Knektid.com

David Gibbs on Environmental Economic Geography

February 6, 2009

In his article Prospects for an Environmental Economic Geography: Linking Ecological Modernization and Regulationist Approaches, David Gibbs presents a strong argument for economic geographers to better integrate environmental issues into their discipline. Incorporating environmental concerns, Gibbs contends, will have “implications for the subdiscipline’s existing objects of study (194)”, as well as “important implications for future research in economic geography consequent on environmental change (194)” (Gibbs 2006). Specifically, components of both ecological modernization theory and regulation theory can be used to advocate environmental policy recommendations from an economic geography perspective.

Gibbs promotion of environmental economic geography rests largely on a theoretical foundation. The author extols the virtues of the subdiscipline but presents no empirical evidence as to the efficacy of this approach. Rather, he recommends future research that will be essential to support the growth of this new branch of economic geography. Gibbs champions a blending of the strong empirical groundwork of ecological modernization with other theories in an effort to achieve a new paradigm. This new model would recognize both the need for technological advancement as well as the requirement for simultaneous social adaptation.

Gibbs outlines a specific framework for future research to advance the field of environmental economic geography. First and foremost, he advocates an examination of institutional forms, “given that both ecological modernization and regulation theories strongly emphasize them” (Gibbs 2006, 207). This analysis would focus largely on the “intertwining of accumulation and regulation”, as well as on the significant and continuing role of the state (Gibbs 2006, 207).  Further research would focus on the often contradictory roles of ecological modernization, which seeks to increase resource efficiency while maintaining economic growth, and neoliberalism, which seeks absolute economic growth while largely ignoring negative environmental externalities.

In an effort to address the root causes of worldwide environmental degradation, Gibbs proposes a strong review of the role of globalization. This research would primarily be focused on a determination as to whether rich-nation environmental standards are effectively adopted in emerging economies, and whether international bodies encourage “strong” or “weak” environmental regulations in developing nations. To address the effects of consumerism in developed economies, Gibbs further proposes an analysis as to the effectiveness of emphasizing production side environmental controls rather than focusing more significantly on consumption. Gibbs declares the danger of developing a “closed-loop throwaway society” but acknowledges the difficulties in addressing consumption from both a regulatory perspective as well as a technological perspective (Gibbs 2006, 209).

David Gibbs is a worthy proponent of the pursuit of environmental economic geography. There is a definitive need to attribute economic value to the environment in an effort to better represent the true cost of environmental degradation and resource consumption. A combination of interrelated theories will indeed be essential to “link the grand and high-level abstractions of regulationist approaches to the concrete outcomes and contingencies of everyday life” (Gibbs 2006). In reevaluating our use of resources we have the potential to create a truly cradle-to-cradle consumption structure in which economic growth is not impeded.

Gibbs, David. “Prospects for an Environmental Economic Geography: Linking Ecological Modernization and Regulationist Approaches.” Economic Geography, 2006: 193 – 215.

Filed under: Environmental Economic Geography