The sufficiency strategy: Would rich-world frugality lower environmental impact?

One alleged weapon against unsustainable environmental impact is for the wealthy to consume less. This sufficiency strategy is to complement the efficiency strategy of lowering ratios of resource inputs to economic outputs; the former would reduce the affluence factor in I = PAT, the latter the technology factor. That the latter strategy suffers from a consumption rebound is widely recognized. This paper identifies a similar rebound when the affluence factor is autonomously lowered: The lower initial demand lowers prices, which in turn stimulates new demand by others. The strategy moreover addresses only the rich, raising questions of its theoretical maximum efficacy. Its proponents usually conflate frugality with the North-South dichotomy and intragenerational with intergenerational equity. Moreover, there are difficulties with the supporting arguments that frugality is good for one’s own sake as well as for the environment, and that the rich should ‘lead the way’ to living more lightly. Personal behaviour change is furthermore not a substitute for international political efforts. Finally, since all changes in right-side factors of the I = PAT equation change other right-side factors, such indirect attacks on impact should be abandoned in favor of supply and emissions quotas.     

A Classification System for Economic Consequences Issues in Accounting Regulation

This paper offers a classification system for economic consequences issues based on dividing perceived economic consequences issues into those that arise from decision making by users of accounts and those that arise from the mechanistic application of regulation or contracts. In order to test the system, twenty examples of economic consequence issues were selected (all of them relating to the UK or the Republic of Ireland) and subjected to three tests. The paper argues that the system proposed meets the tests. In addition implications for the definition of economic consequences are identified.     

Measuring cost savings in the operating room: a matter of FOCUS (follow-through, obsolescence, control, utilization, standardization)

In summary, changes came slowly at first in the OR. The biggest inventory reduction came about a year after the effort had begun. It would seem that tackling obsolescence, standardizing products, etc. would give an initial "big chunk" savings, with small amounts coming later as inventories are lowered. What we expected did not occur, due to the inherent nature of practices and what was customarily being used. For example, previously, some equipment purchases were paid for by purchasing product, which resulted in long-term commitments and high supply costs. The OR at times seemed more like a process of managing change, not just supplies. FOCUS is a daily process. How many times can you afford to overlook this process? How often are the mistakes of the past repeated? In review, we suggest this simple outline: Follow-through (review each case from start to finish), Obsolescence (schedule inventories every six months), Control (achieve inventory management by adjusting PAR levels to needs), Utilization (utilize product/equipment with your control), and Standardization (standardize products and measure results).