Does sharing backfire? A decomposition of household and urban economies in CO2 emissions

Underwood, Anthony; Fremstad, Anders

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2018.09.012

Cited by 38 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In these countries, the income level is actually lower in urban than in rural areas (supplementary table 18). Thus, the carbon footprint pattern is similar to what has been found in the US, where carbon footprints are highest in rich suburbs and lower in dense city cores, where lower income groups also reside (Jones and Kammen 2014, Underwood and Fremstad 2018). The carbon footprints increase most steeply with the increasing degree of urbanisation in Eastern European countries, such as Lithuania, Latvia, Hungary and Poland, but also in Cyprus and Luxembourg.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 73%

Household carbon footprint patterns by the degree of urbanisation in Europe

Ottelin

Heinonen

Nässén

et al. 2019

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urbanisation increases household carbon footprints in developing economies. However, the results from developed countries have varied, particularly in Europe. This study provides a coherent comparison of the impact of the degree of urbanisation on income, expenditure and carbon footprints in Europe. On average, carbon footprints are 7% lower in cities than in rural areas when income and household characteristics are controlled. However, this is compensated by the 6% higher average income in cities. The patterns are not uniform in all countries. In Eastern Europe, the pattern is similar to other developing regions. In some Western European countries, both the income level and the carbon footprints are lower in urban areas than in rural areas. In the rest of Europe, the differences in income level between rural and urban areas are small, but they still largely compensate for the efficiency benefits of urban areas. We call for more systemic emissions accounting and climate strategies.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 73%

Household carbon footprint patterns by the degree of urbanisation in Europe

Ottelin

Heinonen

Nässén

et al. 2019

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results may also be country-specific. For example, a recent study from US did not find severe rebounds for sharing [59]. Secondly, the reduced ownership in the study was identified based on the existing categories of standard IO tables from national accounting.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Reduced Ownership on the Environmental Benefits of the Circular Economy

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Ala-Mantila et al, 2016), for instance, stress the benefits of collaborative consumption among solo-dwellers to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of small-sized urban households. (Underwood & Fremstad, 2018) find that sharing within households leads to decreasing transport-related emissions and residential energy use.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

What if everyone becomes a sharer? A quantification of the environmental impact of access-based consumption for household laundry activities

Wasserbaur

Sakao

Söderman

et al. 2020

Resources, Conservation and Recycling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to meet the EU's climate and resource efficiency targets, changes in our daily-life behaviours, as well as business models, are urgently necessary. More insights are needed to make real changes based on research with a systems perspective. We developed a system dynamics model to analyse the environmental benefits of a transition from ownership-based to access-based household laundry activities. The model considers demographic, technological and behavioural aspects and thereby assesses the environmental impact of laundry activities. The model is applied to the Swedish as well as the European context and allows crosscountry comparisons. The results indicate a significant potential of the sharing economy. The higher utilisation of shared machines and extended lifespans of the machines can cut greenhouse gas emissions by a third and lower raw material usage overall and lower primary raw material in production due to higher recycling rates. The carbon intensity of the energy mix is a crucial factor for the environmental consequences that arise through changes in energy usage due to sharing economy practices. This case study shows the value of adopting policies that could promote sharing and extended life spans.

show abstract

Does sharing backfire? A decomposition of household and urban economies in CO2 emissions

Cited by 38 publications

References 43 publications

Household carbon footprint patterns by the degree of urbanisation in Europe

Household carbon footprint patterns by the degree of urbanisation in Europe

Influence of Reduced Ownership on the Environmental Benefits of the Circular Economy

What if everyone becomes a sharer? A quantification of the environmental impact of access-based consumption for household laundry activities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About