Green Economy: Recent work by the Nordic Council of Ministers

Report 2012/43

Annegrete Bruvoll

Green Economy: Recent work by the Nordic Council of Ministers

Category	Reports
Sub-Categories	n/a
Year	2012
Report Number	43
Author(s)	Annegrete Bruvoll
Download	file_download (1.2 MB)
Read in browser	PDF

REPORT 	
2012/43 	
 	
Annegrete Bruvoll 	
Green Economy: Recent 	
work by the Nordic Council 	
of Ministers

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 1 
Document Details 
Vista Analysis AS Report number 2012/43 
Title Green Economy: Recent work by the Nordic Council of Ministers 
ISBN 978-82-8126-092-4 
Author Annegrete Bruvoll 
Finished date 26. October 2012 
Project Manager Annegrete Bruvoll 
Quality Control John Magne Skjelvik 
Client Nordic Council of Ministers 
Access Public 
Published PDF 
Key words Green economy, Environmental economics, Nordic Council of Ministers

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	2	
Preface 
The Nordic Council of Ministers has a long tradition for highlighting solutions to the 
environmental challenges in their working groups, r esearch programs and publications. 
This reports aim to summarize some of the recent wo rk on greater resource efficiency 
and greener economic growth and development in the Nordic countries, including core 
background documents from the Nordic Council of Min isters, The Nordic prime 
ministers’ Working Group for Green Growth, and the EU, research studies related to 
green growth financed by the Nordic Council of Mini sters and the Oslo conference on 
Green economic growth held in March 2012. The repor t was commissioned by the 
Nordic Council of Ministers, with Øyvind Lone, chai r of its Working Group on 
Environment and Economy, as contact person. 
26. October 2012 
Annegrete Bruvoll 
Project leader 
Vista Analysis AS

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 3 
 
Content 
Summary ............................................................................................................................................................. 5	 	
1 	Introduction ...................................... ....................................................................................................... 9	 	
1 	Background ........................................ ................................................................................................... 10	 	
1.1	 	The environmental action plan 2009-2012 ........... ......................................................... 10	 	
1.2	 	The EU2020 Strategy with its Road Map on resource e fficiency ............................ 10	 	
1.3	 	The Nordic prime ministers’ Working Group for Green Growth ............................ 12	 	
2 	Projects initiated by the Nordic Council of Ministers ........................................................... 14	 	
2.1	 	Greening the economy: Nordic experiences and challe nges .................................... 14	 	
2.2	 	The economic crisis and its consequences ...................................................................... 15	 	
2.3	 	Reforming environmentally harmful subsidies ....... ...................................................... 17	 	
2.4	 	Payment for and management of ecosystem services .. .............................................. 18	 	
2.5	 	Voluntary agreements and environmental labelling in the Nordic countries ... 19	 	
2.6	 	Benefits of green public procurement ............................................................................... 20	 	
2.7	 	Valuation of ecosystem services from Nordic watersh eds ....................................... 21	 	
2.8	 	Measuring green jobs? ............................................................................................................. 22	 	
2.9	 	Using the right environmental indicators .......... .............................................................. 24	 	
2.10	 	Environmental technologies in the Nordic countries ................................................. 25	 	
3 	The conference .................................... ................................................................................................. 26	 	
3.1	 	Introduction....................................... .......................................................................................... 26	 	
3.2	 	Session 1: Resources, ecology and growth ...... ............................................................ 27	 	
3.2.1	 	Global resource use and decoupling ................ ............................................................. 27	 	
3.2.2	 	The value of ecosystem services ................... .................................................................. 28	 	
3.2.3	 	Europe 2020 and the Roadmap for Resource Efficiency ....................................... 29	 	
3.2.4	 	The Nordic Task Force on Green growth .................................................................... 29	 	
3.3	 	Session 2: Resource efficiency in industry .... .............................................................. 29

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	4	
3.3.1	 	Forest industry resource efficiency: Borregaard industries................................ 30	 	
3.3.2	 	Resource efficiency and industrial ecology in Kalundborg .................................. 30	 	
3.4	 	Session 3: Environmental policy, innovation and technology ............................. 30	 	
3.4.1	 	Green growth and innovation .......................................................................................... 31	 	
3.4.2	 	The Nordic Top-level Research Initiative and Green Growth ............................. 31	 	
3.4.3	 	Environmental technology challenges for the Nordic countries ........................ 31	 	
3.4.4	 	Green procurement, labelling and voluntary agreemen ts .................................... 32	 	
3.5	 	Session 4: Where do we go from here? ......................................................................... 32	 	
3.5.1	 	Green growth: China and the Nordic countries ...... .................................................. 32	 	
3.6	 	Panel debate: Green economic growth in the Nordic countries? .......................... 33	 	
4 	Concluding words from the summary conference ................................................................. 34	 	
5 	References ........................................ ..................................................................................................... 35

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 5 
Summary 
The Nordic Council of Ministers has a clear focus on the Nordic countries’ role as a 
pioneer region in the environmental area. The Nordi c countries aim to work together in 
developing expertise and joint strategies on implem entation of environmentally friendly 
policies. The countries have contributed initiative s and tested solutions for international 
environmental cooperation and exchange of experienc e, and plan to further enhance 
cooperation to optimise the utilisation of availabl e resources and find joint solutions in 
the Nordic region. 
The portfolio of reports financed by the Nordic Cou ncil of Ministers includes relevant 
works providing new insight into these areas, in ad dition to general aspects related to 
improved efficiency in environmental policy. The sy nthesis report on Nordic efforts to 
advance greening of the economy over more than thir ty years shows that healthy 
economic growth can be combined with ambitious and successful environmental goals 
and policies (section 2.1). Also, studies on decoup ling economic growth and growth in 
emissions to air prove that this has been part of e conomic historical development 
(section 3.2.1). This is a natural consequence of g eneral technological progress, but can 
be stimulated in a more sustainable direction by im plementing efficient instruments. 
However, along with the increasing economic scale, environmental pressure may very 
well increase despite decoupling. It is hence both a challenge and opportunity for the 
Nordic countries to improve efficiency in policy de sign, and to meet new and remaining 
environmental and economic challenges. 
The challenge has been sharpened with the financial crisis from 2007-2008. Economic 
crises are strong motors for structural changes, wh ich constitute both risks and 
opportunities. This is studied in section 2.2. It i s a particular challenge to balance the 
environmental and resource concerns with the needs for economic growth. A first order 
effect of the crisis has been reduced economic grow th, with resulting emission 
reductions. However, environmentally friendly inves tments risk lower priority in favour 
of general investments promoting economic growth. T he challenge is thus to formulate 
policies stimulating both economic growth and still taking care of the environment. 
The experts contributing at the conference on Green economic growth (chapter 3) 
generally advised a broad portfolio of instruments. This includes traditional legislative 
and administrative instruments (“command-and-contro l”), but generally with a much 
stronger emphasis on economic and market-based inst ruments, such as environmental 
taxes, as well as information instruments (e.g. lab elling and certification schemes), and 
green public procurement, to stimulate the demand s ide. 
The project studying the problem of environmentally harmful subsidies (section 2.3) 
shows that eliminating, reducing and reforming dir ect and indirect subsidies 
stimulating energy use in particular, is import to get the prices right. Lack of 
environmental taxes is, from an analytic point of v iew, just another form of indirect 
subsidies to polluting industries and consumption. The challenge is how to safeguard 
and compensate the most vulnerable population group s, while this may become even 
more difficult under financial crises. The financia l and fiscal crisis can be opportunities 
to carry out much-needed reforms and reorient econo mic growth in a greener, more 
sustainable direction, through reforming environmen tally harmful subsidies reforms 
and increasing revenues from environmental taxes an d charges.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	6	
Environmental damages reducing ecosystem services is another area lacking externality 
pricing. One of the projects financed by the Nordic Council of Ministers looks at the 
status of methods and measures and the use of valua tion of ecosystem services (section 
2.4). The project shows that payment for ecosystem services is firmly embedded in the 
tool box of classical incentive-based policy instru ments, and yet offers a novel way to 
managing ecosystem services by providing a direct c onditional way of buying 
conservation and integrating the demand and supply sides. The report concludes that 
there is scope both for improving and expanding eco nomic instruments in this field in 
the Nordic countries. 
Green labelling and voluntary agreements are exampl es of “soft” instruments. A study 
evaluating the use and prevalence of these instrume nts in the Nordic countries (section 
2.5) concludes that there is need for more knowledg e on the effects of both these 
instruments. Existing evaluations are thorough and factual, but they seem to lack 
baseline and economic analysis. The same conclusion applies to green public 
procurement (section 2.6), as it was not possible t o identify relevant references for the 
assessment of the potential impact of public procur ement. Hence the reports reveal a 
clear need for further studies on the cost-effectiv eness of green labelling, voluntary 
agreements and public procurement relative to econo mic instruments and direct 
regulations. Above all, such “soft” marked-based in struments need to be seen together 
with and actively combined with these other instrum ents. 
Solid information on the functioning of instruments is a prerequisite for efficient policy 
formulation. One severe problem in environmental ec onomics is the nature of negative 
externalities; the costs can per definition not be derived from market prices. 
Traditionally, much effort has been devoted to prod ucing statistics on environmentally 
harmful emissions, and to estimate costs to human h ealth and the environment. The 
costs due to reduced ecosystem services are even mo re complex to estimate, and have 
been given far less attention. As found in the proj ect (section 2.4) mentioned above, 
there are many examples of payment for ecosystem se rvices, but it is more difficult to 
evaluate the costs of ecosystem service damages fro m pollution and resource depletion. 
The project looking at values from Nordic watershed s (section 2.7) clearly illustrates the 
complications related to average value estimates fo r ecosystem services. For example, 
the modelling has to be spatially explicit to addre ss economic interests and the locations. 
Two projects were directed at development of statis tics as information basis for e.g. 
environmental instruments. To better understand the transition to a greener economy, 
several initiatives have been made to measure singl e aspects of greenness. The first 
project (section 2.8), reviewing initiatives made t o measure such aspects, argues that it 
is both theoretically and practically impossible to measure, define and delineate which 
jobs, companies, sectors and technologies that are “green”, and, implicitly, which are not. 
All production and consumption of goods and service s have environmental effects. 
Hence, “greenness” is a relative concept, which all jobs and companies contribute to 
along the production and delivery chains. The repor t concludes that existing emission 
inventories and national accounts offer more releva nt statistics on environmental 
pressure across activities. 
The second project evaluates different types of inf ormation and environmental 
indicators and their major uses, and gives guidance regarding the use of environmental

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 7 
indicators (section 2.9). The report underlines the need for caution using statistics and is 
a reminder and guide of for what purpose to use wha t statistics. 
Relations to the overall goals 
The Nordic Council of Ministers’ Environmental action plan 2009-2012 (see section 1.1) 
aims to focus on climate and air, sea and coastal r egions, biological diversity and 
ecosystem services and sustainable consumption and production as key themes for 
environmental cooperation. The studies carried out under the Nordic Council of 
Ministers’ research programs mentioned above togeth er cover these focus areas. Some 
of the reports look at general experiences and prin ciples for environmental policy 
promoting sustainable development, covering all are as. Other projects bring particularly 
forward the complicated field of ecosystem valuatio n and regulation. The focus on the 
development of relevant statistics also provides a general basis for all areas forwarded 
in the action plan. 
A second leading initiative is the EU2020 Road Map on resource efficiency (see section 
1.2). This strategy focusses on getting the prices right, encouraging sustainable 
innovation, filling knowledge gaps and international consensus. This is consistent with 
the Nordic Council of Ministers’ strategies as elaborated above. 
The conference 
The conference on Green economic growth in March 2012 filled in many of the 
conclusions from the reports financed by Nordic Cou ncil of Ministers. The conference 
covered three sessions. The first one, Resources, ecology and growth, included 
discussions on historical and potential future deve lopment of decoupling between 
economic growth and the environment (section 3.2.1) . As stated in the synthesis report 
(section 2.1), there are clear signs of decoupling. But still, the environmental pressure on 
ecosystems increases. The extent and values of the damages are subject to exploration, 
and the session confirmed the need for good statist ics for ecosystem services are needed 
(section 3.2.2). 
The second session, Resource efficiency in industry , presented cases from the industries 
with clear resource efficiency improvements (sectio n 3.3). The cases illustrated how 
increasing costs and economic motives spur innovati on to more resource efficient 
products. 
The third session, Environmental policy, innovation and technology , focussed on 
innovation and on correct relative prices as import ant incentives (section 3.4). The 
importance of combining and adding incentives, incl uding support to relevant research, 
was emphasised. The presentations confirmed the con clusion that data on the effects of 
green procurement, labelling and voluntary agreemen ts is scarce, and that there is little 
evidence of the effects of these instruments. 
The fourth session, Where do we go from here? , discussed the similarities between the 
Nordic countries and China (section 3.5). Recent ex periences show that China mainly 
uses the same tools in their transition to a greene r economy as we have found efficient. 
This includes the instruments in focus in the Nordi c work on green economy, i.e. public 
investment, research and development, green procure ment, price incentives and tariffs. 
The road ahead

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	8	
The Nordic prime ministers’ Working Group for Green Growth has mapped specific 
Nordic strengths and tangible areas for Nordic coop eration, and suggests eight main 
areas for joint work within the Nordic region (see section 1.3). These areas will be core 
topics for Nordic cooperation on green growth in th e coming years.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 9 
1 Introduction 
In the presence of a rapidly rising global populati on and the threat of increasing 
environmental pressure in general, and global warmi ng in particular, the environmental 
problems has got increasing attention on the intern ational political agenda. A transition 
to a future with lower greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental damages calls 
for a greening of the economy, i.e. more environmen tally friendly production an 
consumption processes and technologies. The emphasi s on reduced environmental 
pressure conflicts with the urge for economic growt h, particularly in developing 
countries. The financial crises may contribute to d owngrade the environmental 
ambitions also in developed countries. The challeng e is how to combine actions to meet 
climate change and other environmental challenges t o obtain a more sustainable 
economic development, in both developed and develop ing countries. 
The Nordic Council of Ministers has a long traditio n for highlighting solutions to the 
environmental challenges in their working groups, r esearch programs and publications. 
This reports aim to summarize some of the recent wo rk on greater resource efficiency 
and greener economic growth and development in the Nordic countries. This includes 
core background documents from the Nordic Council o f Ministers, The Nordic prime 
ministers’ Working Group for Green Growth, and the EU (chapter 1), research studies 
related to green growth financed by the Nordic Coun cil of Ministers (chapter 2), and the 
Oslo conference on Green economic growth held in Ma rch 2012 (chapter 3).

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	10	
1 Background 
This section summarizes the main background reports to the Nordic work on green 
economy. These include The environmental action pla n 2009-2012 (Nordic Council of 
Ministers 2008), the EU2020 Strategy with its Road Map on resource efficiency (EU 
2011) and the report from The Nordic prime minister s’ Working Group for Green 
Growth (2011). 
1.1 The environmental action plan 2009-2012 
The environmental action plan 2009-2012 (Nordic Council of Ministers 2008) emphasises 
the ambition of the Nordic countries to be a pionee r region in the environmental area 
and in sharing their experience with others. Throug h coordinated efforts, the Nordic 
countries have contributed initiatives and tested p roblem solutions to the international 
environmental challenges. The plan points to the ne ed to further continue and develop 
this work method, to enhance cooperation between th e Nordic countries to optimise the 
utilisation of available resources and to find join t solutions in the Nordic region. 
The choice of areas for Nordic cooperation rests on the principle that the cooperation 
can improve the results or save resources compared with the situation where the 
countries act alone. The plan points to four main t hemes for environmental cooperation 
during the period 2009-2012: 
-	
 	Climate and air : Serious changes in the earth’s climate must be av erted and the 
effects of climate change prevented. The content of pollutants in the air must not 
harm the environment or human health. 
-	
 	Sea and coastal regions : The Nordic waters must have a good ecological sta tus by 
2020. The Nordic waters must be utilised sustainabl y. 
-	
 	Biological diversity and ecosystem services : Sustainable management of the 
natural environment must be achieved for the purpos e of protecting natural 
processes and the value of the cultural landscape t o maintain ecosystem services. 
-	
 	Sustainable consumption and production : Consumption and production must take 
place in such a manner that environmental and healt h conditions can be 
improved and resource utilisation is efficient and sustainable. 
Throughout this report, we will examine how the ove rall objectives within these themes 
have been captured by the initiatives made by the N ordic Council of Ministers. 	
1.2 The EU2020 Strategy with its Road Map on resource e fficiency 
The EU2020 Strategy with its Road Map on resource efficiency (EU 2011) is another 
important guideline for the Nordic work. The Vision of the road map is that by 2050 the 
EU's economy has grown in a way that respects resou rce constraints and planetary 
boundaries, thus contributing to global economic tr ansformation. 
Towards resource efficient policies

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 11 
The Road Map emphasises the need for transforming the economy in order to remove 
barriers holding back resource efficiency and to cr eate the right incentives for 
production and consumption decisions. The vision is that by 2020, citizens and public 
authorities have the right incentives to choose the most resource efficient products and 
services, through appropriate price signals and cle ar environmental information. The 
report points to the need for policies that balance the natural capital and the removal of 
barriers to improved resource efficiency, with a fa ir, flexible, predictable and coherent 
basis for business to operate. Four main suggestion s are forwarded: 
-	
 	To address markets and prices, taxes and subsidies that do not reflect the real 
costs of resource use and lock the economy into an unsustainable path. As a 
milestone for 2020, environmentally harmful subsidi es have been phased out, 
and taxes shifted from taxation of labour towards e nvironmental taxation. 
-	
 	To encourage more long-term innovative thinking in business, finance and 
politics that leads to the uptake of new sustainabl e practices and stimulates 
breakthroughs in innovation, and develops forward t hinking, and cost effective 
regulation. 
-	
 	To carry out research to fill the gaps in our knowl edge and skills and provide the 
right information and training. As a milestone for 2020, scientific breakthroughs 
and sustained innovation efforts have dramatically improved how we 
understand, manage, reduce the use, reuse, recycle, substitute and safeguard and 
value resources. 
-	
 	To deal with international competitiveness concerns , and seek to get a consensus 
with international partners to move in a similar di rection. 
In order to get the prices right, evaluation of non -market goods can provide important 
guidelines for market adjustments. The report empha sises the need for valuation and 
accounting of ecosystem services. 
Sector-wise milestones 
Milestones for 2020 are set up for particular areas : 
-	
 	Waste should be managed as a resource and illegal s hipping of waste should be 
eradicated. 
-	
 	The loss of biodiversity and degradation of ecosyst em services should be halted 
and biodiversity restored as far as feasible. 
-	
 	The Water Framework Directive is implemented and im pacts of droughts and 
flood minimised. 
-	
 	The EU’s interim air quality standards will have be en met. 
-	
 	The EU policies take into account their direct and indirect impact on land use 
with the aim achieving no land take by 2050. 
-	
 	Good environmental status of all EU marine waters i s achieved and fishing is 
within maximum sustainable yields. 
-	
 	Widespread incentives to healthier and more sustain able food production and 
consumption. 
-	
 	High resource efficiency in renovation and construc tion of buildings and 
infrastructure. 
-	
 	Transport will use less and cleaner energy with red uced negative impact on the 
environment.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	12	
The Road Map further provides a detailed framework illustrating the inter-linkages 
between key sectors and resources and their associa ted EU policy initiatives. 
1.3 The Nordic prime ministers’ Working Group for Green Growth 
The Nordic Working Group for Green Growth was issued by the Nordic prime ministers. 
Their mandate was to map specific Nordic strengths and tangible areas in which Nordic 
co-operation creates or has the potential to create synergy. In their report, they suggest 
eight main areas for joint work within the Nordic r egion (The Nordic prime ministers’ 
Working Group for Green Growth 2011): 
-	
 	Develop Nordic test centres for green solutions: So that energy technologies can be tested and devel oped on a large scale, and 
also to study the opportunities and added value to be derived from 
establishing new joint Nordic test and demonstratio n facilities. 
Responsible ministries: Energy, with trade, researc h, transport and 
agriculture. 
-	
 	Work together on education, training and research f or green growth: 
To map the opportunities and quantify the added val ue of working together 
on national education, training and research initia tives of significance to 
green growth. 
Responsible ministries: Education and research, wit h energy and trade. 
-	
 	Promote flexible consumption of electricity: 
To reinforce the focus on the demand side, e.g. pro mote flexible consumption 
of electricity and a Nordic exchange of experiences , and to promote 
partnerships with leading stakeholders in industry and the service sector in 
order to share experiences and best practice. 
Responsible ministries: Energy, with trade. 
-	
 	Work together on green-technology norms and standar ds: 
Identify the most important areas in construction i n which technical norms 
and standards would be suited to co-ordination at N ordic level, and to 
develop proposals for how the barriers to this work could be removed, and to 
raise the level of ambition in EU work on eco-desig n and energy-labelling 
requirements for various types of products. 
Responsible ministries: Trade, energy, housing and environment. 
-	
 	Work together on green procurement in the public se ctor: 
Identify areas and product groups in which green pr ocurement standards are 
most efficient in comparison with other instruments , and study the 
opportunities for coordinating green procurement st andards at Nordic level. 
Responsible ministries: Trade, with environment and energy. 
-	
 	Develop techniques and methods for waste treatment: 
Develop joint Nordic methods and technology for sel ected types of waste in 
which there is known potential for a resource-effec tive life cycle in the waste-
treatment sector. 
Responsible ministries: Environment, with energy an d trade. 
-	
 	Promote the integration of environmental and climat e considerations into 
development aid: Reinforce the green emphasis and study opportunitie s for the further 
development of the Nordic Climate Facility.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 13 	
Responsible ministries: Aid/development ministers. 
-	
 	Coordinate and improve funding for green investment and companies to 
support funding for growth in green companies and i nvestment: 
Responsible ministries: Finance, with trade and ene rgy.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	14	
2 Projects initiated by the Nordic Council of Ministe rs 
This chapter summarizes the main findings in the research studies related to green 
growth financed by the Nordic Council of Ministers. 
2.1 Greening the economy: Nordic experiences and challe nges 
All of the background initiatives in chapter 1 emphasise the challenging policy 
requirements needed to balance environmental and re source values with the needs for 
economic growth. The project “ Greening the economy: Nordic experiences and challeng es” 
( Skjelvik, Bruvoll and Ibenholt 2011 ) looks into the experiences in the Nordic countrie s 
with respect to greening the economy over the previ ous decades. The report focusses on 
how economic instruments have contributed to integr ate environmental concerns into 
economic growth and development policies. 
The report demonstrates that the Nordic countries o ver the last decades have achieved a 
decoupling of economic development from growth in e missions. Several major 
pollutants have been substantially reduced along wi th clear improvements in local and 
regional environmental quality, while maintaining a n internationally respectable rate of 
economic growth. This has been achieved through a r ange of policy instruments, with a 
strong and increasing element of economic, marked-b ased instruments. 
There are many examples in the Nordic countries of lacking instruments, or that the 
instrument did not provide the correct incentives. To include payment for ecosystem 
services into the market based scheme is one exampl e. There is significant scope for 
using such payment to promote private sector engage ment in biodiversity conservation. 
The report concludes that it is both a challenge an d opportunity for the Nordic countries 
to improve efficiency in policy design of and in th e combination of policy instruments. 
It is recommended that the need for subsidies shoul d be critically assessed. Subsidies 
should be used to create incentives to generate an optimal level of positive externalities, 
which are normally present during the R&D phase. Th e introduction of new technologies 
however, should be left to the market rather than p icking the winners in subsidy 
schemes. 
The report recommends consideration of new ways of redistributing or recycling the 
revenues from environmental taxes. While reducing t ax revenue might not be in 
compliance with first best solutions, it can offer second best solutions securing cost 
effective emission reductions, cf. the Norwegian NO	
x fund. 
The report has some specific recommendations direct ed at the Nordic and other 
industrialized countries, and some for developing c ountries: 
Recommendations for Nordic / other developed countr ies 
-	
 	Global cooperation based on national responsibility is crucial to reduce GHG 
emissions. 
-	
 	Biodiversity loss should be handled locally 
-	
 	Curbing use of hazardous substances needs internati onal cooperation. 
-	
 	Local car traffic needs special attention.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 15 	
- 	Car taxation and costs should be more transparent to consumers. 
-	
 	Tax exemptions should be removed. 
Recommendations for emerging / developing economies 
-	
 	Assess the costs of environmental degradation. 
-	
 	Remove environmental harmful subsidies. 
-	
 	Consider imposing local resource management and fue l/emission taxation. 	
2.2 The economic crisis and its consequences 
As is pointed out by the background initiatives in chapter 1, it is a particular challenge to 
balance the environmental and resource problems wit h the needs for economic growth. 
This problem is more relevant than ever before due to the financial crises. A first order 
effect of the crisis has been reduced economic grow th, with emission reductions as a 
result. However, environmentally friendly investmen ts will face lower priority in favour 
of general investments promoting economic growth. T he challenge is to formulate 
policies stimulating both economic growth while sti ll taking care of the environment. 
The project ” The economic crisis and its consequences for the envi ronment and 
environmental policies ” presents a review of the effects of the crisis on environmental 
policy and on the environment in the Nordic countri es, followed by an analysis of 
various possible policy interventions aimed at miti gating adverse effects. The report 
( Berghäll and Perrels 2010 ) contains a quick review of typical mechanisms and effects, 
based on a literature survey as well as on a scan o f recent trends in key economic and 
environmental statistics in Nordic countries. 
The report states that some Nordic countries were h it more severely by the economic 
crisis than others, owing to different economic str uctures and monetary policies. 
Recovery has been rather hesitant. Crises usually s et in motion significant changes in the 
structure of the economy and its institutions, whic h constitute both risks and 
opportunities. 
The reduction in global energy demand caused a redu ction in fossil fuel prices, whereas 
also prices of carbon emission rights in the Europe an Emission Trade System (EU-ETS) 
decreased as a result of lowered projections of ove rall emissions in the near term future. 
As a consequence the use of coal in electricity gen eration increased, thereby partly 
offsetting the original reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. The Nordic countries 
taking part in EU-ETS are expected to fulfil their reduction obligations for the period 
2008–2012 more easily. It seems that other emission s show less sensitivity to the 
economic crisis. This is partly attributable to act ivities such as food production, of which 
the physical volumes depend much less on economic c ycles. 
Recovery policies 
The reduction in emission levels may be a temporary scale effect, and after some years 
the emissions will likely start to grow again. If e nvironmental investment efforts are 
slowed down due to the crisis, the resumption in gr owth of environmental burdens may 
even be significant. This kind of concerns motivate d many governments and specialists 
around the world to consider how economic stimulus packages could be made “green”. 
On the other hand these stimulus packages are suppo sed to have only a limited life span,

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	16	
whereas the economic conditions for both public and private investments probably 
imply a substantially reduced manoeuvring space for large efforts in various 
environmental policy areas. This prospect invites t o consider what kind of policies could 
overcome these obstacles for envisaged increased en vironmental policy efforts. 
The report concludes that recovery policies, even w hen “green”, should be distinguished 
from long term policies aiming at a sustainable tra nsition, inter alia creating a low-
carbon society. The former type of policies focuses on economic growth, the latter on 
structural change. Careful selection and dosage of measures will help to ensure that 
recovery policies also promote sustainable transiti on. 
The report shows that also the Nordic countries app ly stimulus programmes with green 
elements, except Iceland which has not prioritized stimulus programmes due its 
domestic banking crisis. Outright green stimulus pr ogrammes will expire fairly soon, but 
for the medium to long term changes in fiscal polic ies may be expected, which can also 
offer opportunities for “greening” public finance p olicy. 
A common element for most if not all Nordic countri es is a further shift towards so-
called “ecological tax reform”, i.e. taxing environ mentally burdening activities more and 
taxing labour income less. 
Fiscal policy is expected to tighten considerably i n all Nordic countries and elsewhere, as 
the crisis led to significant increases in public d ebt, whereas the ageing of the population 
adds further pressures. This creates possibilities to continue ecological tax reform as 
well as to diminish or abolish environmentally harm ful subsidies. Furthermore, in 
addition to emission trade other quasi market instr uments and informational 
instruments may gain importance. 
In conjunction with expected tightening of public f inances and capital markets in 
general, this easing effect could result in a slowd own of a sustainable transition in the 
Nordic countries as well in Europe overall, unless environmental policies and the 
greening of the fiscal policies are emphasized suff iciently. The report points to a quite 
large portfolio of environmental technologies and s ervices where the Nordic countries 
have strong positions in export potentials and gree n product and service areas. These 
areas would need continued support for their R&D ef forts and for demonstration 
projects. 
In short the report suggests that the following ada ptations could be considered: 
(1) tax reforms, with evermore stress on taxing con sumption of (natural) resources and 
only limited (temporary) overall increase of tax ra tes, 
(2) abolishment or at least reduction of environmen tally harmful subsidies, 
(3) other quasi-market incentive structures (tradab le certificate systems; performance 
dependent “fee bates”), 
(4) radical improvement of market information via m onitoring and feedback services, 
certified labelling, etc. and 
(5) combinations of the aforementioned options.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 17 
2.3 Reforming environmentally harmful subsidies 
An important part of sustainable policy is to remov e or adjust environmentally harmful 
subsidies. In particular, subsidies to fossil fuel consumption are widespread around the 
world and contribute to significant environmental c osts. Such subsidies are hard to 
remove, since they are used to support low income g roups or out of other distributional 
concerns. In a transition to a more efficient envir onmental policy, more information on 
well-functioning reforms are needed. 
The project “ Reforming environmentally harmful subsidies ” gives an overview on 
environmental harmful subsidies, subsidy reforms an d how to counteract distributional 
impacts ( Bruvoll, Skjelvik and Vennemo 2011 ). The report discusses the theoretical 
principles for an efficient environmental and redis tribution policy, and offers a survey of 
experiences from policy reforms over a range of cou ntries. The reform survey forms a 
background for recommendations of sustainable polic y reforms, taking care of 
environmental, economic and distributional concerns . 
The phase-out of fossil fuel consumption subsidies would reduce global energy-related 
carbon emissions by about 6 per cent. The burden on public budgets is particularly high 
in developing countries. The total order of magnitu de of fossil fuel subsidies is roughly 
estimated to almost 1 per cent of world GDP. 
The review of environmentally harmful subsidies sho ws that the most common 
justification for subsidies to energy consumption i s to support low income groups. 
Developed countries face higher environmental aware ness and higher willingness and 
economic possibility to prioritize the environment. The Nordic countries are among the 
richest in the world, and typical characteristics a re strong public sectors. Though 
environmentally harmful subsidies seem to be more c ommon as support to industries, 
employment and regional development, the total envi ronmental impact is probably 
relatively lower compared to most other countries. 
Definition of environmentally harmful subsidies 
The report draws theoretical lines for the definiti on of environmentally harmful 
subsidies. The main recommendations are that: 
-	
 	Environmentally harmful subsidies are inefficient s ubsidies causing negative 
environmental effects. 
-	
 	Subsidies correctly levied to adjust for market fai lure or in order to correct 
distributional impacts should not be included in th e definition of a harmful 
subsidy, despite their possible negative environmen tal effects. 
-	
 	Exemptions and lack of environmental taxes and regu lations, in addition to 
several non-budgetary support mechanisms are also p rincipally environmentally 
harmful subsidies. 
Policy recommendations 
Normally, subsidies are thought of as direct suppor t over public budgets. But indirect 
support and polluters not paying the external emiss ion costs are just other forms of 
environmentally harmful subsidies. Lack of environm ental taxes, selective exemptions 
from governmental standards, preferential market ac cess and price support represent

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	18	
different types of off-budget subsidies with principally the same effects as direct 
subsidies. Hence reducing the extent of environment ally harmful subsidies involves 
more than only removing the on-budget subsidies. In direct subsidies and tax exemption 
should also be removed, and polluting activities sh ould be fully taxed according to their 
external costs. 
The core of the problem related to environmentally harmful subsidies is that the support 
benefits significant groups. Removing the subsidies normally provokes opposition from 
pressure groups and political parties. First, it is necessary to identify which groups are 
in target for support. In reality, subsidies to fos sil fuel consumption first of all benefits 
those who can afford to use energy-intensive applia nces, not the poor. To raise the 
necessary political support, it is important to pro duce high quality, reliable information 
about the benefits and costs, in order to communica te the net benefits to the society, and 
to be clear about the political targets. Adversely, it has been shown that lack of 
transparent information has been a decisive obstacl e to reforms. Predictability and 
broad political support increase the possibility of implementing sound reforms. 
The environmental and economic costs and benefits s hould be evaluated to help 
prioritize reforms. The original purpose of the sub sidies must be identified in order to 
evaluate whether compensatory measures are required to uphold the political goals. 
Compensatory measures have proven to be of crucial importance in successful reforms 
of harmful subsidies around the world. Reducing har mful subsidies improves the public 
budgets and releases funding for direct compensatio n packages. To avoid new, 
inefficient subsidies, it is important to levy the compensation as close to the prioritized 
groups as possible. It is also important to avoid n ew environmentally harmful subsidies, 
such as the different forms of subsidies for new en ergy forms, which always have some 
negative effects. Instead, emissions should be subj ect to direct taxes. 
2.4 Payment for and management of ecosystem services 
Payment for ecosystem services (PES) gives the owne rs of natural resources direct 
incentives to manage it in society’s best interest, given that the prices reflect the social 
marginal costs including environmental consequences . Such payment can imply that the 
resource owner gives up some private income in exch ange for a compensation for the 
ecosystem services. While environmental taxes are i ncreasingly used to get the prices 
right, PES is an emerging policy alternative to dir ect regulations. Since experiences with 
PES are rather scarce, there is a need for an overv iew to increase the scientific basis for 
more widespread use of economic instruments. 
The project “ Payment for and management of ecosystem services ” provides an overview 
of the status of methods and measures in the valuat ion of and payment for ecosystem 
services and gives examples of such payment systems or other similar management 
mechanisms ( Zandersen, Grønvik Bråten and Lindhjem 2009 ). The study provides policy 
makers as well as the wider public advice and recom mendations on how such methods 
and systems can be applied in different areas and f or different types of ecosystem 
services. 
It is shown that PES is firmly embedded in the tool box of classical incentive-based 
policy instruments and yet offers a novel way to ma naging ecosystem services by

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 19 
providing a direct conditional way of buying conservation and integrating the demand 
and supply sides of ecosystem services. PES is foun d either in the form of nature 
conservation contracts or as creation of new market products such as offset credits or 
eco-labelling. 
The report proposes to use a distinction between in termediate and final goods of nature 
in helping to set up efficient PES schemes. It iden tifies at an overall level the 
beneficiaries of ecosystem services, distribution o f rights between buyers and sellers of 
ecosystem services and public-private good aspects of ecosystem services, and it 
proposes a framework for integrating ecosystems and economic values. A number of 
examples of PES from OECD countries are presented t o show the variety in PES contract 
designs and two in-depth case studies from Denmark and Finland illustrate different 
experiences in the Nordic countries with PES. 
The report concludes by arguing there is scope both to improve and expand the current 
use of PES in the Nordic countries. 
2.5 Voluntary agreements and environmental labelling in the Nordic 
countries 
While the standard advice from economic experts is to get the prices right, 
supplementary “soft” instruments are popular policy alternatives to rising costs through 
environmental taxes. The optimal choice between ins truments requires information on 
the cost efficiency of the alternative instruments. Pigouvian taxes are per definition cost 
effective, if formulated in accordance with theory. The cost-efficiency in soft 
instruments, as voluntary agreements and eco labell ing, is however difficult to 
investigate. 
The project “ Voluntary agreements and environmental labelling in the Nordic countries” 
( Bauer and Fischer-Bogason 2011 ) map the use and prevalence of eco-labels, 
environmental voluntary agreements in the Nordic co untries, and the inclusion of these 
specific tools in policy mixes. 
The study reveals that voluntary agreements and Eco -labelling Schemes are in use in all 
the Nordic countries. Especially Denmark, Sweden an d Norway have made numerous 
experiences in the use of these soft regulatory ins truments. Whereas the development 
and implementation of voluntary agreements is ad ho c based, Eco-labelling is a quite 
well developed policy tool and especially the Nordi c Swan is well known in the Nordic 
markets and has increased the number of licenses in the recent years. 
Voluntary Agreements 
The use and effects of the voluntary agreements are not well documented in any of the 
countries; evaluations are few and data are quite p oor. Only few evaluations on the cost 
effectiveness have been identified, all stating tha t cost effectiveness is difficult to assess; 
not least caused by a general lack of data and lack of comparables and baselines. 
Moreover, it is difficult to isolate the effects of the agreements. The conclusions that are 
made state that the studied agreements are consider ed cost effective either in terms of 
“expected costs” or in comparison to other measures . Cost effectiveness seems to be a

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	20	
strong argument for drawing and entering the agreements. Evaluations of the effects of 
voluntary agreements on society level are not seen. 
Eco-labels 
Eco-labels are evaluated on different levels, but a ctual environmental effects of the 
schemes are not documented. No analyses have been i dentified on the cost effectiveness 
of The Nordic Swan and the EU-Ecolabel. 
Policy mixes 
There are not many examples of strategic use of vol untary agreements or eco-labelling 
with other policy instruments, and policy-mixing ha s not been thoroughly addressed in 
the existing evaluations. Successful cases of polic y mixes are mainly found within energy 
efficiency, linking energy efficiency agreements wi th instruments such as environmental 
permits, green taxes and information campaigns. Mor e experience and analyses of the 
combination of policy tools are needed. 
Concerning eco-labelling there are good examples an d a large potential in using the 
labelling criteria in public tenders. The mappings show that little knowledge exists on 
the environmental effectiveness of policy mixes of voluntary agreements and eco-labels. 
It is concluded in other studies that the use of po licy mix is particularly relevant when 
aimed at environmental problems that are of a “mult i aspect” nature. 
Need for knowledge 
The main conclusions are that there is a need for m ore knowledge on the actual 
economic and environmental effects of both voluntar y agreements and eco-labelling 
schemes. The existing evaluations are thorough and factual, but they lack baseline and 
economic analysis. Systematic monitoring and evalua tion processes must be carried 
through on a regular basis in order to gather valid data and a form a knowledge base 
from which practitioners can learn. It is also conc luded that policy mixes with these 
instruments are rare and seldom intended. The study of available evaluations shows 
that it is essential to develop structured methods for monitoring and evaluating both the 
voluntary agreements and the eco-labelling schemes. 
2.6 Benefits of green public procurement 
Public procurement is a frequently discussed instru ment to influence the private sector 
towards more sustainable products and services. Bauer et al. (2009 ) identify product 
groups for which green public procurement can serve as an effective regulatory 
instrument, and illustrate the potential impact of green public procurement (GPP). 
Public procurement constitutes 16 percent of GNP in the Nordic countries and for 
certain product groups the public sector is the mos t significant purchaser. However, it 
has not been clarified so far in which areas public procurement is most efficient, in other 
words where the largest environmental result can be obtained with the lowest cost. The 
project was initiated to identify product groups fo r which green public procurement is 
an effective regulatory instrument, and to illustra te the potential impact of GPP.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 21 
The report defines some products with a large turnover and significant environmental 
impact; construction works, IT products, cleaning a gents, transport services and 
vehicles. 
The report states that it was not possible to ident ify relevant references for the 
assessment of the potential impact of existing and optional regulation, including GPP. 
Hence the project does not provide answers to the c ost-efficiency in GPP relative to 
other instruments. 
Although the report points out some positive featur es, such as flexibility and 
reversibility, these features also apply for econom ic instruments and direct regulations. 
The report also point to challenges related to GPP. The procurement costs are higher for 
green products. It is necessary to address structur al and legislative barriers to GPP and, 
opposed to legislation and taxes, it requires speci al competences by public procurement 
officers. 
The report reveals a lack of information of benefit s and costs related to green public 
procurements. The core question is how resources di rected at environmental 
improvements can maximise the environmental benefit s. Even though GPP may reduce 
emissions, this offers no information about the eff ects of alternatives. More research is 
needed as background for evaluation of GPP as an en vironmental policy instrument. 
2.7 Valuation of ecosystem services from Nordic watersh eds 
The environmental action plan (section 1.1) emphasises the need for improving the 
ecological status in the Nordic waters in sea and c oastal regions, and also the EU Road 
Map (section 1.2) prioritizes sustainable managemen t within biological diversity and 
ecosystem services. The valuation of environmental damages is a crucial prerequisite for 
getting the prices right by using environmental tax es and direct regulations. 
Environmental economics has long tradition for theo retical and empirical works within 
evaluation of negative externalities related to pol lutants, but the negative consequences 
on ecosystem services are less studied. Valuation o f ecosystem services is thus an 
important research field to include the broader ran ge of environmental externalities in 
an efficient policy framework. 
The project “ Valuation of ecosystem services from Nordic watersh eds” (Barton et al. 2012 ) 
responds to a need for a Nordic synthesis of experi ences with valuation of ecosystem 
services from watersheds. The objective of the repo rt from the project is to estimate the 
scope of economic values of ecosystem services in s elected watersheds as decision-
support for specific policy scenarios and for gener al demonstration of the importance of 
such services. 
The main findings are that the watershed ecosystem services valued are quite similar 
across the Nordic countries. The services addressed are mainly provisioning services as 
food and fresh water supply, as well as cultural se rvices as aesthetic information and 
opportunities for recreation and tourism. However, valuation studies of regulating and 
supporting habitat services seem to be under-repres ented. 
The authors argue that valuation studies framed to address economic analysis of a 
particular policy respond to a different policy nee d than studies aiming at calculating

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	22	
average per hectare values of ecosystems. Commissioned valuation studies must start by 
addressing what kinds of policy they are aimed at i nforming as a function of how reliable 
and accurate the valuation method has been found to be relative to policy requirements. 
Be-yond using valuation studies as information for framing policy debate through 
raising awareness, it should be made clear whether specific studies of valuation of 
ecosystem services are to be used for accounting, p riority-setting or instrument design. 
Associating values of water quality to states of th e ecosystem involves combining 
pressure-state-impact modelling of run-off from lan d and water uses to status of water 
bodies. The focus on valuing ecosystems contributio n to human well-being while 
laudable, must avoid a focus on trying to isolate t he value of “natural” ecosystems if this 
is at the expense of tried and tested methods such as cost-effectiveness analysis. 
The authors therefore argue that calculation of ave rage per hectare ecosystem services 
values may be useful for awareness raising and acco unting at aggregate levels. However, 
it is not useful for the part of policy addressing priority-setting and instrument design. 
Modelling of regulating services such as flood redu ction and pollution control needs to 
be spatially explicit if it is to address economic interests and their locations, and in turn 
be policy relevant. Different interests live and us e different “hectares” of an ecosystem. 
Average values of ecosystem services do not address income distributional issues, but 
cover conflicts of interest between different users using the same ecosystem and trade-
offs between them. 
Economic valuation is useful for instrument design if it can help predict how similar 
incentive levels would lead to different behaviour of different interests at different 
locations; or how to target incentives across inter ests and locations in order to achieve 
similar behaviour. Priority setting between alterna tive land-uses, projects, and 
measures is at its core identifying how land and wa ter use values differ between 
interests at specific locations. 
Ecosystem services are in part defined by policy re gulation. Particularly in high income 
countries such as the Nordic, health and safety sta ndards probably play a large part in 
how we perceive nature. Regulations define what ri ghts private interests have to 
ecosystem services, to public measures to provide t hese services, and to compensation if 
these are lost. Establishing these rights through regulation is costly. However, valuation 
of ES seldom addresses the transaction costs of def ining ES as rights. Policy relevant 
valuation research includes research on transaction costs of payments of ES. 
2.8 Measuring green jobs? 
The demand for data on green activities in many for ms is driven by the need for 
international comparisons, and to track progress on environmental progress in different 
companies, sectors, companies and the economy as a whole. Environmental authorities 
and politicians ask for information to demonstrate the effects of environmental policies. 
Countries with high unemployment seek new business opportunities and additional jobs 
for economic growth. 
As a response to the need for information helping u s to understand the transition to a 
greener economy several initiatives have been made to measure “green sectors”, “green 
jobs” and “green technologies”. There is no commonl y agreed definition across the

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 23 
different initiatives made to measure the green factors. Hence, there is a need to clarify 
and structure relevant concepts to improve the info rmation asked for. 
The project « Measuring green jobs? An evaluation of definitions and statistics for green 
activities » reviews initiatives made to measure these aspects (Bruvoll et al. 2012 ). The 
report discusses whether the statistics collected u nder the present initiatives increase 
insights into the fundamental questions motivating the initiatives, and looks into 
information on future economic structures and needs for educated labour to meet 
environmental challenges. Suggestions are made on w hich data would be best suited for 
producing the relevant information. 
In particular, the report evaluates the UN/Eurostat initiative EGSS (Environmental 
Goods and Service Sectors), which is a comprehensiv e attempt planned to become an 
international standard for quantification. The repo rt concludes that it is both 
theoretically and practically impossible to measure , define and delineate which jobs, 
companies and sectors that are “green”, while other jobs, companies and sectors are not. 
Since all production and consumption of goods and s ervices have environmental effects, 
“greenness” is a relative concept. All jobs and com panies are part of long production and 
delivery chains involving many companies and sector s, and all activities cause 
environmental damages to some extent. 
Alternative statistics 
The core issue of green growth is not the relative size of “green” sectors, but the 
aggregate environmental impacts of the whole econom y. The report illustrates that the 
use of conventional statistics covers all the infor mation needs requested by politicians, 
including factual data on emissions, resource, empl oyment and production, and enable 
measurements of environmental load and related empl oyment per sector without 
creating normative categories for which activities are green and non-green. The UN 
SEEA and, in particular, the European NAMEA system , applied in several Nordic 
countries, provide frameworks for using and further developing such data, and can also 
be used for linking to macro-economic modelling and analysis of highly relevant 
environmental policy issues. 
A consistent way to use the statistics could be to calculate the environmental damages 
per produced unit of different sectors and track th e development over time. This can be 
done by using traditional statistical methods and d ata. Emissions and other damages 
may be weighed together using cost estimates from t he literature, to form estimates or 
uncertainty intervals for the more overall environm ental pressure, if such information is 
requested. 
Finally, economic models offer forecasts for potent ial economic and environmental 
development, and hence the need for environmental i nstruments and policy to stimulate 
relevant competence development. 
Education needs 
The report further looks at present and future econ omic structures and needs for labour 
to meet environmental challenges. As a general tren d in the Nordic countries, jobs are 
getting more knowledge intensive. This does not nec essarily correlate to

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	24	
environmentally friendly technologies, since these require both low and high skilled 
jobs. From a policy point of view it is difficult t o point out specifically which types of 
education will be most important to support in the future in an environmental 
perspective. 
2.9 Using the right environmental indicators 
To formulate responses to environmental impacts, co mprehensive and accessible 
information is needed. However, the environmental i nformation is often a puzzle with 
many different pieces found in various ministries, agencies and institutions involved in 
the development and publication of data, statistics and indicators. Making sense of this 
information, keeping track of who is doing what and figuring out what information is 
needed and when to use which type of indicator can be challenging. 
The project “ Using the right environmental indicators ” attempts to evaluate different 
types of information/indicators and what are their major uses (Hass and Palm 2012 ). 
Further, it looks at the work of the Nordic countri es in light of the System of 
Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA), the relat ed 2011 EU regulation requiring 
reporting of environmental accounts and the propose d new reporting areas that are 
under discussion with the European Commission (Eur ostat). In addition to describing 
the different types of indicators, some evaluation and guidance regarding the use of 
indicators are given. 
The main conclusions and recommendations in the rep ort include: 
-	
 	Indicators need to be used appropriately. For examp le, indicators which are best 
used for awareness-raising cannot be appropriately used for monitoring policies. 
-	
 	Statistics used for monitoring need to be construct ed specifically to address and 
keep track of policy goals. 
-	
 	Complex, aggregated indicators are typically only a ppropriate for awareness-
raising, and data quality and international compara bility are often questionable. 
-	
 	Attempts to develop “Green GDP” figures encounter a range of problems, above 
all that all valuation methods proposed for assigni ng prices to environmental 
goods and services yield prices that are not consis tent with and cannot be added 
to the market-based prices in the present system of national accounts. 
-	
 	These problems also arise for attempts to integrate the value of ecosystem 
services in national accounting. While much useful work has been done and can 
be further developed on identifying and describing physical ecosystem services, 
in measuring the amounts and the importance of such services to human users 
and stakeholders, and in analysis and evaluation of the different types of “value” 
of these services, the fundamental problem of incom patible types of prices 
remains a stumbling block to full integration in na tional accounting. 
-	
 	The statistical offices of the Nordic countries hav e a long history of working with 
“satellite accounts” for the environment, in combin ing national accounts with 
environmental information, and in modelling and ana lysis of a range of 
environmental issues, based on linking such nationa l accounting and 
environmental data. These systems and methods may b e the best approach to 
respond to the needs and demands of policy-making t hat “Green GDP”-efforts are 
sometimes put forward as an answer to.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 25 	
- 	On proposed new modules in the European Union legal framework on 
environmental-economic accounts, the report support s a module on energy use 
by economic actor, with some modifications, sees th e detail required for a 
module on Environmental Goods and Services as a det ermining factor in its 
acceptance, and suggests that data needs for a new module on environmental 
protection expenditure could be met by current requ ired reporting. 
-	
 	In relation to further development of existing modu les, the report strongly 
recommends that priority on material flow accountin g move from overall 
economy-wide figures to substances with less mass b ut higher environmental 
impacts, such as hazardous chemicals. 
These conclusions and recommendations might form pa rt of the basis for Nordic 
contributions to further work in the OECD (e.g gree n growth indicators) and in 
EU/Eurostat (indicators for resource efficiency, en vironmental-economic accounts). 	
2.10 Environmental technologies in the Nordic countries 
Environmental improvements basically rely on techno logical development and 
adaptation. For example, emission reductions per un it of energy used will be crucial in 
the future solution to global warming, either as ne w sources of energy, or more efficient 
energy technologies. 
The project “ Environmental technologies in the Nordic countries ” aims to describe the 
Nordic countries’ efforts to promote eco-efficient technology or environmental 
technology ( Skov 2012). The report emphasises the solutions of environme ntal problems 
rather than the business potential, and assesses th e status and possibilities for 
improvement for each Nordic country. The report fur ther looks at differences and 
similarities between the Nordic countries, and asse sses whether there are opportunities 
for better cooperation to move forward by the help of others. 
The report recommends more environmental informatio n on companies and their 
export and patents, in addition to information on t he amount of funding, how it has been 
used and dissemination of the outcomes. The report also asks for sufficient grant funds 
and venture capital to meet the reasonable needs of companies, more regulation of the 
demand side, including green public procurement, co ordination between state actors 
and nations, and strategies for green growth.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	26	
3 The conference 
As part of the Norwegian chairmanship of the Nordic Council of Ministers in 2012, the 
Norwegian Ministry of the Environment arranged a co nference on Green economic 
growth in March 2012. The conference built on recent Nord ic and international work on 
greening the economy and on green economic growth. 
The aim of the conference was to discuss how to dee pen and strengthen efforts to 
achieve greater resource efficiency and greener eco nomic growth and development in 
the Nordic countries, and, in particular, how to fo llow-up both the EU2020 Strategy with 
its Road Map on Resource Efficiency and the report from the Nordic Prime Ministers’ 
Task Force on Green Growth, cf. Chapter 1. 
The conference included presentations from UNEP’s I nternational Resource Panel, from 
the European Union, on the Road Map on Resource Eff iciency, and from the OECD, on the 
role of innovation in OECD’s Green Growth Strategy, in addition to presentations based 
on the Nordic Council of Ministers’ own work on a G reen Economy, cf. Chapter 2. The 
conference concluded with a discussion between a pa nel and the audience, on how to 
promote environmental technology, resource efficien cy and green economic growth in 
the Nordic countries. 
This chapter summarizes the main content of the con ference, including the 
presentations and the penal debate. 
3.1 Introduction 
Erik Solheim, the Norwegian Minister of Environment a nd International Development 
opened the conference. The Minister referred to the positive historical aspects of 
international development, as the world has reached less poverty, more peace, more fair 
democracy, better health, and higher education leve l than in any other part of history. 
The next problem now is how the western world shoul d solve the industrial pollution 
problem. 
At the same time as we are in the fortunate situati on of high economic capacity, it is 
uncertain whether we manage to solve climate change , and whether we have the 
capacity to come together and agree. It is also unc ertain whether Europe and USA are 
able to solve the economic challenges following the financial crisis. The world has also 
become politically multi-polar world, which is more fair, but this framework is also more 
difficult to agree within than before. 
Still 1 billion people live in poverty, and economi c uncertainty. The minister pointed to 
green inclusive growth as the answer to this proble m. We need growth to get countries 
like India out of poverty, but the growth has to be green, otherwise it will be 
undermined. 
The largest challenge is that private profit from u tilizing ecosystems brings great benefit 
to privates. He pointed to socialized costs, i.e. m ore fair economic systems, as a solution, 
for example profits from ecosystems must be shared by taxes, also taking care of future 
generation. The Minister referred to the Nordic mod el and its ability to find

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 27 
compromises. The cooperation between industrial leaders, unions and the state is 
unique to the world, the ability to agree is a grea t Nordic advantage, and he claimed that 
the Nordic countries are less fearful of change tha n other societies, including changes in 
industrial behaviour. 
The Minister pointed to several important strategie s to solve the conflicting interests 
between growth and environment. First, he stated th at it will be necessary to decouple 
the economy. We need economic growth, as there no t heory of how to improve the 
economies without growth. Nearly all pollutants hav e been decoupled from economic 
growth, and most have substantially decoupled since the 1990s. A crucial point is to 
become more resource efficient. 
Further, he pointed to the large potential in rainf orests preservation. In Brazil, 
deforestation has been reduced by 70 percent in 7 y ears. This is the most impact any 
country has ever made to reduce GHG and to preserve biodiversity. Another initiative, 
made by Sweden and USA, is to reduce short-lived cl imate drivers. 
Finally, he mentioned Ban Ki-moon’s global initiat ive to create a global right to 
sustainable energy. 1,4 billion people have still n o grid connection. This cannot be based 
on coal, but must be renewable. Huge green scale in vestments must be done with public 
financial aid, in cooperation with private interest s. 
3.2 Session 1: Resources, ecology and growth 
The two first speakers in this session focussed on particular aspect of green growth; 
Edgar Hertwick discussed the historical and potenti al future development of decoupling 
between economic growth and the environment, and Ma rianne Kettunen discussed the 
measurements of benefits from ecosystem services. W hile we find clear signs of 
decoupling, the environmental pressure still increa ses. This harms ecosystems, but the 
extent and values of the damages are still subject to exploration. To implement the 
correct signals to the market and to formulate effi cient regulations, good statistics for 
ecosystem services are needed. This is reflected in the initiatives following the 
background documents for the Nordic work on green e conomy, see The environmental 
action plan (section 1.1) as well as the EU Roadmap (section 1.2). 
The last two speakers presented programs supporting initiatives for green growth. Janos 
Herman presented the EU Roadmap for green growth, a nd Øyvind Lone presented the 
Nordic prime Ministers’ Task Force on Green Growth, which looks into potentials for 
increased governmental cooperation on green growth. 
3.2.1 Global resource use and decoupling 
Edgar Hertwich, UNEP’s International Resource Panel , discussed the issue of resource use 
and decoupling. He claimed that there may be ways t o decouple the environmental 
impacts and resource use from economic growth while at the same time avoiding 
burden shifting between countries, generations and trade-offs between impact 
categories and life cycle stages. 
Hertwich participates in UNEP’s International Resou rce Panel, which has launched five 
assessment reports, from which he referred the resu lts: A key finding is that GDP has

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	28	
grown faster than material extraction over the last 100 years in all the categories of the 
investigated material extractions (ores and industr ial materials, fossil energy carriers, 
construction materials and biomass). At the same ti me, resource use per capita has 
increased, and resource use per capita grows by inc ome. The increasing trends hold 
across expenditure categories; the carbon emissions increase with income. The Panel 
estimates an elasticity between carbon emission and income of 0,73, and a relative 
decupling between household income and energy use. 
Hence, the findings in this project, as well as in other parts of the literature, show that 
there is a relative decoupling between resource use and GDP. There is however no signs 
of absolute decoupling. At present, consumption gro wth outstrips decoupling, leading to 
an increase in absolute resource consumption. 
Generally, resource prices fell towards 1990, but s tatistics indicate increasing prices the 
last decades. This may be a sign of scarcity, which may promote efficiency 
improvements. In his conclusion, Hertwich pointed t o the fact that, despite decoupling, 
emissions increase due to the increasing scale of t he economy. A more controversial 
alternative is to focus on decoupling of wellbeing from resource consumption. This 
implies not using economic growth as a meter of gro wth in wellbeing, but accepting that 
human welfare can increase without increasing GDP. 
3.2.2 The value of ecosystem services 
Marianne Kettunen, Finnish Environment Institute and Institute for European 
Environmental Policy discussed the values and the valuation of ecosyste m services. 
Ecosystem services may be categorized into provisio ning (food, freshwater, wood, fuels 
etc), regulating (climate, flood and disease regula tion, water purification etc.) and 
cultural services (aesthetic, spiritual, educationa l, recreational etc.). Several of the values 
from these services are part of the market economy, and hence exposed to negative 
externalities. Between these categories are trade-o ffs, interactions and multiple 
interdependencies. 
Kettunen presented the TEEB initiative – The Econom ics of Ecosystems and 
Biodiversity. This is one of many important project , along with e.g. the activities within 
the Nordic Council of Ministers – working with maki ng the ecosystem services values 
visible. 
There are about 300 programmes globally for payment for ecosystem services, covering 
both the public and the private sector, and the use of such instruments is expanding. 
Global markets of organic food and drinks and ecoto urism are increasing. As an example 
of economic value of ecosystem, Kettunen referred t o the value of EUR 15 billion of 
pollination by animals. 
Kettunen pointed to the importance of improving the foundations, getting the market 
signals right and encouraging to invest green. She proposed four main points to 
integrate green economy: 
-	
 	Understand the value of nature and natural capital even when the values are not 
market based.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 29 	
- 	Integrate the value of nature and natural capital into the foundations of decision-
making, such as plans and regulations, accounting s ystems and impact 
assessments. 
-	
 	Provide the right economic signals – remove harmful subsidies and create 
incentives to sustainable use of natural capital. 
-	
 	Invest in green activities and create green jobs. 
To understand the value of ecosystems, both stocks and flows of ecosystem services 
must be mapped. Second, the qualitative, quantitati ve, and monetary values of 
ecosystem services must be valued. Finally, there i s a need to map the status and trends 
in biodiversity. 	
3.2.3 Europe 2020 and the Roadmap for Resource Efficiency 
H.E. Ambassador Janos Herman, Head of the Delegation of the European Union to Norway 
presented the Europe 2020 Roadmap for Resource Effi ciency (see also section 1.2). This 
is part of the Europe 2020 Strategy, an overall str ategy for smart, inclusive and 
sustainable growth, setting specific goals for empl oyment, R&D/innovation, climate 
change/energy, education and poverty/social exclusi on. The resource efficiency flagship 
initiative establishes resource efficiency as the g uiding principle for EU policies on 
energy, transport, climate change, industry, commod ities, agriculture, fisheries, 
biodiversity and regional development. 
The Resource Efficiency Roadmap, launched in 2011, proposes ways to increase 
productivity and decouple economic growth from reso urce use, with milestones for 
2020. Core targets to increase resource-efficiency are to 
-	
 	Get the prices right - major shifts are needed in t axation, gradually diminishing 
the tax bases on labour and increasing them on poll ution and resource use. 
-	
 	Get rid of subsidies for inefficient consumption - reduce environmentally 
damaging subsidies, instead of first subsidising th e bads and then repairing the 
damages. 
-	
 	Encourage companies to develop sustainable products and services. 
-	
 	Focus on housing, transport and food. 	
3.2.4 The Nordic Task Force on Green growth 
Øyvind Lone, Norwegian Ministry of Environment, presented the Nordic Prime Ministers’ 
Task Force on Green Growth. The remit for the group is to identify Nordic positions of 
strength and potentials for increased cooperation o n green growth, including 2-3 
tangible green growth initiatives, 2-3 strategic pr iorities and opportunities for linking 
with existing measures and funding sources. 
The group presents eight areas for recommendations, and specifies with which 
ministries are responsible for cooperation. The pla n is further outlined in section 1.3. 
3.3 Session 2: Resource efficiency in industry 
This session presented two industrial cases with cl ear improvements in resource 
efficiency. The Borregaard case, presented by Krist in Misund, is an example of how

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	30	
increasing costs spur innovation to more resource efficient products. The same applies 
for the Kalundborg case, presented by Niels Larsen. 
3.3.1 Forest industry resource efficiency: Borregaard ind ustries 
Kristin Misund, Borregaard, presented the programs for bio-refinery innovation in 
Borregaard. Bio-refinery represents processing of b iomass into a range of marketable 
products. This includes e.g. food products, constru ction materials, textiles, and not least 
ethanol. Ethanol includes bio fuels, which are impo rtant alternatives to fossil fuels and 
oil based products. Borregaard spends close to NOK 100 mill per year on R&D to 
develop new products each year, and about 20 percen t of the revenues come from new 
products. 
Misund referred to increasing raw material, energy and labour costs as drivers for 
innovation. While both technologies and capital wer e foreign based at the time the 
company was established, Borregaard is now on the c ompetitive edge on technology, 
market and innovation competence. 
3.3.2 Resource efficiency and industrial ecology in Kalun dborg 
Niels Larsen, Kalundborg Symbiosis, presented the Kalundborg Symbiosis project. This 
project is an example of an industrial exchange of resources, where one partner’s bi-
product is the raw material in another partner’s pr oduction. The project has developed 
over time, starting with three partners in 1961. To day, more than 30 waste streams 
exist between partners, and includes water recyclin g projects, exchange of energy and 
recycling of waste products. The project contribute s to lower use of resources and 
reduced CO	
2 emissions. 
Larsen claimed that several aspects were important to the development of the 
Kalundborg project; industrial potentials, economic incentives, no legal barriers and 
good communication. Despite economic incentives, La rsen claimed that to promote such 
symbiosis projects in the future, support from the authorities will be important. 	
3.4 Session 3: Environmental policy, innovation and technology 
This session focussed on innovation. The first three presentations were based on 
general research programs – Dirk Pilat the OECD gre en growth initiative and Rolf 
Annerberg presented the Nordic Top-level Research I nitiative – and Karsten Skov 
presented a general study of environmental technolo gies in the Nordic countries. These 
presentations focussed on correct relative prices a s important incentives for innovation. 
However, stronger means are needed to promote the n ecessary innovation fast enough, 
including a mixture of incentives and support to re levant research. Research should be 
multi- and interdisciplinary with interactions betw een science and industry in order to 
gain new innovation insight from scientific interac tion. 
After innovation, it can be necessary to follow up in the adaptation and implementation 
of new technologies. The last section focussed on “ soft” instruments - green 
procurement, labelling and voluntary agreements – a s means of stimulating adaptation. 
An important message from Bjørn Bauer is that data is scarce and there is little evidence 
of the effects of these instruments.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 31 
3.4.1 Green growth and innovation 
Dirk Pilat, OECD, talked about the role of innovation in green growt h. He emphasised 
water scarcity, climate change, health impacts and biodiversity loss as the main 
environmental challenges. OECD’s green growth frame work deals with enabling political 
conditions for sound environmental development, pro moting the transition to more 
sustainable economies, and measuring different core aspects of green growth. 
One of his main messages was that we need lots of i nnovation, since challenges are so 
big that we can’t afford expensive solutions. Green innovation is mainly driven by 
relative prices, policy measures and public R&D. Al so, policy stability and flexibility and 
clear important signals are important. E.g., after the Kyoto Protocol, the patenting 
activities for renewable energy projects increased markedly. Pilat argued that it is 
important to support a mix of incentives. He mentio ned several examples of positive 
effects from emission taxes, and also argued that r egulation and standards are important 
policy instruments. 
He claimed that there is a need for greater investm ent in relevant research, which can 
re-orientate R&D spending, with focus on both short - and long-term challenges. 
Research should increasingly be multi- and interdis ciplinary with interactions between 
science and industry. It is important to spread the risk by supporting a range of 
technologies 
3.4.2 The Nordic Top-level Research Initiative and Green Growth 
Rolf Annerberg, Top-level Research Initiative, presented the Nordic Top-level Research 
Initiative and Green Growth (TRI), initiated by the Prime Ministers to constitute a 
coordinated Nordic effort in research and innovatio n, to find solution to the global 
challenges of climate, energy and environment. The research questions being addressed 
are 1) effect studies and adaptation to climate cha nge, 2) interaction between climate 
change and the cryosphere, 3) energy efficiency wit h nanotechnology, 4) integration of 
large-scale wind power, 5) sustainable bio-fuels, a nd 6) CO	
2 capture and storage. The 
project is financed by the Nordic countries and run s over five years. So far, six Nordic 
Centres of Excellence on climate change and a Nordi c Competence centre for CCS 
research are established, in addition to ten R&D pr ojects on energy issues and several 
extensive networks in climate and energy. 
The TRI works together with the Nordic Council of M inisters on education, training and 
research for green growth. Important experiences fr om the project show that 
interdisciplinary approach makes it easier to defin e the problems. The project made 
policy to action within only two years. Annerberg c laimed that the TRI has created a new 
platform for Nordic cooperation on climate, energy and the environment, with potential 
for continuation. All the thematic programmes inclu de activities relevant to green 
growth. 	
3.4.3 Environmental technology challenges for the Nordic countries 
Karsten Skov, consultant, presented the project on environmental technologie s in the 
Nordic countries (see also section 2.10). He recomm ends several actions to promote 
green growth; improve demand side activities, secur e sufficient manpower resources 
and amounts of funding, more evaluations and clarif ication of concepts, strong

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	32	
leadership and efficient coordination, to improve international cooperation, promote 
concrete strategies for green growth, and to improv e statistics and knowledge. See also 
section 2.10. 
3.4.4 Green procurement, labelling and voluntary agreemen ts 
Bjørn Bauer, PlanMiljø, discussed more effective use of green public procu rement, green 
labelling and voluntary agreements (see also sectio n 2.5 and 2.6). He claimed that 
command and control instruments are not sufficient instruments to promote sustainable 
production, and that we need sustainable consumptio n as a vehicle for sustainable 
production. To work with innovative green public pr ocurement, vision, leadership, 
strategy, competent and motivated staff is all impo rtant prerequisites, in addition to 
clear structure, systems and culture. While traditi onal green public procurement is 
important to promote eco-friendly products, it is i nsufficient to drive innovation. 
Eco-labels are necessary for good information, and could be linked to public 
procurements. But when comes to soft regulatory ins truments, there is little data, few 
evaluations and little evidence of their effects. T his applies also to voluntary agreements. 
To use voluntary agreements as a growth factor, com mon guidelines at national level are 
needed. Research and innovation should be connected , and Bauer recommends policy 
mixes. For more information on these projects, see also section 2.5 and 2.6. 
3.5 Session 4: Where do we go from here? 
In the last section, Haakon Vennemo discussed the N ordic experiences in light of the 
environmental policy development in China. 
3.5.1 Green growth: China and the Nordic countries 
Haakon Vennemo, Vista Analysis, discussed green growth in China, and what the Nord ic 
countries can learn from their experiences. China i s an important contributor and future 
driver for greenhouse gas emissions, constituting h alf of global coal consumption. As a 
response to high growth in energy demand, China emp hasises investments in renewable 
energy, facing higher growth in wind power and sola r energy investments than EU and 
USA. The rapid growth raises the need for new infra structure, which to large degree is 
based on non-fossil fuels. Railway construction and the metro system are prioritized, 
and 5 mill electric vehicles are planned by 2020. 
This is made possible due to state owned enterprise s, who obtain cheap credit, local 
government funding and low return on equity. Fundin g is devoted to research and 
development, and public procurement is extensive. I n addition to direct funding, prices 
and tariffs are used as instruments, along with com mand-and-control instruments and 
career incentives. 
Vennemo concluded that the instruments used are no big secrets – China uses the same 
tools as we have found efficient – public investmen t, research and development, green 
procurement and prices and tariffs.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 33 
3.6 Panel debate: Green economic growth in the Nordic countries? 
Rolf Annerberg (TRI), Annegrete Bruvoll (Vista Analysis), Magnus Cederlöf (MoE, Finland), 
Stefan Nordin (Swedish Agency for Economic and Region al Growth) 
The subject of the panel debate was how to promote environmental technology, 
resource efficiency and green economic growth in th e Nordic countries. All the panel’s 
participants emphasised the use of marked based too ls as instruments for attaining 
green growth. Removal of environmentally harmful su bsidies and getting the prices 
right are the main tools to promote efficient incen tives for lower environmental 
pressure and improved resource use. Also, support o f R&D and securing information are 
important to make the markets work in the green dir ection and to promote a decoupling 
between the economy and pollution. Happiness resear ch – the potential of decoupling 
welfare growth from economic growth - was suggested as an important topic for future 
research. 
It was given attention to the risk of using subsidi es to support green technologies, as this 
could give wrong signals to the market regarding th e viability of technologies. Also, 
subsidies may run the risk of stimulating negative side effects, implying environmentally 
harmful subsidies. The phase out of environmentally harmful subsidies was promoted as 
part of getting the prices right.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 	34	
4 Concluding words from the summary conference 
In the final section of the conference referred in chapter 4, Hæge Andenæs, Director 
General, International Cooperation, Norwegian Minis try of Environment, summed up 
Nordic green initiatives. Andenæs concluded that th e Nordic countries’ experience 
shows that it is possible to combine healthy econom ic growth with ambitious and 
successful environmental goals and policies. The mo st effective policies have often been 
based on combinations of instruments. 
The present economic crisis may be an opportunity t o a green fiscal consolidation, with 
reduction and reform of environmentally harmful sub sidies and increased revenues 
from environmental taxes and charges. 
Green innovation and technology requires active pol icies on both the supply side on 
research and development and on the demand side, al ong with combined, concerted and 
coherent action by many sectors and policies. Envir onmental regulations, standards, 
prices and taxes are crucial, and green public proc urement, voluntary agreements and 
environmental labelling seem to have considerable u nused potential. 
Andenæs claimed that the focus on resource efficien cy and decoupling of material 
consumption from economic growth means that waste p olicy becomes even more 
important, and it is necessary to aim for “greening ” of all sectors. 
She refereed to several follow-up initiatives, amon g them this summary report, input to 
the Rio2012 in June and the EU2020 “Roadmap on a Re source Efficient Europe”, along 
with several workshops, meetings between all minist ers in October 2012 and project 
proposals on waste, green public procurement, and t he eight issues in the Task Force 
report.

Green economy 
Vista Analysis AS 35 
 
5 References 
Barton, D. N., H. Lindhjem, K. Magnussen and S. Hol en (2012): Valuation of Ecosystem 
Services from Nordic Watersheds - from awareness ra ising to policy support? Nordic 
Council of Ministers TemaNord 506. 
Bauer, B. and R. Fischer-Bogason (2011): Voluntary Agreements and Environmental 
Labelling in the Nordic Countries, Nordic Council o f Ministers TemaNord 538. 
Bauer, B., J. Christensen, K. Christensen, T. Dyekj ær-Hansen and I. Bode (2009): Benefits 
of Green Public Procurement, Nordic Council of Mini sters TemaNord 593. 
Berghäll, E and A. Perrels (2010): The economic cri sis and its consequences for the 
environment and environmental policy, Nordic Counci l of Ministers TemaNord 555. 
Bruvoll, A., K. Ibenholt, S. Ahvenharju, M. Bröckl, L. Martinsen and M. Zandersen (2012): 
Measuring green jobs? An evaluation of definitions and statistics for green activities, 
Nordic Council of Ministers TemaNord 534. 
Bruvoll, A, J. M. Skjelvik and H. Vennemo (2011): R eforming environmentally harmful 
subsidies. How to counteract distributional impact s, Nordic Council of Ministers 
TemaNord 551. 
EU (2011): Roadmap to a Resource Efficient Europe, Communication from the 
commission to the European Parliament, the council, the European economic and social 
committee and the Committee of the regions, Brussel s 20.09.2011. 
Hass, J. and V. Palm (2012): Using the right enviro nmental indicators: Tracking 
progress, raising awareness and supporting analysis . Nordic perspectives on indicators, 
statistics and accounts for managing the environmen t and the pressures from economic 
activities, Nordic Council of Ministers TemaNord 53 5. 
Nordic Council of Ministers (2008): Environment act ion plan 2009-2012, Copenhagen 
2008. 
Skjelvik, J. M., A. Bruvoll and K. Ibenholt (2011): Greening the economy: Nordic 
experiences and challenges, Nordic Council of Minis ters TemaNord 532. 
Skov, K. (2012): Miljøeffektiv teknologi eller milj øteknologi i de nordiske lande. En 
undersøgelse af de nordiske landes aktiviteter på o mrådet i årene 2004-2011, Nordic 
Council of Ministers TemaNord 517. 
The Nordic prime ministers’ Working Group for Green Growth (2011): The Nordic 
Region – leading in green growth, Nordic Council of Ministers, Copenhagen 2011. 
Zandersen, M., K. Grønvik Bråten and H. Lindhjem (2 009): Payment for and Management 
of Ecosystem Services, Nordic Council of Ministers TemaNord 571.

Parse pdf-doc by clicking the button below. Parsed pdf-documents will be searchable.

Metadata Found
Producer
GPL Ghostscript 8.15
CreationDate
2012-12-13T09:49:23+00:00
ModDate
2012-12-13T09:49:23+00:00
Author
Eier
Pages
38