Summary Study: Technological progress alone won’t stem resource use | MIT News | Massachusetts Institute of Technology news.mit.edu
1,875 words - html page - View html page
One Line
Technological progress alone is insufficient for sustainability, as efficiency gains can increase demand and negate potential reductions, necessitating broader societal changes beyond just technological solutions.
Slides
Slide Presentation (23 slides)
Key Points
- Technological progress alone will not bring about dematerialization, or the reduction of the amount of materials needed to produce goods and services
- Despite improvements in efficiency and performance, consumer demand for products has outpaced the rate of technological change, leading to an overall increase in materials usage
- The researchers found no evidence of an overall reduction in the world's consumption of 57 common goods and services, including materials, hardware, and energy technologies
- The only cases of dematerialization observed were due to government intervention to restrict the use of toxic chemicals, or the substitution of one material (wool) with another (synthetic fabrics)
- Achieving sustainability will require more than just technological change, and will likely involve social and cultural changes, as well as cooperation among people
Summaries
23 word summary
Technological progress alone cannot curb material use. Efficiency gains often increase demand, negating potential reductions. Sustainability requires broader societal changes, not just technology.
55 word summary
Technological progress alone cannot reduce material consumption. Efficiency gains often lead to increased demand, offsetting potential reductions. Sustainability requires social, cultural, and policy changes, not just technology. Exceptions like declining toxic chemicals and wool substitution show the importance of government intervention and substitution. Achieving sustainability may come at a significant cost without a holistic approach.
129 word summary
A new MIT study challenges the belief that technological progress alone can reduce material consumption. The researchers found no evidence of overall "dematerialization" despite efficiency gains. The study examined the "Jevons Paradox," where more efficient products lead to increased consumer demand, offsetting potential reductions. Applying this model, the researchers found that demand elasticity and technological change often work against each other. For example, silicon consumption has grown 345% as consumers demand more powerful electronics. The study identified exceptions like the decline in toxic chemicals, driven by government intervention, and the substitution of wool by synthetic alternatives. The findings suggest that social, cultural, and policy changes, not just technology, are needed to achieve sustainability. Experts warn that this transition may come at a significant cost without a more holistic approach.
419 word summary
A new MIT-led study challenges the belief that technological progress alone can reduce the world's consumption of materials. The researchers found no evidence of an overall reduction, or "dematerialization," in the use of 57 common goods and services, despite significant technological improvements.
The study examined the concept of "Jevons Paradox," which suggests that as products become more efficient, consumer demand for them increases, offsetting any potential reduction in material use. The researchers developed a model to calculate the likelihood of dematerialization, considering factors like population growth, economic trends, and the rate of technological change.
Applying this model to a wide range of materials, goods, and services, the researchers found that demand elasticity and technological change often work against each other. The more efficient a product becomes, the more consumers want it, leading to an overall increase in material consumption.
For example, the study looked at the case of silicon-based semiconductors, which have become vastly more powerful and compact over the past few decades. However, the world's consumption of silicon has grown by 345% during this time, as consumers demand more powerful and feature-rich electronics.
The researchers did identify a few exceptions, such as the decline in the use of toxic chemicals like asbestos, which was driven by government intervention rather than technological progress. They also noted the case of wool, which has been replaced by synthetic alternatives like nylon and polyester, a process of "substitution" rather than true dematerialization.
The findings challenge the "techno-optimist" view that technological change alone will solve environmental problems. As one of the researchers, Christopher Magee, states, "What it's going to take is much more difficult than just letting technological change do it. Social and cultural change, people talking to each other, cooperating, might do it."
While some experts remain hopeful that technology will eventually lead to sustainability, the study suggests that this transition may come at a significant cost. As J. Doyne Farmer, a professor of mathematics at the University of Oxford, notes, "The question is whether we can do that without great pain. Magee's paper shows that we need to expect more pain than some of us thought."
The study highlights the complex relationship between technological progress, consumer demand, and environmental sustainability. It suggests that a more holistic approach, involving social, cultural, and policy changes, may be necessary to achieve a truly sustainable future. The researchers emphasize the need for a deeper understanding of the factors that drive material consumption and the development of strategies that go beyond relying solely on technological advancements.