Ulrich Petschow – författare

Sustainability cannot be achieved without good governance. The Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002 stated that governance and sustainable development are intimately tied together and the future role and architecture of institutions, from local to international levels, will be crucial determinants to whether future policies and programmes for sustainable development will succeed.But these are changing times. With growing tensions over both globalization and regionalization, traditional systems of regulation are being subjected to growing pressure for reform. While states will continue to play a significant, if changed, role in the future, the importance of players from business and civil society is increasing. Sustainable development requires this change. Such an intra- and intergenerational concept cannot be achieved with a top-down approach, but rather needs the participation of all. In fact, the governance of sustainable development requires the exploration of new forms of both social co-operation and confrontation. By doing so, the different levels (global and local), players (state, company and civil society), control structures (hierarchy, market and public-private) and fields of action need to be taken into consideration.Governance and Sustainability examines the possibilities of integrating the environmental, social and economic dimensions of sustainable development within the framework of governance processes and how that might steer societies towards sustainability. It takes a close look at the key actors, their agendas and methods, forms of organization, problems and limits, as well as real-life examples for governance in different areas of society at the regional, national and international level. It is especially interested in exploring the nature of changes in the context of governance; the role of actors in such processes; and analysing how different forms of societal learning can improve governance processes. It concludes that this is a continuous process, characterized by conflicts and learning processes necessary to heighten both awareness of the complexity of the social and environmental problems faced and the prospects of implementing successful solutions.Based on a major conference hosted to assess the issue of governance post-Johannesburg, the book includes innovative insights from some of the leading thinkers in both sustainable development and governance from academia, business, multilateral organizations and NGOs. It provides a unique perspective on two of the key societal problems facing the world today.

This book identifies, analyzes and discusses the current trends of digitalized, decentralized, and networked physical value creation by focusing on the particular example of 3D printing. In addition to evaluating 3D printing’s disruptive potentials against a broader economic background, it also addresses the technology’s potential impacts on sustainability and emerging modes of bottom-up and community-based innovation.  Emphasizing these topics from economic, technical, social and environmental perspectives, the book offers a multifaceted overview that scrutinizes the scenario of a fundamental transition: from a centralized to a far more decentralized system of value creation.

This book identifies, analyzes and discusses the current trends of digitalized, decentralized, and networked physical value creation by focusing on the particular example of 3D printing.

Structural change in basic industries is usually interpreted as an autonomous economic process. Some authors claim that there is a tendency to use the "end of the era of materials", thus resulting in a decline of the basic industries. Such a process would obviously benefit the environment. Classic economic theories, which deal with structural change in a rather holistic way, correspond to this trend, predicting either a shift towards manufacturing and services or a relocation of old basic industries to developing countries. On the basis of this dematerialization hypothesis, comparative case studies analyze in detail the driving forces behind industrial restructuring with regard to different industries and countries in Europe, where such a decline has been observed in recent years.

Nanotechnology is frequently described as an enabling technology and 1 fundamental innovation, i.e. it is expected to lead to numerous innovative developments in the most diverse fields of technology and areas of app- cation in society and the marketplace. The technology, it is believed, has the potential for far-reaching changes that will eventually affect all areas of life. Such changes will doubtlessly have strong repercussions for society and the environment and bring with them not only the desired and intended effects such as innovations in the form of improvements to products, pr- esses and materials; economic growth; new jobs for skilled workers; relief for the environment; and further steps toward sustainable business, but also unexpected and undesirable side effects and consequences. With respect to the time spans in which nanotechnology’s full potential 2 will presumably unfold, M. C. Roco (2002:5) identified the following stages or generations for industrial prototypes and their commercial expl- tation: Past and present: The “coincidental” use of nanotechnology. Carbon black, for example, has been in use for centuries; more specific, isolated applications (catalysts, composites, etc.) have been in use since the early nineties. First generation: Passive nanostructures (ca. 2001). Application p- ticularly in the areas of coatings, nanoparticles, bulk materials (nan- tructured metals, polymers, and ceramics). Second generation: Active nanostructures (ca. 2005). Fields of appli- tion: particularly in transistors, reinforcing agents, adaptive structures, etc.

There is a wide consensus about the necessity of sustainable development. There is also a consensus that wide areas of our economy, industry, and technology and the life styles in industrialized countries are not susta- able. Science and technology are widely regarded as (main) causes for this situation. Issues in this context comprise the generally low resource ef- ciency, an increased and mostly undebated technological power, an - creased invasiveness of modern technologies, increasing amounts and - versity of pollutants, and high technological risks. On the other hand science and technology are also regarded as (main) solution providers towards more sustainability. Thus the question is which type of science and technology is rather a part of the problem, and which type is rather a part of the solution? ‘Learning from nature’ may give some orientation in this context. B- mimetics and bionics are widely regarded as being a part of the solution.

Structural change in basic industries is usually interpreted as an autonomous economic process. Some authors claim that there is a tendency to use the "end of the era of materials", thus resulting in a decline of the basic industries. Such a process would obviously benefit the environment. Classic economic theories, which deal with structural change in a rather holistic way, correspond to this trend, predicting either a shift towards manufacturing and services or a relocation of old basic industries to developing countries. On the basis of this dematerialization hypothesis, comparative case studies analyze in detail the driving forces behind industrial restructuring with regard to different industries and countries in Europe, where such a decline has been observed in recent years.

Nanotechnology is frequently described as an enabling technology and 1 fundamental innovation, i.e. it is expected to lead to numerous innovative developments in the most diverse fields of technology and areas of app- cation in society and the marketplace. The technology, it is believed, has the potential for far-reaching changes that will eventually affect all areas of life. Such changes will doubtlessly have strong repercussions for society and the environment and bring with them not only the desired and intended effects such as innovations in the form of improvements to products, pr- esses and materials; economic growth; new jobs for skilled workers; relief for the environment; and further steps toward sustainable business, but also unexpected and undesirable side effects and consequences. With respect to the time spans in which nanotechnology’s full potential 2 will presumably unfold, M. C. Roco (2002:5) identified the following stages or generations for industrial prototypes and their commercial expl- tation: Past and present: The “coincidental” use of nanotechnology. Carbon black, for example, has been in use for centuries; more specific, isolated applications (catalysts, composites, etc.) have been in use since the early nineties. First generation: Passive nanostructures (ca. 2001). Application p- ticularly in the areas of coatings, nanoparticles, bulk materials (nan- tructured metals, polymers, and ceramics). Second generation: Active nanostructures (ca. 2005). Fields of appli- tion: particularly in transistors, reinforcing agents, adaptive structures, etc.

There is a wide consensus about the necessity of sustainable development. There is also a consensus that wide areas of our economy, industry, and technology and the life styles in industrialized countries are not susta- able. Science and technology are widely regarded as (main) causes for this situation. Issues in this context comprise the generally low resource ef- ciency, an increased and mostly undebated technological power, an - creased invasiveness of modern technologies, increasing amounts and - versity of pollutants, and high technological risks. On the other hand science and technology are also regarded as (main) solution providers towards more sustainability. Thus the question is which type of science and technology is rather a part of the problem, and which type is rather a part of the solution? ‘Learning from nature’ may give some orientation in this context. B- mimetics and bionics are widely regarded as being a part of the solution.

Die Diskussion über die Globalisierung der Märkte bzw. die Standortdebatte ist angstbesetzt und häufig sachlich irreführend. Die Autoren relativieren existierende Befürchtungen und zeigen, daß die Gestaltungsspielräume durch die verstärkte Arbeitsteilung zwischen ähnlich strukturierten Gesellschaften zunehmen. Sie geben Hinweise darüber, wo die Handlungsspielräume liegen und vermitteln die Überzeugung, daß die arbeitsteilige Vernetzung auch eine gute Grundlage für eine nachhaltig zukunftsverträgliche Entwicklung sein kann.