Greening the Fife Economy: Ecological Modernization as a Pathway for Local Economic Development

This article was downloaded by: [Northeastern University]On: 01 December 2014, At: 15:18Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of EnvironmentalPlanning and ManagementPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjep20

Greening the Fife Economy:Ecological Modernizationas a Pathway for LocalEconomic DevelopmentTony Jackson & Peter RobertsPublished online: 02 Aug 2010.

To cite this article: Tony Jackson & Peter Roberts (1997) Greening theFife Economy: Ecological Modernization as a Pathway for Local EconomicDevelopment, Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 40:5,615-630, DOI: 10.1080/09640569711976

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09640569711976

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of allthe information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions andviews of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information.Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjep20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/09640569711976

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09640569711976

reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Environm ental Planning and Managem ent, 40(5), 615 ± 629, 1997

Greening the Fife Economy: Ecological M odernization

as a Pathway for Local Economic Development

TONY JACKSON & PETER ROBERTS

School of Town and Regional P lanning, University of Dundee, Perth Road , D undee DD 1

4H T, UK

(Received July 1996)

ABSTRACT Progress in the greening of U K local governm ent has been ham pered by

uncertainty about the relationship between resource use and environm ental protection.

Ecological m odernizationmay offer the m ost appropriateparadigm to reconcile econom ic,

social and environm ental interpretations of sustainability. Th e transition from corporate

to strategic environmental management currently being attem pted by som e `green’

authorities can be construed as an attempt to prom ote ecological modernization in the

form of institutional learning . Fife Council in Scotland provides an interesting case

study. Progress with corporate environm ental management has becom e bound up with

a rad ical devolution of decision m aking. Efforts to link the authority’s Sustainable

D evelopm ent Policy to a Local Agenda 21 program me have been initiated with the

piloting of sustainability indicators.

Introduction

So-called optimal allocative solutions for determining the usage of renewable

natural resources can be shown to produce irreversible depletion. None the less,

the literature on economic development and the environment has largely fo-

cused on allocative failure. It is replete with examples of market or other

allocative systems that fail to deal adequately with environmental externalities ,

with the ª problem of environmental damage¼ interpreted in the context of

departures from the conditions securing an optimal allocation of resources in the

economyº (Weale, 1993, p. 204). Conceptualizing the relationship between

resource use and environmental protection as a problem of allocative failure has

tended to emphasize the trade-off between economic development and environ-

mental sustainability, without offering any means for policy makers and plan-

ners to resolve the issue.

Furthermore, in many discussions of planning for sustainable development,

relatively little attention has been paid to the social dimension. Despite the

inclusion of speci® c social objectives and concerns in the Brundtland Report, and

despite the recognition in that report of the consequences of a series of

ª interlocking crisesº (World Commission on Environm ent and Development,

1987, p. 4), many observers and practitioners consider the challenge of sustain-

able development to be chie¯ y concerned with attempting to strike a balance

0964-0568/97/050615-15 $7.00 Ó 1997 University of Newcastle upon Tyne

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

616 T. Jackson & P. Roberts

between environmental and economic objectives. It is dif ® cult to understand

why questions of social equity and opportunity have been ignored, for the most

part, in plans and strategies for sustainable development. This exclusion is all

the more surpris ing given that a central objective of many such plans is the

enhancement of the quality of life enjoyed by the inhabitants of an area.

Since the 1960s, increased public concern about environmental damage in

Western industrialized economies has coincided with a revival of interest in

subsidiarity: the need to make public decisions about resource allocation at the

lowest level compatible with effective democracy. In the UK this has led to

widespread adoption of environmental agendas within local government, seek-

ing ways to regulate, supplement or supersede existing decision-making systems

for promoting the environmental interests of their communities.

Despite radical restructuring and the loss of considerable powers and func-

tions, UK local government remains the country’ s principal provider of public

goods and services. Many of its functions have a direct environmental impact

(e.g. social housing, provision of subsidised public transport, compulsory edu-

cation, waste management) while others have crucial policy implications for the

environment (e.g. land use planning and development control, local economic

development, urban and rural conservation and regeneration). Given recent

acknowledgement by central government that the local development process

should be planned, planning authorities have a key role in developing new

approaches towards sustainability that can encompass economic, environmental

and social goals, and assist in the delivery of these at local level (Winter, 1994).

Some of the implications of this `greening ’ of UK local government are

considered in this paper, drawing on the experiences of a particular Scottish

local authority, Fife Council (Fife Regional Council prior to April 1996). The

paper starts by suggesting a typology for local authorities based on the role

taken by their environmental agenda. It then examines the dif® culties local

authorities face in translating the concept of sustainable development into an

effective environmental agenda. The third section of the paper considers

whether a new paradigm, in which ecological modernization helps promote

appropriate forms of economic and social development, offers the means for

local authorities to resolve these dif® culties. The next section compares the

efforts currently being made by UK local authorities to implement Local Agenda

21 (LA 21) with this new paradigm, while the ® nal section evaluates the

experiences of Fife Council in this respect.

A Typology of Environmental M anagement for U K Local Authorities

UK local authorities may be classi® ed according to the approach taken to the

management of environmental issues (Hams et al., 1994). This enables a distinc-

tion to be drawn between approaches which are truly sustainable and those in

which environmental protection is simply added to the current portfolio of

outcomes offered by a local authority. The following typology suggests that a

number of stages, or phases, in the development and applications of strategies

for sustainable development can be distinguished:

Environmental fragm entation. The ® rst phase, from which the bulk of UK local

authorities have now emerged , is characterized by a totally fragmented ap-

proach towards environmental policy and programmes. Individual departments

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Greening the Fife Econom y 617

may have their own environmental initiatives, but these function within a

management system lacking any coherent means of incorporating environmental

aspects into the entire decision-making process.

Em bryonic environmental greening. The second phase is characterized by an

acknowledgement of the need to have a corporate environmental policy. Al-

though environmental measures may still consist largely of unco-ordinated

individual projects, these local authorities have undertaken a review of their

activities in the light of their commitment to promoting a more environmentally

conscious stance. This phase includes the promotion of corporate initiatives,

such as recycling targets and natural conservation strategies, which are essen-

tially retro-® tted onto existing corporate policies. Most UK local authorities have

reached at least this point of development.

Corporate environmental greening . The third phase, which includes an increasing

proportion of UK local authorities , is characterized by a clear corporate strategy

on environm ental issues, involving the integration of environm ental policies

with other corporate objectives. Markers for this phase are the appointment of

environmental co-ordinators and the introduction of management techniques

designed to set and implement corporate environm ental targets, such as the local

government eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS), adapted from EU

legislation designed for site-based manufacturing industry. Local authorities in

this phase will be producing corporate reports on their environm ental activities,

which compare achievements against corporate commitments to the environ-

ment. Such strategies may be expressed both through the actions of local

government and through the operations of territorial coalitions.

Strategic environmental greening. The ® nal phase, which the most committed

UK local authorities are currently exploring, is characterized by full-scale re-

engineering designed to structure both the corporate objectives and their deliv-

ery around the concept of sustainable development. This involves a re-examin-

ation of the aims of the local authority, and the use of indicators to develop and

evaluate its spending programmes on an environmental basis. One of the

markers for the start of this phase is the development of indicators of sustain-

ability. Another is the restructuring of the decision-making process, with a view

to making it far more accessible to local communities. This approach, as will be

demonstrated later, is akin to the implementation of an ecological modernization

strategy.

Sustainable Development and Local Agenda 21

From a purely economic perspective, there is little novel about sustainability

criteria, which can be traced back at least as far as Ramsey (1928). Economic

sustainability adds an intergenerational equity constraint to normal allocative

rules, requiring as a minimum that future generations of humans be left no

worse off than current generations (World Commission on Environment and

Development, 1987). Judged on these terms, the task consists of identifying

allocative rules which will achieve such sustainable `growth’ (i.e. a stream of

future consumption per head at least equal to present levels) . Environmental

goods and services are a form of consumption which by their nature may be

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


dif® cult to value and to conserve. Their depletion poses special problems for

future consumption levels, and it is on this basis that economic sustainability

takes an interest in the environm ent.

As one of the precursors of ecological modernization, the World Commission

on Environment and Development added an intra-generational equity constraint

to the inter-generational one. This requires that current levels of consumption

amongst the world’s poor are at least maintained. Higher living standards (an

economic goal) and improved quality of life (a social goal) are desirable

objectives for the world’s poor, to be realized in ways which do not compromise

future living standards and quality of life. Environm ental goods and services,

currently gross ly undervalued and neglected in many less developed nations,

form an essential part of the objectives. This approach to sustainability has been

adopted by the World Bank (1992). As Pearce (1993) points out, in these

interpretations of sustainability ª what is being referred to is sustainable econ-

omic development ¼ sustainable development is economic development that

lastsº (p. 7). At a more local scale, intra-generational equity implies that

attention is paid to the level and distribution of ® nancial and other resources

within a community.

Applying this de® nition, sustainability is violated only if measures are imple-

mented which are likely to result in the reduction of current or future living

standards. Environmental considerations are pertinent purely to the extent that

their neglect is likely to violate inter- and intra-generational consumption

constraints. Current generations are not precluded from enriching themselves by

using non-renew able resources at the expense of future generations, provided

future generations are offered the prospect of being left at least as well off as

current.

In contrast, environmental perspectives on sustainability are expressed in

terms of the planet’ s ecological carrying capacity and the need to conserve stocks

of environm ental capital. Although the spatial and temporal maintenance of

human consumption levels is not part of the objective, failure to achieve

ecological sustainability is seen as certain to lead to declining levels of consump-

tion. This approach to sustainability was aptly summarized by the then Scottish

Secretary in speaking to the Bill establishing Scottish Natural Heritage: ª The

concept [of sustainability] is that the environment should be so regarded and

maintained that it does not erode or degrade and is handed on to future

generations in the same condition or possibly enhanced or developed. Therefore

no operation should be allowed to take place which would damage the environ-

ment without restoring or replenishing the damageº (Ian Lang, House of

Commons, 2 N ovember 1991).

Given the profoundly different precepts applied to the concept by economists,

social theoris ts and environm entalists, much of the debate on the implications of

sustainability centres on the extent to which these can be reconciled in practice.

Informed contributions have focused on key issues such as the degree of

substitutability possible between environm ental resources and other assets and

ways of incorporating the precautionary principle into environmental assess-

ments. As yet, progress in identifying appropriate decision rules and practices

applicable at local level has been limited. Dasgupta’s observation suggests that

the absence of an agreed ideological framework has stunted progress: ª Most

writings on sustainable development start from scratch and so proceed to get

things hopelessly wrong. It would be dif® cult to ® nd another ® eld of research

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


endeavour in the social sciences that has displayed such intellectual regressº

(Dasgupta, 1995, p. 116).

This uncertainty is a source of practical tension for Scottish local authorities.

Several recent major initiatives involving the exploitation of non-renew able

natural resources located in areas of high landscape value, although attracting

support as a means of promoting economic development and sustaining local

communities in rural locations with limited employment opportunities , have

been strongly opposed by environmental agencies on grounds of environmental

non-sustainability. This can be taken as further evidence that local authorities are

in need of a practical interpretation of sustainability which will pay due heed to

environmental concerns without pre-empting all forms of economic and social

development.

The foregoing may help explain the alacrity with which UK local authorities

associations have committed themselves to LA 21. This is part of the detailed

programme of actions designed to achieve sustainable development adopted by

the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development at Rio de

Janeiro, to which the UK Government has committed itself (DoE, 1994). The

overall Agenda 21 programme incorporates both the economic and the environ-

mental interpretations of sustainability by applying the United Nations Environ-

mental Programme (UNEP) de® nition: ª Development which improves the

people’ s quality of life, within the carrying capacity of the earth’s life support

systemº .

Ecological M odernization as a Pathway for Local Econom ic Development

Ecological modernization re¯ ects a belief that the economic, social and environ-

mental interpretations of sustainability can be reconciled in ways which will lead

to the promotion of sustainable local development. This claim can be seen to best

effect in the evolution of environmental action programmes within the European

Union (EU). Initially focused on correcting market failures, successive pro-

grammes have come to emphasize the role of environmental protection as a

facilitator of economic development rather than a burden upon it. A central tenet

of the current Fifth Environmental Action Programme is that future economic

development within the European Union requires sustainable policies with

regard to the environment.

There are several strands to this proposition. One is that failure to promote

sustainability locks environmental costs into the economic system. These have to

be met at some point and at some time, in ways which will impose long term

economic and social burdens on the communities involved. An obvious example

in this context is the additional costs imposed by the absence of a traf® c

management strategy which takes into account environmental externalities.

Another strand is the belief that high environmental standards provide a

competitive edge for those industries within the European Union selling primar-

ily in non-local markets. Given the need for high-income nations to exploit their

comparative advantages in the production and sale of high value-added prod-

ucts, this line of argument suggests that compliance with the best environmental

standards through applying European expertise will allow such industries

(including tourism) to improve their market share. The resulting innovative

environmental technologies and management systems will in turn provide the

source for new economic development and employment opportunities . A closely

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


associated argument is that failure to apply suf® ciently stringent environmental

standards to the production of goods and services increases the risk of trade

sanctions, as trading blocs and trade agreements single out for discrimination

products made under poor environmental (and social) conditions.

The precautionary principle adds a further strand by providing the basis for

a more risk-averse strategy in the management of the environment, one which

looks on higher environm ental standards as desirable in their own right rather

than as a cost that has to be met by industry in selling its products. In this way

ecological modernization offers a vision of sustainability as the trigger for

innovation and development based on technical change. The ideological frame-

work has shifted from a Pigovian view of sustainability involving adjustment to

a better static equilibrium to a Schumpeterian one focusing on the exploitation

of a shifting dynamic disequilibrium (Weale, 1993).

While this paradigm has been developed most fully for the manufacturing

sector, ecological modernization is of equal relevance to the built and natural

environments and to the provision of local public services to their communities.

Indeed, it can be argued that the concept of locality is crucial to any

effective implementation of ecological modernization, and that bottom-up

rather than top-down solutions ª are the distinguishing characteristic of

most successful attempts at planning for sustainable developmentº (Roberts ,

1996, p. 5).

Although it is now accepted that ecological modernization, especially if it is

developed to a high level and applied in a rigorous manner, implies the need for

a radical restructuring of the ways in which society makes and implements

choices, this paper concentrates on the ® rst of Hajer’ s (1996) interpretations of

the concept. This interpretationÐ ecological modernization as institutional learn-

ing Ð re¯ ects the gradual progression and increasing sophistication implied by

the typology of local authority environmental management which was presented

earlier in this paper. However, progress on the other main interpretations of

ecological modernization, as a technocratic project and as cultural politics, may

also accompany the process of institutional learning.

Local Agenda 21 and Ecological M odernization

Roberts (1996, p. 10) identi® es a series of steps which would need to be

incorporated into local authority environmental agendas to facilitate ecological

modernization, which include the:

· adoption of programmes for sustainable development which seek to im-

plement national and international agreements and which co-ordinate and

integrate bottom-up approaches;

· promotion of the new socio-cultural paradigm of ecological modernization at

local level to facilitate democratic choice;

· development of location-speci® c solutions based on the new paradigm, de-

signed to integrate human social, economic and cultural needs into homoge-

neous ecological areas;

· substitution of locally-determined needs for centrally-imposed targets for

consumption growth;

· internalization of external environmental costs (and bene® ts) in order to allow

local choices to be properly informed;

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


· conservation of resources through appropriate use of local strategies for waste

minimization and management;

· continued emphasis on the desirability for development focused on the needs

of individual humans.

LA 21 provides local authorities with a possible framework to deliver such

objectives. Chapter 28 of Agenda 21 argues that the participation and co-

operation of local authorities will be a determining factor in meeting the

requirements of sustainable development, because so many of the problems and

solutions involved have their roots in local activities . Furthermore, because local

authorities provide the level of government closest to the people, they can help

to educate the public in sustainability, mobilize public awareness and opinion on

its importance and respond to public needs in its promotion.

The UK Local Government Management Board (1994) identi® ed six essential

elements for implementing LA 21:

· managing and improving the local authority’ s own environmental perform-

ance;

· integrating sustainable development aims in the local authority’ s policies and

activities;

· raising awareness of and promoting education about sustainable develop-

ment;

· consulting and involving the public;

· creating partnersh ips;

· measuring, monitoring and reporting on progress towards sustainability.

A key feature of this approach is the emphasis given to involving local

communities in developing sustainable local action programmes. Stakeholders

can be involved through the creation of partnerships and environm ental fora,

building on existing bodies, although experience has indicated that some of

these ® nd dif® culty in incorporating the economic and social goals of LA 21 into

their environmental agendas (Touche Ross, 1995). A greater challenge is to gain

the active involvement of ordinary members of the community in the process of

developing an agenda which re¯ ects their desires for sustainability. The most

advanced development of this process in the UK is to be found in the structures

for management, involvement and empowerment which have been adopted as

a central element of the four `environment city’ experiments. In each case a

management system has evolved which has encouraged the development of a

territorial coalition of local authority, community, business and voluntary sector

interests (Wood, 1994).

Drawing on community participation for their action plans, local authorities

can then progress from the third phase of corporate environm ental management

to the fourth, in which sustainable development becomes a strategic driving

force. The eco-management and audit scheme approach (Department of the

Environm ent, 1993), adapted from the site-based EU regulations for manufactur-

ing industry, offers a standard management loop system (establish policy,

review current position, set objectives, implement targeted programme, monitor

progress and adapt policy, objectives or programme as required) for integrating

environmental strategy into corporate management. An innovative feature is the

attempt to add to the assessment of the direct effects of local authorities on the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


Table 1. Key elements of the Eco-management and Audit

Scheme (EMAS)a

Com mon usage EMAS terms De® nition

Environmental statement or Environmental Statement of LA

charter policy environmental

aims and

intentions

External audit or state of None Regular

environment report (SOE) monitoring and

review of quality

of environment in

area and of

implications for

sustainability

Internal audit:

Review of Environmental Evaluation of

internal review of environmental

practices (RIP) direct effects impact of LA’ S own

practices

Policy impact Environmental Evaluation of

assessment review of environmental

(PIA ) service impact of LA’ s

effects regulatory,

policy and service

activities

Managem ent Review of Assesses

audit (MA) environmental effectiveness of

management LA’ s organization

system and procedures in

tackling

environmental

issues

Environmental action plan and Environmental Policies, plans and

plans and programmes in programme programmes with

related areas environmental

content or

implications

aFrom Barron & Bruder (1995)

environment an assessm ent of `service’ effects, aris ing from the impact of council

policies. Table 1 provides a summary of the basic components of this approach.

As this table indicates, guidance on external auditing is not covered by such

procedures. While corporate management systems can ensure that sustainable

policies are effectively implemented, they cannot by themselves generate such

policies. Nor can they measure the effect of these policies on the external

environment. Chapter 40 of Agenda 21 notes that indicators of sustainable

development need to be developed to provide solid bases for decision making

and to contribute to the self-regulating sustainability of integrated environmen-

tal and development systems. One of the main LA 21 research initiatives

promoted by the UK Local Governm ent Management Board (Touche Ross, 1994,

1995) has been to develop suitable procedures to this end. Interestingly, many of

these features and characteristics are closely related to the development and

application of eco-management systems in the business and voluntary sectors

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


Table 2 . Requirements for a sustainable community: themes for

sustainability indicators research projecta

Theme

Resources and Ef® cient use of resources and waste minimization by

waste closing cycles

Pollution Limitation of pollution to levels within the carrying

capacity of natural systems

Biodiversity Valuing and protecting the diversity of nature

Localness Meeting needs locally where possible

Access to basic Offering everyone access to good food, water shelter

needs and fuel at reasonable cost

W ork Providing everyone with the opportunity to undertake

satisfying work in a diverse economy; recognising the

value of unpaid work; offering fair and fairly

distributed payments for work

Health Protecting people’s good health by creating safe, clean

pleasant environments and health services which

emphasize prevention as well as proper care for the sick

Access to Ensuring that access to facilities, services, goods and other

facilities people is not achieved at the expense of the environment

or limited to those with cars

Crime Offering people opportunity to live without fear of

personal violence from crime or persecution because of

their personal beliefs, race, gender or sexuality

Access to skills Access to skills, knowledge and information to enable

and know ledge everyone to play a full part in society

Empowerment Empow ering all sections of the community to

participate in decision making

Culture and Making opportunities for culture, leisure and

recreation recreation readily available to all

Aesthetics Combining meaning and beauty with utility in places,

spaces and objects; providing settlements human in

scale and form; valuing and protecting diversity and

local distinctiveness

aFrom Touche Ross (1994).

(Roberts, 1995). This suggests that mutually supportive approaches are begin-

ning to emerge at a local level, offering a basis for cautious optimism regarding

the future of the sustainable development initiative.

The UK sustainable development strategy (Department of the Environm ent,

1994) draws a distinction between indicators of sustainability and indicators of

environmental quality. The strategy argues that, in addition to assess ing the

state of the environment, sustainability indicators must take account of economic

linkages, the quality of life and future welfare aspects. In a pilot project

involving Fife Regional Council (Touche Ross, 1994, 1995, Economic Develop-

ment and Planning Department (EDPD) 1995a, 1995b), the LGMB tested the

effectiveness of indicators derived from 13 previously agreed sustainability

themes based on this strategy, which are summarized in Table 2.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


The themes were chosen to incorporate the UNEP working de® nition of

sustainable development, which seeks to improve the quality of life within the

carrying capacity of supporting ecosystems. Thus the ® rst three themes deal

with carrying capacity, while quality of life is taken to mean meeting local needs

for basic necessities, health, access to facilities, work, freedom from crime and

persecution, involvement in the community, etc.

The pilot authorities had the task of testing indicators derived from these

themes, to see whether it was possible to identify meaningful measures which

were both practicable and acceptable locally . In some cases , there was a clear

trade-off between public acceptance and scienti® c rigour. Of the 101 possible

indicators suggested by the consultants, 95 were chosen by piloting authorities,

but only seven were chosen by seven or more of the 10 piloting authorities.

Many were adapted and 45 additional ones were developed.

For planners, the rapid acceptance of LA 21 by local government offers an

opportunity to realize one of the goals of ecological modernization: the im-

plementation of environmentally-led planning. New government guidance on

development plans recommends that they should incorporate explicit environ-

mental objectives and that local authorities should use these plans as instru-

ments for sustainable development.

Progress with Ecological M odernization in Fife

Over the past two decades the signi® cance of ecological modernization in

promoting local development has gradually come to be acknowledged

in Fife, and the regional council has become a best practice authority.

Historically, the region’s industrial base relied on the exploitation of

Fife’ s coal® elds, which in the immediate post-war decades provided employ-

ment for a quarter of the labour force. The subsequent rapid run-down of

employment in deep-mined coal created serious structural adjustment problems

and very high levels of localized unemployment, which have yet to be fully

resolved.

From the 1970s onwards, the region deployed national and European funds to

rehabilitate derelic tion caused by the mining industry. Efforts over the same

period to diversify the Fife economy away from coal re¯ ect what Roberts (1996)

has identi® ed as a neglect of spatial elements, with initiatives designed ulti-

mately to serve national priorities and sectoral requirements rather than spatial

coherence. Regional development strategies which placed emphasis on tra-

ditional regional policy measures, such as the establishm ent of a branch plant

economy, tended to ignore the environmental, social and indigenous economic

characteris tics of a particular region . Many of the new activities created tended

to exacerbate rather than resolve the reliance on traditional ª tonnage ideologyº

(Simonis, 1993) and increasingly decoupled economic restructuring from local

environmental and social priorities .

In west Fife, production for military use took over from coal as the economic

base. As a result the Dunfermline District of Fife experienced the highest degree

of defence-dependency of any UK local authority. The subsequent loss of orders

in the early 1990s led to a rapid rundown of capacity and the exodus of skilled

craftsmen from the naval dockyards (up to that point Scotland’s larges t single

site industrial employer) as well as the closure of the naval base. In east Fife,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


steel fabrication for the North Sea oil and gas ® elds replaced coal. This has

encountered severe cyclical ¯ uctuations, with orders for work dependent on the

relative pro® tability of the North Sea as a place for exploration and develop-

ment.

These policies have left the region at present with the highest rate of unem-

ployment in mainland Scotland, and one of the highest in Great Britain. The

tourism and higher education sectors have been identi® ed as two of the region ’s

more sustainable non-manufacturing sources of development, along with elec-

tronics, the remaining source of increasing employment in manufacturing. A

further important long term source of employment has been the region’s ® ve

paper mills. In recent years, these have invested heavily in waste management

and disposal systems, under the guidance of the local authority.

The current Fife Structure Plan (Fife Regional Council, 1994) re¯ ects the

current, proto-ecological modernization phase of environmental management

reached by the authority. It includes a separate chapter on the environm ent.

Policy commitments itemized therein are based on the region ’s Charter for the

Environm ent, introduced in 1988. The Charter and the associated action pro-

grammes provide the basis for the authority’ s commitment to sustainable

development. The most recently completed programme addressed 66 environ-

mental projects over a two-year period. This attracted various environmental

awards , including the title of Scottish Green Local Authority of the Year. Included

amongst the projects was a revised vers ion of the Charter, designed to incorpor-

ate sustainability; a state of the environment report linked to the development of

an environmental database; the introduction of an internal audit system using

EMAS; and the creation of Green Business Fife, an environmental business

forum.

The above indicates that Fife is beginn ing to emerge into the third phase of

environmental development, in which there is a clear corporate commitment to

the environmental agenda. Initial moves are being made to prepare the ground

for a more radical refocusing of council policy towards sustainable development.

Three aspects deserve attention.

Eco-management and Audit Schem e (EMAS)

Fife is currently concluding a piloting of the LGMB EMAS Manual as one of four

European authorities participating in an EU Partnersh ip in EMAS (PIE) project.

In Fife testing of the system has focused on four functional areas of manage-

ment. Supplies and transport have been chosen to examine its effectiveness

where direct effects predominate, while economic development and planning

offer a means of testing for service effects.

The purpose of EMAS is to draw attention to the need to focus on manage-

ment processes when dealing with the environment rather than relying on a

project-driven agenda. The traditional structure of local government decision

making makes the implementation of authority-wide environm ental strategies

dif® cult. Senior management encounters problems in integrating services across

departmental lines, because of the line management structure inherent in pro-

fessional services. Hill & Smith (1994) argue that a traditional local government

structure ª may give rise to a fundamental contradiction of values and objectives

between `professionals’ who see their prime duty to aspects of the `environm ent’

and others whose concern is the effectiveness of the whole service. Although

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Assessor

Chief ConstableFiremaster

HousingSocial Work

Social StrategyFinance

Law andAdministration

IT

Human Resources

CorporateProcurement

Property, Clientand Provision

DSOs and DLOs

Roads Managementand Design Transportation

Planning

EconomicDevelopment

VocationalTraining

Trading Standards

EnvironmentalHealth

Education

Leisure, Recreation,CommunityEducation andDevelopment

CHIEF EXECUTIVECorporate ManagementCorporate PolicyQuality and PerformanceKey Regulatory IssuesExternal and Internal CommunicationArea Co-ordinationServices to Members

Competitive and

Technical Strategy Environmental and

Development Strategy


Figure 1. Strategic management organization for Fife Council. Source: Fife Council

(1995).

there are some advantages to this model, it has several disadvantages that are

likely to militate against achieving sustainability and its implementation through

environmental auditing and managementº (p. 91).

Local Authority D ecision-making Structures

Following the decision to provide Fife with a single unitary authority in 1996,

the new Fife Council has introduced a radically different management structure.

This offers considerably greater scope for the introduction of EMAS and effec-

tive implementation of LA 21. Figure 1 summarizes the functional structures,

which are designed to improve corporate decision making and to expand the

scope for decentralized delivery of services.

The new structure identi® es three key areas of strategy: social; environmental

and developmental; and competitive and technical. The appointment of corpo-

rate managers for these three areas reporting directly to the Chief Executive

means that professional services are co-ordinated along lines which enable

coherent strategies such as LA 21 to be introduced. In addition to these corporate

managers, the authority has created a Citizenship Commission at full council

level charged with taking forward and developing decentralization, consultation

and community and citizen involvement in council affairs. Underpinning this is

a policy of strategic decentralisation through the creation of a number of local

area co-ordinators in charge of multi-functional area of® ces deliverin g local

community services and empowered to work across departmental lines. Each of

these areas also has an area committee composed of elected councillors for the

area, with devolved responsibilities for determining local decisions.

Local Agenda 21

As part of its plans for introducing LA 21 to Fife, the authority was chosen as

one of six pilot authorities in the LGMB sustainability indicators project. As well

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


Table 3. Summary of trends in chosen Fife sustainability

indicatorsa

Away from sustainability No clear trend Tow ards sustainability

Homelessness Affordable warmth Life expectancy

Long term unemployment Alternative means Infant mortality

Poverty of transport Nursery education

Land quality Crime Pedestrian and

Biodiversity Air quality pedal cyclist safety

Quality of surface and Household waste

underground water Sewage treatment

Pleasant urban environment and disposal

Food supply: agriculture

Food supply: ® sheries

Energy

aFrom Economic Development and Planning Department (1995a).

as testing indicators on a region-wide basis, Fife chose to examine community

involvement in sustainable development in three speci® c locations: the East

Neuk ® shing communities; Glenrothes New Town; and Benarty ex-coalmining

communities. The project was seen as providing the opportunity to measure the

quality of life and environmental conditions in the region . Public consultation

identi® ed four of the 13 themes as being of greatest signi® cance: access to basic

needs; health; crime; and pollution Ð in order of importance (crime was not

included as an indicator by Strathclyde, one of the four shadow authorities

which also undertook the exercise).

The ® nal report on this project includes 20 indicators for sustainability which,

as Table 3 indicates, can be sorted into three categories: those which involve a

departure from sustainability ; those which indicate a movement towards sus-

tainability; and those with no clear trend. Findings are set out using the

Sustainable Seattle (1992) layout and are illustrated where possible with graphic

trends. For the three communities specially chosen for involvement, the follow-

ing questions were posed to enable local actions towards sustainability to be

formulated:

· are the basic needs of local people being met?

· does the lifestyle of local people compromise the ability of people in other

places to meet their needs?

· are local people being encouraged to improve their quality of life?

· is the environment being cared for to ensure that future generations are able

to meet their own needs?

Lessons learnt from the exercise included the dif® culty in communicating to

people what was meant by the LA 21 version of sustainable development.

Against this, the inclusion of quality of life indicators with ecological ones gave

scope to bring into partnersh ip community groups which hitherto were con-

sidered to have a purely social function.

As a next stage, continued development of the indicators will be linked to the

incorporation of LA 21 into council structures through the authority ’s Sustain-

able Development Policy. Efforts will be made to identify effective linkages

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


between the indicators and other programmes using datasets available at local

level. This will enable correlations between variables to be explored, making use

of Geographical Information packages to map the ® ndings. This will allow a

number of the indicators to be tested for validity against other measures which

have already been evaluated. It will also permit a spatial analysis of the

indicators to be undertaken, examining the sub-regional spread and location of

indicators de® ned at regional level. A further purpose of this research is to

evaluate relationships between socio-economic and environmental factors, and

to carry out work on rural deprivation.

Conclusions

This paper has explored a number of important sectoral and spatial dimensions

of the debate on sustainable development, and has attempted to compare

progress on the achievement of sustainable development with the goals of

ecological modernization. At a general national level, much attention in recent

years has been focused on the de® nition of the parameters within which

sustainable development might be achieved, and on the establishment of a

means of discourse aimed at allowing the establishment of local territorial

responses. A new etiquette has emerged which both encapsulates the major

characteris tics of the challenge of sustainable development, and respects the

importance of ensuring the involvement and empowerment of the full range of

local actors and participants.

Within this new model there are signs that economic and social value systems

are undergoing review and revision. The case study of Fife re¯ ects such changes:

the incorporation of a strong sustainable development thrust in the Structure

Plan; the establishment of a Charter for the Environment; the adoption of EMAS;

and progress on the introduction of LA 21. But it also indicates the dif® culties

that are encountered in attempting to operationalize a new paradigm. Progress

along the pathway towards environmental management and sustainable devel-

opment may be slow, but at least movement towards such goals is occurring and

the pace of change is accelerating.

This suggests that corporate environmental greenin g is learning from past

failures and mistakes and that, more importantly, this institutional learning is

assisting in the establishm ent of a territorial capacity for policy making which is

both inclusive and capable of adapting to new challenges. The realization that

solutions cannot be imposed, and that technocratic responses are unlikely to

yield lasting results, has assisted in shifting emphasis from a project-driven

approach to a strategic agenda which emphasizes the need for effective pro-

grammes and good management.

Fife is now at a point in the evolution of an approach to sustainable

development which provides a solid foundation for the simultaneous achieve-

ment of a range of environm ental, economic and social objectives . Progress on

some objectives is more advanced than on others , but it is likely in any case that

a mixed scenario rather than a standard pattern of response will emerge. In

some sectors and areas of Fife it w ill be easier to make the transition from

embryonic environmental green ing to corporate environmental greenin g; the

ease and pace of change is dictated by the pre-existing condition of the built and

natural environment and by the spatial advantages and disadvantages of the

localities and communities within the region. Nevertheless, this patchwork of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014


progress indicates that the ecological modernization concept has taken root and

that the participants in the initiative have accepted that the achievem ent of the

® nal objective, strategic environmental management, necessitates long term

commitment.

References

Barron, H . & Bruder, N . (1995) A G uide to Local Env ironm enta l A ud iting (London, Earthscan).

Dasgupta, P. (1995) Optimal development and the idea of net national product, in: I. Goldin & L.A.

W inters (Eds) The Econom ics of Sustainable Developm ent (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).

Department of the Environment (1993) A G uide to the Eco-m anagem ent and A udit Schem e (London,

DoE, Scottish Of® ce, Local Government Management Board).

Department of the Environment (1994) Susta inable D evelopm ent: The U K Strategy (London , DoE).

Economic Development and Planning Department (1995a) Sustainability Indica to rs Project: Sum m ary

and Recom m endations (Glenrothes, EDPD, Fife Regional Council).

Economic Development and Planning Department (1995b) Susta inability Ind icator s for Fife: M easuring

the Q uality of Life and th e Q uality o f the Environm ent in Fife (Glenrothes, EDPD , Fife Regional

Council).

Fife Council (1995) Decision-making and management structure in the Fife Council, Agenda Item

No. 4, 18 August (Glenrothes, Fife Council).

Fife Regional Council (1994) The Fife Structure Plan (Glenrothes, FRC).

Hajer, M.A. (1996) Ecological modernisation as cultural politics, in: S. Lash, B . Szerszynski & B.

W ynne (Eds) Risk, Env ironm ent and M odernity (London , Sage).

Hams, T., Jacobs, M., Levett, R., Lusser, H ., Morphet, J. & Taylor, D . (1994) Greening your Loca l

A uthority (London, Longm an).

H ill, D . & Smith, T. (1994) Environmental management and audit, in: J. Agyeman & B. Evans (Eds)

Loca l Env ironm ental Policies and Strategies (London, Longman).

Local Government Management Board (1994) Loca l A genda 21 : Princip les and Process (Luton, LGMB).

Pearce, D . (1993) Blueprint 3 : M easuring Sustainable D evelopm ent (London, Earthscan).

Ramsey, F.P. (1928) A mathematical theory of saving, Econom ic Journal, 38, pp. 543± 559.

Roberts, P. (1995) Environm enta lly Susta inable Business: A Loca l and Reg ional Perspectiv e (London , Paul

Chapman).

Roberts, P. (1996) Ecological modernization approaches to regional and urban planning and

development, International Conference on Environment, Planning and Land Use, Planning and

Environment Research Group, April (Un iversity of Keele).

Simonis, U.E. (1993) Industrial restructuring: does it have to be jobs versus trees?, W ork in Progress

o f the U nited N ations U niversity , 14(2), p. 6.

Sustainable Seattle (1992) Ind icator s o f Sustainable Com m unity 1992 (Seattle).

Touche Ross (1994) Susta inability Ind ica tors Research Project: Report of Phase 1 (Luton, Touche

Ross/UN A Sustainable Development Unit/New Economics Foundation/Local Government Man-

agement Board).

Touche Ross (1995) Susta inability Ind icator s Research Project: Consultants’ Report o f the Pilot Phase

(Luton, Touche Ross/UNA Sustainable Development Unit/New Economics Foundation/Local

Government Management Board).

Weale, A. (1993) Ecological modernisation and the integration of European environment policy, in:

J.D . Liefferink, P.D . Lowe & A.P.J. Mol (Eds) European Integ ration and Environm ental Policy (London,

Belhaven).

Winter, P. (1994) Planning and sustainability: an examination of the role of the planning system as

an instrument for the delivery of sustainable development, Journal o f P lanning and Environm ent

Law , October, pp. 883± 900.

Wood, C. (1994) Painting by N um bers (L incoln, Royal Society for Nature Conservation).

World Bank (1992) D evelopm ent and th e Environm ent: W orld D evelopm ent Report 1992 (Oxford, Oxford

University Press).

World Com mission on Environment and Development (1987) O ur Com m on Future (Oxford , Oxford

University Press).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

15:

18 0

1 D

ecem

ber

2014

Documents

Greening the Fife Economy: Ecological Modernization as a Pathway for Local Economic Development