Previous - Next
This is the old United Nations University website. Visit the new site at http://unu.edu
One significant background fact is that the world is currently moving through a period of extraordinary turbulence reflecting the genesis and intensification of deep changes associated with the current techno-economic revolution, led by micro-electronics and accompanied by a constellation of developments based upon new, science intensive technologies (biotechnology, new materials, new sources of energy, etc.) (Herrera 1986). This situation implies that sustainable land use must aim not only at preserving and maintaining the ecological base for development and habitability, but also at increasing the social and ecological capacity to cope with change and the ability to retain and enlarge the available options in the face of a natural and social world in permanent transformation. Sustainable land use in a rapidly changing world requires the capacity to confront many different types of change at the same time, without compromising the social, economic, and ecological sources of renewal, as well as to reduce vulnerability and retain or enlarge the range of available options.
Thus, the concept of sustainable land use cannot mean merely perpetuation. The central question is what is to be sustained and what is to be changed. Approaching sustainable land use, and sustainable development, requires (Gallopín et al. 1989): (1) getting rid of accumulated rigidities and impediments; (2) identifying and protecting the accumulated foundations of knowledge and experience that are important as a basis upon which to build; (3) sustaining the social and natural foundations for adaptation and renewal, and identifying and enhancing the lost renewal capacity needed; (4) stimulating innovation, experimentation, and social creativity.
For sustainable land use, the issues of technological pluralism (complementary use of traditional, "modern," and high technology) and technological blending (constructive integration of high technology into existing technologies, such as using biotechnology to improve the yield and pest resistance of traditional crops - thus increasing efficiency and substituting for pesticides - or applying advanced ecological theory to redesign production systems based on shifting cultivation to improve sustainability) assume paramount importance, requiring new forms of organization and an integral strategy for technological development and diffusion. The upgrading of traditional technology and empirical knowledge will become especially important for the medium- and small-scale sectors of rural areas. Many traditional technologies are already better adapted to local conditions and ecological cycles than the expanding "modern" technology. Technological blending could improve yields and avoid some of the limitations of traditional techniques. Such technological integration could reduce conflicts, promote self sustainable technological innovation, be easily absorbed and adapted to local situations, and favour social, cultural, economic, and environmental sustainability. Special emphasis should be allocated to developing systems of production for the already altered ecosystems, including "neo-ecosystems" generated by human activities. Strategies should be developed for choosing areas for protection involving large-scale ecological functions and processes.
A general criterion is the maintenance of productive pluralism, with the coexistence of different major types of agriculture integrated through sub-national, national, and regional policies. An example of different, coexisting, types appears in table 10.5. Structural reforms and technological innovations directed to the transformation of the present subsistence agricultural sector into an efficient and sustainable peasant agriculture will be required. New forms of high-technology diversified agriculture should be developed, directed to the selective exploitation of local genetic resources for food, medicine, industry, etc. It will imply the development of technologies for a new efficient recollection agriculture in diversified ecosystems, as well as new ranching and wildlife management systems, viewing ecological diversity, heterogeneity, variability, and singularities as resources rather than as hindrances or constraints. Forestry should emphasize the revalorization of the forests as multi-purpose producers (wood, energy, wildlife, special products, ecological functions). This will require deep changes in storage and commercialization systems. Today, market and consumer demand are geared to guaranteeing uniformity in products. This has favoured the dominance of mono-cropping, which is highly vulnerable to pests and genetic erosion. The challenge is now to ensure uniformity in quality and delivery at the consumer level while managing and even nurturing variability at the production system level. This implies a completely different approach to the whole system of production/distribution of agricultural produce.
Table 10.5 Major types of sustainable rural systems proposed for Latin America
Agriculture |
Meat production |
Forestry |
Fisheries |
| 1. Modern, capital-intensive agriculture. Located on land with higher comparative ecological advantages (fertile and stable soils, optimal climate, good irrigation potential). Not necessarily in the form of large mono- cultures. It includes diversified crops, biological control of pests, crop rotation, and soil conservation. | 1. Modern intensive livestock-raising. Capital-intensive animal husbandry, in herds or in barns, and intensive raising of wildlife with high food or commercial value. | 1. Integrated forestry. Carried out by companies and cooperatives linking scattered households. Based on the sustainable management of natural and altered forests, mainly in the tropical rain- forest zone, and including the rational use of most species (not just a few, as is the current practice). The products, or domestic consumption and export include timber agglomerates, hardboard, paper pulp, wood flour for animal feed, chemicals, raw materials for the plastics industry, fertilizers, soaps, charcoal, fuelwood, and hunting and fishing products. | 1. Intensive marine industrial fishing. Confined to open seas. Managed by companies or large cooperatives. Mainly directed to domestic consumption and export, exploiting a diversity of species. |
| 2. Peasant agriculture. Requires the implementation of structural reforms and technological innovations. Production directed to satisfying local food requirements as well as yielding cash products of wildlife management and high unit value made possible by special opportunities provided by local ecological conditions. Multi-purpose integrated or mixed farming widely adopted. Mainly labour intensive, as well as intensive in technologies appropriate for diversified and small-scale production. Technological blending very significant. | 2. Extensive livestock-raising. Implies a modernization and rationalization of the current extensive ranching, and includes the harvesting and use of native species and wildlife management. Most current subsistence and nomadic pastoralism would be transformed into this activity or, alternatively, into peasant agriculture. | 2 Recollection forestry. An artisan forestry, socially organized and provided with scientific research inputs, savannas, and shrubby semi-deserts. Complements peasant agriculture, with communal organization of zones of extraction. Products, depending on the local ecology, could include palm sprouts, rubber, mushrooms, nuts, and palms. | 2. Modern marine artisan fishing. In the coastal zones. Implies rescuing and improving existing techcniques, using many species. Requires research and technical assistance (mainly to reduce post-harvest losses). Produce directed to domestic consumption (assuming changes in the current patterns of consumption) and export. |
| 3. High-technology diversified agriculture. Directed to the selective exploitation of local genetic resources for food, medicine, industry, etc. Implies the development of new, efficient technologies for diversified ecosystems. | 3. Modern and high-technology harvesting. Implies the management, domestication’s and harvesting of wildlife in captivity, semi-captivity, or wilderness for the production of meat, fur, fine wool, skins, and hides for domestic con- gumption and for export. Major candidates are chamelids, capybara, otter, alligator. Under good management, they can produce higher economic yields than cattle. | 3. Productive plantations. Run by companies or cooperatives in tropical rain forests and dry tropical and subtropical forests with scientific research inputs regarding local fast-growing species. Mainly for the production of paper, fuelwood, charcoal, and timber. | 3. Marine aquaculture. In the coastal zones, estuaries, and fishponds. Implies setting priorities for the management of local species and the protection of estuaries as breeding grounds. Production for domestic consumption and export. |
| 4. Indigenous farming systems. By respecting cultural diversity indigenous communities can maintain can maintain their lifestyles and integrated production systems if they so choose. | 4. Protective reforestation. Important for watershed and highland protection; directed to restoring ecological regulation of floods and reducing erosion and the silting of reservoirs. | 4. Modern freshwater artisan fishing. Similar to its marine counterpart, but directed essentially to domestic and local consumption. |
Eco-restructuring for peasant agriculture in Latin America: An illustration
The case of peasant agriculture is a good illustration of the potential role of technical change for sustainable development if integrated with socioeconomic policies. Peasant agriculture (including here much of so-called subsistence agriculture) is important in terms of the number of people involved, the intense environmental pressures it generates in many countries of the region, and the concentration of rural poverty.
The problem cannot be solved through technological fixes. An integral strategy for the transformation of the current subsistence agriculture into a sustainable and profitable peasant agriculture would need to include efforts in (a) facilitating access to the means of production, (b) eco-restructuring of the national economies and of the marketing and distribution systems, (c) community empowerment, as well as (d) research and development.
The strategy proposed here might be labelled Utopian by some readers. However, one should consider that technical innovation and diffusion have already occurred in the past few decades on a greater scale than implied in this section. Many remote areas are already being connected through radio, TV, and telephone networks, and communication costs are fast declining. The next decade or two will almost certainly involve tremendous additional technological change. The need to address the fact that fundamental, rather than incremental, changes in policy and values are required to move towards sustainable development is increasingly obvious.
Facilitating access to the means of production
The means of production include not only the land, agricultural inputs, capital, and technology but also (and this is likely to become increasingly important) information and knowledge. In the initial stages, the availability and redistribution of land for use through community management will be a key element, together with strategies for the restoration and rehabilitation of ecologically degraded lands. An agriculture under ecological management could in many cases lower requirements for material and energy inputs. Access to appropriate technology, and the stimulation of the social creativity to improve on it, should be supported. Finally, access to information in rural communities may be greatly improved through telematic networks connecting communal nodes. This includes quick access to information about the prices of products and inputs, the monitoring of weather conditions, of the condition of crops, and of erosion, meteorological forecasts, and the anticipation of natural disasters, besides programmes of education and capacity-building (local and at a distance). The same telematic networks could also be used to collect information about the state of the agro-ecosystems and of the population to facilitate regional and national planning.
Eco-restructuring of the national economies and of the marketing and distribution systems
Eco-restructuring of the national economies and marketing systems implies a redesign in order to benefit from technological and productive pluralism. This represents an important theoretical and organizational challenge. Many traits of the current economic systems rest on the homogenization of both production (e.g. mono-cultures) and consumption, which has often generated serious environmental problems and increased vulnerability to pests. Productive and distributive systems must be restructured in such a way that they will operate efficiently in situations where rural products are highly diversified (particularly in the tropics) and where the production of a given agricultural commodity is based on myriad dispersed exploitations, distributed in time and space. The new technologies, used within new forms of interlinked but decentralized social organizations, make possible sophisticated productive and distributive management making full use of variability and heterogeneity as assets rather than constraints. It will also be necessary to develop mechanisms for the articulation of large-scale, homogeneous agricultural production (which will continue to exist, directed particularly to urban consumption and agro-industry and to export) with diversified small-scale production (thus minimizing or reversing the expulsion of rural labour to marginal land).
A proportion of the diversified rural production would be used for self consumption by the peasant populations, contributing to a balanced diet. The marketable surplus would be composed in large part of food or industrial crops of high unit value made possible by local germplasm and ecological conditions; many of these products would not have competition at the international level. Active exploration and measures to open up new national and international markets will be necessary. Peasant agriculture will increasingly focus on the ecological comparative advantages rather than on the comparative advantage of cheap labour (the latter, besides often being associated with low standards of living, is rapidly losing importance at the world level).
Community empowerment
Creative programmes to improve the living conditions of the peasant populations will be essential. The role of the new communication system is essential here, in synergy with the fostering of social participation and communal self-reliance. Access to health, housing, and education services should be improved, as well as access to the means for family planning. Technological advances, in a participative and decentralized context, can open up huge opportunities for the discovery of new, flexible, and adaptive solutions to the traditional liabilities of rural populations, while respecting their cultural identity. Support for the peasant populations will in many cases require the implementation of financial systems capable of managing thousands of small loans and investments, rather than only a few massive investments, as is typical of the majority of the national and international agencies for rural development and financing.
Research and development
A strong push to scientific and technological research will be required, directed to improving yields and the profitability of agricultural systems based (as appropriate) on traditional, modern, or even completely new systems and making use of local cultural and ecological comparative advantages. The systematic and comparative study of the potential of the regional germplasm is a priority area of research. Another priority is the implementation of an annotated catalogue or database of the traditional and modern technologies used in the region and, whenever possible, those that were used in the past. Such a catalogue should include the social and ecological conditions to which these technologies are adapted, their degree of environmental sustainability and social suitability, the type of products and their possible yields, and the major economic, social, cultural, political, or ecological constraints on their wide utilization. Comparison with other regions of comparable ecology could be of great utility (for instance between the technologies used in the tropical moist forests of South America and in the forests of other regions with ancient agricultural traditions, such as South-East Asia, or between the semiarid American and African regions). On the basis of the comparative analysis of the relative advantages of the different technologies, it should be possible to select a menu of technologies as a basis for the development of suitable solutions for each ecological zone and socio-cultural realm, improving them on the basis of technological, ecological, and social research. These would help the development of diversified production, adapted to the different local conditions but integrated through regional, national, and international systems of capacity-building, information, transport, storage, and distribution.
The improvement of crop varieties through biotechnology and the relaxation of environmental constraints through the use of agro-technology, biotechnology, and informatics could include, for instance: the selection or creation of nitrogen-fixing or phosphorus concentrating bacterial strains, which are easy to reproduce and have little environmental impact; the application of biological pest control; genetic manipulation to increase crop resistance to pests or drought; and social and anthropological research directed at improving the cultural and social suitability of production systems and the quality of the information and capacity-building systems. New technologies such as informatics and telematics could play a crucial role. For instance, serious attention should be given to the possibility of facilitating access to microcomputers and expert systems by local communities, to aid fertilizer and irrigation dosage, pest control, the management and administration of complex agro-ecosystems, medical diagnosis, education, etc.
The current level of technological development would make it possible to keep costs within a reasonable level, provided a decentralized and collective design is adopted, with computers run by community-based rural units and linked through telecommunication networks. The research requirements for the success of this strategy are significant. It suffices to consider the challenge represented by the need to develop efficient software for rural populations who are often illiterate or, as is the case with some peasant communities in Latin America, have a culture based on magical thinking, distant from Western logic. This would require new modes of research and interaction, interdisciplinary teams that include participation by local farmers (participatory research), the development of sophisticated forms of iconic communication, and the simultaneous utilization of alternative cultural paradigms. Regarding hardware, it will be necessary to develop inexpensive but very robust equipment, of low obsolescence and easy to update.
Ecological research in combination with anthropological research, making use both of the empirical knowledge accumulated by the peasant cultures of the region and of modern science, would allow sophisticated new forms of ecosystem management. The sequence and localization of human activities and of the germplasm would allow effective management of the local bio-geochemical cycles - for instance, crops grown in a temporal sequence designed to regenerate their own nutrients, in a spatial mosaic designed so as to benefit from diversity and heterogeneity in order to minimize the growth of pest populations, and in a vertical architecture (such as multi-strata agriculture) allowing fuller use of resources.
The net result of such a strategy directly focused on peasant agriculture (upon which millions of people depend) would be an improvement in the rural quality of life, an associated decrease in the migratory flows to the urban centres, an important decrease in ecological degradation, and the utilization of an economic potential that is currently barely tapped.
The quest for sustainable development in the present historical context poses new, deep challenges to the ways we define problems, identify solutions, and implement actions. This reflects directly upon the issues of the feasibility of sustainable development and of capacity-building for sustainable development.
The prevailing mind-set in development and other areas is showing critical inadequacies. Indeed, in a number of cases, the very success of classical compartmentalized approaches has led to the aggravation of the environmental and developmental problems addressed. Even the language and metaphors we use may be hindering discussions about sustainable development.3 Of more immediate concern, the present historical context and dynamics exhibit major differences from those of the past few decades.
The need for a change in direction was officially recognized at the Earth Summit at Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. However, the new direction is not yet clearly defined; moreover, most of the discussions and recommendations are still quite compartmentalized. Sustainable development requires: the integration of economic, social, cultural, political, and ecological factors; the constructive articulation of top down approaches to development with bottom up or grass-roots initiatives; the simultaneous consideration of local and global dimensions and of the way they interact; and a broadening of the space- and time-horizons to accommodate the need for intragenerational as well as intergenerational equity.
All of this has direct implications for capacity-building. The question of what kind of capacity is needed to foster sustainable development and to implement Agenda 21 and other necessary initiatives in a practical and relevant way must be addressed. Capacity-building certainly cannot be limited to the transfer of knowledge and skills from the North to the South.
Many aspects of what is called capacity-building involve traditional activities such as reinforcing institutions, developing skills, education, and training for science, technology and decision-making, the transfer of technology, mostly in reference to the South where these elements are critically scarce. However, capacity-building for sustainable development, in a world marked by a technological, economic, and political revolution and global interdependence, must be based upon the capacity for learning to learn, to cope with change and knowledge gaps, to combine different viewpoints and aspirations constructively, to tackle interlinkages and complexity, to integrate rational thinking with emotional experience, to transform knowledge into wisdom. It is very likely that this will require new kinds of institutions and new institutional mechanisms. This type of capacity still needs to be developed, both in the South and in the North. Although external financial support will be required in the South, the basic challenge holds globally, and the cross-fertilization between different experiences could result in powerful synergies.
Agriculture will represent one of the most important activities in the new path, and it will have to be conceived of in a much broader sense than now. Agriculture will have to become more than a food or an industrial crop production activity; it will have to encompass the stewardship of the earth's resources. The sustainable and increased production of food and the sustainable management of the renewable natural resources need to be integrated and complement each other in such a way as to meet the needs of present and future generations while preserving and even enhancing environmental quality. Using the power, flexibility, and understanding offered by the new and emerging technologies and scientific developments, blended when appropriate with traditional technologies, agriculture will eventually become synonymous with sustainable and productive management of eco-resources, which will include not only the soil, plant and animal varieties, and water, but biodiversity (in its double function of economic resource and basic ecological regulator), ecological functions and services such as watershed and climate regulation, chemical cycling, etc.
1. This overview based on Lopez Cordovez (1993).
2. I am indebted to Dr. Filemón Torres for his inputs.
3. For instance, "development" is often described as a
permanent increase (usually of GNP); expressions such as
"target," "optimal path," or
"trajectory" resonate with ballistic analogies. The
word "sustainability" suggests reaching a state of
constancy, preserving an existing situation. Therefore the phrase
"sustainable development" intuitively sounds
contradictory. The argument here is not that sustainable
development is inherently contradictory (I believe it is not) but
that the wording and conceptualization we use are not well suited
to the new concepts being generated.
Beets, W. C. (1990) Raising and Sustaining Productivity of Smallholder Farming Systems in the Tropics. Alkmaar, the Netherlands: AgBé Publishing.
Chambers, R., A. Pacey, and L. A. Thrupp (eds.) (1989) Farmers First. London: ITP.
Ewel, J. J. (1986) Designing agricultural systems for the humid tropics. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 17: 245-271.
Funderburk, J. E. and L. G. Higley (1994) Management of arthropod pests. In: J. L. Hatfield and D. L. Karlen (eds.), Sustainable Agricultural Systems, pp. 199-228. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis Publisher.
Gallopín, G. C. and M. Winograd (1995) Ecological prospective for tropical Latin America. In T. Nishizawa and J. I. Uitto (eds.), The Fragile Tropics of Latin America: Sustainable Management of Changing Environments, pp. 13--44. Tokyo: United Nations University Press.
Gallopín, G. C., P. Gutman, and H. Maletta (1989) Global Impoverishment, Sustainable Development and the Environment. Report to the International Development Research Centre, 3 March.
Gallopín, G. C., M. Winograd, and I. A. Gómez (1991) Ambiente y Desarrollo en America Latina y el Caribe: Problemas, Oportunidades, y Prioridades. S. C. Bariloche, Argentina: Grupo de Análisis de Sistemas Ecológicos.
Gallopín, G. C., I. A. Gómez, A. Perez, and M. Winograd (eds.) (1995) El Futuro Ecológic de un Continente. Una Vision Prospectiva para la America Latina. Mexico, D.F.: Fondo de Cultura Economical
Girt, J. (1990) The Sustainable Development of Agricultures in Latin America and the Caribbean: Strategic Recommendations. Report to the Instituto Interamericano de Cooperación pare la Agricultura (IICA), San Jose, Costa Rica.
Gómez, I. A. and G. C. Gallopín (1995) Oferta Ecológica en la America Latina: Productividad y producción de los grandes ecosistemas terrestres. In: G. C. Gallopín, I. A. Gomez, A. Perez, and M. Winograd (eds.), El Futuro Ecológico de un Continente. Una Vision Prospectiva para la América Latina, vol. 3, pp. 445-498. Mexico, D.F.: Fondo de Cultura Economical
Herrera, A. O. (1986) The new technological wave and the developing countries: Problems and options. In: E. MacLeod (ed.), Technology and the Human Prospects, pp. 140-153. London: Frances Pinter.
Lopez Cordovez, L. (1993) Lineamientos conceptuales para el desarrollo rural sostenible y equitativo. San José, Costa Rica: Instituto Interamericano de Cooperacion pare la Agricultura (IICA).
MacRae, R. J., S. B. Hill, J. Henning, and A. 1. Bentley (1990) Policies, programs, and regulations to support the transition to sustainable agriculture in Canada. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 5(2): 76-92.
NRC (National Research Council) (1989) Report on
Alternative Agriculture. Washington D.C.: National Academy
Press.
- (1993) Sustainable Agriculture and the Environment in the
Humid Tropics. Washington D.C.: National Academy Press.
Pesek, J. (1994) Historical perspective. In J. L. Hatfield and D. L. Karlen (eds.), Sustainable Agricultural Systems, pp. 1-19. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis Publisher.
Turner II, B. L., R. H. Moss, and D. L. Skole (eds.) (1993) Relating Land Use and Global Land-Cover Change. IGBP Report No. 34 and HDP Report No. 5. Stockholm: IGBP/HDP.
White, D. C., J. B. Braden, and R. H. Hornbaker (1994) Economics of sustainable agriculture. In J. L. Hatfield and D. L. Karlen (eds.), Sustainable Agricultural Systems, pp. 229-260. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis Publisher.
11. The restructuring of transport, logistics, trade, and industrial space use
Introduction
The significance of freight transport
Past growth and patterns of freight transport
development
Spatial
and transport outcomes
Future developments affecting freight volumes
and patterns
The scope for reducing freight volumes
Taking
up the potential
Conclusion
Notes
References
Paul M. Weaver
The transport sector is a major contributor to environmental change. Apart from the land-take and materials-use implications of building transport infrastructures and machinery, which are considerable, environmental stress is imposed by the pollution implications of transport energy use. Part of the eco-restructuring agenda must therefore be to reduce the environmental disturbance caused per unit of transport, which is mostly a function of the characteristics of different transport modes and of modal splits, and to reduce the volume of transport.
The issues involved are complex partly because of the systemic interlinkages between production and consumption patterns, the characteristics of transportation technologies, the characteristics of other technologies that can substitute for physical transportation, and the prevailing incentive structures that give rise to patterns of land use and technological, logistical, and transportation choices. Geographical differences between countries in size, shape, topography, resource endowment, state of development, and socio-economic conditions also complicate analysis. So do differences in the structure of different firms and industries and the locations of different types of manufacturing activities. Above all, the key factors influencing transportation those that affect both the scale and structure of transportation demand and the ways in which these are met - are dynamic. This systemic complexity means that there is need for broad and dynamic analysis of the linkages between transportation and sustainability.
This chapter is necessarily restricted to a partial analysis. None the less, the insights it gives are motivated by what I consider to be of special relevance for transportation policy at the start of an eco-restructuring agenda. It focuses on the already industrialized countries, where transport and related arrangements pose the greatest environmental burden and are most in need of restructuring. It focuses on options and measures to reduce the volume of freight transport in the near to mid term, which are investigated in relation to other possibilities for reducing environmental impacts in the longer term, including major changes in transportation technology, although these are not themselves explored here in any detail. Within the scope that this identifies, the chapter explores those options that provide greatest room and flexibility for effecting near-term change. These include the reorganization of production and logistics arrangements, technological and organizational adaptations within the confines of existing knowledge, mode-switching even within the context of the road freight transport category,1 and physical goods transportation substitution possibilities.
The chapter also look at the dynamics of freight transportation, at the factors affecting developments, and at how these might be influenced. Because much of the scope for reducing freight volumes hinges on changing the nature of existing relationships and trends between freight transport, logistics (the ways in which companies organize the movement and storage of goods in the supply chain to consumers), and patterns of industrial and economic space use, the chapter looks at these together. Patterns of land use and freight transport in Western industrialized societies have co-evolved under market conditions where natural resource productivity has never been a priority, where road-building has been publicly financed, and where levels of (demand-led) road provision have been economically and environmentally excessive. Under these conditions, current (profit-maximizing) land-use and transport patterns represent an excessive use of transport. Although there is no necessary link between market liberalization and transport volumes, deregulation and shifts toward free trade have contributed to an internationalization - in some cases a globalization - of economic activities, which, in practice, has added significantly to freight tonne-kilometers. For this reason, developments affecting international trade and/or the relationship between internationalized economic activities and freight transport volumes are of interest because they may help or hinder progress toward eco-restructuring.
The choices made over the substance and coverage of the chapter in respect to the wider debate on transport and sustainability are due to my view of the importance of the transportation sector generally as regards policies and measures to usher in a restructuring of our economies and societies. Certainly, it is conceivable that much of the concern over the sustainability of current transport arrangements would be reduced were a competitively priced transportation technology based upon a renewable energy source to become available; for example, a technology based upon the solar-derived, hydrogen based carriers that earlier chapters in this book suggest may ultimately be feasible. However, such technologies are unlikely to become available within the next 50 years. More importantly, their development will come about only in the context of appropriate incentives. In the near term, then, reducing the environmental impact of transport will depend mostly upon reducing transport volumes and increasing transport efficiency; i.e. cutting out or substituting for transport that can be avoided, undertaking remaining movement so that this does least environmental damage, and making most productive use of this remaining movement. This suggests that the preference should be for policy instruments that will stimulate these changes and simultaneously provide incentives for the longer-term development of fundamentally more sustainable transportation technologies. A lead taken along these lines within the industrialized countries would also signal an important message for caution over the extent of public road provision to countries now rapidly building their transportation infrastructures.