization
and
as
both
modernization
theory
ecological
discourseis thatit can help to legitimate
culturethat
an environmental
policy-making
businessesandmajor
absolvesprivate-sector
oftheirenvironmental
responcorporations
sibilities(Bliihdorn2000; Buttel2000a).
Indeed,thismaybe one reasonforitswideWhileecologicalmodernspreadpopularity.
izationmaybe predicatedupon thepotenof capitalisteconomies,
tialtransformation
it is also liable, as a discourse, to be
intoyetanotherdiscursive
repre"corrupted
sentationof dominantformsof economic
power" (Harvey 1996, 82), resultingin
greaterdominanceof global resourcesby
nationalgovernments,
transnational
industry,
and "big science" in the name of sustainability.Harvey(1996, 380) suggestedthat
"the discourse would not have had the
purchase it evidentlyhas had withouta
tranchofsupportfromtheheartsignificant
land of contemporary
political-economic
power."As he stated:

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

APRIL
GEOGRAPHY
2006
ECONOMIC
likeIBM,sawa greatdeal
thatis no longersolelyresponsible(ifitever
many
corporations,
ofprofit
to be had fromsuperiorenviron- was) for environmental governance
mentaltechnologies
andstricter
globalenviand Mol 2002b).Thisfailureto
(Sonnenfeld
ronmentalregulation.For the advanced
the state and the social
conceptualize
toremain
nations,
compet- processesatworkadequatelymeansthatthe
capitalist
struggling
environmental
ofstrong
itive,theimposition
typeof embeddedculturaltransformations
solutions
demanding
regulations
high-tech
thatwill sustainfactors,such as environnotonlya competitive
promised
advantage mental
reducedconsumpimprovements,
totheir
ownindustries
butalsoa strong
export
are unlikelyto be
and
tion,
market
forthemoreenvironmentally
greater
equity,
friendly
realized (Cohen 1997, 1998; Jamisonand
haddeveloped.
1996,
(Harvey
technology
they
Baark1999).
382)
lacksa
Third,ecologicalmodernization
ofpowerrelations.
In someaccounts,
Second,despitea focusontheinstitutional theory
ofsociety,
the assumptionoftenappears to be that
ecologicalmodernreorganization
ization approaches often contain little
is so
the logicof ecologicalmodernization
detailedanalysisoftheformsofinstitutional obvious(andprofitable
forbusiness)thatits
adaptationorchangethatare required.The
widespreadadoptionis simplya matterof
of
institutional
is
timeas long as a mixof international
civil
appearance
changes
and
environmental
presentedas evidencethat"ecologicalratiosociety
nongovernmental
nality"has startedto challenge"economic
organizations keep up the pressure
(Mol 2002). AlthoughJanicke
rationality"
(McCarthy 2004). As Leroy and van
Tatenhove (2000, 197) commented,"as
(1997) focused on the "environmental
capacity" of states to make the shiftto
nobody seems to oppose it-and as the
modernization
and
others
have
ecological
theory lacks power relations, there is
ofsocialandenviat all,ecologarguedthattheintegration
hardlyanyroomforopposition
ronmentalmovementsinto the policyical modernisationis assumed to occur
In otheraccounts,
almostautomatically."
making process is drivingthe process
forward(Weidner2002), thereis stilllittle
willonlyoccurif
modernization
ecological
detailoftheformofinstitutional
adaptation
sufficient
and
societal,
administrative,
orchangerequiredatthenation-state
political,
level,
is availableandthen
organisational
capacity
let alone at subnationalscales. This is a
ofspecific
onlyin responseto thestrength
ofthestate
productoftheundertheorization
such
as
variables,
hypothesised
corpostrong
in ecological modernization. In early
ratist
theinnovative
character
of
institutions,
accounts,the roleofthe (central,regional,
and
informational
and
a
legal
systems,
or local) statewas seen as minimal(Huber
certain
(Andersen
2002,
regulatory
proficiency.
1982, 1985). In lateraccounts,therewas a
1395)
moresophisticated
thatthe
understanding
stateperforms
an enablingand contextually
However,thereasonswhysuchchanges
role.
One
is
that
should
haveoccurredand whenand where
steering
argument
ecologicalmodernization
sublimates
the"enabling
are notaddressed.The implementation
of
state"as theinstitutional
responsethatwill
policy,however,is about the exerciseof
securetheefficient
ofthemarket
functioning
politicalandeconomicpower,and although
within
a
framework
of
statereguthis is rarely made explicit, ecological
economy
lation(Blowers1997). Blowersarguedthat
modernization
is a fundamentally
political
thisenablingstatewill deliverecological
(Owens
1994; McCarthy and
concept
modernization
relationPrudham2004). Whetherit can be introthrough
corporatist
duceddependsupon"whois incontrol,
who
ships between governmentand industry,
movesetsagendas,who allocatesresources,who
althoughco-optingenvironmental
mentswhen necessary.Certainly,many
mediates disputes,who sets the rules of
accountshave recognizedthe continued
thegame"(Wilbanks1994,544). Ecological
albeitone
modernization
is thusas muchan ideologimportanceof the nation-state,
200

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.

82 No. 2

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

ical and politicalissue as it is an ecological

and economicone (O'Connor1994).While
I do notsuggestthatproponents
ofecological modernizationare unaware of these
issues,the drivingforcebehindthe developmentof "environmental
capacity"and
institutional
is rarelymade
reorganization
explicit,
althoughthereis a strongemphasis
measuresandpressures
uponmarket-based
fromcivilsociety(Weidner2002). Similarly,
while some authors have argued that
"ecological subversion"may reversethe
character"
(Mol 2002,94)
"semi-permanent
oftheecologicalmodernization
process,the
motivation for it is not made explicit
(Andersen2002).
Harvey(1996,401) therefore
arguedthat
needs
a more
modernization
ecological
radicaledgetoitifitistoleadtoanysubstantivechanges:

201

become so, it "mustultimately

be a theory
of politicsand the state-that is, a theory
ofthechangesinthestateandpoliticalpractices (and a theoryof the antecedentsof
thesechanges)"(Buttel2000a,58). It is here
thatexploringdevelopmentsin economic
geographythathave approachedenvironmentalissuesfroma regulationist
perspectivemayprovidea meansof reconfiguring
ecologicalmodernization.

RegulationistApproaches

A substantial
bodyofworkin economic
inrecentyearshasusedconcepts
geography
drawnfrompoliticaleconomyas a meansto
understandeconomicchange(Peck 2000).
From a politicaleconomyperspective,
the
economyisviewedas bothan objectofregulationand a focusofstruggle
betweenlocal
actors and groups, each of which may
Andthatrequires
thefundamental achievedifferent
outcomesas a resultofthe
confronting
of
underlying
processes(andtheirassociated
types policies and regulationsthatare
institutional introduced(Cocklin and Blunden 1998).
socialrelations,
powerstructures,
discourses
andbeliefsystems)
configurations,
Regulationtheoryanalyzessocietyand its
andsocialinjusthatgenerate
environmental
at threeinteractive
levels:the
institutions
tices.... Alternative
modesofproduction,
of
the
mode
production, regimeof accuanddistribution
aswellasalterconsumption,
andthemodeofsocialregulation.
mulation,
modesofenvironmental
transformation
native
In
theconceptof
regulationist
terminology,
ifthediscursive
haveto be explored
spaces
focuses
the
mode
of
social
movement
and
oftheenvironmental
regulation
justice
attentionon institutional
structures,
areto
thethesesofecological
modernisation
politsocial
icalpractices,
be conjoinedin a programmeof radical
mechanisms,
regulatory
action.
and
norms
that
networks,
political
(togetherwith
ensure
the reproproductionstrategies)
To some extent,thispointis recognized
ductionof a particularregimeof accumuin theworkof Hajer (1995) and his "argulation.The mode ofsocialregulation
mentativeapproach."Here, politicscomes
but
notbereduced
tostateinstitutions,
should
in "as a strugglefordiscursivehegemony
often
a
series
of
"softer"
also
embraces
(and
for
their
inwhichactorstrytosecuresupport
forms
ofregulaanalytically
quiteintractable)
definition
of reality"(Hajer 1995,263). In
societal
as
such
norms,
tion,
consumption
ofecologicalmodernthiscase,thediscourse
andconventions,
economic
habits
expectations,
ization, at least in its weak version, is
whichtogether
define
andcultural
practices,
attractive
sinceitprovidesa way
oftheaccumulation
"politically
thesocialcontext
process.
of accommodatingradical environmental
(Peck2000,64)
theneedtorestrucandofmotivating
critics,
coreoftheailingWestern
turetheindustrial
A mode of regulationwillstabilizefora
to
new
thus
economies,
while,but ultimatelythe extantmode of
strength
giving
beliefsin the possibilityof socio-political
regulationfora particularregimeof accumulationcannotresolvethecontradictions
and
control"
2000,
28).
(Lundqvist
mastery
is not
and giveswayto a periodofcrisisandtransHowever,ecologicalmodernization
In these periodsof crisis,new
formation.
(yet,at least) a distinctsocial theory;to

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

202

GEOGRAPHY
ECONOMIC

structural
formsemerge,someofwhichmay
formthe basis of a new periodof stability
and hence a new mode of regulation,and
othersofwhichmaybe short-lived
experiments.Regulationtheorydoes notpredict
the exact formof an emergingregimeof
butis a conceptual
framework
accumulation,
forunderstandingprocesses of capitalist
It focuses
crisis,and reproduction.
growth,
on relationships,
at
the
macroecomainly
nomic level, between the accumulation
processand the ensembleof institutional
formsandpracticesthattogether
constitute
the mode of social regulation(Peck and
forms
Miyamachi1994).Theseinstitutional
and practicesguideand stabilizethe accumulationprocess and create a temporary
resolutionof the crisistendenciesthatare
seen to be endemic in the accumulation
is neither
process.The mode ofregulation
nor
since
strucinevitable,
predetermined
turalformsare theoutcomeofsocialstruggles and conflict(Painter1991). The mode
of regulationis the meansof institutionalizingthese strugglesbetweencompeting
interests that lead to the bounds that
reproduce and legitimate the balance
betweenproduction
andconsumption
within
a particular regime of accumulation
(Marsdenet al. 1993).
Angel(2000,615) suggestedthata regulationistapproach"willlikelybe the most
whichtheenvisignificant
platform
through
ronmentis broughtinto economic geography"fortwo main reasons. First, the
historical
ofcapitalist
periodization
productionis helpfulin understanding
contemporaryenvironmentalproblemsbecause it
allowsforthe materialconstraints
thatare
the
environment
imposed by
upon the
to
be
economy
disentangled fromthe
politicalchallengesthatitposes. Second,it
framework
forexamprovidesan effective
iningtheprocessesofenvironmental
regulation(or "real" regulation),in whichthe
mode of regulationalso includes a social
mode ofenvironmental
A third
regulation.
reasonmaybe thatwherebya regulationist
approacharticulatesthe kindsof technologicalchangesthatareenvisagedinecological modernizationaccountswithinstitu-

APRIL2006

tionalchangesand, in so doing,offersan
forchangethatcouples,rather
explanation
than collapses, the two (Bridge and
McManus2000). However,
thecriticalchallengewillbe to go beyond
theapplication
ofeconomy-environment
relationsto an analysis
ofhowthedynamics
of
relations
economy-environment
requiresa
ofregulation
itself....Itis
rethinking
theory
farfromclearthatthecurrent
periodisation
ofeconomic
transformation
proposed
byregulationtheorymatchesup to thechanging
ofeconomy-environment
relations
patterns
within
advanced
industrial
economies.
(Angel
2000,615)
The regulationof ecologicalrelationsis
therefore
as important
as theusual objects
of regulationist
analysis(Robertson2004).
Indeed, it is in this respect that some
economicgeographershave attemptedto
linkexplanatory
froma regulationist
insights
to
environmental
perspective
analysis(see
Gibbs1996,2002;Gandy1997;Bakker2000;
Bridge2000; Bridgeand McManus 2000;
Krueger2002; McManus2002). The regulationapproachtendsto conceptualizethe
environment
as external
toaccumulation
and
as a condition for social regulation
(Drummondand Marsden1995).Viewedin
this way, the environmentis an extraeconomicobjectof social regulationand a
siteof strugglebetweenactorsand groups
at various scales. Political economy
approacheshave been usefulin advancing
workon economy-environment
relationsin
thattheyhighlight
thefactthatpolicydevelopment and implementationare essentiallysocial and politicalprocesses,rather
thanproblem-free,
as muchworkinecological modernization
has assumed.

Regulation Approaches:
RethinkingEcological
Modernization
Recent workin political economy on
relations
hasfocused
economy-environment
upon the discursivepractices and materiosocialstructures
throughwhichregula-

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.

82 No. 2

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

tions,decisions, and policies that affect

sustainableoutcomesare formulatedand
and aroundwhichstruggles
and
interpreted
conflictoccur (Gibbs and Jonas 2000).
Adoptingsuch an approach enables the
consideration
ofpolicymakingforsustainin
relation
to its wider role in
ability
and
structures
of"economic
processes
governance"and"socialregulation."
The emphasis
is thuson environmental
policymakingas
a material
anddiscursive
than
process,rather
as a normativeoutcome,as in ecological
modernization.
Thisargument
canbe develwork
the
ofJessop
oped by drawingupon
(1990,1995,2002),whoconceptualizedthe
stateas an "institutional
ensemble"andcharacterizedstatepoweras reflecting
theinterbetween
interests
the
ofpolitirelationship
ciansandstatemanagersandthepromotion
of interestsby social and economicforces
(Jonas,While, and Gibbs 2004). Jessop's
(1995) neo-Gramscian
conceptof"strategic
that
some actorsand
selectivity"
suggests
institutions
have the abilityto formulate,
secure, and implementspecificpolicies,
while othersdo not.The argument,then,
is that
ofthestateas a looselyarticuconceiving
lated"institutional
statestrategy
ensemble",
as a keyconcept
becauseoftheneed
emerges
togenerate
forstateprojects
andthe
support
in
terms
of
coherresulting
challenge
bringing
class
encetotherangeofcompeting
capitalist
andthoseofitspotential
interests,
strategic
allies,inandaroundthestate.(Jonas,
While,
andGibbs2004,154)
In thismanner,thestatemayactto regulate "by strategicarticulationbetween
institutionallyordered realms of logic"
(Robertson 2004, 366), thatis, between
capitaland ecologicalrelations.From this
we canbegintoreconceptualize
perspective,
modernization
accounts,inwhich
ecological
economic
thefocusuponwaysofintegrating
and environmentalaims in some developed statessuggestsa processof strategic
selectivityat work.The extentto which
this has happened and replaced a more
narrowfocusupon economiccompetitiveness and GDP growthis open to question,

203

internal
withinthestate.
reflecting
struggles
For example,Barryand Paterson(2003)
outlined the ways in which the United
Kingdom's New Labour government,
elected in 1997, quicklydowngradedits
while
emphasison ecologicalmodernization,
in Sweden,despitea majorpolicyemphasis
upon creatingan "ecologicallysustainable
littleprogresshas been
society,"relatively
madebecauseoftheopposition
ofindustrial
interests
andthelimitedengagement
ofthe
tradeunions(Lundqvist2000; Haley2005).
In accounting
forsuchprocessesatwork,
there is also a need to take account not
and processes,but
onlyof local structures
alsooftheconstraints
andopportunities
that
are derivedfromthewidermodesofregulationoperating
atwiderspatialscales.Doing
so assistsus in addressingthe questions
raisedearlieras to why,when,and where
thechangesthatareassociatedwithecological modernizationhave occurredor may
occur.Thus, Bridge(2000, 253, emphasis
added) suggestedthat
a regulation
tothetransformation
of
approach
naturehaspotential
as a method
advantages
foranalysing
between
industrial
relationships
andenvironmental
restructuring
change....
It is abletoillustrate
howcrisistendencies
can

[sic]fromtheformand rateat
emergence
whichnatureis incorporated
intoproduccontradictions
tion;themechanisms
bywhich
themselves
as a challenge
toaccumuexpress
lationat particulartimesand in particular

stemfrom
a
places;andhowthesechallenges
failureofexisting
andinstitutions
practices
to ensurecontinued
accessto resources
or
effectively
regulatetheimpactsofproductionontheenvironment.
a regulationist
Although
adopting
perspectiveis a usefulwayof avoidingthe normativeapproachesthatarefrequently
foundin
muchresearchon ecologicalmodernization,
ofnature
thedifficulty
isthat"theproduction
(or the 'managementof the environment')
is an intrinsic
aspectofthesocialconstruction of regimesof accumulationin capitalism"(Jonas,
While,andGibbs2004,154).
In thisregard,one can drawon theworkof
Altvater (1993), Fitzsimmons (1991),

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

204

ECONOMIc GEOGRAPHY

O'Connor(1998),and Smith(1984),among
others,who have focuseduponthecontradictionsinvolvedin thecapitalistapproprihave
ationofnature.In thiswork,"attempts
been made to explicatethewaysin which
industrialproductioncan also generate
bio-physicaland socio-politicalconditions
tofurther
thatareantithetical
accumulations
the
by exceeding
regenerativeand assimilativecapacitiesoftheenvironment"
(Bridge
is that"theenvi2000,239). The argument
ronmentaldegradation associated with
economic
energyand materials-intensive
has
created
both
a
material
development
anda legitimization
crisis
crisisofproduction
forcapital"(Angel 2000, 611). O'Connor
extendedtheanalysisfroma focuson forces
and relationsof productionto includethe
conditionsof production,arguingthatthe
former
tendto degradetheecologicalconditionstheydependupon-the secondcontradictionofcapitalism.
Fromthisperspective,
a tendencytowardecological crisis may
therefore
be just as endemicto capitalism
as a fallingrateof profitor overaccumulation(Drummondand Marsden1995). For
example,Smith(1984,59) notedthat
in itsuncontrolled
driveforuniversality,
createsnewbarriers
to itsown
capitalism
future.
Itcreates
ofneededresources,
scarcity
thequalityofthoseresources
impoverishes
notyetdevoured,breeds new diseases,
thatthreatens
developsa nucleartechnology
thefuture
ofallhumanity,
theentire
pollutes
inorder
environment
that
wemust
allconsume
toreproduce,
andinthedailyworkprocessit
threatens
theveryexistenceofthosewho
producethevitalsocialwealth.
Natureis thereforea conditionfor,and
an object of,struggleand strategicaction
in the searchforpost-Fordist
institutional
and spatialfixes.Whilethe secondcontradictionofcapitalism
suggeststhatecological
conditions for production are being
constantlyundermined, there is also a
needtoexamineattempts
toproduceatleast
a temporary
fixto the problemof nature,
which is where drawingupon ecological
modernization
analysesto informpolitical
economy approaches may be useful. As

APRIL 2006

Hudson (2001,313) stated,a "criticalissue

relatesto the extentto whichthissecond
contradictioncan be held in check and
ofsocialandpoliticalregulation
and
systems
governancecan be constructedto ensure
thatproductionand consumptionmoveto
more environmentally-and sociallysustainable
Animportant
questrajectories."
tionin thisregardis whetherthe shiftsin
ecologpracticethatsupposedlyconstitute
are now entrenchedas
ical modernization
a constituent
partofthemodeofsocialregulation-do theyprovidea kindof "sustainability fix"? (While, Jonas, and Gibbs
2004).
Drawingupon regulationist
approaches
calls intoquestionthe driversof ecological
modernization
and the processesthatwill
lead to the supposed shiftto the restructuringof productionand regulation(the
fix)thatthisapproachsuggests.
sustainability
to a reguLinkingecologicalmodernization
lationistapproach raises the question of
the extentto whichthe kindsof political,
social,cultural,and economicchangesthat
are outlinedin ecological modernization
accountscan be interpreted
as an incipient
mode ofregulation.
Thus,does thecurrent
mixof reductionsin the intensity
of materialsand use of resources,environmental
policies, the adoption of environmental
managementsystems,
greenconsumerism,
clean technologies,
and corporateenvironmentalism
makeup theconstituent
elements
ofa newmodeofsocialregulation?
Froma
theextentto
theoryperspective,
regulation
whichtheseelementsmay(or can) cohere
into a mode of regulation will be the
outcomeof social struggleand conflict.It
wouldmeana reconstitution
ofthemodeof
(andmodeofproduction
regulation
through
ecological modernization,forexample,
adoptingclean technologiesand recycling
sustainproducts)toachievean ecologically
able society.In thissense,politicaleconomistscould see ecological modernization
as one ofa numberofalternative
strategies
ofregulation
ornewcollectivewillthathave
thepotentialto havea radicalimpactupon
the conditionsof existenceof a regimeof
accumulation
for
(Jessop1990).Conversely,

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.82 No. 2

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICGEOGRAPHY

thosewho are workingfroman ecological

modernization
perspective,incorporating
conceptsthatare drawnfromregulation
theoryraises questionsabout the ecological sustainability
ofdifferent
development
rather
than
a single,postoptions,
defining
Fordistdevelopmentpaththatis based on
While,and
ecologicalmodernization
(Jonas,
Gibbs 2004; Peck and Tickell 1994).
wouldsuggestthatrather
than
Regulationists
some
the
transition,
involving
unproblematic
is
mode
with
concerned
regulatory
usually
perpetuatingthe existingsocioeconomic
order and defendingthe distributionof
power withinthat order. For Peck and
Tickell(1994, 307), thereare fundamental
barriers
tothekindofinstitutionalized
solution offeredby ecologicalmodernization.
Theyquestioned
whether
further
is ecologically
accumulation
andeconomically
sustainable.
Basedasitison
of nature,capitalism
thetransformation
thatnature
aninfinite
is,effectively,
requires
resource.
Yetas environmental
resources
are
progressively
degradedandas theendis in
foroil(thecommodity
whichbothlitersight
fueledFordism),
itis
allyandmetaphorically
has
clearthatcapitalism
becoming
increasingly
transformed
allofnature.
perilously
thatseeksto redefine
Hence,anystrategy
theobjectofregulation
is necessarily
radical
becauseitprovidesa challengetothatsocial
order.In consequence,existing
powerstructuresforma major barrierto promoting
theecologicalmodernization
agenda,a factor
that is rarely mentioned in ecological
modernizationapproaches. Conversely,
offers
theprospect
ecologicalmodernization
of a different
mode of development,not
simplythe doom and gloomof regulationists.

The Potential Benefitsof

Boundary-PermeatingWork
Obviously,a call formore boundarypermeating work between ecological
modernization
and regulationist
approaches
is easierto do thanit is to developin practice.We are stillintherelatively
earlystages

205

o1 developing such an environmental

economic geography, and there are a
numberof areas thatneed further
investigation.In thissection,I tryto progressthe
I havepresentedso farin more
arguments
in
an
detail,
attemptto showthe benefits
fromworkthatdrawsupon a combination
ofthesetwotheoretical
perspectives.
First, I suggest that drawing upon
elements of a regulationist approach
witha
providesecological modernization
clearertheoretical
in
relation
basis,notably
to powerrelationsand theroleofthestate.
In ecologicalmodernization
therole
theory,
of the state is to act throughnegotiated,
consensual governance modes-where
is notoccurring,
it
ecologicalmodernization
is seen as a failureof currentmechanisms
and incentives(Hills 2005). Regulation
however,suggeststhatratherthana
theory,
simple failureof governance,these state
initiativesand policies will be subject to
contestation and conflictbetween and
amongvariousgroupsofactors.Thus,while
ecological modernizationrecognizesthat
transforsocial,political,and institutional
mationsare necessary(and, in ecological
modernization
terms,possible),ithas little
to sayaboutthesocialprocessesand agencies thatare requiredforthesetransformationstotakeplace.As a socialtheory,
itlacks
thatregulation
thekindofhistorical
analysis
theorycan provide.Thus "if'strongecological modernisation'
is to providethenecesrestraint
on
the
sary
globalmarket,
capitalist
will
thequestionsofhowthetransformation
takeplace,overwhattimescale,and bythe
agencyof what subjects,remainslargely
unanswered"
(Low 2002,48). A regulationist
indicates
thatpoliticalstruggle
perspective
and agencywillbe crucialandthattheform
of any post-Fordist solution is open to
contestation. In a similar manner to
Goodwin,Cloke, and Milbourne's(1995,
1258) workon ruralresearch,"bydrawing
on regulationtheory,we can locate and
conceptualise[ecological modernization]
that
within
a framework
whichacknowledges
this is part and parcel of more general
to regulatethecontinuing
contraattempts
dictionsand crisesofcapitalism."
Adopting

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

206

GEOGRAPHY
ECONOMIC

theinstitutional
formsandpracticesthatare
associatedwithecological modernization
may representonlya means to resecure
conditions for capital accumulation
(McManus2002). Much maydependupon
whether"weak"or"strong"
formsofecological modernization
are adopted(see Table
1). Ifweakformsare adopted,"thecurrent
of sustainability
proliferation
projectsand
products represents little more than a
to secureconditions
forthecontinstrategy
uanceofaccumulation-as-usual"
(MacBride
2004, 341). If a mode of social regulation
thentheaccumulation
splinters,
system
may
be able to incorporate
it as a newsourceof
growth-thismayhelp explainsomeofthe
enthusiasmforecological modernization,
since it offerssome firms,as well as some
nation-states
(see, e.g.,thecase ofSweden;
forgrowth
2000),
Lundqvist
opportunities
(Bridgeand McManus2000; Bakker2002).
As Schoenberger(2003) argued,environmentalproblemsmayrepresent
a newspatial
fix for capital. Thus, while ecological
modernization represents one way to
and crisis
manageecologicalcontradictions
tendencieswithincapitalist
this
production,
does notmeanthatthe

APRIL2006

and incorporatedwithinregimesof accumulation"

(Bridge2000,241). Indeed,while
some have been critical of ecological
modernization approaches and their
"win-win"
scenarios,
perhaps-overoptimistic
ofsustainablecapiseeingthedevelopment
talismas impossible(see O'Connor 1994),
"thechancesof a systematic
non-capitalist
alternative are at least equally distant
(Hudson2005,212). Anecologicalmodernization approach,while not overcoming
the ecologicalcontradictions
of capitalism,
mayprovidea temporaryfixand involve
"relative(butsignificant)
changesintomore
sound
directions"(Mol
environmentally
2002,97), ratherthanlead us intowhatmay
be a futile
searchforsomeformof"absolute"
sustainability.
Ecologicalmodernization
may
thereforerepresentan alternative
way"to
andtoputoffthe
managethecontradictions
pointat whichtheirimpactson accumulationbecomeintolerable"
(Bridge2000,254).
Whileecologicalmodernization
is opento a
substantive
for
theoretical
its
shortcritique
as
a
normative
it is
dimension,
comings,
morecoherentand offers"a framework
to
describe and designa pragmaticpolitical
to redirectenvironmental
programme
policymaking"(von Malmborgand Strachan
contradictions
havebeen resolvedin any
2005, 152). Here, the statehas a keyrole
finalsense.Instead,theyrepresent
alternative
to play in devisingstrongenvironmental
thecontradictions
andtoput
waystomanage
targets, encouraging macroeconomic
offthepointatwhichtheirimpacts
on accurestructuringaway fromresource- and
mulation
becomeintolerable.
In theprocess,
anddeveloping
the
sectors,
energy-intensive
thesenewregulatory
components
postpone
cross-fertilization
of
and
theemergence
ecology
ofecologicalcontradictions
economy
(von Malmborg and Strachan 2005), as
as a full-fledged
crisisandunderpin
an instiwell as developingformsof "real"regulatutionalframework
conduciveto renewed
tion.
accumulation.
(Bridge2000,254)
Third, one of the key challenges for
Second, although political economy
researchis "tofinda
economy-environment
of
the
of
approachesare helpfulin alertingus to the
way transposing grandabstractions
destructive
characterof capiimmanently
political-economiceventsthatshape the
talistproductionand warningus notto be
environmental
histories
ofparticular
regions
about the processesidenti... [and]... to showhowdifferences
within
overoptimistic
fiedin ecologicalmodernization,
the altertheemergingregulatory
landscapes... are
nativescenariosfroma neo-Marxist
of
constructed
perspecthrough
specificgeographies
tivewouldseemto be eitheroverlyutopian
and
2002,
3).
struggle" (Bridge
Jonas
or undulypessimistic.
Some formofstrong
Givenitshighlevel of abstraction,
regulabe
tion theoryneeds a means of engaging
ecologicalmodernization
maytherefore
withenvironmental
issuesandconcernsthat,
possible,anditmaybe thecase that"ecological processesare beingincreasingly
valued
while maintaining
theoreticalcoherence,

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.

82 No. 2

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

manages to capture the messiness and

contingencyof everydaylife (Bridge and
McManus2000).The distinction
is between
as
"theorized
regulationtheory
history"
and as "distinctive politico-economic
method"(Peck and Miyamachi1994) and
thewaysinwhicheconomicgeographers
can
in
research
engage "empirically-grounded
whichuses regulationtheoryas a method
forexaminingthe implicationsfor... the
environmentof socio-economicrestructuring"(Bridge2000, 241). In contrastto
this high level of abstraction,ecological
modernization
containsthekindsofuseful
suggestions for "concrete trajectories
towardssocialchange"(Mol 2002,98) that
are largely absent from regulationist
accounts.Again,drawingupon elementsof
bothregulationist
and ecologicalmodernthe
izationapproacheshelpsus understand
to
that
is
an
economy
potential develop
basedon strong
formsofecologicalmodernization.

207

The new institutionalfixforenvironmentalproblemsmayvaryacrossspace,and

theremaybe different
nationalformsof
or institutionally
modernization
ecological
forms
ofcapitalism
or,as Sonnenfeld
specific
and Mol (2002b, 1457) termedit, "environmental
Indeed,Le Heron
glocalization."
and Hayter(2002, 25) suggestedthatthe
ofanyfuture
environmental
geography
paradigm
raisesinteresting
about:thelocusof
questions
ofleadingedgeenvironmental
creation
innotheir
diffusion
within
andamong
counvations;
andamongindustrial
tries(as wellas within
sectors);
regional
development
implications,
forexample,withrespectto mostrapidly
andresource
countries
industrialising
regions;
thenature
oflocaand,inmoremicro-terms,
tiondynamics.

Here,then,is a setofquestionsthatneed
There is a need to
empiricalinvestigation.
examineinstitutional
forms,
giventhatboth
ecological modernizationand regulation
theoriesstrongly
emphasizethem.As Peck
"one ofthechallengesof
stated,
65)
(2000,
Tensions and Potential
real-timeregulatoryanalysisis to trace
Research Foci
instihowthelogicsand illogicsofemergent
tutions
are
and
combined
(for
regulationists
In thissection,I sketchoutfourkeyareas
inparticular)
toexplorehowtheycohereand
in whichI thinkproductiveresearchcould
conflict
at themacrolevel."However,there
be conducted and in which there are
in thisregardthatare related
are
problems
tobe resolvedbetweenregulationist
tensions
the
of accumulationand
to
intertwining
andecologicalmodernization
approaches-thatinstitutions
are
and
the
fact
regulation
institutional
form,neoliberalism,
globalizanotfunctional/deterministic,
as well as the
tion,and consumption.2
First,whatmaya
Thereare
problemsofex-postidentification.
newinstitutional
fixforenvironmental
probin simplyreadingoffconclusions
dangers
lemslooklike?
fromthe formsoutlined in ecological
of
as wellas a compounding
ofinstitutional
innovation modernization,
Theleadingtarget
if
are
seen
as
causal.
the
institutions
problem
in thefuture
ofarrange... is thecreation
and servicesmay
Thus,certaininstitutions
froma
thetransition
mentsthatfacilitate
be
for
oriented
technonecessary ecologicalmodernization,
economic
andprofit
narrow
incorpo- but thisdoes notmean thattheyare suffilogicalfocusto onethatresolutely
cientto ensureit (Mol 2002). A keyfocus
ratesgreendimensionsin technological
needs to be upon the role of the state.
all
be
seen
as
This
needs
to
spanning
change.
ofeconomic
from
activity,
conception Whereas ecologicalmodernization
places
spheres
toproduction
andfinal
consumption. considerablefaithin culturalshiftswithin
through
andLe Heron2002,401)
(Hayter
corporationsand pressure
self-regulating
fromcivil society operating within an
2 Notethat
theseareaswerechosentobe illus"enablingstate,"a regulationist
approach
rather
thandefinitive.
trative,
suggeststhatthestateretainsa keyroleand

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

208

GEOGRAPHY
ECONOMIc

that social movements are engaged in

andconflict
withthestateandwith
struggle
business.
Second,thereare cleartensionsbetween
thetypesofreform
proposedbyecological
modernizationand the currentde facto
modeofsocialregulation
thatis represented
by the dominance of neoliberalism.3
Effectively,strongformsof ecological
a political
modernization
represent
challenge
to neoliberalism,
which
and an alternative
hasboth"rolledback"andrestructured
state
environmentalcontrolsand engendered
substantive
environmental
impacts,
bringing
intoquestionissuesof equityand distribution(McCarthyand Prudham2004). While
environmentalism
has acted as a brakeon
some of the worstexcesses of neoliberal
attacks on the environment,ecological
modernization
"saysverylittleaboutneoliberalism per se, and seems remarkably
sanguine about the capacity of liberal
marketsand voluntarismto redressenvironmental problems" (McCarthy and
Prudham2004, 280). For example,from
an ecological modernizationperspective,
Sonnenfeld
andMol (2002a,1322)suggested
thatsocialforces"are gettinga gripon the
contradictorydevelopmentsof environmentalandpoliticalreform,"
albeitthatthis
purchaseis contingent
uponcontinued
politicalreform.
Weidner(2002,1359)
Similarly,
suggestedthatcriticsof neoliberalglobalization"frequently
whenitcomes
exaggerate
to environmental
and
policy" thatthereare
positiveoutcomestobe gained.Conversely,
regulationtheoristshave offereda more
thoroughgoing
challengeto neoliberalism
and
Tickell
(Peck
2002), albeitrarelyfrom
an environmentalperspective(although
forrecentexamples,see Mansfield2004;
Bakker 2005). McCarthyand Prudham
is not
(2004,281) arguedthatneoliberalism
just a politicalprojectwithenvironmental
of
impacts;ratherthe"changingregulation
theenvironment
hasbeencentralto neolibam grateful
to an anonymousreviewerfor
3 I
suggestingthat attentionshould be paid to
thesetensions.

APRIL
2006

eral,capitalist
Indeed,theincormodernity."
of
intoa "weak"
environmentalism
poration
formof ecological modernization has
become centralto corporatediscourseand
ofgovernment,
such
withintheinstitutions
as the World Bank and the World Trade
and
(Goldman2001; Hartwick
Organization
Peet 2003). While advocatesof ecological
modernization
mayplace theirfaithin the
of
environmental
development international
civilsocietyto tametheexcessesofneoliberalism,the realityis somewhatdifferent.
For example,thereare keycontradictions
betweenideas thatare drawnfromecologicalmodernization
andthedominant
neoliberal formsof trade policies (Mol 2002;
McCarthyand Prudham2004). Indeed,
withitsemphasis
ecologicalmodernization,
and faithin civil
regulation
uponvoluntary
about the
society,maybe overoptimistic
natureoftradeagreepotentially
progressive
ments,such as the NorthAmericanFree
Trade Agreement(NAFTA) (McCarthy
2004). McCarthy(2004) outlinedhowinternationaltradeagreements,
suchas NAFTA,
farfromimprovingenvironmental
governance, have a deleteriouseffecton environmentalquality,health,and equality.A
keyarea forfutureresearchwilltherefore
be to investigatewhetherthe "processof
and commodifying
theecological
codifying
relationsaroundus is ... a projectofmobilising ecological forces in the service of
neoliberal hegemony"(Robertson2004,
fixor
362), as a temporarysustainability
whetherit representsa morefundamental
shiftin capitalistdevelopmentwherebyan
is attainingequal
"ecological rationality"
weightwith"economic rationality"(Mol
2002). In eithercase, we need to explore
howformsofenvironmental
are
governance
the
institutional
and
shifting,
organizationalformsassociatedwiththisshift,and
the waysin whichit involvesprocessesof
in particular
nation-states.
reregulation
Third, an important area of future
researchrevolvesaround
the contribution
of the globalisationof
tothe
economic,
social,andpolitical
processes
ofenergyandmaterials-intensive
dynamic

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.

82 No. 2

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

Ofcritical
accumulation.
concern
capitalist
hereis whetherglobalisation
necessarily
involves
a deepening
andbroadening
ofthe
orwhether
crisis,
environment/development
theprocesses
ofglobalisation
themselves
can
be harnessed
toa goalofimproved
environmental
performance.
(Angel2000,612)
Areas forinvestigation
includethe differences in environmental
practicesbyTNCs
intheirhomeandhostcountries;
theroleof
internationalorganizations,such as the
World Bank and the World Trade
in regulating
environmental
Organization,
andtheinfluence
ofconsumer
performance;
and supply-chain
pressuresuponproducers
in the rapidlyindustrializingeconomic
spaces ofAsiaand elsewhere.In relationto
the latterpoint,"despite ever-improving
productionefficienciesand processtechtheAsia-Pacific
regionstillcontinues
nology,
to see economicgrowthratesthatoutpace
the abilityof technologyto preventthe
release of pollutants"(Welfordand Hills
2003, 330). Where ideas of ecological
modernization
have takenpurchasein the
tended to be "weak"
have
region, they
versions-for example,Hills (2005, 215)
suggestedthatit maybe an appropriate
concerns
approachtoaddressenvironmental
"ina waythatdoes notjeopardiseeconomic
growthin the Pearl RiverDelta Regionor
in Hong Kong." Moreover,pressure on
in
companies to behave environmentally
countriesmayvaryby countryof originfor example, while Western TNCs in
Vietnam may be under pressure from
domesticand global"civilsocietyorganizafromSouthKoreaorTaiwan
tions,"investors
have less to fear (Mol 2002). As Dicken
(2004) has repeatedlypointedout,nationandthisis no lesstruewith
statesstillmatter,
to
environmental
issues.There are
regard
then,to explorethedifferent
opportunities,
typesof regionaland national flavorsof
ecological modernizationthatare consequent upon globalization(Mol 2002). For
example, while Angel and Rock (2005)
concludedthatthe developmentof global
productionstandardsby majorTNCs has
improvedenvironmental
performancein
Asiancountries,
as TNCs developfirm-based

209

standardsthatexceed nationallegislation,
other research in Mexico has indicated
thatlong-establishedTNC branchplants
withcorporate
mayhavelittleengagement
standardsand lax environmentalperformance(Salgado 2005).
Finally,anotherstarting
pointforfuture
researchis Hudson's(2001) commentthat
within economic geography too much
emphasishasbeenplacedupon"production
andnotenoughon "consumption
pollution"
Similarcriticisms
havebeenmade
pollution."
of ecologicalmodernization,
thatit is both
and
conceptually
analytically (over)
concernedwithproduction4
(Carolan2004),
and of economic geography, that it is
overlyconcernedwithindustry
(Yeungand
Lin2003).Politicaleconomyapproaches
also
fail
to
address
issues,
largely
consumption
thatregimes
despitethecentralcontention
ofaccumulation
encompassbothproduction
and consumption
norms.In earlyaccounts
of a transition from Fordism to postFordism,forexample,althoughchanging
consumertasteswerecitedas one cause of
thispointwas,
methods,
shifting
production
and remains,considerably
undertheorized
(Peck 2000). Such a focusmeansthatenvironmental problems are conceived as
productionproblemsthatcan largelybe
oftechnology
solvedthrough
theapplication
(Carolan 2004; although see Mol and
Spaargaren2004 in replyto thischarge).
Greater attention to the processes of
consumptionand a shiftfromeconomic
with
continuedpreoccupation
geography's
to
an
enviare
required
develop
production
ronmental economic geography. Conmaybe an
centrating
uponthe supply-side
easier routethanfocusingupon consumption,buttakenin isolation,itcarrieswithit
thedangersofencouraging
thedevelopment
of a closed-loop throwawaysociety. In
contrast,
addressingthe issue ofconsumptionraisesa wholesetofquestionsregarding
4 See also,forexample,
therelatedfieldof
focusupon
industrial
thathasa strong
ecology
lines,
alongeco-efficient
reorganizing
production
buthas onlyrarelyfocusedon consumption
issues.

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

210

ECONOMICGEOGRAPHY

the political and economic viabilityof

reducingand/orregulatingconsumption,
to economic
centrality
givenconsumption's
growth,political objectives,values, and
(Hobson 2003).
lifestyles

Conclusions
The basic assumptionunderlyingthis
articleis thatexistingmodes of economic
development and organization are not
sustainablebecause oftheirenvironmental
there
consequences.Giventhisassumption,
is a need, at the veryleast, to ameliorate
theseconsequencesand,moreprofoundly,
to shiftindustrial
societyto a moreecologicallyrationalorganization.To date,work
fromtheperspectiveofecologicalmodernintrying
izationhasgonefurthest
toconceptualize how the lattermayoccur and the
politicalprogramthatmayfollowfromit.
A smallnumberofgeographers
have(implicitlyand explicitly)adopted elements of
intheirownwork,
ecologicalmodernization
are
of problemswith
there
a
number
yet
that
modernization,
ecological
particularly
it provideslittlesense of how the desired
institutionaland cultural changes will
come aboutor thepowerrelationsthatare
involved.Instead,it "assumesthatexisting
institutions
and structurescan internalise
environmental
problemsthrough
efficiency,
andcreativity"
(Hobson2003,
restructuring
152), althoughrecentworkby Mol (2002,
103) recognizedthat"whilevariousdevelopmentspointtowardsan institutionalization of the environment
in the economic
reasonor
domain,thereis no fundamental
principle preventingthe stagnation or
reversalof thisprocessof ongoinginstitutionalisation."Exactlyhow the proposed
transformation
(or reversal)to (or from)
willtakeplace, over
ecologicalmodernity
whattimescale, and bywhichagencystill
remainsunclear(Low 2002).
In contrast,workfroma regulationist
perspectivehas been strongeron concepbetweeninstitutualizingthe relationships
tionalformsand practicesand the struggles and competingintereststhatmakeup
a mode of social regulation.It is here that

APRIL 2006

workbyeconomicgeographers
offers
useful
for
into
the
insights
potential greaterecological rationality
in economicdevelopment.
Thus,an advantageof regulationtheoryis
thata successor
thatit"offers
no guarantees
regimewillhappenalong,just as it rejects
the idea thatnew 'institutionalfixes'are
the resulteitherof spontaneousforcesor
political fiat"(Peck 2000, 67). Rather,a
discourseshave been
varietyof regulatory
to freeproposed,fromstateintervention
marketenvironmentalism,
allofwhichclaim
to be the most effectiveway of dealing
withenvironmentaldegradation(Gandy
1997). Takinga regulationist
approach,I
fromeitherecological
suggest,is different
modernization
or workon TEPs, in which
the motivationforthe necessarytechnologicaland institutional
changesseems to
comefroma rational
oftheneed
recognition
forchangeora paradigmatic
shift,
especially
withregardtoinnovation
(Hayter2004).The
cross-fertilization
of ecologicalmodernizationwitheconomicgeography
approaches,
withtheiremphasisupon theroleofsocial
can therefore
relations,
improveourunderstandingof the link between economic
processes and environmentaloutcomes
(Bridge2002).
Hence, the benefitsof drawingupon a
regulationistapproachforthose who are
concerned withadvancingan ecological
modernization
agendaarethatitmakesclear
thenondeterministic
natureofpost-Fordism
and thatthefutureformoftheeconomyis
open to shapingand debate.It emphasizes
the need to considerboth economic and
socialprocessesas an integrated
wholeand
indicatesthatsustainabledevelopment
will
need to be promotedat a varietyof levels
and scales.Thus "capitalism
mayhaveinviolable laws but is has a pluralityof logics,
some of which may be more accordant
with a sustainable mode of production
than others" (Drummond and Marsden
1995, 56). Such political economy
approachescanprovidea theoretical
vantage
point fromwhich to view the kinds of
current,on-the-groundinitiativesthat
havebeen examinedin ecologicalmodernization and, in practical terms, could

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.

82 No. 2

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

contributeto devisingappropriatepolicy
outcomes. In theoreticalterms,reinterpretingenvironmental
problemsthrougha
combinationof the two approaches will
involvean investigation
of the creationof
the institutional basis of sustainable
economiesortheformofthemodeofsocial
thatis associatedwithecological
regulation
andtoexaminewhether
such
modernization
cancoheretoresolvethecrisis
developments
ofcapitalism
thatstemsfromenvironmental
problems.Thus,a regulationist
approachis
in
the
helpful exploring
ways in which
contradictionsemerge among economic
environmental
andsocial
growth,
protection,
equity.At the same time,usingecological
modernization
approacheshelpsto linkthe
and
of regugrand
high-levelabstractions
lationist approaches to the concrete
ofeveryday
life.
outcomesandcontingencies
Focusing upon the political and social
over
processesthatareinvolvedin struggles
issues
is
economy-environment-equity
ofhow
centralto anyfutureunderstanding
can be advanced,
ecologicalmodernization
both theoretically and through policy
Such an interlinked
prescription.
approach
willenable us to focusupon thecontradictionsthatemergein relationto economyenvironment
relationsand the challenges
ofexisting
thatemergefromthefailure
practices and institutions
to addressproblems
thatariseat theinterfaceofenvironmental
protection,economic growth,and social
equity(Gibbs and Krueger2004).
Yetincorporating
approaches
regulationist
willnotjust
withecologicalmodernization
be a simplematterofdrawing
uponthebest
elements of each. Rather, a substantial
amount of work needs to be done in
reframingregulationistapproaches. The
oftheregulationapproachto date
strength
has been itsabilitytolinkeconomicrestructuringto socialand politicalprocessesand
to link political-economic shiftsat the
local, national, and internationalscales
(MacKinnon2001). As such,ithas obvious
debatesoverecological
meritsin exploring
modernizationby linkingpotentialforms
ofeconomicrestructuring
to environmental
the necessary
processesand investigating

211

to achieveimprovedenvironinterventions
mentalperformance
atvariousspatialscales.
However,whileregulationist
approachesare
valuablein providinga conceptualframefor
work,theyhavebeen subjectto criticism
that
operatingat a highlevelofabstraction
is remote from the "concreteness" of
suchas thoseexamined
activities,
everyday
in accountsofecologicalmodernization,
and
link
to
to
failing developmidrange
concepts
them. One way to investigatethis issue
furtherand to develop such midrange
an exploration
of
conceptscouldbe through
thediscoursesthathelptolegitimate
particularregimesofaccumulation
and modesof
Suchdiscoursesarea significant
regulation.
component of a mode of regulation to
facilitatethe requisitedegreeof certainty
and stabilityin the accumulationprocess.
environmental
discoursesare
Increasingly,
ofa mode
a
becoming significant
component
of regulationto stabilize contradictions
intherelationship
thatareinherent
between
and
environment.
For
the
example,
capital
"thefunction
discourse
ofthesustainability
remainsthatof facilitatingthe requisite
in theaccuand stability
degreeofcertainty
mulationprocess"(Bridgeand McManus
2000,21). One approachto developingthe
theoreticalframeworkproposed in this
be to explorethe
articlecould,therefore,
role of corporate actors in propagating
distinctive
environmental
discourses,both
tounderstand
andtosituatethesediscourses
framework.
withina regulationist
By such
means, we could endeavor to provide
"empirical support for translatingthe
abstractionof 'modes of social regulation'
intotheparticulars
oflanguage,metaphor,
and the'concreteness'ofthe
and narrative
fromand through
actorsand institutions
which discourse flows" (Bridge and
McManus2000, 21).

References
E. 1993.Thefutureofthemarket.
Altvater,
London:Verso.
modernization
M. K.2002.Ecological
Andersen,
Theeffect
ofEuropeanization
orsubversion?

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

212

ECONOMICGEOGRAPHY

on Eastern Europe. AmericanBehavioral

Scientist45:1394-416.
and
innovation
Angel,D. 2000. Environmental
regulation. In The Oxford handbook of
economicgeography,ed. G. L. Clark,M. P.
Feldman,and M. S. Gertler,607-22. Oxford,
U.K.: Blackwell.
Angel, D., and Rock, M. 2000. Asia's clean
revolution:Industry,growthand the environment.Sheffield,
U.K.: Greenleaf.
. 2005. Global standardsand the environmental performance of industry.
and PlanningA 37:1903-18.
Environment
water,producing
Bakker,K. J.2000. Privatizing
scarcity:The Yorkshiredroughtof 1995.
EconomicGeography76:4-27.
2002. From state to market?Water
in Spain. Environment
and
mercantilizaci6n
PlanningA 34:767-90.
. 2005. Neoliberalizing
nature?Market
inwatersupplyin England
environmentalism
and Wales. Annals of the Association of
AmericanGeographers95:542-65.
M. 2003.The British
state
Barry,
J.,andPaterson,
New Labour'secologand the environment:
ical modernisationstrategy.International
Journal of Environmentand Sustainable
Development2:237-49.
Beck, U. 1992. Risk society: Towards a new
London: Sage.
modernity,
Blowers, A. 1997. Environmental policy:
or therisksociety?
Ecologicalmodernisation
UrbanStudies34(5-6):845-71.
and
I. 2000. Ecologicalmodernisation
Bliihdorn,
and
post-ecologistpolitics.In Environment
ed. G. Spaargaren,
A. Mol,
globalmodernity,
and F. Buttel,209-28. London:Sage.
ofresource
Bridge,G. 2000.The socialregulation
accessandenvironmental
Production,
impact:
in the U.S. copper
natureand contradiction
31:237-56.
Geoforum
industry.
. 2002. Groundingglobalization:The
prospects and perils of linkingeconomic
processesof globalisationto environmental
outcomes.EconomicGeography78:361-86.
A. 2002.Governing
nature:
Bridge,G.,andJonas,
The reregulation
ofresourceaccess,production and consumption.Environmentand
PlanningA 34:1-8.
Bridge,G., and McManus,P. 2000. Sticksand
stones:Environmental
and discurnarratives
sive regulationin the forestryand mining
sectors.Antipode32:10-47.
as
Buttel,F. 2000a. Ecological modernisation
socialtheory.Geoforum
31:57-65.
2000b. Classical theoryand contem-.
poraryenvironmental
sociology:Some reflec-

APRIL 2006

tions on the antecedentsand prospectsfor

theoriesin the study
modernisation
reflexive
and society.In Environment
of environment
ed. G. Spaargaren,A.
and globalmodernity,
Mol, and F. Buttel,17-39. London: Sage.
Carolan,M. S. 2004. Ecologicalmodernisation
Whataboutconsumption?
Societyand
theory:
NaturalResources17:247-60.
P. 1996. Ecological modernisation,
Christoff,
Environmental
Politics
ecologicalmodernities.
5:476-500.
Cocklin,C., andBlunden,G. 1998.Sustainability,
water resourcesand regulation.Geoforum
29:51-68.
Cohen, M. 1997. Risk societyand ecological
Alternative
visionsforpostmodernisation:
industrial
nations.Futures29:105-19.
. 1998. Science and the environment:
Assessing cultural capacity forecological
modernization. Public Understandingof
Science7:149-67.
Dicken, P. 2004. Geographersand "globalisation":(Yet)anothermissedboat?Transactions
29:5-26.
ofBritishGeographers
oftheInstitute
I., andMarsden,T. 1995.Regulating
Drummond,
Global
sustainable
development.
Environmental
5(1):51-63.
Change
Dryzek, J. 1997. The politics of the earth:
Environmentaldiscourses. Oxford,U.K.:
Press.
OxfordUniversity
Fitzsimmons,M. 1991. The matterof nature.
Antipode21:106-20.
Freeman, C. 1992. The economics of hope.
London:Pinter.
Fudge, C., and Rowe, J. 2001. Ecological
modernisationas a frameworkforsustainable development:A case studyin Sweden.
Environment
and PlanningA 33:1527-46.
Gandy,M. 1997. The makingof a regulatory
crisis:Restructuring
New YorkCity'swater
oftheInstitute
ofBritish
supply.Transactions
Geographers22:338-58.
sustainabledevelGibbs,D. 1996. Integrating
A role
opmentand economicrestructuring:
forregulationtheory?Geoforum
27:1-10.
2002.Local economicdevelopment
and
--.
theenvironment.
London:Routledge.
Gibbs,D., and Jonas,A. 2000. Governanceand
in local environmental
regulation
policy:The
utilityof a regime approach. Geoforum
31:299-313.
R. 2004.TowardtheoGibbs,D. C., andKrueger,
risinga politicaleconomyof sustainability.
Paper presentedto the annual meetingof
the Associationof AmericanGeographers,
Philadelphia,15-20 March.

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.

82 No. 2

ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

Goldman,M. 2001. Constructingan environmentalstate:Eco-governmentality

and other
transnationalpracticesof a "green"World
Bank.Social Problems48:499-523.
P. 1995.
Goodwin,M.; Cloke,P.; and Milbourne,
Regulation theory and rural research:
Theorising contemporaryrural change.
Environment
and PlanningA 27:1245-60.
Gouldson,A., and Murphy,J. 1997. Ecological
modernisation: Restructuringindustrial
economies. In Greeningthe millennium?
The new politicsoftheenvironment,
ed. M.
Jacobs,74-86. Oxford,U.K.: Blackwell.
andtheinstiHajer,M. 1993.Discoursecoalitions
tutionalisation
ofpractice:The case ofacidrain
in GreatBritain.In The argumentative
turn
inpolicyanalysisand planning,ed. F. Fischer
and J.Forester,43-76 Durham,N.C.: Duke
Press.
University
. 1995. The politics of environmental
discourse:Ecologicalmodernisation
and the
U.K.:
Clarendon
Press.
Oxford,
policyprocess.
Haley, B. 2005. Social democracyand ecologicalmodernisation:
Swedishlessonsfora green
industrialpolicy. Paper presented to the
York
Nature,Socialismconference,
Capitalism,
Canada,23 July.
University,
Harris,P. G., and Udagawa,C. 2004. Defusing
the bombshell? Agenda 21 and economic
inChina.ReviewofInternational
development
PoliticalEconomy11:618-40.
Hartwick,E., and Peet, R. 2003. Neoliberalism
and nature:The case oftheWTO. Annalsof
the American Academy of Political and
Social Science590:188-211.
Harvey,D. 1996.Justice,natureand thegeogOxford,U.K.: Blackwell.
raphyofdifference.
economicgeogHayter,R. 2004. Environmental
The greening
raphyininstitutional
perspective:
offirms,
andregions.Paperpresented
markets
at the conferenceEnvironmental
Economic
Geography:State of the Artand Prospects,
Cologne,23-28 May.
Hayter,R., and Le Heron,R. 2002. Conclusion:
Institutionsand innovationin territorial
In Knowledge,
and enviindustry
perspective.
ronment,ed. R. Hayterand R. Le Heron,
399-409. Aldershot,
U.K.: Ashgate.
reform,
Hills,P. 2005. Environmental
ecological
modernisation
andthepolicyprocessin Hong
Kong: An exploratorystudyof stakeholder
perspectives. Journal of Environmental
Planningand Management49:209-40.
environmental
Hobson,K. 2003. Consumption,
sustainability and human geography in
Australia: A missing research agenda?
AustralianGeographicalStudies41:148-55.

213

Huber, J. 1982. Die verloreneunschuld der

okologie[Thelostinnocenceofecology:New
develtechnologiesand superindustrialized
Frankfurt
am
Main:
Fischer
opment].
Verlag.
. 1985. Die Regenbogengesellschaft:
Okologie und sozialpolitik [The Rainbow
Society:Ecologyandsocialpolitics].Frankfurt
am Main: FisherVerlag.
Hudson,R. 2000. Production,
places and environment.
Harlow,U.K.: PrenticeHall.
. 2001. Producingplaces. New York:
GuilfordPress.
London:
. 2005. Economicgeographies.
-Sage.
A.,and Baark,E. 1999.Nationalshades
Jamison,
ofgreen:ComparingtheSwedishand Danish
styles in ecological modernisation.
Environmental
Values8:199-218.
M.
1985.
Preventiveenvironmental
Jinicke,
and strucpolicyas ecologicalmodernisation
turalpolicy.DiscussionPaper IIUG dp 85-2,
InternationalesInstitutFiir Umwelt und
BerlinFiir
Wissenschaftszentrum
Gesellschaft,
(WZB).
Sozialforschung
. 1997.The politicalsystem's
capacityfor
environmental
policy.In Nationalenvironmental policies: A comparative study of
capacity-building,ed. M. Jinickeand H.
Weidner,1-24. Berlin:Springer.
inretrospect
theories
Jessop,B. 1990.Regulation
and prospect. Economy and Society
19:153-216.
1995.The regulation
approach,governanceandpost-Fordism:
Alternative
perspectives on economic and political change?
Economyand Society24:307-33.
. 2002. The future of the capitalist
state.Cambridge,U.K.: Polity.
Jonas,A.; While,A.; and Gibbs,D. 2004. State
modernisation
and local strategicselectivity
"after"Local Agenda21. Policyand Politics
32:151-68.
Krueger, R. 2002. Relocating regulationin
Montana'sgoldminingindustry.
Environment
and PlanningA 34:867-81.
Le Heron, R., and Hayter, R. 2002.
techno-economic
Industrialisation,
paradigms
In Knowledge,
andtheenvironment.
industry
and environment,
ed. R. Hayterand R. Le
U.K.: Ashgate.
Heron,11-30. Aldershot,
Leroy,P., and vanTatenhove,J.2000. Political
politheoryandenvironmental
modernisation
tics. In Environment
and global modernity,
ed. G. Spaargaren,A. Mol, and F. Buttel,
187-208. London:Sage.

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

214

ECONOMICGEOGRAPHY

Low, N. 2002. Ecosocialisation and environmental planning: A Polanyian approach.

and PlanningA 34:43-60.
Environment
L. J.2000.Capacity-building
orsocial
Lundqvist,
construction? Explaining Sweden's shift
towardsecologicalmodernization.
Geoforum
31:21-32.
MacBride,S. 2004. Productionand therevenge
of nature: Material transformationsin
Hudson's Producing Places. Antipode
36:337-43.
MacKinnon,D. 2001.Regulating
regionalspaces:
State agenciesand the productionof goverEnvironment
nancein theScottishhighlands.
and PlanningA 33:823-44.
Mansfield, B. 2004. Rules of privatization:
Contradictionsin neo-liberalregulationof
North Atlantic fisheries. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers
94:565-84.
Marsden,T.; Murdoch,J.;Lowe,P.; Munton,R.;
and Flynn,A. 1993. Constructing
thecountryside.London:UCL Press.
McCarthy,J. 2004. Privatisingconditionsof
production:Trade agreementsas neo-liberal
environmental governance. Geoforum
35:327-41.
McCarthy,
J.,and Prudham,S. 2004. Neoliberal
nature and the nature of neoliberalism.
Geoforum35:275-83.
McManus,P. 2002. The potentialand limitsof
A comparative
study
progressive
neopluralism:
of forestpoliticsin coastalBritishColumbia
and southeast New SouthWales duringthe
1990s. Environment and Planning A
34:845-65.
ofindusMol,A. 1994.Ecologicalmodernisation
trial society: Three strategic elements.
International Social Science Journal
121:347-61.
-.
1999.Ecologicalmodernisation
andthe
transition
ofEurope:Between
environmental
nationalvariationsand commondenominators.Journalof EnvironmentalPolicy and
Planning1:167-81.
-.
2002.Ecologicalmodernisation
andthe
Politics
globaleconomy.GlobalEnvironmental
2:92-115.
Mol, A., and Sonnenfeld,D. 2000. Ecological
modernisation
aroundtheworld:Perspectives
and criticaldebates.London:FrankCass.
G. 1993.Environment,
Mol,A.,and Spaargaren,
The apocamodernityand the risk-society:
lyptic horizon of environmentalreform.
International
Sociology8:431-59.
-.
2000. Ecologicalmodernisation
theory
in debate: A review.In Ecologicalmoderni-

APRIL2006

and critsationaroundtheworld:Perspectives
ical debates,ed. A. Mol and D. Sonnenfeld,
17-49. London:FrankCass.
-.
2004. Ecological modernisationand
consumption:A reply.Societyand Natural
Resources17:261-65.
O'Connor, J.1994. Is sustainable capitalism
Political
sustainable?
possible?In Is capitalism
economyand thepoliticsof ecology,ed. M.
Press.
O'Connor,152-75.New York:Guilford
-.
1998.Naturalcauses:Essaysinecological Marxism.New York:GuilfordPress.
Owens,S. 1994. Land,limitsand sustainability:
A conceptualframework
and some dilemmas
fortheplanningsystem.Transactionsof the
InstituteofBritishGeographers19:439-56.
Painter,J. 1991. Regulationtheoryand local
government.Local GovernmentStudies,
23-44.
November-December,
Transactions
Peck,J.1999. Greygeography?
of
theInstitute
24:131-35.
ofBritishGeographers
2000. Doingregulation.
In TheOxford
-.
handbookof economicgeography,ed. G. L.
Clark, M. P. Feldman, and M. S. Gertler,
61-80. Oxford,U.K.: Blackwell.
Peck, J.,and Miyamachi,Y. 1994. Regulating
versustheJapanese
Japan?Regulationtheory
experience.Environmentand PlanningD,
Societyand Space 12:639-74.
fora new
Peck,J.,andTickell,A. 1994.Searching
fix:The afterFordistcrisisand
institutional
global-local disorder. In Post-Fordism:A
reader,ed. A. Amin,280-315. Oxford,U.K.:
Blackwell.
-.
2002. Neoliberalizing
space. Antipode
34:380-404.
Pellow,D. N., and Park,L. S. 2002. The Silicon
Valleyof dreams:Environmentalinjustice,
and thehigh-tech
workers,
immigrant
global
economy.New York:New YorkUniversity
Press.
Roberts,P., and Colwell,A. 2001. Movingthe
to centrestage:A newapproach
environment
toplanning
anddevelopment
at Europeanand
6:421-37.
regionallevels.Local Environment
M. M. 2004.The neoliberalisation
of
Robertson,
ecosystem services: Wetland mitigation
bankingandproblemsinenvironmental
governance.Geoforum
35:361-73.
Salgado, E. J.2005. The adoptionand implementationof environmentalmanagement
in the
systemsby transnational
corporations
Toluca-Lerma industrialcorridor,M6xico.
ofHull.
UnpublishedPh.D. thesis,University
E. 2003.The globalization
ofenviSchoenberger,
ronmental
International
investmanagement:
mentinthewater,waste-water
andsolidwaste

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

VOL.82No. 2

ENVIRONMENTAL
GEOGRAPHY
ECONOMIC

industries.
In Remakingtheglobaleconomy,
ed. J.Peck and H. W.-c. Yeung, 83-98.
London:Sage.
Nature,
Smith,N. 1984. Unevendevelopment:
capitaland theproductionofspace. Oxford,
U.K.: Blackwell.
Sonnenfeld,
D., and Mol,A. 2002a.Globalization
of environmental
and the transformation
governance.AmericanBehavioral Scientist
45:1318-39.
-.
2002b. Ecological modernization,
governance and globalization: Epilogue.
AmericanBehavioralScientist45:1456-61.
Soyez,D. 2002. Environmental
knowledge,the
powerof framingand industrialchange. In
ed.
Knowledge,industryand environment,
R. Hayter and R. Le Heron, 187-208.
U.K.: Ashgate.
Aldershot,
Spaargaren,G.; Mol, A.; and Buttel,F. 2000a.
London:
Environment
and globalmodernity.
Sage.
-.
2000b. Introduction:Globalization,
modernity and the environment. In
Environment
and global modernity,
ed. G.
Spaargaren,A. Mol, and F. Buttel, 1-15.
London:Sage.
H. 1985.Environmental
and
Stafford,
protection
location.AnnalsoftheAssociation
industrial
ofAmericanGeographers75:227-40.
von Malmborg,F., and Strachan,P. A. 2005.
and
Climatepolicy,ecologicalmodernisation
theUK EmissionTradingScheme.European
Environment
15:143-60.

215

Walker,R.; Storper,M.; and Gersh,E. 1979.The

limitsof environmental
control:The saga of
Dow in thedelta.Antipode11:38-60.
Watts,M. 2002. Greencapitalism,
greengovernmentality.AmericanBehaviorial Scientist
45:1313-17.
Weidner,H. 2002. Capacitybuildingforecological modernization: Lessons fromcrossnational research. American Behavioral
Scientist45:1340-68.
Welford, R., and Hills, P. 2003. Ecological
environmental
modernisation,
policyandinnovation:Prioritiesforthe Asia-Pacificregion.
InternationalJournalof Environmentand
SustainableDevelopment2:324-40.
While, A.; Jonas, A.; and Gibbs, D. 2004.
collecthecity?Growth
Unblocking
pressures,
tiveprovision,
and thesearchfornew spaces
inGreaterCambridge,
ofgovernance
England.
and PlanningA 36:279-304.
Environment
in
T. 1994."Sustainable
Wilbanks,
development"
geographic perspective. Annals of the
Association of American Geographers
84:541-56.
neweconomicgeograYeung,H. 2003.Practicing
Annals
examination.
phies:A methodological
American
the
Association
of
of
Geographers
93:445-66.
Yeung, H. W.-c., and Lin, G. C. S. 2003.
Theorizingeconomic geographiesof Asia.
EconomicGeography79:107-28.

This content downloaded from 141.85.0.110 on Sun, 7 Apr 2013 14:32:16 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions