We're looking at ways in which the world can maintain economic growth while reducing its primary material use – ending the pattern that has driven world economic growth over the past four-and-a-half decades.

The world is using its natural resources at an ever-increasing rate. Worldwide, annual extraction of primary materials – biomass, fossil fuels, metal ores and minerals – tripled between 1970 and 2010. People in the richest countries now consume up to ten times more resources than those in the poorest nations.

Clearly, if the developing world is to enjoy a similar standard of living to those in the developed world, this cannot continue. We need to break the link between global economic development and primary resource consumption.

Over the past few days, nations have been meeting in New York to discuss the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which aim to “promote prosperity while protecting the planet”.

Today the meeting sees the launch of an international report coordinated by CSIRO and the UN Environment Program. The report lists several ways in which the world can maintain economic growth while reducing its primary material use – ending the pattern that has driven world economic growth over the past four-and-a-half decades.

Global resource use from 1970 to 2010. Author provided.

The importance of decoupling

Decoupling economic growth from resource use is crucially important – especially when we consider our finding that not even the wealthiest countries have managed to stabilise or reduce their overall material consumption footprint. The only time this footprint was reduced was during the global financial crisis of 2008-09. It has since begun to grow again.

This suggests that there is no level of human well-being at which the demand for primary materials will level off – unless we make some fundamental changes to our economy.

The ‘material footprint’ (in tonnes of raw material per capita) of nations at different levels of the Human Development Index (HDI). Author provided

Since the turn of the century, as emerging economies like China have begun to industrialise and urbanise, they have used massive amounts of iron, steel, cement, energy and construction materials. While this has helped millions of people move out of poverty, huge infrastructure investments have also ratcheted up the demand for primary materials to unprecedented levels.

Surprisingly, this boom in global growth has not led to improvements in efficiency, despite the many technological advances along the way. The global economy uses more material per unit of GDP than it did in 2000. This is because production has shifted from material-efficient economies such as Japan, South Korea and Europe to less efficient ones like China, India and Southeast Asia.

Decoupling will create the space for developing countries to raise their standards of living while also achieving the SDG objectives. This won’t occur spontaneously; it requires well-designed policies, not to mention large public investments in research and development.

New measures needed

Past policy decisions that determine economic development, human well-being and environmental outcomes have often been informed by a small set of economic indicators.

In contrast, policies designed to achieve progress towards the SDGs will require new information about natural resource use and environmental impacts. The new report, compiled with help from my colleagues in Austria, Germany and Japan, aims to provide data on current resource use, and on how these primary materials might be used more efficiently to produce goods and services.

We have found that while dramatic increases in the consumption of fossil fuels, metals and other materials threaten to intensify the effects of climate change, increase pollution and harm wildlife, there are also large opportunities to embrace more sustainable practices. This in turn would also lead to economic benefits and improved well-being.

Here are some of the report’s recommendations for maintaining economic growth while streamlining resource use, split across the major sectors of the economy:

  • Construction and housing. Improved building materials, insulation and orientation of new buildings – together these can cut energy use in buildings by 80%. Meanwhile, using higher-strength steel in the construction of medium-density and high-rise buildings can save on the amount of construction material used.
  • Transport and mobility. Improved urban design, walkable cities, public transport, electric and hybrid vehicles, improved fuel efficiency in aviation, freight and private transport – all of these measures will deliver massive savings in materials, energy and greenhouse emissions.
  • Agriculture and food. Improved irrigation techniques; reduced fertiliser and pesticide use; reduced average consumption of meat and dairy; and reducing food loss and waste from its current level of more than 30%.
  • Heavy industry and energy. Besides embracing recycling and renewable energy, heavy industries such as steel, cement and paper can each draw on a range of new technologies, such as electric arc furnace improvements in the iron and steel industry.
  • Technology. Nano- and biotechnology will play increasingly important roles in sustainable production and consumption – for instance, through the creation of more durable products or the development of enzymes as industrial catalysts.

The report also recommends placing a price on primary materials at the point of extraction, as well as putting a price on carbon emissions. The proceeds of these levies should be invested in research and development in resource-intensive sectors of the economy, to find yet more ways to reduce overall consumption of materials.

Of course, increasing material efficiency can bring its own problems. The report recommends various policy initiatives to address these issues. Among these is shorter working hours to compensate for productivity gains, instead of salary increases alone, to avoid the rebound effect of higher overall consumption.

Lower-income countries will doubtless require more primary materials than they currently use, if they are to reach the same level of development as today’s wealthy countries. Expanding global demand for materials may contribute to local conflicts like those seen in areas where mining competes with agriculture and urban development. But the more we can curb the world’s resource growth, the more room there will be for people’s standards of living to grow too without surpassing planetary limits.

This article was written with the help of Karin Hosking from CSIRO’s Land and Water Flagship. More information on the data in the report is available from UNEP Live.

The Conversation

Heinz Schandl, Senior Science Leader, CSIRO

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.


  1. It seems the elephant in the room is unsustainable, un-managed global population growth. We cannot possibly support high standards of living for all if population levels are not limited in some way. While a few developed nations have achieved stable or even declining populations, other nations are continuing to experience rapid population growth. The question is not if population control is necessary, but how this can be done in an ethically acceptable way.

  2. I totally agree with the thrust of this report….however, it has been obvious for some time that the way we live and consume has to change….but there has been little inclination or political will on a global scale for this to occur. I do not believe that Governments will come up with an integrated set of policies and programs to push us towards a de-coupling of growth vs resource use – there are too many competing interests and it is too complex.
    The best we can hope for are programs that do not get in the way of those individual entrepreneurs that are willing to invest their capital (and those of their supporters), ingenuity and time in a range of activities according to their inclinations and priorities. It’s messy, takes longer than it should and will probably cost more than it could…..but lets feed them with information such as is in this report, lobby governments to support them and get out of their way.

  3. I don’t pretend any advanced ken on aspects of this worthy topic, but wonder whether, in a related vein (alternative methods utilised in construction etc), more research could be devised to find ways to collect, stabilise and utilise waste plastics currently rotating in huge gyros in our major oceans and waterways?

  4. “Clearly, if the developing world is to enjoy a similar standard of living to those in the developed world, this cannot continue. We need to break the link between global economic development and primary resource consumption.” It’s not clear to me that ‘this’ level of resource use cannot continue: we have adequate resources for the next 50-100 years, during which time world population will stabilise and then decline quite rapidly (eg Japan, Italy, Russia) and resource use will also decline. So I’d appreciate seeing the reasons why we need to break the link between development and resource use.

    1. Hi Bernie,

      We forwarded your question on our author, Heinz Schandl. Here is his reply:

      Our research shows that wealthy countries have a material footprint of around 30 tonnes per capita on average based on current systems of provision of housing, mobility, food and energy. If you multiply the 30 tonnes per capita with 9 billion people you end up with a total global material use of 3-4 times the current level. To supply such high demand will need very large investments in supply infrastructure, i.e. additional mines, quarries, fisheries, forests and agricultural areas plus refineries. According to our research, even current use levels of 70 billion tonnes yearly overwhelm the ecological capacity of the Earth system and have tremendous social (and sometimes economic) impacts. Growing natural resource use further will increase environmental impacts including climate change, soil degradation, biodiversity loss, and will result in negative ecosystem and human health impacts. How many natural resources exist globally and which share is economically viable is a complex issue and obviously linked to the investment into exploration of those resources and the finances required to extract them. It is correct to assume though, again according to our research, that the world is not running out of resources any time soon for most materials. If we would run out of natural resources it would drive investment into innovation, technological change and substitution towards lower resource intensity of the economy. That would also help to reduce environmental impacts. We also find that consumption has replaced population as the main driver of resource use. While population may stabilize by the middle of the century it seems also clear that consumption levels will further increase in the growing cities of Africa, Latin America and Asia because of a fast growing new middle class. Stabilizing the population may not offset the growth in consumption. Can I encourage you to read our report and happy to discuss further. There is a summary available at http://unep.org/documents/irp/16-00271_LW_GlobalMaterialFlowsUNE_SUMMARY_FINAL_160701.pdf

      We hope this helps.

      CSIRO Social Media

Commenting on this post has been disabled.