Ecological Modernization Debate

Step 1: Develop a clear understanding of ecological modernization. Use Lidskog and Elander to
develop your own definition of what ecological modernization is, and use the Brundtland Report to
elaborate more on this vision of ecological and social problem-solving. We all acknowledge that growth
can sometimes have negative social and environmental costs, but how specifically does ecological
modernization envision steering growth toward pro-social and pro-environmental pathways? What
conditions would be necessary for growth to function as envisioned by the authors of the Brundtland
Report?

Step 2: Search for evaluations of the philosophy and practice of ecological modernization. Select 2
or more articles that evaluate ecological modernization; at least one of those should consider a concrete
case study of ecological modernization programs in practice. To find these, think beyond a google search
for “evaluation of ecological modernization.” A few places you might begin:
- Lidskog and Elander’s bibliography
- Articles citing Lidskog and Elander
- Google Scholar searches using a broad range of terms including “ecological modernization” as well
as other phrases that might lead you to literature on green growth, technological innovation,
decoupling economic growth and energy/environment, or ecological markets.

Before selecting an article, be sure that it really represents the ecological modernization paradigm—we
don't want to evaluate any old environmental policy proposal. You may also want to find articles
supporting the other side’s arguments so you can be prepared to contest them.

Step 3: Prepare for the debate. Bring your article to class and be able to describe how green growth
was pursued, how externalities were internalized, and with what results. What were the strengths and
weaknesses of these programs and what lessons do they offer regarding ecological modernization more
generally? Does this provide evidence in support of ecological modernization, evidence in support of
ecological modernization given certain conditions, evidence against ecological modernization given
certain conditions, or evidence fully against it? To what extent are these pragmatic considerations versus
deep, fundamental flaws/strengths of ecological modernization? What weaknesses might the other team
point out? How does this contribute to your group’s overall argument?

Step 4: Debate. In class, you will have 10 minutes with your group to organize your thoughts. You should
come with all of your personal thoughts and arguments prepared and simply use this time to create an
over-arching order to your presentations. The debate will be structured as follows:
15 minutes: The case for ecological modernization. The “pro” group will define the ecological
modernization paradigm, outline the case for it both philosophically and practically, and
offer evidence that it can work. (Multiple people can and should speak.)
15 minutes: The case against ecological modernization. The “con” group will present their
arguments and evidence against ecological modernization. (Multiple people can and should
speak.)
5 minutes: Group discussion.
5 minutes: Rebuttal against ecological modernization. The “con” group will respond specifically to
any statements/evidence provided by the pro group.
5 minutes: Rebuttal for ecological modernization. The “pro” group will respond to any
statements/evidence provided by the con group and will have the last word.
20 minutes: closing discussion among full class.