Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Factor Four and Factor 10 are two examples of targets proposed for concomitant increases in ecoefficiency and reductions in material usage. Factor Four sets forth a target of doubling welfare while resource consumption simultaneously halves. Factor 10 proposes that material flows should be reduced by 90 percent over a period of 30–50 years.

Both Factor Four and Factor 10 were first proposed in 1994. Factor Four was set forth by Ernst von Weizsäcker and Amory Lovins, while Factor 10 was introduced in the Carnoules Declaration published by the International Factor 10 Club. Each proposal rose from the concern that worldwide stores of natural resources were being drawn down at unsustainable rates and the conviction that changes in production methods coupled with technological advances could be instituted to not only stem the overdraft, but to reverse the damage already done. Both proposals contended that these changes could be adopted without reducing living standards, rather that they would be improved. Factor Four (republished in English in 1997), forms an extended counterargument to the claims that adopting environmental protection measures would be too expensive and would result in drastically reduced economic prospects. Other factors ranging from the original four to as high as 50 have subsequently been put forth by various groups. In January 2010, von Weizsäcker and several coauthors released an update to Factor Four titled “Factor Five: Transforming the Global Economy Through 80 Percent Improvements in Resource Productivity.”

Factor Four and Factor 10 have been more readily accepted as government programs in Europe than anywhere else. Their value lies in encouraging resource conservation through technological innovation. The case studies highlighting the successes of early adopters of technologies to reduce the use of material inputs are valuable in recruiting other businesses to do the same or to undertake innovation in their own industry.

Factor Four

Factor Four and its successor Factor Five contain case studies of individual businesses and sectors to show technological innovations that have been implemented to improve resource productivity. Factor Four contends that society can live twice as well while using half as many natural resources. Among the suggested ways to reduce the drain on natural resources are incorporating solar features into homes and offices, car sharing, rethinking the use of wood in construction, increasing efficiency in farming, lengthening the active work life of individuals by 15 years, and shifting economic emphasis from production to service. Many of the innovations highlighted have already made their way into widespread use; some technologies are far more advanced today. Factor Four points out the need to reexamine government, which often subsidizes wasteful resource use. Though it makes a strong argument for redesigning our production methods and consumption patterns to be more frugal, it does not succeed in showing how Factor Four can be applied across the whole of the economy. Independent researchers applying total materials reductions or material intensity per unit service measures to the examples given in Factor 4 have been unable to find factor reductions approaching four (much less 10). Despite the lack of empirical evidence that Factor Four can be achieved, several countries have adopted Factor Four as a technology-forcing policy.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading