Sustainable development and ecological modernisationIndustry
If state structures show tardiness in adapting to ecological modernisa-
tion, evidence of genuine conversion in the business world is also scarce.
Whilst many business leaders proclaim the virtues of greening industry,
therhetoric is not always matched by behavioural changes. For every com-
pany that has made a serious attempt to build ecological criteria into its
operations – and there are an increasing number of innovators – there are
dozens more that have done little or nothing. Many companies are selective
in their adoption of ecological modernisation. Most major energy suppliers,
for example,havedevelopedarenewableenergy business – electricity supply
companies have built wind farms, oil companies have invested in biomass
and hydrogen (BP has even rebranded itself ‘Beyond Petroleum’) – whilst
theircore businesses continue to use or supply massive amounts of fossil
fuels. Other corporations have appropriated successful niche ‘ecologically-
sound’ businesses – Cadbury Schweppes purchased Green & Black’s, the
organic chocolate company, and Unilever bought Ben & Jerry’s ethical ice
cream company – whilst their core businesses have remained unchanged.
The slow progress of ecological modernisation within European indus-
try can be illustrated by the limited impact of initiatives to promote
environmental improvement at the enterprise level. The voluntary EU Eco-
Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) involves firms publishing an exter-
nally verified environmental statement of their operations. EMAS is a very
weak eco-audit scheme. Firms can select the sites they wish to enter and
set their own objectives and targets (which do not even have to match the
industry-best environmental practice), so the external audit does little more
than check that the documentation is in order (Neale 1997 ). Even so, take-up
is low. EMAS was introduced in 1995, yet ten years later just 3,225 compa-
nies were registered throughout the EU and Norway, of which 1,499 were
in Germany, where external verification requirements are lower than else-
where (ENDs 1998 ). Many European firms have chosen to register with the
international standard ISO 14001 which, as it involves no independently
verified statement, is even less demanding than EMAS. Recognising these
weaknesses, the EU adopted a new EMAS regulation in 2001, extending the
scheme to all areas of economic activity including local authorities, encour-
aging greater employee participation and transparency, and incorporating
ISO 14001 as part of a tougher environmental statement. Of course, many
firms carry out environmental audits without bothering to register with
official programmes, but the general indifference to schemes that would
publicly advertise their green credentials indicates the limited penetration
of ecological modernisation in the industrial sector (see Box8.7).
One reason for the general reluctance to embrace ecological mod-
ernisation may be ignorance. Many industrialists, particularly in small
and medium-sized firms, may lack the opportunity or resources to gain
access to the ecological modernisation discourse. Even when the ‘pollution