مشخصات مقاله | |
ترجمه عنوان مقاله | مسائل حسابداری: بررسی مجدد ادعاهای جدایی و رشد سبز واقعی در کشورهای شمال اروپا |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله | Accounting matters: Revisiting claims of decoupling and genuine green growth in Nordic countries |
انتشار | مقاله سال 2022 |
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی | 9 صفحه |
هزینه | دانلود مقاله انگلیسی رایگان میباشد. |
پایگاه داده | نشریه الزویر |
نوع نگارش مقاله |
مقاله پژوهشی (Research Article) |
مقاله بیس | این مقاله بیس نمیباشد |
نمایه (index) | Scopus – Master Journals List – JCR |
نوع مقاله | ISI |
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی | |
ایمپکت فاکتور(IF) |
5.180 در سال 2020 |
شاخص H_index | 202 در سال 2021 |
شاخص SJR | 1.917 در سال 2020 |
شناسه ISSN | 0921-8009 |
شاخص Quartile (چارک) | Q1 در سال 2020 |
فرضیه | ندارد |
مدل مفهومی | ندارد |
پرسشنامه | ندارد |
متغیر | ندارد |
رفرنس | ندارد |
رشته های مرتبط | حسابداری |
گرایش های مرتبط | حسابداری مالی |
نوع ارائه مقاله |
ژورنال |
مجله | اقتصاد اکولوژیک – Ecological Economics |
دانشگاه | Environmental and Energy Systems Studies, Department of Technology and Society, Lund University, Sweden |
کلمات کلیدی | رشد سبز، حسابداری کربن، شاخص ها، نوردیک ها، نوسازی محیطی، حاکمیت محیطی |
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی | Green growth – Carbon accounting – Indicators – Nordics – Ecological modernisation – Environmental governance |
شناسه دیجیتال – doi |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107101 |
کد محصول | E15815 |
وضعیت ترجمه مقاله | ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید. |
دانلود رایگان مقاله | دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی |
سفارش ترجمه این مقاله | سفارش ترجمه این مقاله |
فهرست مطالب مقاله: |
Abstract Keywords 1. Introduction 2. Ecological modernization as genuine green growth 3. Exploring claims of green growth 3.1. The role of carbon accounting 3.2. Implications of the 1.5 °C target: Sensitivity to budget specification 4. Discussion – What does it take to be genuine? 5. Conclusion Declaration of Competing Interest References |
بخشی از متن مقاله: |
Abstract Ecological modernisation in the form of support to the notion of green growth remains the dominant discourse in environmental policy globally. Still, questions of limits to economic expansion and growth on a planet with finite natural resources have been at the core of environmental discourses at least since the 1970’s. A recent effort by Stoknes and Rockström (2018) seeks to unite notions of ecological limits with the concept of green growth by proposing genuine green growth as denoting a situation when growth respects planetary boundaries. Focusing on recent trajectories in emissions intensity, they highlight Nordic countries including Denmark as examples of such genuine green growth. In this article, we demonstrate that the specific conceptualization of genuine green growth and resulting claims about the Nordic countries rest on particular assumptions, specifically concerning national-level carbon accounting frameworks and the size of the remaining global carbon budget. By opening up these assumptions for analysis we illustrate the partiality and potentially misleading nature of the conceptualization of GGG. 1. Introduction Recent years have seen a resurgence of the canonical debate on the role of ecological limits accentuated by the unfolding global climate and environmental crises. Even more recently, debates on the need for post-COVID recovery packages to strike a balance between ecology and economy have surfaced (Hepburn et al., 2020). Some see green growth as ‘the sustainable way out of the corona crisis’ (State of Green, 2020). Yet, while intuitively appealing, the notion of green growth is notoriously vague and elusive1 (Stoknes and Rockström, 2018). If green growth is indeed supposed to be a ‘way out’, what does such a way entail? How can green growth be specified, operationalized and translated into policy goals? These questions matter not least because the rhetoric of green growth appears to exist unproblematically alongside ever more dire scientific evidence and warnings about the multi-faceted global ecological crisis (IPBES, 2019; IPCC, 2018). As such, it is perhaps not surprising that activists and scholars call for approaches that clearly put ecological concerns and welfare before growth to guide post-COVID trajectories (Taherzadeh, 2021, Barlow et al., 2020). |