Working Paper 43 - ETH Zurich - Natural and Social Science ...

Working Paper 43
(Re-) Structuring
the Field of Non-
Energy Mineral
Resource Scarcity
Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften
Natural and Social Science Interface
Sciences naturelles et sociales de l'environnement
Maya Wolfensberger,
Daniel J. Lang &
Roland W. Scholz
March 2008

Publisher:
Prof. Dr. Roland W. Scholz
Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED)
Natural and Social Science Interface (NSSI)
ETH Zürich CHN J74.2
Universitätsstrasse 20
CH-8092 Zürich
Tel. +41 44 632 5892
Fax +41 44 632 10 29
E-mail: roland.scholz@env.ethz.ch
Authors:
Maya Wolfensberger
Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED)
Natural and Social Science Interface (NSSI)
ETH Zürich
CH-8092 Zürich
Prof. Dr. Roland W. Scholz
Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED)
Natural and Social Science Interface (NSSI)
ETH Zürich CHN J74.2
Universitätsstrasse 20
CH-8092 Zürich
Tel. +41 44 632 58 92
E-mail: roland.scholz@env.ethz.ch
Dr. Daniel J. Lang
Institute for Environmental Decisions (IED)
Natural and Social Science Interface (NSSI)
ETH Zürich CHN J72.2
Universitätsstrasse 20
CH-8092 Zürich
Tel. +41 44 632 60 37
E-mail: daniel.lang@env.ethz.ch

(Re-) Structuring the Field of
Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
Summary of the Workshop “Scarce Raw Materials”
August 31-September 2, 2007 – Davos, Switzerland
This document is intended to summarize the discussions of the workshop
“Scarce Raw Materials” and is targeted at the participants, involved institutions,
and further interested parties.
Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
Contents
Contents ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Setting ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 2
Workshop goals and topics ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Preparation and Follow-up Phase .............................................................................................................................. 4
Organization .......................................................................................................................................................................... 4
Participants ............................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Program ................................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Summary of the Workshop Discussions ...................................................................................................................... 7
Topic A: The Role of Scarcity in Society ................................................................................................................... 7
Topic B: Causes of Scarcity ........................................................................................................................................... 10
Topic C: Sustainable Coping Strategies ............................................................................................................... 14
Topic D: The »Red List of Scarce Raw Materials« ............................................................................................. 17
Summary .................................................................................................................................................................................... 20
Concluding Remarks ............................................................................................................................................................. 22
References ................................................................................................................................................................................. 22
Glossary ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 24
Annex ............................................................................................................................................................................................ 26

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
Setting
Mineral raw materials exhibit an ever-increasing importance and indispensability in
various products. The rapid development of electronic industrial products requires a growing
diversity of mineral raw materials for specific functions, especially engineering metals. Some
cycles of materials such as copper are today mainly dominated by human action (Klee &
Graedel, 2004). The dissipative use of a number of metals has increased in a variety of applications
(Ayres, 1997) and could represent a cause for concern as it stands for an irreversible loss of
material. Concerns arose, among others, because the viability of recycling at end-of-life seems
to be hindered by the materials concentration in products (Johnson, Harper, Lifset, & Graedel,
2007). Gordon et al. (2006) estimated the quantities of metals residing in ore in the lithosphere,
in use in products and in waste deposits. In the case of copper, the results suggest that a sustained
supply at today’s consumption rates require measures such as near-complete recycling.
Although others, such as Tilton & Lagos (2007), have argued against these results, the awareness
that the scarcity of certain mineral raw materials may be a future challenge to society has
recently increased. The enormous increases in prices of some specialty metals used for emerging
technologies have endorsed these concerns and finally brought the notion of scarcity back
to the forefront of scientific research and public discussion (Wäger & Classen, 2006). Industrialized
countries are now largely dependent on imported ores of many metals from a shrinking
list of potential mineral exporters. For instance, the emerging economies of India and China
require enormous amounts of material, are growing rapidly, and will increase the competition
among importers (Ayres, 1997). Hence, a nation’s or an industrial branch’s access to the relevant
mineral raw materials might become increasingly important in ensuring a functioning market
economy and securing national interests. Growing scarcity might increase the conflict potential
between nations and/or continents and favor strategic decisions or market interventions.
The regional distribution of those non-renewable resources and the different purchasing
power of nations are critical issues to be considered, particularly when addressing intragenerational
equity issues. The globally widespread and unequally distributed material flows of mineral
raw materials matter with respect to societal and political development 1 and need further
consideration.
1 Finally, most economic resource models depart from the basic assumption of a market economy as the prevailing
economic system. However, discussing resource scarcity should also imply considering long-term developments (i.e.,
>100 years). Within these time scales, new economic and societal systems might emerge which are based on regulatory
mechanisms that differ from a market economy.
2 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
Workshop goals and topics
During a two-day workshop, a group of the world’s leading experts in the field of resource
availability, management, economy, and material sciences discussed the incidence of
and evidence for potential raw material scarcity and possible ways to create an anticipatory
and preventive resource management. The focus was on non-renewable resources not used as
fuels. Among these, special emphasis was placed on mineral raw materials such as Platinum
Group Elements (PGEs, see Glossary), Rare Earth Elements (REEs, see Glossary), more conventional
elements like zinc, copper, or titanium, and minerals used as fertilizers, such as phosphorus
or potassium.
The subject was analyzed under four topic areas that structure and address important issues
in the field, aiming to elicit the relevant foci with regard to the dynamics and significance
of scarcity both at present and in the future. The topics were, at the same time, chosen as being
conducive to building mankind’s capacity to estimate future societal vulnerabilities emerging
from raw material scarcity:
• The Role of Scarcity in Society (Topic A): What is meant by scarcity and what role does it play
in society?
• The Causes of Scarcity (Topic B): What are the potential causes of scarcity in the future?
• Sustainable Coping Strategies: (Topic C): What can a society committed to Sustainable
Development do to alleviate scarcity?
• The »Red List of Scarce Raw Materials« (Topic D): Would a Red List be a suitable instrument
to prevent scarcity?
The aim of topic D was to provide evidence for the relevance of preventive resource management
and to set the stage for the future course of action. Such management should help to
avoid unexpected scarcities that have the potential to endanger human welfare by indicating
priorities of actions with respect to Research and Development (R&D), policy making or
lifestyle changes. During the workshop, a half-day session was dedicated to each topic.
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 3

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
Preparation and Follow-up Phase
The workshop was embedded in an in-depth preparation phase (April to August 2007)
and follow-up phase (ongoing since October 2007). The preparation phase and the initial postprocessing
phase of the workshop were coordinated within the scope of a Master’s thesis completed
by Maya Wolfensberger Malo and supervised by Dr. Daniel J. Lang and Prof. Roland W.
Scholz.
The results of both phases are documented in a final report available on request (daniel.lang@env.ethz.ch).
Within the scope of the preparation phase, a framework consisting of the four mentioned
topics was constructed with the intention of initiating and sustaining the workshop discussions,
compiling the fundamental knowledge base, and proposing possible foci for the discussion.
The data collection was carried out via literature research and a Delphi-like inquiry process
among the invited experts. Based on these data, hypotheses were extracted and formulated.
The relevant information was provided to the experts in the form of a booklet, which
provided a basis for the workshop discussions. Within the scope of the follow-up process, it is
planned to merge the data collected into a joint publication.
Organization
The workshop was financed by the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN). It
was organized by the Institute for Environmental Decisions – Natural Science Social Interface
at ETH Zurich (IED/NSSI). The workshop is part of a cooperation project between IED/NSSI, the
Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) - Waste and Raw Materials Division, the Environmental
Protection Agency of Canton Zurich (AWEL) and the University of Zurich – Chair of
Social and Industrial Ecology (SIE).
The workshop took place Aug. 31-Sept. 2, 2007 in Davos, Switzerland, antecedent to and in
collaboration with the conference R07, »Recovery of Materials and Energy for Resource Efficiency»
organized by the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research (EMPA)
and the Swiss Academy of Engineering Sciences.
4 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
Participants
Experts from different disciplines, such as resource economy, material sciences, geology,
and industrial ecology were invited to participate. The ten experts in those fields listed bellow
were selected based on Internet research and a “snowball inquiry process”.
Inhee Chung
Dr. John H. DeYoung, Jr.
Juerg Gerber
Prof. Thomas E. Graedel
Prof. Chris T. Hendrickson
Prof. Jacqueline A. Isaacs
Prof. Randolph E. Kirchain
Prof. Armin Reller
Prof. John E. Tilton
Prof. Friedrich-W. Wellmer
UNEP, Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (DTIE), France
U.S. Geological Survey, USA
World Business Council of Sustainable Development (WBSCD) and Alcan
Switzerland
Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, USA
Carnegie Mellon University, USA
Northeastern University Boston, USA
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
University of Augsburg, Germany
Colorado School of Mines, USA and Pontificia Universidad Católica de
Chile
(Formerly) Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources
(BGR), Germany
Dr. Patrick Wäger of the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Testing and Research
(EMPA) acted as a liaison officer for the World Conference “R07, Recovery of Materials and Energy
for Resource Efficiency“
The Steering Committee included 10 consultants representing the Swiss entities involved,
including the ETH Zurich (Prof. Scholz’s Chair, Natural Social Science Interface at the
Institute for Environmental Decision (NSSI/IED)), the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment
(FOEN), the Environmental Protection Agency of Canton Zurich and the University of Zurich.
Prof. Roland W. Scholz
Dr. Daniel J. Lang
Andy Spörri
Maya Wolfensberger Malo
Prof. Claudia R. Binder
Dr. Hans-Peter Fahrni
Susan Glättli
Dr. Elmar Kuhn
Dr. Stefan Schwager
Dr. Beat Stäubli
ETH Zurich, NSSI/IED, Principal Organizer
ETH Zurich, NSSI/IED, Principal Organizer
ETH Zurich, NSSI /IED, Junior Organizer
ETH Zurich, NSSI /IED, Junior Organizer
University of Zürich, Social and Industrial Ecology (UZH-SIE), Switzerland
FOEN – Waste and Raw Materials Division, Switzerland
FOEN – Waste and Raw Materials Division, Switzerland
Environmental Protection Agency of Canton Zurich
FOEN – Waste and Raw Materials Division, Switzerland
Environmental Protection Agency of Canton Zurich
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 5

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
Program
FRIDAY, AUGUST 31, 2007
Optional program (14:30): Short hiking trip and guided visit to the Kirchner Museum
Reception (18:00) and Welcoming Speech (Prof. R.W. Scholz)
Welcome Dinner (18:30)
SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 1, 2007
Outline of the ideas and the goal of the workshop (Prof. R.W. Scholz)
Introduction to the organization of the workshop (Dr. Daniel J. Lang) and introduction round
Introductory Presentations: Topic A (Morning)
Prof. F.W. Wellmer The “Scarcity-Problem” in the Field of Commodities
Prof. A. Reller
Geography of Strategic Non-Energy Minerals
Introductory Presentations: Topic B (Afternoon)
Prof. T. Graedel Determining the Criticality of Materials
Prof. R. Kirchain The Role of Materials in Sustainable Mobility
Prof. J. Isaacs
Scarcity Issues Associated with Nanoscale Electronics
SUNDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 2007
Introductory Presentations: Topic C (Morning)
Prof. J.E. Tilton Sustainable Coping Strategies, Part A
Prof. C.T. Hendrickson Sustainable Coping Strategies, Part B
Introductory Presentations: Topic D (Afternoon)
Dr. J.H. DeYoung Jr. Content, Updating, and Critical Points of the Red List
Juerg Gerber
The Red List from a Business Perspective
Inhee Chung
Aspects in Reference to the Scientific Panel for Sustainable Resource
Management
6 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
Summary of the Workshop Discussions
In the following, the main messages of the workshop discussions are briefly summarized.
The topics discussed evoked many different opinions. After each section, the general conclusions
are indicated by either one of the two following symbols:
Indicating
consensuses
Indicating
dissenting views
Consensuses have been inferred, but they may not entirely reflect the opinion of
all experts. Therefore, they only indicate that there seemed to be a main tendency
toward agreement.
The dissenting views may either reflect an expert’s opinion that was not advanced
by others or different points of view considering a certain issue. In the latter case,
the dissenting views mentioned are sequentially named.
Topic A: The Role of Scarcity in Society
What is meant by scarcity and what role does it play in society?
Debating about resource scarcity requires initially defining what is actually meant by
“scarcity”. Resource analysts attribute different meanings to the term. Absolute scarcity (also
called physical scarcity) happens when satisfaction of an elementary need is no longer possible
and cannot be met by additional production (Baumgartner, Becker, Faber, & Manstetten, 2006),
while relative scarcity (also called economic scarcity) refers to a shortage of supply relative to
the mineral’s demand (adapted from DeYoung et al., 1987, p. 517). Brooks (1966, pp. 22-24) attributed
the term scarcity to what is referred to as economic scarcity and the term rarity to what is
referred to as physical scarcity. Baumgartner et al. (2006) proposed that discussion of these
terms is important as the distinction between both types of scarcity has immediate implications
for the distinction between what has been called ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ sustainability (see
Glossary). During the workshop, there was general agreement that absolute or physical scarcity
is too narrow as a concept because the availability of mineral raw materials is constantly
influenced by societal, technological and economic development, besides geologic abundance.
It is inappropriate to talk only about absolute scarcity as this concept fails to take into account
the dynamics of society, technology, and economics.
Prof. Wellmer introduced the feedback control system which proposes that higher prices
will give incentives to offset emerging scarcities through technological improvements (more
efficient products or substitutes) or the discovery of new reserves (see Glossary). He argued that
as long as this feedback control system works efficiently and effectively, scarcity would not be
an issue of concern to human welfare. By and large, the experts have agreed with the feedback
control system, but no consensus was found on the time frame within which this system would
work in the future.
In the next 20 years, if prices of mineral commodities rise, scarcities of raw materials will be
offset through technological improvements by (i) substitution, (ii) recycling, and (iii) the finding
of new reserves. Within this time frame, scarcity will act as a trigger for technology improvements
and product development.
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 7

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
The disagreement with respect to the time frame was mostly rooted in different assumptions
on the question whether the limitedness of resources (see Glossary) will constrain
economic growth. To the resource optimists, resources are unlikely to exercise significant constraints
over human action, as rises in extraction costs would induce an array of scarcityoffsetting
activities such as new cost-saving technologies, more efficient products, the substitution
with less costly and more abundant resources, recycling and the discovery of new deposits
(Tilton, 1996). The resource base (see Glossary) is seen as practically unlimited source of mineral
raw materials. The numbers suggested by the resource base would thus prove that society
has more pressing problems than the mineral depletion, because some estimates would last
for millions of years (Tilton, 2003, pp. 23, table 3-2). Limits to growth due to resource constraints
would thus be a non-problem. Early authors defending this view are Stiglitz (1974), Dasgupta &
Heal (1974) or Solow (1974a, 1974b), for instance.
Resource pessimists in turn, assume that incessant extraction of primary deposits will
eventually exhaust deposits. Hence, they assume that the geologic limits will sooner or later
exercise constraints on human action. Concerns about absolute scarcity have been expressed
by Barnett and Morse (1963), Meadows et al. (1971) or Daly (1977), for instance. They tend to stick
to the numbers suggested by the reserves and the reserve base (see Glossary), which are considerably
lower than those suggested by the resource base.
According to Prof. Tilton’s work (1996, 2003) the outlined debate is based on two different
paradigms: the “fixed stock paradigm” (defended by resource pessimists) and the “opportunity
cost paradigm” (defended by resource optimists).
The incessant extraction of primary deposits will eventually exhaust them. Thus, the geologic
limits will sooner or later exercise constraints on human action.
Resources are unlikely to exercise significant constraints over human action, as rises in
extraction costs would eventually induce an array of offsetting activities.
Which role scarcity finally plays in society depends on many assumptions and the time
frames considered. Whether we should think in years, decades, centuries or even millennia was
a focus of interest. The uncertainties lying ahead might require a departure from thinking in
short time frames, but the longer-term context of these issues should not be neglected.
Mineral raw material scarcity and material cycles are often related to north-south conflicts.
Prof. Reller illustrated the contexts revealed by the spatial and temporal trajectories of
metals used in advanced technologies by taking their whole life cycle into account. He illustrated
the geographical distribution of those metals of mining, consumption, and recycling,
pointing out that the value-producing processes are often conducted in developed countries,
while the processes associated with hazardous impacts, such as mining and disposals, often
take place in developing countries. The latter are primarily used as a source and a sink of materials
needed in the industrialized world.
The geographical distribution of raw material processing phases matters with respect to the
interaction of politics, economics, and social well-being.
8 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
The significance of the real price (see Glossary) in reflecting trends in scarcity uncovered
a number of dissenting views. Some experts argued that the real price could not be a suitable
indicator in some cases because external social and environmental costs were not included.
Others defended it as the best indicator available despite its limitations.
Real price trends are useful indicators of trends in scarcity over time even though external
costs and benefits complicate their use.
Apparently, a consensus was found on the significance of the reserve-to-consumption ratio
(R/C ratio, defined as the reserves (see Glossary) divided by current annual consumption),
also called static lifetimes. These have been criticized for failing to take into account the dynamic
nature of reserves (Tilton, 1996, p. 93) and the different choices of criteria that lead to
divergent resource estimates by different investigators (Gordon, et al., 2006, p. 1211). Wellmer &
Becker Platen (2002, p. 730) propose that the ratio can be regarded as an indication of the need
for innovation, signifying the available time buffer during which functionally equivalent substitutes
must be found. In any case, the ratio could give an idea as to which mineral raw materials
should be considered in view of a preventive resource management.
The remaining lifetimes suggested by the R/C ratio do not provide an adequate indicator of
upcoming scarcity, but they might indicate whether there is a need for innovation.
The panel agreed that it is important to focus primarily on the function which can be fulfilled
by a raw material’s material properties, as proposed by Wellmer & Becker-Platen (2002,
p. 725). This view is apparent as other chemical elements or other materials usually replace
metals used for electronic devices if they become scarce (and thus expensive).
The function that is fulfilled by a mineral raw material’s material properties is a decisive
criterion when addressing issues of scarcity.
Scarcity might oblige society to weigh up certain functions or differing objectives. Should
indium be used in thin film photovoltaics or Liquid Crystal Displays? However, the hypothesis
that trade-offs between competitive applications may hinder the implementation of sustainable
technologies (in this case the solar cells) was not advanced by all experts to the same extent.
Trade-offs between competitive applications may hinder the implementation of sustainable
technologies.
There were different assumptions considering the essentiality of raw materials for specific
functions. It was undisputed that phosphorus and potassium are essential in fulfilling
functions of vital importance, but opinions diverged on the view that other raw materials also
have essential properties and are thus irreplaceable over the long run in certain applications.
Substitution is not possible for a variety of mineral raw materials in certain applications.
Substitution is, as a matter of principle, feasible for all mineral raw materials (excluding the
essential elements for plant growth, P and K).
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 9

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
A consensus was reached on the proposition that substitution must receive special attention
in research and development. The time lags to implement new technologies based on
alternative (more abundant) raw materials might be a critical factor inhibiting the functionality
of certain services.
Substitution possibilities are a key aspect to be addressed by R&D.
It was proposed to differentiate among certain categories of mineral raw materials, distinguishing
them by the relevant features determining the attention they should receive in
terms of insecurity of supply. The following categories were differentiated: human and natural
system-sensitive, technological system-sensitive, geopolitical system-sensitive, and market/economic
system-sensitive. These categories are not mutually exclusive. More information
about these categories and some examples can be found in Table 1 (see annex).
Open Questions
• What functions are vital for life or essential for technical applications? Will we be able to
provide sufficient amounts of the raw materials needed to fulfill these functions?
• Will sink problems (the limited capacity to absorb the hazardous impacts of material cycles
for human health and the natural environment) be more urgent than source problems (limited
supply of mineral raw materials)?
Topic B: Causes of Scarcity
What are the potential causes of scarcity in the future?
Analyzing and detecting the causes of scarcity are indispensable preparatory steps before
creating problem-solving strategies. Mineral raw material scarcities emerge for various
reasons. In most cases, they arise from the interplay of different drivers. Supply- and demandrelated
drivers were distinguished and allocated to different areas (geological, technological,
societal, economic, and functional). The drivers of scarcity that were mentioned in the workshop
were merged and illustrated in Figure 1.
They were, also grouped into different potential time frames (permanent, mid-term (25
to 100 years), and short-term 0–25 years)). These times frames should indicate the potential
duration of scarcity caused by the corresponding drivers.
10 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
Figure 1:
Supply- and demand-related drivers of scarcity
The workshop placed emphasis on scarcities emerging from insufficient primary production.
Nevertheless, factors inhibiting secondary production were discussed as well. It was argued
that the recovery of raw materials from anthropogenic stocks is mainly restricted by their
increasing statistical entropy (see Glossary), either in products or the environment. According
to Prof. Reller, losses of materials due to spatial dilution into the environment and the anthroposphere
occurring through societal mobilization processes are one of the biggest issues. He
stressed that not only the mineral raw materials used in small amounts, but also conventional
and highly available elements like zinc or titanium are subject to dissipation. Entropy reversal is
in theory feasible using enough energy. However, the scarcity of energy resources reveals the
irretrievability of dissipated mineral raw materials and the importance of anticipatory measures
to prevent high entropy states (Rechberger & Graedel, 2002).
Another problem is revealed by the unidentified outflows occurring through uncontrolled
exports of residuals. A great number of used cars, for instance, are exported to regions without
an appropriate recycling infrastructure or awareness, which in the end leads to great losses of
many mineral raw materials.
The recovery of mineral raw materials from anthropogenic stocks is limited by their high
entropy states and out-of-reach disposal because of unidentified outflows.
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 11

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
Prof. Graedel illustrated the two dimensions that reveal the criticality of materials.
These are the importance in use and availability. Illustrating these dimensions as axes reaching
from high to low in a two-dimensional graph indicates the region of danger (high risk in
both dimensions). Also, Prof. Graedel pointed out that there are data challenges on a variety of
points and a potential temporary mismatch between the quantity supplied and quantity demanded
of certain mineral raw materials due to a lack of highly qualified researchers and
skilled workers in the mining area. All experts did however not defend this. Some argued that
we have enough information to quantify the mineral raw materials in deposits successfully
with current knowledge. Skinner (1976) postulated a bimodal distribution of geochemical
scarce metals (less than 0.1 percent of crust by weight) that are concentrated as a result of
leaching, transport, and deposition by ore-forming solutions. This means that after the highgrade
ores are exhausted, energy requirements for mineral production from common rocks
would increase considerably. This switch from the extraction of ores to the extraction of common
rocks has been named the ‘mineralogical barrier’. However, whether ores must be extrapolated
by assuming the Skinner hypothesis remains unclear and disputed.
Prof. Scholz stressed that resource availability by no means corresponds to resource accessibility.
The differences in global capital among nations and geopolitical causes may provoke
scarcity rather than mineral depletion. It has been argued that the location of deposits in a
few countries and the low numbers of companies controlling the mineral commodity’s production
might substantially increase the potential for geopolitically or strategically induced scarcities.
Some experts countered that the likelihood of coalitions of sellers to provoke longer-term
scarcities seems to be low, because more suppliers would enter the market immediately.
The availability of mineral raw materials is not the most critical issue. Accessibility is more
difficult to manage due to changing values in society and the uneven distribution between supply
and demand geographies and markets.
The discussion about the likelihood of the network production system between potential
joint products (see Glossary) and principal wanted element(s) to induce scarcities revealed a
polarized field of debate. Potential joint products are by-products (see Glossary) of primary
products, co-products (see Glossary) and coupled elements (see Glossary). Elements currently
produced as joint products are, for instance, indium, germanium, and those PGEs or REEs, which
are not produced as principal wanted elements. For the PGEs, the principal wanted elements
are platinum and palladium, for the REE this is at present neodymium, formerly due to market
circumstances europium, samarium, or cerium. Currently, there are no mines from which only
by-products and coupled products are economically extracted; their extraction always depends
on the extraction of a main product. The so-called “metal wheel” illustrates this interconnection
(Reuter et al., 2005; Verhoef, Dijkema, & Reuter, 2004). As proposed by the same authors
(Reuter, Verhoef, Dijkema, & Villeneuve, 2005), by reducing the capacity for the production of
main products, the input and recovery capacity of the dependent potential joint products in the
networked production system are removed. Also, if potential joint products experience sharp
12 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
increases in demand without a relative increase in demand of corresponding main products,
there will be an insufficient supply of potential joint products. It has been proposed that the low
resilience of this system could lead to a so-called “structural scarcity” (Christian Hagelücken,
presentation at the workshop “Closing the material cycle” at EMPA, 12.4.2007). This opinion
relies on the assumption that potential joint products cannot be produced economically as
main products. However, opinions diverged on this assumption. It was argued that it would be
possible to produce potential joint products as main products because high demand (and thus a
high price) would unleash efforts to do so. The fact that no exploration has been undertaken for
deposits from which potential joint products can be economically produced as main products
was cited as an indication for a probable solution. It was argued that, as in the case of main
products, the previously postulated feedback control system would offset the scarcity of potential
joint products as well, as higher prices would induce a quest for cost-reducing effects.
Hence, it was not concluded whether the network production system is likely to cause longerterm
scarcity if potential joint products experience sharp increases in demand or if the capacity
for production of the main products is reduced.
Potential joint products cannot be produced economically as main products. Without a relative
increase in production of the corresponding main products, they become “structurally scarce”.
Potential joint products can be produced economically as main products. If a potential joint
product must be produced as a main product, the feedback control system will regulate its
production and longer-term scarcities will not occur.
It was proposed that nanotechnology offers a potential for material-saving technologies
due to the lower amounts of mineral raw materials required. However, nanotechnology might
even increase the potential for dissipation of mineral raw materials and thus lead to a scarcity
situation. It was also argued that nanotechnology would neither provoke nor ease scarcity, and
thus is essentially unrelated to scarcity. Prof. Isaacs showed that nanotechnology couldn’t be
considered as just one technology. It should thus be discussed carefully with respect to generalization
about its impacts.
Nanotechnology has the potential to ease scarcity due to the reduced amounts of materials
needed.
Nanotechnology increases the dissipation of mineral raw materials and thus potentially causes
scarcity.
Nanotechnology is essentially unrelated to scarcity. It neither provokes nor eases scarcity.
Prof. Kirchain presented the results of a study on the role of materials in sustainable mobility
completed by his group for WBCSD. Projected global automotive materials consumption
has shown that sufficient material resources are available for the production of transport vehicles
over the next 50 years, given that resource demands from other sectors do not change
dramatically. Results have shown that even with maximized recycling rates, there will be a
growing need for primary material resources. This is because the projected increase in vehicle
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 13

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
production and material demand will outstrip the rate at which secondary material can be recycled
from de-registered vehicles. Such extrapolations might be interesting with respect to
emerging technologies promoted as sustainable technologies. One task of an early warning
system as addressed in topic D could be to prevent emerging technologies based on insufficiently
existing mineral raw materials.
Open Questions
• Which mineral commodities are most likely to encounter much higher production costs in
the future? To what extent and how reliably can we extrapolate the future demand of mineral
raw materials?
• Should we focus on those commodities currently recovered as joint products but whose
consumption may increase rapidly, requiring production as main products? What will be the
associated rises in costs of production?
• Do we have to worry about the Skinner hypothesis, and if so, which mineral commodities
are likely to be most vulnerable?
• How might geopolitics affect the economic regulatory systems of demand and supply?
Topic C: Sustainable Coping Strategies
What can a society committed to Sustainable Development do to alleviate scarcity?
Mutually defining a sustainable strategy to confront scarcity is not easy, as resource optimists
and resource pessimists rely upon different assumptions. However, the proposition of
intergenerational equity provides common ground to move towards Sustainable Development.
This was clear and defended by all experts, but opinions on what actually must be conserved
for future generations could be grouped under the two concepts ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ sustainability.
Thus, it was a matter of controversy whether we should conserve the function that a raw
material fulfills and allow depletion if the raw material has a suitable substitute, or whether
we should hand down a reasonable stock of mineral raw materials for future generations.
We must ensure that the functions of the mineral raw materials will be fulfilled in the future.
We must hand down a reasonable stock of all mineral raw materials to future generations and
allow them to detect new functions.
Closing the materials loop is by many seen as an imperative for achieving SD. This however
poses a challenge for a variety of reasons. Reusing anthropogenic stocks to a much greater
extent requires installing an appropriate infrastructure for product design and recycling, avoiding
dissipative losses or material losses through out-of-reach disposals. There seems to be a
great need for improving life cycle thinking in business models which until now often see the
primary and secondary metal’s market as a completely separate activities (Petrie, 2007). The
14 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
paramount need is to integrate these coping strategies into political agendas and to ensure
that case-oriented strategies will be preemptively steered. As outlined by Prof Reller integrative
precautionary measures are central to avoid dissipation. Approaches such as the “designing
for disassembly” described by Johnson et al. (2007) are potential measures to preventively
avoid the losses occurring through spatial dilution.
With decreasing primary deposits of mineral raw materials, the recovery from secondary feeds
such as products or landfills will become more important. Preventive strategies to “Close the
Loop” are recommended to address this situation.
Problem-solving strategies were collected by mutual discussion. The Closed-Loop-
System approach was analyzed, and coping strategies to achieve this system were merged and
are illustrated in Figure 2. The coping strategies named in the discussions were allocated to
three different repositories, roughly divided into: “Lithosphere”, “in-use”, and “waste deposits”.
It is assumed that the main losses occur through dissipation and out-of-reach disposal.
The seven groups of coping strategies
are:
1. Find new deposits
2. Make identified mineral resources
economic to exploit
3. Avoid dissipative losses 2
4. Retard growth in consumption
5. Increase efficiency
6. Avoid out-of-reach disposals
7. Encourage recycling
Figure 2:
Material cycle of mineral raw materials and coping strategies allocated to the three repositories
“lithosphere”, in-use” and “waste deposits”.
As outlined by Prof. Tilton, long-run availability of the mineral commodities can be either
achieved by reducing the cost-increasing effects of mineral depletion (i.e., by altering the speed
at which society extracts and uses its primary mineral resources) or by promoting the costreducing
effects of new technology. Prof. Tilton stressed that new technologies have more than
offset the cost-increasing effects of depletion over the past century, but that this does not
guarantee that this situation will continue indefinitely in the future. He argued that most of the
coping strategies applied today (e.g., more recycling, new technologies that allow the substitution
of abundant resources for scarce resources, etc.) only slow the speed at which society extracts
and uses primary mineral resources. Hence, such efforts slow the pace at which mineral
2 The anthropogenic extent of dissipation can be quantified by means of a reference value reflecting the statistical
entropy of a MRM in processes compared with the statistical entropy in the original ore. The characterization of the
statistical entropy by a single metric per substance offers a useful decision support and design tool (Rechberger &
Graedel, 2002).
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 15

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
depletion promotes scarcities, but for the most part do not reverse the tendency. What can reverse
the tendency for depletion to produce scarcities are new technologies that reduce the
costs of producing mineral raw materials and that allow society to extract metals from previously
infeasible sources.
Prof. Hendrickson also stressed the difficulties revealed by the unpredictability of future
supply of mineral raw materials. He argued that companies could react over different time
periods to make new investments, with profits discounted over a relatively short planning horizon.
This allows estimating the amount of a mineral raw material available in the next few
years. However, the shifts in demand and supply functions over a long period of time remain
difficult to predict.
There are mineral raw materials whose extraction is significantly limited by other scarce
resources such as energy, water, land, or pristine ecosystems and thus may potentially induce
trade-offs between these natural goods. For instance, as mining and processing of ore requires
enormous amounts of water with current technologies, and much of the activity takes place in
water-scarce regions, trade-offs between different uses might occur. If regulations are set up
to control these interfering uses, scarcity might emerge in spite of sufficient resources remaining
in the ground. It has been argued that the low practicability of environmental regulations in
developing countries permitted the continuous supply of low-cost mineral raw materials in the
past. Should these circumstances change, which is certainly desirable from a socio-political
point of view, production costs of mineral raw materials might increase considerably. Pressure
from industrialized nations to keep the prices low might however extend the point in time
when this will happen. Hence, there are trade-offs between the security of supply and social or
environmental issues. As outlined by Prof. Hendrickson, a paramount policy issue in coping with
scarcity is the extent to which market intervention may be desirable for purposes such as preventing
disruptions of supply or improving inter- and intragenerational equity.
Solutions to scarcity entail a certain trade-off between security of supply and intra-and
intergenerational issues. Public policy plays a key role in undertaking the socially optimal action.
Open Questions
• What should public policy undertake to cope with potential scarcity caused by mineral depletion,
and to what extent should it try to alter the behavior of markets?
• What are the trade-offs between the two coping options (i.e., the conservation of the function
vs. the conservation of the mineral stocks for the next generation)? What are the relative
roles of public policy and the marketplace in determining how these trade-offs will be
effected?
16 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
Topic D: The »Red List of Scarce Raw Materials«
Would a Red List be a suitable instrument to prevent or handle scarcities sustainably?
The term “Red List” was adopted from the official “Red List of Threatened Species” designed
to determine the relative risk of species extinction (IUCN, 2006). The »Red List of Scarce
Raw Materials« was proposed to serve as an early warning system, encouraging proactive action
according to the precautionary principle by helping to anticipate, and thus avoid, scarcities
that could endanger human welfare. The surveys in the run-up to the workshop already revealed
that the idea of the »Red List of Scarce Raw Materials« met with different opinions as to
its significance. Some experts thought that it is rather irrelevant and even has the potential to
negatively affect the market. Others thought it could be a useful instrument for policy makers
or product designers and that it could steer research and pre-emptive actions of industry in the
right direction. As a result of discussion during the workshop, more ideas and suggestions were
integrated in the initial idea. The panel concluded that more aspects in addition to mere physical
scarcity must be considered in such an early warning system.
A “Green List” or ”Scenario-Based Preventive Resource Management“ was proposed to
replace the “old” idea of the Red List by including the new approaches dealt with in the last topics.
Resources whose availability and accessibility is of concern in the realms of environment,
society and economy should be the focus of interest, not necessarily those which are claimed to
be exhausted soon. The basic approach is to address crucial questions from the viewpoint of
the “Scenario-based Preventive Resource Management“, considering the following key issues:
Relevant functions in natural and human systems
The relevant functions fulfilled by a mineral’s material properties in natural and human
systems are a decisive criterion to be considered.
• What are the material properties needed to ensure the provision of the relevant functions
in the future?
Trends of demand
The trends of demand of relevant technologies must be kept in view in order to anticipate
erroneous developments. Short-term and long-term trends must be equally considered on
the basis of different scenarios.
• Which emerging technologies based on critical mineral raw materials might experience a
considerable increase in demand in the near-term and long-term future?
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 17

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
Eco-political criteria
As has been demonstrated, environmental regulations might induce scarcity. A social optimum
between security of supply and intra-and intergenerational issues must be aspired.
• What are the negative side effects for environment and social issues? Is the usage of these
materials environmentally and socially justifiable? How can those negative side effects be
preemptively recognized and avoided?
• If more than one material can fulfill the defined functions, which has the least negative
environmental, social, economic, and political consequences?
Geopolitical criteria
Geopolitics has the potential to induce scarcity. The country and company concentration
(see Glossary) of mineral commodities and other critical factors should be observed and registered
as a precautionary measure.
• Is or will there be a high country or company concentration respectively of the mineral raw
materials in focus?
• Will mineral raw materials be available and accessible in the required amounts and from
reliable sources?
Such a tool entails several crucial challenges due to existing uncertainties. It is unsure
how far we are capable of predicting the future course of research and technology. As pointed
out by Dr. DeYoung, the updates and maintenance of such a list are likely to take as much effort
as the initial set-up. Monitoring seems to be the most crucial and critical issue at the same
time. Dr. DeYoung presented a list of attributes for measuring a mineral commodity’s criticality
that was used for planning purposes for the upcoming USGS national mineral resource assessment,
with measures and criteria for each mineral commodity.
Many experts stressed the environmental concerns associated with resource management.
It remained unclear which indicators could be used in considering them and how an environmental
impact (of mining, for instance) should become allocated to a certain mineral commodity.
It was also discussed on what level (organizational, national, or international) such an
early warning system would be most usefully implemented. An international level would require
involving many stakeholders and ensuring that value judgments do not influence the results.
It was argued that it might be more effective to complete several lists for each nation
(national) or even for each industrial sector (organizational). However, in the latter two cases,
there might be many conflicting interests competing with each other, so the usefulness of the
venture might be compromised. The implementation of a list offers advantages and disadvantages
for each level considered. The experts agreed that the implementation of such an in-
18 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
strument as the ”Scenario-Based Preventive Resource Management“, on any level, would require
a multi-stakeholder approach. In order to ensure its implementation, the relevant industry
and science stakeholders need to be asked to participate and provide information in a corresponding
network.
Mr. Gerber illustrated the role of raw materials from a business perspective. He stressed
the significance of a systematic application of life cycle thinking in modern business practice to
provide society with more sustainable goods and services by managing the total life cycle of an
organization’s product portfolio. He proposed working more on the basis of scenarios and emphasized
that for this purpose, stakeholder management is needed, as forecasts would not be
good enough for the topics addressed. He pointed out that we should have an idea today of
what a sustainable product will look like in 2050 because of the long investment cycles for base
industries and lead times in R&D.
Ms. Chung presented the idea of the Scientific Panel on Sustainable Resource Management
whose aim is to provide independent scientific advice to national governments and relevant
international organizations on use intensity, security of supplies and the environmental
impacts of selected products and services on a global level. Furthermore, it should support the
enhancement of scientific knowledge, and capacity building in developing countries and furthermore
contribute to sustainable consumption and production. Ms. Chung’s presentation
showed that many of the concerns addressed are in the focus of international organizations
such as UNEP. After the workshop, the Scientific Panel was actually launched in November
2007. More information on the panel can be found at http://www.unep.fr/pc/sustain/initiati
ves/resourcepanel/.
The two-dimensional graph presented by Prof. Graedel and described in a recent release
of the Committee on Critical Mineral Impacts of the U.S. Economy, Committee on Earth Resources
and the National Research Council (2008) provides significant information for deciding
on a mineral’s criticality and is a suitable baseline for the pre-selection of minerals that ought
to receive special attention in a Preventive Resource Management. During the workshop, critical
raw materials potentially falling under that category were listed in a first draft (Table 2, see
annex). The table gives information about the mineral raw materials that were named in the
discussion and is to be seen as a first, incomplete collection.
Open Questions
• How do we know if the materials required today to fulfill society’s needs, will continue to
be required in the future?
• How can appropriate consideration be given to environmental and social concerns?
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 19

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
Summary
The ambitious two-day workshop “Scarce Raw Materials” with leading international experts
in the relevant areas was set up in order to analyze potential future risks emerging from
resource scarcity. An appropriate way to build an early warning system was envisioned. The
latter system should facilitate an anticipatory and preventive (sustainable) resource management
which helps avoid unexpected scarcities that have the potential to endanger human welfare
by indicating priorities of actions with respect to R&D, policy making, or lifestyle changes.
The workshop process included an in-depth preparation and post-processing phase which was
carried out in collaboration with the workshop participants. The experts were chosen based on
their outstanding expertise in the fields of resource management, resource economy, geology,
and material sciences.
The workshop was structured in four topic areas. Each half-day was dedicated tone of the
four topics respectively. Some crucial outcomes of the workshop with respect to each topic are
briefly summarized below:
Topic A: The Role of Scarcity in Society
In many cases, scarcity is not permanent but rather constantly influenced by societal,
technological, and economic developments. The feedback control system proposes that scarcity
acts as a trigger for technology improvements and product development. The system indicates
that higher prices provide incentives to offset emerging scarcities through technological
improvements. The panel did not agree on the time frame of its validity (years, decades, centuries
or even millennia). The disagreement was rooted in the different assumptions considering
the questions whether the limitedness of resources will exercise constraints on human action
and the extent to which it will be possible to explore the resource base. This debate is led by
two camps; “resource pessimists” following the “fixed stock paradigm” and “resource optimists”
arguing according to the “opportunity cost paradigm” (Tilton, 1996, 2003; Tilton & Lagos,
2007). Further disagreements involved the essentiality of mineral raw materials. All experts
agreed that phosphorus and potassium are considered essential, but no agreement was
achieved on whether further mineral raw materials are irreplaceable in certain technical applications.
Different categories of mineral raw materials were perceived. The categories distinguish
the mineral raw materials according to relevant features that determine the attention
they should receive when insecurity of supply is analyzed. The following categories were distinguished:
Human and natural system-sensitive, technological system-sensitive, geopolitical
system-sensitive and market/ economic system-sensitive (see further information in Table 1 in
the annex).
20 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
Topic B: The Causes of Scarcity
Potential drivers of scarcity were identified. By and large, experts agreed that counterproductive
geopolitics, dissipation, high statistical entropy states in products, or societal barriers
will presumably be equally or even more decisive in producing scarcities than the depletion
of primary deposits. The role of nanotechnology was perceived differently. Some considered
that it would ease scarcity; others that it would increase scarcity due to dissipation and the
potential dependence on scarce mineral raw materials, and still others argued that it is unrelated
to scarcity.
The likelihood of so-called “structural scarcities” of potential joint products was discussed.
Whether the potential joint products are likely to suffer from long-term scarcity under
sharp increases in demand was assessed differently.
A very critical issue seems to be the irreversible loss of materials through dissipation,
which is still increasing in a variety of applications. Dissipative flows into the environment finally
inhibit a closed loop system and thus sustainable action.
Topic C: Sustainable Coping Strategies
It was evident that coping strategies to alleviate scarcity may force trade-offs between
the security of supply and intra- and intergenerational equity issues. It was argued that more
efforts to should be made to “Close the Loop”. The key role of public policy in fostering “life cycle
thinking” was stressed.
The hazardous impacts on the environment and human health associated with production,
recovery, and disposal, are rather alarming and could further increase in case of scarcity.
The fact that the processing phases involved mainly take place in developing countries is a
paramount policy issue of intragenerational equity.
Topic D: The »Red List of Scarce Raw Materials«
The idea of the Red List was replaced by a more dynamic approach considering new aspects.
Rather than only scarcity, other risks in supply security should be considered as well. It
emphasized that system dynamics, the significance of a raw material’s function, and environmental
as well as social criteria should become integrated. Such a “Scenario-based Preventive
Resource Management” would have to be set up in a challenging multi-stakeholder process
with critical issues to be considered. It was not concluded on what level (organizational, national,
or international) it would be most effective. Also, maintenance and updating were identified
as complex challenges. The “Scenario-based Preventive Resource Management” must be
promoted by implementing a national or international resource network to exchange data and
increase data security. The involvement of the relevant stakeholders of industry and science is
a key aspect in establishing such an early warning system.
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 21

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
Concluding Remarks
Neither the fixed stock paradigm postulated by the resource pessimists, nor the opportunity
cost paradigm defended by the resource optimists alone seems to fulfill the overall requirements
for a future-oriented policy of sustainable management of mineral raw materials.
The goal of going beyond these paradigms to the idea of a preventive anticipatory resource
management is a major challenge. However, integrating key aspects of both paradigms might
provide a basis for eliciting a common strategy for the formulation of the desired early warning
system.
Today’s resource use and management have long-term impacts for future political, social,
and economic systems. Comparing the current rather short-term oriented comprehension
and partly sketchy information about resource availability and accessibility with the longlasting
effects of today’s resource management reveals telling discrepancies.
Upcoming publications will address and further evolve case-oriented approaches to sustainably
plan and steer the future use of mineral raw materials. The network of people created
during the workshop sets the stage for pursuing the goal of further projects and cooperation
between the institutions involved in the challenging and societal relevant field of mineral raw
material scarcity.
References
Andersson, B. A. (2001). Material Constraints on Technology Evolution: The Case of Scarce Metals
and Emerging Energy Technologies,. Chalmers University of Technology and Göteborg
University, Göteborg, Sweden.
Ayres, R. U. (1997). Metals recycling: economic and environmental implications. Resources, Conservation
and Recycling, 21(3), 145-173.
Barnett, H. J., & Morse, C. (1963). Scarcity and growth the economics of natural resource availability.
Baltimore: Resources for the future; Johns Hopkins Press.
Baumgartner, S., Becker, C., Faber, M., & Manstetten, R. (2006). Relative and absolute scarcity of
nature. Assessing the roles of economics and ecology for biodiversity conservation. Ecological
Economics, 59(4), 487-498.
Brooks, D. B. (1966). Supply and Competition in Minor Metals. Baltimore, MD: Resources for the
Future Press.
Brooks, D. B. (1976). Mineral supply as a stock, chapter 2.5A. In W. A. Vogely (Ed.), Economics of the
mineral industries, 3rd ed. (pp. 127-207). New York: American Institute of Mining, Metallurgical,
and Petroleum Engineers.
Committee on Critical Mineral Impacts of the U.S. Economy, Committee on Earth Resources, &
National Research Council. (2007). Minerals, Critical Minerals, and the U.S. Economy.
Daly, H. E. (1977). Steady-State Economics. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company.
Daly, H. E. (1994). Operationalizing sustainable development by investing in natural capital. In A.
Jannsson, H. Hammer, C. Folke & R. Costanza (Eds.), Investing in Natural Capital: The Ecological
Economics Approach to Sustainability (pp. 21-37). Washington, DC: Island Press.
Dasgupta, P., & Heal, G. (1974). Optimal Depletion of Exhaustible Resources. Review of Economic
Studies, 3-28.
DeYoung, J. H., Jr., Barton, P. B., Boulege, J., Dahmen, P., Gocht, W. R. A., Kürsten, M. O. C., et al.
(1987). Assessment of Non-energy Mineral Resources- Group Report. In D. J. McLaren &
B. J. Skinner (Eds.), In: Resources and world development report of the Dahlem Workshop
on Resources and World Development (pp. 509-523). Chichester: Wiley.
22 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
DeYoung Jr., J. H., Sutphin, D. M., & Cannon, W. F. (1984). International Strategic Minerals Inventory
summary report—Manganese. U.S. Geological Survey Circular 930-A, 22.
Gordon, R. B., Bertram, M., & Graedel, T. E. (2006). Metal stocks and sustainability. Proceedings of
the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(5), 1209-1214.
Hartwick, J. M. (1977). Intergenerational Equity and the Investment of Rents from Exhaustible
Resources. American Economic Review, 67, pp. 972-974.
IUCN. (2006). Red List of threatened species. from http://www.iucnredlist.org/:
Johnson, J., Harper, E. M., Lifset, R., & Graedel, T. E. (2007). Dining at the Periodic Table: Metals
Concentrations as They Relate to Recycling. Environ. Sci. Technol., 41(5), 1759-1765.
Klee, R. J., & Graedel, T. E. (2004). Elemental cycles: A status report on human or natural dominance.
Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 29, 69-107.
Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. W. (1971). The Limits to growth. New
York: Universe Books.
National Research Council. (2008). Minerals, Critical Minerals, and the U.S. Economy. Washington,
DC: The National Academic Press.
Petrie, J. (2007). New models of sustainability for the resources sector - A focus on minerals and
metals. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 85(B1), 88-98.
Rechberger, H., & Graedel, T. E. (2002). The contemporary European copper cycle: statistical
entropy analysis. Ecological Economics, 42(1-2), 59-72.
Reuter, M. A., Heiskanen, K., Boin, U., Van Schaik, A., Verhoef, E. V., Yang, Y., et al. (2005). The metrics
of material and metal ecology harmonizing the resource, technology and environmental
cycles. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Reuter, M. A., Verhoef, E., Dijkema, G. P. J., & Villeneuve, J. (2005). Life cycle assessment (LCA) for
the metals cycle in the context of waste policy. Géosciences, numéro 1.
Scherer, F. M. ( 1970). Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance. Chicago, IL: Rand
McNally College Publishing Co.
Skinner, B. J. (1976). Second iron age ahead? American Scientist, 64(3), 258-269.
Solow, R. M. (1974a). The economics of resources or the resources of economics. American Economic
Review, 64, 1-14.
Solow, R. M. (1974b). Intergenerational equity and exhaustible resources. [Symposium]. Review
of Economic Studies, 29-46.
Solow, R. M. (1992). An almost practical step towards sustainability. Washington DC: Resources
for the Future.
Stiglitz, J. (1974). Growth with exhaustible natural resources: efficient and optimal growth
paths. [Symposium]. Review of Economic Studies, 123-137.
Tilton, J. E. (1996). Exhaustible resources and sustainable development: Two different paradigms.
Resources Policy, 22(1-2), 91-97.
Tilton, J. E. (2003). On borrowed time? Assessing the Threat of Mineral Depletion. Washington DC:
Resources for the Future.
Tilton, J. E., & Lagos, G. (2007). Assessing the long-run availability of copper. Resources Policy,
32(1-2), 19-23.
USGS, & U.S. Bureau of Mines. (1980). Principles of a Resource/Reserve Classification for Minerals
(U.S. Geological Survey Circular 831).
Verhoef, E. V., Dijkema, G. P. J., & Reuter, M. A. (2004). Process Knowledge, System Dynamics,
and Metal Ecology. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 8(1-2), 23-43.
Wäger, P., & Classen, M. (2006). Metal availability and supply: the many facets of scarcity. Proceedings
of MMME’06. Paper presented at the 1st International Symposium on Material,
Minerals &Metal Ecology (MMME 06), November 14-15, Cape Town, South Africa.
Wellmer, F.-W., & Becker-Platen, J. D. (2002). Sustainable development and the exploitation of
mineral and energy resources: a review. International Journal of Earth Sciences, 91(5),
723-745.
Wellmer, F.-W., Hannak, W., Krauß, U., & Thormann, A. (1989). Deposits of Rare Metals. In M. Kürsten
(Ed.), 5th International Symposium on Mineral Resources: Raw Materials for New
Technologies, (pp. 71-122). Hannover, 19.-21. Oct. 1988: Stuttgart (Schweizerbart).
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 23

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
Glossary
By-products
Company concentration
Co-product
Country concentration
Coupled elements
Resource base
By-products are elements that can be produced from concentrates
or slags of principal wanted elements due to market circumstances
(like indium or germanium from zinc concentrates).
Prof. Wellmer (personal communication, January 14, 2008) and
Dr. DeYoung (personal communication, February 3, 2008).
The distribution of production of a mineral commodity within an
industry, which can be measured by a company concentration ratio
(or industry concentration ratio) showing the percentage of
total production (physical output or value) contributed by the
largest few firms, ranked in order of shares of production. Related
to the concept of market concentration, which concerns the
distribution of sales within a market, as opposed to the distribution
of production within an industry. (Scherer, 1970, pp. 50-57)
Co-products are elements that must be produced together from
a mineral deposit because market circumstances require the
revenue from all of the co-products in order to be profitable Dr.
DeYoung (personal communication, February 3, 2008).
The global distribution of production of a mineral commodity
among producing countries, which can be measured by a country
concentration ratio, showing the percentage of total production
(physical output or value) contributed by the largest few countries,
ranked in order of shares of production. (Adapted from the
concepts of market concentration and industry concentration,
DeYoung Jr., Sutphin, & Cannon, 1984, pp. 8-9, 11)
Coupled elements are such elements that must be produced at
the same time as a principal wanted element, at least to the intermediate
product stage, regardless of market circumstances
because the elements are chemically very similar and occur together
in ore deposits (like rare-earth elements in REE deposits
or platinum, palladium, and other platinum-group elements in
PGE deposits). Adopted from Wellmer et al. (1989) and amended
by Dr. DeYoung (personal communication, February 3, 2008).
An approach to the universe of resource availability in which
technologic and economic limitations are largely ignored. Geologic
limitations derive from natural abundance and are not ignored,
for they are the essence of the resource base.” The resource
base encompasses all of a given material (e.g., copper)
within some portion of the earth’s crust. (D.B. Brooks, 1976, pp.
148-149, 152-158)
24 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
PGEs
Potential joint products
Real price
REEs
Reserve base
Reserves
Resources
Statistical entropy
Strong sustainability
Weak sustainability
Platinum Group Elements include iridium, osmium, palladium,
platinum, rhodium, and ruthenium.
Potential joint products include potential by-products (of primary
products), co-products, and coupled elements. They either can or
must be produced when producing the principal wanted element(s).
Prof. Wellmer (personal communication, January 14,
2008) and Dr. DeYoung (personal communication, February 3,
2008)
Price of a commodity that has been adjusted for inflation (Tilton,
2003, p. 141).
The Rare Earth Elements include the element lanthanum (La) and
the fourteen elements that follow La in the periodic table (Lanthanides).
“That part of an identified resource that meets specified minimum
physical and chemical criteria related to current mining
and production practices, including those for grade, quality, thickness,
and depth. The reserve base is the in-place demonstrated
(measured plus indicated) resource from which reserves are estimated.”
(USGS & U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1980, p. 5)
“That part of the reserve base which could be economically extracted
or produced at the time of determination. The term reserves
need not signify that extraction facilities are in place and
operative.” (USGS & U.S. Bureau of Mines, 1980, p. 5)
“A concentration of naturally occurring solid, liquid, or gaseous
material in or on the earth’s crust in such form and amount that
economic extraction of a commodity from the concentration is
currently or potentially feasible.” (USGS & U.S. Bureau of Mines,
1980, p. 5)
Entropy is a measure of the disorder or randomness in a closed
system. Statistical entropy is used to measure the variance of a
probability distribution (Rechberger & Graedel, 2002).
Strong sustainability, as supported by Daly (1994) claims that
natural capital and man-made capital are only complementary
at best. In order for Sustainable Development to be achieved,
natural capital has to be kept constant independently from manmade
capital.
The use of natural resources is consistent with weak sustainability
so long as the diminishing natural capital is being substituted
by gains through human capital (e.g., buildings) (Hartwick, 1977;
Solow, 1992).
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 25

Maya Wolfensberger, Daniel J. Lang & Roland W. Scholz
Table 1:
Annex
Proposed categories of mineral raw materials
Category Explanation Examples
Human and natural
system-sensitive
Technological
system-sensitive
Geopolitical systemsensitive
Market-/ economic systemsensitive
Mineral raw materials that are essential for vital
functions. Their scarcity represents a threat for
human beings.
Mineral raw materials whose extraction is
significantly limited by other scarce
environmental goods such as energy, water, land,
or pristine ecosystems. Scarcities might emerge
from these trade-offs between environmental
goods.
Mineral raw materials used for emerging
technologies with global potential of widespread
market diffusion.
Mineral raw materials that are essential for
technical applications. Suitable substitutes might
be found but currently no alternative solutions
are on hand.
Mineral raw materials produced in only a few
countries or extracted by only a few companies
may have a higher risk of seller coalitions
increasing market prices.
Which elements are considered to be
geopolitically critical depends finally on the
strategic purposes of the nation and their import
dependence.
The thorough market penetration of many
products relying on the supply of certain bulk
mineral raw materials might lead to severe
impacts on market structures if the accessibility of
the materials changes temporarily. Furthermore,
the supply of these materials might respond
sensitively to economic interventions. For
instance, the high volatility of the market price
might be an investment barrier and induce
economic scarcity.
Phosphorus and potassium
Several (e.g. water scarcity
constraining mining activities)
Indium, rhodium, bismuth, selenium,
tellurium, etc.
REEs such as gadolinium for energy
efficient light systems
Rhenium for high-temperature
combustors
PGEs mainly extracted from South
African mines, etc.
Copper, etc.
26 March 2008

(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral Resource Scarcity
Table 2:
Draft list of mineral raw materials that might deserve special attention (to be extended)
Mineral raw
material
Copper
Gold
Hafnium
Indium
Criticality
Divided into the importance in use and availability according to the
Committee on Critical Mineral Impacts of the U.S. Economy and others
(2007)
Importance in use
Essential properties such as
low electrical resistance.
Outstanding resistance to
corrosion and electrical
conductivity. Important for
information technology,
other high performance
applications and jewelry.
Increases in demand
expected (new computer
chips).
Limited potential for
substitution (in the
production of low-cost
electricity for instance).
Availability
Need for innovation due to low R/C ratio.
By-product to copper and zinc, two
metals with short reserve lives
(Andersson, 2001).
Need for innovation due to low R/C ratio.
Phosphorus Essential for vital functions. No unlimited source as in the case of
potassium (seawater).
Platinum
REEs such as
Gadolinium
Rhenium
Rhodium
Tellurium
Titanium
Uranium
Zinc
Exceptionally promising for
nanostructural applications.
Essential and indispensable
for new and energy efficient
light systems.
No substitutes in hightemperature
combustors
(airplane engines, etc.).
No substitutes in catalytic
converters of cars.
Limited potential for
substitution (production of
low-cost electricity).
Used as titan oxide in white
colour pigments.
Unique properties for energy
production.
Electrochemical properties
make zinc a good
anticorrosion protection
material.
High degree of dissipation through
losses from vehicle’s catalytic converters.
By-product of copper and zinc, two
metals with low R/C ratios.
As
mentioned
in
Workshop,
surveys
Surveys
Workshop
Workshop,
surveys
Workshop,
surveys
Workshop,
surveys
Workshop
Workshop
Workshop,
surveys
(Andersson,
2001)
High degree of dissipation. Survey 1
High degree of dissipation in corrosive
environments and from other uses.
Survey 1
Workshop,
survey
ETH-UNS Working Paper 43 27

ETH-UNS Working Papers
■ UNS-Working Paper 1 (Out of Print)
Scholz, R.W. (1994). Muss man den Formalismus beherrschen,
um die Formalisten zu schlagen? Zürich:
ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Scholz, R.W. (1998). Umweltforschung
zwischen Formalwissenschaft und Verständnis:
Muss man den Formalismus beherrschen,
um die Formalisten zu schlagen? [Environmental
research between formal science and
comprehension: is command of the formalism
necessary for beating the formalists?] In A. Daschkeit
& W. Schröder (Eds.), Umweltforschung quergedacht:
Perspektiven integrativer Umweltforschung
und -lehre [Environmental research
thought laterally: perspectives on integrating
environmental research and teaching] (pp. 309–
328). Berlin: Springer.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 2 (Out of Print)
UNS (1994). Lehrstuhlbeschreibung Umweltnaturund
Umweltsozialwissenschaften (UNS). Fallstudie,
Forschung und Berufspraxis. Zürich: ETH Zürich,
Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 3
Mieg, H.A. (1994). Die Expertenrolle. Zürich: ETH
Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 4
Heitzer, A. & Scholz, R.W. (1994). Monitoring and
evaluating the efficacy of bioremediation – a conceptual
framework. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur-
und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 5 (Out of Print)
Scholz, R.W., Weber, O., & Michalik, G. (1995). Ökologische
Risiken im Firmenkreditgeschäft. Zürich:
ETH-Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Scholz, R.W., Weber, O., & Michalik,
G. (1995). Ökologische Risiken im Firmenkreditgeschäft.
[Ecological risks in loans to enterprises] In
Overlack-Kosel, D., Scholz, R.W., Erichsen, S.,
Schmitz, K. W., and Urban, G. (Eds.), Kreditrisiken
aus Umweltrisiken [Loan risks due to environmental
risks (pp. 1–49). Bonn: Economica.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 6 (Out of Print)
Scholz, R.W., Heitzer, A., May, T., Nothbaum, N.,
Stünzi, J., & Tietje, O. (1995). Datenqualität und
Risikoanalysen – Das Risikohandlungsmodell zur
Altlastenbearbeitung. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur-
und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Scholz, R.W., Heitzer, A., May, T. W.,
Nothbaum, N. Stünzi, J., & Tietje, O. (1996). Datenqualität
und Risikoanalysen: Das Risikohandlungsmodell
zur Altlastenbearbeitung. [Data
quality and risk analyses. The Risk Action Model
of soil remediation] In S. Schulte-Hostede, R.
Freitag, A. Kettrup, and W. Fresenius (Eds.), Altlasten-Bewertung:
Datenanalyse und Gefahrenbewertung
[Evaluation of soil remediation cases:
analysis of data and evaluation of risks] (pp. 1–29).
Landsberg: Ecomed.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 7 (Out of Print)
Scholz, R.W., Mieg, A.H., & Weber, O. (1995). Mastering
the complexity of environmental problem
solving by case study approach. Zürich: ETH Zürich,
Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Scholz, R.W., Mieg, H.A., & Weber, O.
(1997). Mastering the complexity of environmental
problem solving with the case study approach.
Psychologische Beiträge, [Contributions
to Psychology] 39, 169–186.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 8 (Out of Print)
Tietje, O. & Scholz, R.W. (1995). Wahrscheinlichkeitskonzepte
und Umweltsysteme. Zürich: ETH
Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Tietje, O. & Scholz, R.W. (1996).
Wahrscheinlichkeitskonzepte und Umweltsysteme.
[Concepts of probability and environmental
systems] In A. Gheorghe & H. Seiler (Eds.),
Was ist Wahrscheinlichkeit? Die Bedeutung der
Wahrscheinlichkeit beim Umgang mit technischen
Risiken [What is probability? The
meaning of probability in the case of technical
risks] (pp. 31–49). Zürich: vdf.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 9 (Out of Print)
Scholz, R.W. (1995). Grenzwert und Risiko: Probleme
der Wahrnehmung und des Handelns. Zürich: ETH
Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Scholz, R.W. (1996). Grenzwerte und
Risiko: Probleme der Wahrnehmung und des
Handelns. [Standards and risks: Problems of
cognition and of action] In A. Grohmann & G.
Reinicke (Eds.), Transparenz und Akzeptanz von
Grenzwerten am Beispiel des Trinkwassers
[Transparency in the setting of standards and
their acceptance in the case of drinking water]
(pp. 5–19). Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 10 (Out of Print)
Weber, O. (1995). Vom kognitiven Ungetüm bis zur
Unverständlichkeit: Zwei Beispiele für Schwierigkeiten
im Umgang mit Grenzwerten. Zürich: ETH
Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Weber, O. (1996). Vom kognitiven
Ungetüm bis zur Unverständlichkeit: zwei Beispiele
für Schwierigkeiten im Umgang mit Grenzwerten.
[From cognitive monsters to incomprehensibility:
two examples of difficulties in managing
standards] In Umweltbundesamt (Ed.),
Transparenz und Akzeptanz von Grenzwerten am
Beispiel des Trinkwassers. Berichtsband zur Tagung
vom 10. und 11. Oktober 1995 (mit Ergänzungen),
[Transparency in and acceptance of standards.
The case of drinking water] (pp. 133–150).
Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 11
Oberle, B.M., Meyer, S.B., & Gessler, R.D. (1995).
Übungsfälle 1994: Ökologie als Bestandteil von
Unternehmens- strategien am Beispiel der Swissair.
Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 12 (Out of Print)
Mieg, H.A. (1996). Managing the Interfaces between
Science, Industry, and Society. Zürich: ETH Zürich,
Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Mieg, H.A. (1996). Managing the
interfaces between science, industry, and society.
In: UNESCO (Ed.), World Congress of Engineering
Educators and Industry Leaders (Vol. I, pp. 529-533).
Paris: UNESCO.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 13 (Out of Print)
Scholz, R.W. (1996). Effektivität, Effizienz und Verhältnismässigkeit
als Kriterien der Altlastenbearbeitung.
Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und
Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Scholz, R.W. (1996). Effektivität, Effizienz
und Verhältnismässigkeit als Kriterien der
Altlastenbearbeitung. [Efficacy, efficiency and
appropriateness as criteria for evaluating soil
remediation cases] In: Baudirektion des Kantons
Zürich in Zusammenarbeit mit ETH-UNS (Eds.).
Grundsätze, Modelle und Praxis der Altlastenbearbeitung
im Kanton Zürich: Referate zur
Altlastentagung 1996 [Principles, models and the
administrative practice of soil remediation in the
Canton of Zurich] (pp. 1–22) Zürich: AGW Hauptabteilung
Abfallwirtschaft und Betriebe.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 14 (Out of Print)
Tietje, O., Scholz, R.W., Heitzer, A., & Weber, O.
(1996). Mathematical evaluation criteria. Zürich:
ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Tietje, O., Scholz, R.W., Heitzer, A.,
and Weber, O. (1998). Mathematical evaluation
criteria. In H.-P. Blume, H. Eger, E. Fleischhauer, A.
Hebel, C. Reij, & G. Steiner (Eds.), Towards
sustainable land use (pp. 53–61). Reiskirchen:
Catena.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 15
Steiner, R. (1997). Evaluationsbericht: Bewertung
der obligatorischen Berufspraxis im Studiengang
Umweltnaturwissenschaften durch Betriebe und
Studierende. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnaturund
Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 16 (Out of Print)
Jungbluth, N. (1997). Life-cycle-assessment for
stoves and ovens. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur-
und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Jungbluth, N. (1997). Life-Cycle-Assessment
for stoves and ovens. 5th SETAC-Europe
LCAS Case Studies Symposium, (pp. 121–130), Brussels.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 17
Tietje, O., Scholz, R.W., Schaerli, M.A., Heitzer, A., &
Hesske, S. (1997). Mathematische Bewertung von
Risiken durch Schwermetalle im Boden: Zusammenfassung
des gleichnamigen Posters auf der
Tagung der Deutschen Bodenkundlichen Gesellschaft
in Konstanz. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur-
und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.

ETH-UNS Working Papers (continued from previous page)
■ UNS-Working Paper 18
Jungbluth, N. (1998). Ökologische Beurteilung des
Bedürfnisfeldes Ernährung: Arbeitsgruppen, Methoden,
Stand der Forschung, Folgerungen. Zürich:
ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 19 (Out of Print)
Weber, O., Scholz, R.W., Bühlmann, R., & Grasmück,
D. (1999). Risk Perception of Heavy Metal Soil Contamination
and Attitudes to Decontamination
Strategies. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und
Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Weber, O., Scholz, R.W., Bühlmann,
R., & Grasmück, D. (2001). Risk Perception of Heavy
Metal Soil Contamination and Attitudes to
Decontamination Strategies. Risk Analysis, Vol. 21,
Issue 5, pp. 967–967.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 20 (Out of Print)
Mieg, H.A. (1999). Expert Roles and Collective Reasoning
in ETH-UNS Case Studies. Zürich: ETH
Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Mieg, H.A. (2000). University-based
projects for local sustainable development –
Expert Roles and Collective Reasoning in ETH-
UNS Case Studies. International Journal of
Sustainability in Higher Education, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.
67–82.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 21
Scholz, R.W. (1999). «Mutual Learning» und Probabilistischer
Funktionalismus – Was Hochschule und
Gesellschaft von einander und von Egon Brunswik
lernen können. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnaturund
Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 22 (Out of Print)
Semadeni M. (1999). Moving from Risk to Action: A
conceptual risk handling model. Zürich: ETH Zürich,
Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Semadeni, M. (2000). Moving from
risk to action: A conceptual risk handling model.
In R. Häberli, R. Scholz, A. Bill, & M. Welti (Eds.),
Proceedings of the International Transdisciplinarity
2000 Conference: Transdisiplinarity – Joint
Problem-Solving among Science, Technology and
Society. ETH Zurich. Workbook I: Dialogue
Sessions and Idea Market (pp. 239-234). Zürich:
Haffmanns Sachbuch Verlag.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 23 (Out of Print)
Güldenzoph, W. & Scholz, R.W. (2000). Umgang
mit Altlasten während dem Transformationsprozess
im Areal Zentrum Zürich Nord (ZZN). Zürich:
ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften
(Published as: Güldenzoph, W., Baracchi, C., Fagetti,
R., & Scholz, R.W. (2000). Chancen und
Dilemmata des Industriebrachenrecyclings:
Fallbetrachtung Zentrum Zürich Nord [Opportunities
and dilemmas in the recycling of industrial
"brownfields": Case study city center Zurich
North]. DISP 143 [Documents and Information on
Local, Regional, and Country Planning in Switzerland],
36, 10-17.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 24
Semadeni M. (2000). Soil and Sustainable Land-
Use. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften
■ UNS-Working Paper 25
Sell J., Weber, O., & Scholz, R.W. (2001). Liegenschaftsschatzungen
und Bodenbelastungen. Zürich:
ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften
■ UNS-Working Paper 26 (Out of Print)
Hansmann, R., Hesske, S., Tietje, O., & Scholz, R.W.
(2001). Internet-unterstützte Umweltbildung: Eine
experimentelle Studie zur Anwendung des Online-
Simulationsspiels SimUlme im Schulunterricht.
Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Hansmann, R., Hesske, S., Tietje, O.,
& Scholz, R.W. (2002). Internet-unterstützte Umweltbildung:
Eine experimentelle Studie zur
Anwendung des Online-Simulationsspiels Sim-
Ulme im Schulunterricht. Schweizerische Zeitschrift
für Bildungswissenschaften, Nr. 1/2002.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 27
Scholz, R.W. & Weber, O. (2001). Judgments on
Health Hazards to Soil Contamination by Exposed
and Not-exposed Residents. Zürich: ETH Zürich,
Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 28
Scholz, R.W., Steiner, R., & Hansmann, R. (2001).
Practical Training as Part of Higher Environmental
Education. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und
Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 29
Hansmann, R., Scholz, R.W., Crott, H.W., & Mieg,
H.A. (2001). Education in Environmental Planning:
Effects of Group Discussions, Expert Information,
and Case Study Participation on Judgment Accuracy.
Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 30
Laws, D., Scholz, R.W., Shiroyama, H., Susskind, L.,
Suzuki, T., & Weber, O. (2002). Expert Views on
Sustainability and Technology Implementation.
Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 31
Flüeler, T. (2002). Robust Radioactive Waste Management:
Decision Making in Complex Socio-technical
Systems. Part1 = Options in Radioactive Waste
Management Revisited: A Proposed Framework for
Robust Decision Making; Part 2 = Robustness in
Radioactive Waste Management. A Contribution to
Decision Making in Complex Socio-technical Systems.
Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Part 1 published as: Flüeler, T. (2001a): Options in
Radioactive Waste Management Revisited: A
Framework for Robust Decision Making. Journal of
Risk Analysis. Vol. 21. No. 4. Aug. 2001:787-799.
Part 2 published as: Flüeler, T. (2001b): Robustness
in Radioactive Waste Management. A Contribution
to Decision-Making in Complex Sociotechnical
Systems. In: E. Zio, M. Demichela & N.
Piccinini (eds.): Safety & Reliability. Towards a
Safer World. Proceedings of the European Conference
on Safety and Reliability. ESREL 2001.
Torino (I), 16-20 Sep. Vol. 1. Politecnico di Torino,
Torino, Italy:317-325.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 32
Hansmann, R., Mieg, H.A., Crott, H.W., & Scholz,
R.W. (2002). Models in Environmental Planning:
Selection of Impact Variables and Estimation of
Impacts. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und
Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 33
Schnabel, U., Tietje, O., & Scholz, R.W. (2002). Using
the Power of Information of Sparse Data for Soil
Improvement Management. Zürich: ETH Zürich,
Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 34
Weber, O., Reiland, R., & Weber, B. (2002). Sustainability
Benchmarking of European Banks and
Financial Service Organizations . Zürich: ETH
Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 35
Kammerer, D., Sell, J., & Weber, O. (2002). Evaluation
of AIJ Project Proposals – Potential Contribution
to Sustainable Development. Zürich: ETH
Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 36
Scholz, R.W., Mieg, H.A., & Weber, O. (2003). Wirtschaftliche
und organisationale Entscheidungen.
Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
(Published as: Scholz, R.W., Mieg, H.A., & Weber O.
(2003). Wirtschaftliche und organisationale Entscheidungen,
In: Auhagen & Bierhoff. Wirtschaftsund
Organisationspsychologie.)
■ UNS-Working Paper 37
Scholz, R.W. & Binder, C. (2003). The Paradigm of
Human-Environment Systems. Zürich: ETH Zürich,
Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 38
Hansmann, R., Crott, H.W., Mieg, H.A., & Scholz,
R.W. (2003). Is Group Performance Improved by
Evaluating Task Difficulty and by Knowing about
the Differential Effects of Conformity?. Zürich: ETH
Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 39
Binder, C., Hofer, C., Wiek, A., & Scholz, R.W. (2003).
Transition process towards regional wood flows by
integrating material flux analysis and agent analysis:
The case of Appenzell Ausserrhoden, Switzerland.
Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 40
Loukopoulos, P. & Scholz, R.W. (2003). Future Urban
Sustainable Mobility: Using ‘Area Development
Negotiations’ for Scenario Assessment and for
Assisting the Democratic Policy Process. Zürich:
ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 41
Fenchel, M., Scholz, R.W., & Weber, O. (2003). Does
Good Environmental Performance reduce Credit
Risk? – Empirical Evidence from Europe`s Banking
Sector. Zürich: ETH Zürich, Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 42
Grasmück, D. & Scholz, R.W. (2003). Risk perception
of heavy metal soil contamination by high-exposed
and low-exposed inhabitants. Zürich: ETH Zürich,
Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.
■ UNS-Working Paper 43
Wolfensberger, M., Lang, D., & Scholz, R.W. (2008).
(Re-) Structuring the field of Non-Energy Mineral
Resource Scarcity. Summary of the Workshop
“Scarce Raw Materials” August 31–September 2,
2007 – Davos, Switzerland. Zürich: ETH Zürich,
Umweltnatur- und Umweltsozialwissenschaften.