Search results

Drawing upon Alfred Sohn-Rethel's work, we argue that, just as capitalism produces abstract labor, it coproduces both abstract mind and abstract life. Abstract mind is the split between mind and nature and between subject/observer and observed object that characterizes scientific epistemology. Abstract mind reflects an abstracted objectified world of nature as a means to be exploited. Biological life is rendered as abstract life by capitalist exploitation and by the reification and technologization of organisms by contemporary technoscience. What Alberto Toscano has called “the culture of abstraction” imposes market rationality onto nature and the living world, disrupting biotic communities and transforming organisms into what Finn Bowring calls “functional bio-machines.”

This chapter investigates the trends in international and European legal and policy regulation of the process related to carbon capture and storage (CCS). The global endeavor that seeks to limit carbon dioxide emissions has come to recognize CCS as an indispensable ally. This chapter offers an up-to-date and comprehensive commentary to the relatively new and developing area of international regulation of the process of CCS, a dimension that might yield significant effects on the environment and, overall, sustainable development. It reveals a constantly growing trend of an enhanced awareness about the indispensable role and effects of the CCS on wider climate aspirations and, to that effect, also a need for a stable and effective international regulatory framework. The key barriers that are preventing the wider implementation of CCS projects, however, relate primarily to two extra-regulatory processes, which is the policy uncertainty at national levels and financial shortcomings. This background presents a window of opportunity for entrepreneurship and policy invention.

The purpose of this study is to analyse the role of the clean development mechanism (CDM) established by the Kyoto Protocol in channelling foreign technology to China. Appraising the experience of CDM remains of key importance when drawing lessons for the post-2012 climate regime.

Descriptive analysis of the sources and the determinants of foreign technology transfer based on the examination of 1,355 registered projects. Econometric analysis of the probability of having a foreign supplier of technology in any project.

The prominence of German firms as technology providers and the absence of a strong relationship between technology suppliers and credit buyers. The econometric analysis finds that project size and cost, project location, credit buyers’ and consultants’ characteristics, as well as technology diffusion are all relevant factors in determining the probability of having a foreign supplier of technology.

China is a particularly interesting case for analysing technology transfer in CDM projects since, after a slow start, the country has become the largest and most dynamic CDM recipient worldwide. Furthermore, the analysis of CDM projects may offer some insights into the complex web of technological links between Chinese and foreign firms.

The transfer of emission-saving technologies to developing countries is expected to play a major role in addressing environmental problems worldwide.

This study analyses the sources and determinants of international technology transfer in CDM projects in China, and offers some insights into how the characteristics of the major players and the links between them affect this phenomenon.

While technologies are often packaged as solutions to long-standing social ills, scholars of digital economies have raised the alarm that, far from liberatory, technologies often further entrench social inequities and in fact automate structures of oppression. This literature has been revelatory but tends to replicate a methodological nationalism that erases global racial hierarchies. We argue that digital economies rely on colonial pathways and in turn serve to replicate a racialized and neocolonial world order. To make this case, we draw on W.E.B. Du Bois' writings on capitalism's historical development through colonization and the global color line. Drawing specifically on The World and Africa as a global historical framework of racism, we develop heuristics that make visible how colonial logics operated historically and continue to this day, thus embedding digital economies in this longer history of capitalism, colonialism, and racism. Applying a Du Boisian framework to the production and propagation of digital technologies shows how the development of such technology not only relies on preexisting racial colonial production pathways and the denial of racially and colonially rooted exploitation but also replicates these global structures further.

This chapter examines the UK and the Nigerian approach to reducing emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) into the environment as a result of gas flaring utilising the market-based regulation. Determining how different jurisdictions fare in the quest to reduce GHG emissions associated with the oil and gas industry is essential because: policy makers have realised the advantages of market-based regulation over the command-and-control regulation; and in the light of various pledges different countries have made in different forum to reduce the emission of GHGs, particularly in the wake of the recently held Paris climate change conference.

Library-based approach is used, providing conceptual and theoretical understanding of climate change, GHG emissions and various market-based regulatory tools utilised in the United Kingdom and Nigeria in regulating emission associated with operations in the oil and gas industry.

The study reveals the significance of environmental regulations that encourage region integration and flexibility in the implementation of environmental policies. Moreover, it finds that the Paris Agreement re-affirms the utilisation of market-based regulations and indicates a future for investment in the oil and gas industry.

The study revealed that there are lacunas in regulations and strategies for the implementation of environmental regulations which need to be addressed in order to achieve zero or a significant decrease in gas flaring.

This study provided an ample opportunity to theoretically examine market-based regulatory tools utilised in the oil and gas industry in a developed country in relation to a developing country.

This chapter presents the main findings of the EU-funded SATORI project on ethics assessment of research and innovation (R&I) in its first 18 months. It offers summarised descriptions of the ways in which ethics assessment and guidance of R&I are currently practiced in different scientific fields, in different countries in Europe, the United States and China, and in different types of organisations.

The main findings include the following. Although the most extensive institutions, policies and activities exist in the medical and life sciences, there is evidence of a growing institutionalisation of ethics assessment in non-medical fields. Increasing coordination and cooperation between ethics assessors can be observed at the EU and global levels. Each of 15 types of organisations that were studied performs an important role in ethics assessment, which may not always be well established and sometimes poses significant challenges. Although significant differences exist among the countries that were studied in terms of the degree to which ethics assessment of R&I is institutionalised, all seem to be expanding their ethics assessment and guidance infrastructures.

The findings are an important means by which partners in the SATORI project will take their next steps: the identification of best practices, the development of proposals for harmonisation and shared standards, and, to the extent possible, the proposal of common principles, protocols, procedures and methodologies for the ethical assessment of research and innovation in the European Union and beyond.

The European Union’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) calls for far-reaching changes to the way economic activity will occur in EU digital markets. Before its remedies are imposed, it is critical to assess their impacts on individual markets, the digital sector, and the overall European economy. The European Commission (EC) released an Impact Assessment in support of the DMA that purports to evaluate it using cost/benefit analysis.

An economic evaluation of the DMA should consider its full impacts on dynamic competition. The Impact Assessment neither assesses the DMA's impact on dynamic competition in the digital economy nor evaluates the impacts of specific DMA prohibitions and obligations. Instead, it considers benefits in general and largely ignores costs. We study its benefit assessments and find they are based on highly inappropriate methodologies and assumptions. A cost/benefit study using inappropriate methodologies and largely ignoring costs cannot provide a sound policy assessment.

Instead of promoting dynamic competition between platforms, the DMA will likely reinforce existing market structures, ossify market boundaries, and stunt European innovation. The DMA is likely to chill R&D by encouraging free riding on the investments of others, which discourages making those investments. Avoiding harm to innovation is critical because innovation delivers large, positive spillover benefits, driving increases in productivity, employment, wages, and prosperity.

The DMA prioritizes static over dynamic competition, with the potential to harm the European economy. Given this, the Impact Assessment does not demonstrate that the DMA will be beneficial overall, and its implementation must be carefully tailored to alleviate or lessen its potential to harm Europe’s economic performance.

“It should also be noted that the objective of convergence and equal distribution, including across under-performing areas, can hinder efforts to generate growth. Contrariwise, the objective of competitiveness can exacerbate regional and social inequalities, by targeting efforts on zones of excellence where projects achieve greater returns (dynamic major cities, higher levels of general education, the most advanced projects, infrastructures with the heaviest traffic, and so on). If cohesion policy and the Lisbon Strategy come into conflict, it must be borne in mind that the former, for the moment, is founded on a rather more solid legal foundation than the latter” European Commission (2005, p. 9)Adaptation of Cohesion Policy to the Enlarged Europe and the Lisbon and Gothenburg Objectives.