Assessment of physical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in developing Uzbekistan

R

Afl

OT

a

ARRAA

KUE(IRM

1

naNurtEhnng1

rc

h0

ARTICLE IN PRESSG ModelECYCL-2865 No of Pages 10

Resources Conservation and Recycling xxx (2014) xxxndashxxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Resources Conservation and Recycling

jo ur nal home p age wwwelsev ier com locate resconrec

ssessment of physical economy through economy-wide materialow analysis in developing Uzbekistan

zoda Raupova lowast Hirotsugu Kamahara Naohiro Gotooyohashi University of Technology Department of Environmental and Life Sciences Japan

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle historyeceived 4 December 2013eceived in revised form 7 May 2014ccepted 14 May 2014vailable online xxx

eywordszbekistanconomy-wide material flow analysisEW-MFA)ndustrial metabolismesource use indicatorsaterial efficiency

a b s t r a c t

In this paper we assess the physical dimensions of Uzbekistanrsquos economy during 1992ndash2011 by usingthe economy-wide material flow analysis (EW-MFA) method which is an internationally recognized toolfor such assessments There have been a number of studies using methodological standardization of EW-MFA but to the best of our knowledge it has never been used to assess the metabolism of Central Asianeconomies especially in this case the Republic of Uzbekistan

Our analysis strives to empirically evaluate macroscopic economic activities by considering theaccounting of material flows The material flows data-set comprises of consistent data for domesticextraction imports and exports as well as other derived MFA-based indicators

The derived indicators are internationally compared for further evaluation of national economic devel-opment performance in a given period The indicators of direct material input (DMI) and total materialrequirements (TMR) showed a slight increase in 1992ndash2011 with an average annual increase of 279 and234 The trends of TMR DMI domestic material consumption (DMC) and material efficiency which is

indicated by GDPDMI displayed lower values than other industrialized countries referenced in the inter-national comparison Although national economic performance data showed particularly remarkablesuccess indicators measuring material inputs and DMC reveal an insignificant increase during the periodof study During the second decade of study period relative decoupling has occurred which indicatedthat the economic indicator (GDP) grows faster than DMC and other macro indicators grow

Introduction

The concept of sustainable development concerns not only theatural environment but also human societies and economies (Xund Zhang 2007) Sustainability has been defined by the Unitedations as a global process of development that minimizes these of environmental resources and reduces the impact on envi-onmental sinks using processes that simultaneously improvehe economy and the quality of life (UN World Commission onnvironment and Development 1987) Sustainable developmentas many definitions however the most frequently quoted defi-ition is ldquoSustainable development is development that meets theeeds of the present without compromising the ability of futureenerations to meet their own needsrdquo (the Brundtland Commission987)

Please cite this article in press as Raupova O et al Assessment of phydeveloping Uzbekistan Resour Conserv Recy (2014) httpdxdoiorg

Over the past few decades however demand for naturalesources has accelerated to the extent that it is now widelyonsidered a serious threat to well-functioning economies and

lowast Corresponding author Tel +81 532446924 fax +81 532446924E-mail addresses ozoseeenstutacjp ozo hamyahoocom (O Raupova)

ttpdxdoiorg101016jresconrec201405004921-3449copy 2014 Elsevier BV All rights reserved

copy 2014 Elsevier BV All rights reserved

societies because of the associated environmental issues such asclimate change biodiversity loss desertification and ecosystemdegradation (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005 WuppertalInstitute 2005 EPA Network 2006 Stern 2007 WWF 2012UNEP 2013 IPCC 2014) A main driver of human inducedenvironmental changes has been the growing social or indus-trial metabolism that is the inputs of materials and energyinto socio-economic systems and the corresponding outflows ofwastes and emissions (Ayres and Simonis 1994 Fischer-Kowalskiand Haberl 2007) The notion of a socio-metabolic transition isused to describe fundamental changes in socioeconomic energyand material use during industrialization (Krausmann et al2011)

Studies of industrial metabolism aim to provide an understand-ing of the functioning of the physical basis of our societiesrsquo thelinkages of processes and product chain webs within the anthro-posphere and the exchange of materials and energy within theenvironment (Ayres 1989) During the last 15 years material

sical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in101016jresconrec201405004

and energy flow analysis have emerged as significant methodsfor tracking the flows of materials and energy respectively andfor comparing the natural ecosystem and the industrial system(Erkman 1997)

IN PRESSG ModelR

2 rvation and Recycling xxx (2014) xxxndashxxx

ae

iisrimoeaa

dtbogaa2abateMtPaU2l2taktmM

Higotws

FtdM(cpr

2

ma

of resource-use indicators can be derived from the EW-MFAswhich provide a comprehensive description of the biophysicalmetabolism of societies (Fig 2) These indicators can be grouped

ARTICLEECYCL-2865 No of Pages 10

O Raupova et al Resources Conse

In the last 20 years several methods have been developed thatllow for the quantification of the use of natural resources by mod-rn societies (Daniels and Moore 2002)

One of the key methods is economy-wide material flow account-ng and analysis (EW-MFA) internationally recognized as anmportant tool for analyzing social metabolism (in order to under-tand its operation) and as the basis for evaluation and a possibleestructuring in terms of sustainability EW-MFA reveals the phys-cal growth of industrial economies and the increasing shift of

aterial flow burden between environmental media and towardther countries (Bringezu and Schuumltz 2003) The increasing inter-st in the physical basis of economies is also reflected in the largend growing number of economy-wide material flow accounts on

national levelThere have been a number of studies using methodological stan-

ardization of EW-MFA In Gonzalez-Martinez and Schandl (2008)he biophysical perspective of the Mexican economy is presentedy accounting for the countryrsquos material inputs and the dynamicsf natural resource usage are analyzed for given periods For Hun-arian economic performance material flow based indicators suchs direct material input and total material requirements are useds environmental sustainability indicators (Hammer and Hubacek003) Through an assessment of the mass flow of raw materi-ls and commodities in the Italian economy the material flowalance of the physical economy and substantial environmentalspects of the country are depicted (de Marco et al 2001) Forhe period 1970ndash2009 the biological features of the Argentineanconomy are examined using a social metabolism approach (Perezanrique et al 2013) The development of material consump-

ion of three transition economies Czech Republic Hungary andoland are explored and benchmark their material consumptiongainst average values for the member states of the Europeannion that represent a typical market economy (Kovanda and Hak008) Although in peer-reviewed literatures Uzbekistan has been

ooked at in international studies (Schandl and West 2010 CSIRO008) but to the best of our knowledge there is no research under-aken on Uzbekistanrsquos metabolic profile by assessing material flowsssociated with the transition from centrally planned to a mar-et economy This study is considered a first attempt to explorehe metabolic performance of the national economy industrial

etabolism and environmental impacts of Uzbekistan using EW-FA based indicatorsThe research is guided by the following topics and interests

ow the Uzbekistan economy is displayed using EW-MFA-basedndicators what main driving forces are behind the economicrowth of the country using the EW-MFA perspective what levelf Uzbekistanrsquos physical economic performance is depicted byhe EW-MFA using the associated international comparisons andhich alternative approaches must be taken for countryrsquos future

ustainable developmentTo address these questions we structure the paper as follows

irstly we present a brief explanation of the most important defini-ions and concepts applied (Section 2) The main part of the article isescribed in the presentation and in the discussion of the main EW-FA indicators for Uzbekistan during the time series for 1992ndash2011

Section 3) Secondly we illustrate the trends of several macro indi-ators that could draw discussion on the countryrsquos future long-termerspectives and macro policy (Section 4) Finally conclusions areeached in the last part of the article

Definition and methods

Please cite this article in press as Raupova O et al Assessment of phydeveloping Uzbekistan Resour Conserv Recy (2014) httpdxdoiorg

The different types of material flow analysis depend on the pri-ary interest of the analyst (Bringezu and Moriguchi 2002) If we

re interested in certain substances or materials (eg because they

Fig 1 Scope of economy-wide material flow accounting and analysis (EW-MFA)method

Adapted from Eurostat (2001)

are related to specific impacts) we may study for instance theflows of substances such as heavy metals chlorine and carbon orthe flow of bulk materials such as wood energy carries or plas-tics However if we are interested in the specific effects associatedwith products we can perform a life-cycle assessment (LCA) andstudy the flows associated with the relevant product chain By con-trast if we are interested in the metabolic performance of regionsor national economies we should systematically consider all mate-rial flows in order to characterize the total throughput of materialsand employ the EW-MFA method

EW-MFAs are consistent compilations of the overall materialinputs into national economies the changes of material stockwithin the economic system and the material outputs to othereconomies or to the environment (Fig 1)

21 Material flow based indicators

In the EW-MFA framework materials are tracked from theextraction of national resources to the stocks and accumulationwithin the economy and finally to the waste and emissions dis-pensed into the environment (Xu and Zhang 2007) A large number

sical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in101016jresconrec201405004

Fig 2 Material flow categories and main indicators in the economy-wide materialflow accounting and analysis (EW-MFA) method

Matthews et al (2000) amended

IN PRESSG ModelR

rvation and Recycling xxx (2014) xxxndashxxx 3

isaneaewrrtndmdpae

CrTcb(tsm

apdsw

rfmtpst

omawUdfcb

2

atteactaf

Table 1Classification of material flow categories and subcategories

Main category Subcategory Aggregated items

Fossil Fuels Natural gas Natural gas productsOil Petroleum productsCoal Coal products

Constructionminerals

Constructionminerals

Minerals used primarily inconstruction andmineral-based processedproducts

Industrialminerals ampOres

Industrial minerals Non-metallic mineralsused predominantly forindustrial processes(excluding fossil fuels)

Ores Metal ores andmetal-based products

Biomass Primary crops Edible primary cropsharvested from croplands

Crop residues Used crop residues madeavailable for further socio-economic use

Grazed biomass Biomass grazed bylivestock

Wood Wood and wood pulp

ARTICLEECYCL-2865 No of Pages 10

O Raupova et al Resources Conse

nto input consumption and output indicators On the inputide domestic extraction used (DEU) covers the natural materi-ls (excluding water and air) extracted or harvested within theational territory of the economy investigated and further used inconomic processing Unused domestic extraction (UDE) comprisesll materials (except water and air) removed from the domesticnvironment that do not enter the economic system (eg miningaste including overburden) Import (IMP) includes raw mate-

ials and semi-manufactured and final goods imported from theest of the world Indirect flows associated with imports (IFI) arehe upstream material input flows extracted or harvested from theatural environment in the rest of the world and required to pro-uce the imported goods Direct Material Input (DMI) contains allaterials that have economic values and are directly used in pro-

uction and consumption activities DMI equals the sum of DEUlus IMP Total Material Requirement (TMR) equals the sum of DMInd the indirect flows associated with the imports and UDE of theconomy

The indicator for the consumption group is Domestic Materialonsumption (DMC) which measures the total quantity of mate-ials used within an economic system excluding indirect flowshus DMC is the closest equivalent to aggregate income in theonventional system of national accounts The DMC is calculatedy subtracting exports from DMI Total Material ConsumptionTMC) is defined as the total material use associated with domes-ic consumption activities including indirect flows imported butubtracting export and associated indirect flows TMC equals TMRinus exports and their associated indirect flowsOn the output side the following categories are distinguished

s follows Domestic Processed Output (DPO) equals the flow ldquoout-uts to naturerdquo comprising all outflows of used materials fromomestic or foreign origin Exports (EXP) include raw materialsemi-manufactured and final goods exported to the rest of theorld (Eurostat 2009ab)

The physical indicators can be calculated either absolutely orelatively using population size (ie per capita) and economic per-ormance (ie per-unit GDP) Indicators can be used to express

aterial productivity (ie units of GDP per unit of material indica-ors) or material intensity (ie the mathematical inverse of materialroductivity) Material productivity and material intensity demon-tration of material efficiency of the country is necessary but nothe only features of sustainable development

For this article we use aggregated information and present datan the level of four main material groups fossil fuels industrialinerals and ores construction minerals and biomass Ore miner-

ls such as gold silver and molybdenum import and export dataere not available due a confidential record of the Republic ofzbekistan DEU of wood products were calculated by applyingefault densities supplied in (Eurostat 2009ab Forest Statistics)or coniferous and non-coniferous woods possessing 15 moistureontent to the appropriate volumes of all round woods extractedy country and reported in (FAO 2011)

2 Classification of material categories

To identify the driving forces of national material-use patternsnd to further evaluate progress concerning dematerialization andhe sustainable use of resources detailed material flows ratherhan highly aggregated indicators should be examined (Weiszt al 2005) We distinguish between four main material categoriesnd ten subcategories as illustrated in Table 1 For each of the main

Please cite this article in press as Raupova O et al Assessment of phydeveloping Uzbekistan Resour Conserv Recy (2014) httpdxdoiorg

ategories consistent classification is provided and for each of theen subcategories the material flow parameters DEU IMP and EXPnd the derived indicators DMI TMR and DMC have been compiledor Uzbekistan for the period 1992ndash2011

paper materials

23 Collecting data and accounting

The EW-MFA indicators of Uzbekistanrsquos economy from 1992 to2011 are studied in this article and the MFA data-set was compiledfrom several statistical yearbooks and reports that were officiallypublished Data for DEU and trade in fossil fuels were obtainedfrom the International Energy Agency autonomous organization(IEA various years) DE of construction materials calculated by sev-eral evaluation methods as follows (1) Estimation of limestoneextraction calculated through cement production by ratio 114Data of cement production was collected from the State Commit-tee of the Republic of Uzbekistan on Statistics (SCS various years)Meaning that 14 tons of limestone are required to produce 1 tonof cement (Eurostat 2007) (2) Estimation of sand and gravel usedfor concrete production by assuming that the 65 tons of construc-tion aggregates to 1 ton of cement used in making concrete (3) Forroad foundation we estimated sand and gravel used for automobileasphalt road and railway construction For bitumen production weestimated sand and gravel used for asphalt production by a ratioof 120 (Krausmann et al 2009) For 1 km of railway construc-tion we estimated an average of 7000 tons per kilometer of sandand gravel utilized according the multi-method evaluation methodby Federici et al (2008) Data of railway extensions for each yearwas taken from the Uzbekistan Statistical Yearbook 1992ndash2011In order to account for other construction materials bricks sandand gravel used for other purposes than concrete and asphalt pro-duction we proceed as follow (4) We assumed an average area ofone private house in Uzbekistan as 200 square meter and estimatethat an average amount of construction materials (brick sand andgravel) used for construction of one private dwelling as 25 tonsper square meter Previously estimated sand and gravel used forconcrete production assumed that this concrete production usedonly multi-level housing or other public building construction Itshould be noted that in Uzbekistan private houses are constructedby fired-bricks rather than concrete We estimated clay sand andgravel used for one private house by assuming 25 tons per squaremeter These figures are based on standards and regulations of aresidential construction company ldquoKurilishrdquo in Uzbekistan Annual

sical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in101016jresconrec201405004

growth rates of private dwellings for each year were taken fromUzbekistan Statistical on Peoplersquos Living Conditions Yearbook forthe period 1992ndash2011

IN PRESSG ModelR

4 rvation and Recycling xxx (2014) xxxndashxxx

I2YtaipdptfFw2ns(aBtEo

2

ctiobict

aosgrca

c(

A

-80

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011an

nual

chan

ge

GDP Industry Agriculture Expo rt Import

Fig 4 Key macroeconomic indicators for Uzbekistan in US dollar from 1992 to2011 GDP is based on 1990 constant prices

Macroeconomics Ivan Kushnirrsquos Research Center (2012)

Table 2Percentage shares of sectors in total gross value added Uzbekistan 1992ndash2011

GDP share sectors 1992 1995 2003 2011

Industry 36 28 24 33Agriculture 35 32 33 19

ARTICLEECYCL-2865 No of Pages 10

O Raupova et al Resources Conse

We used data compiled by the Commonwealth Scientific andndustrial Research Organization (CSIRO 2008 Schandl and West010) and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) Mineralsearbook for industrial minerals and ores Trade data of construc-ion minerals industrial minerals and ores were requested throughn official letter to the State Committee of the Republic of Uzbek-stan on Statistics (SCS) during the research Requested data wasrovided only for the period 2000ndash2011(SCS N013-01-26-236)ue to undeveloped data collection system in early independencehase of the country (official communication with head of statis-ical division of trading) Base data for the DEU of primary crops isrom FAO 2011 while imports and exports of crops are taken fromAO 2011 Crop residues were estimated using harvest indices asell as recovery rates for the most important crops (Wirsenius

000) Grazed biomass was estimated on the basis of livestockumbers and the daily roughage requirements of different live-tock species (Krausmann et al 2008) Coefficient for hidden flowsHF) (consisting of unused domestic extraction and indirect flowsssociated to imports) for all components have been taken fromringezu and Schuumltz (2001 p 19) and from the technical report ofotal material requirement of the European Union (2001 p44) AllW-MFA based indicators of each material group are considerednly in physical units by the ton

4 The research area

Uzbekistan is the third largest of the five post-communistountries in Central Asia (Fig 3) It is one of only two countries inhe world that are doubly landlocked A doubly landlocked countrys one which is surrounded by landlocked countries The majorityf Uzbekistan land is desert steppe broken by fertile oases along theanks of two great rivers the Amu Darya and the Syr Darya Since

t gained independence in 1991 Uzbekistan chose to transform itsentrally planned economy into a market economy undertakinghis in a gradual and socially focused manner

The government expended efforts to protect its populationgainst shocks caused by a very fast transition into a market econ-my owing to the rapid liberalization processes Since the earlytage of transition the country has achieved a positive economicrowth rate In the new millennium the average economic growthate has exceeded 6 (Center Economic Research 2010) (Fig 4) Theountryrsquos main natural resources used for earning foreign currency

Please cite this article in press as Raupova O et al Assessment of phydeveloping Uzbekistan Resour Conserv Recy (2014) httpdxdoiorg

re natural gas gold and cottonUzbekistanrsquos main share sectors of GDP are industry (33) agri-

ulture (19) and services (48) according to 2011 data sourcesSCS 2012) (Table 2)

Fig 3 Geographical location of research area minus Uzbekistansian Development Bank (2010) amended

Services 29 40 43 48

Total 100 100 100 100

The 1992ndash2011 period is particularly relevant to this researchbecause it represents the transition of the economy in Uzbek-istan This transition started in 1992 with an economic recessionas shown in Fig 4 By 2011 Uzbekistan completed the stabiliza-tion stage of its economic reforms Furthermore the growth andstructure of the countryrsquos GDP became progressive and stabilityimproved (Shadmanov 2010)

3 Results and discussion

In this section using MFA-derived indicators the MFA of inputand consumption flows for Uzbekistan for the period 1992ndash2011 iscompiled and presented

31 Material input flow

Analysis on the material input flow of the Uzbekistan economy isperformed using the main MFA indicators DMI and TMR Materialsincluded in DMI indicators are used in production and consumptionactivities that are of economic value

Fig 5 shows the absolute measurement of DMI and TMRfor Uzbekistanrsquos economy from 1992 to 2011 The obtainedresults show DMI and TMR continuously increases from 1992 to2011 excluding transitory slumps between 1993 and 1995 DMIincreased from 226 million tons in 1992 to 352 million tons in2011 with an average annual growth rate of 279 TMR grew from330 million tons to 485 million tons during the same period ofstudy with an average annual growth rate of 234 The continuousincrease of both DMI and TMR shows evidence that the high rateof Uzbekistanrsquos economy which grew by an average of 4 annually(indicated by real GDP and based on constant 1990 US dollar prices)is resulting in an almost continuous increase of material consump-tion in Uzbekistan Regarding the transitory slumps in 1993ndash1995

sical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in101016jresconrec201405004

not only DMI and TMR but also the subindicators of DEU importsand HF exhibited the same slumps during this period

The pattern of variation of DMI and TMR can be divided intothree phases as follows (I) in 1992ndash1995 DMI and TMR decreased

ARTICLE IN PRESSG ModelRECYCL-2865 No of Pages 10

O Raupova et al Resources Conservation and Recycling xxx (2014) xxxndashxxx 5

FT

aiaawFwDntd

sa2T1m1siare

etr

t

F

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Mill

ion

tonn

es

Fossil Fu els Industr ial mineralsampOresConstrucon minerals Bioma ss

the early years of independence had been achieved energy inde-

ig 5 Input Indicators for Uzbekistan from 1992 to 2011 DMI = DEU + IMPMR = DMI + HF million tons

t respective average rates of minus345 and minus427 annually (II)n 1995ndash2003 DMI and TMR climbed the scale for a short periodnd had a decrease back with an average rates 267 and 283nnually (III) in 2003ndash2011 DMI and TMR began to grow againith average annual growth rates of 506 and 456 respectively

or the (II) and (III) phases the annual growth of material inputsas lower than the annual economic growth indicated by GDPuring referenced phases the material requirement per unit of eco-omic growth for Uzbekistan decreased It can be concluded thathe material efficiency of Uzbekistanrsquos economic system improveduring either of these phases

The difference between DMI and TMR indicators results from theo-called ldquohidden flowsrdquo (consisting of unused domestic extractionnd indirect flows associated to imports) (Hammer and Hubacek003) As shown in Fig 6 hidden flows in 2011 contributed to 30 ofMR The ratio of TMR to DMI indicated a continual decrease from992 to 2011 In 2011 the ratio of TMR to DMI was 138 whicheans 138 tons of material are completely removed whereas only

ton of material is used in the economic production process Ithould be noted that indirect flows have not been accounted formported finished products and therefore this figure still representsn underestimation of hidden flows The progressive decline of theatio of TMR to DMI shows an increasing development of materialfficiency which will be discussed in more detail later

Components of DMI and TMR include fossil fuels industrial min-rals and ores construction minerals and biomass Fig 7 depicts

Please cite this article in press as Raupova O et al Assessment of phydeveloping Uzbekistan Resour Conserv Recy (2014) httpdxdoiorg

he quantitative variation pattern of DMI components The drawnesults show that biomass represented the largest share of the DMI

Biomass in DMI grew continuously from 77 million tons in 1992o 112 million tons in 2011 but stayed proportionally in the range

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Mill

ion

tonn

es

TMR DMI

ig 6 Relation of TMR and DMI for Uzbekistan from 1992 to 2011 in million tons

Fig 7 Direct material input (DMI) components for Uzbekistan from 1992 to 2011in million tons

of 32 (Fig 8) DMI biomass was compiled by DEU and IMP ofbiomass subcategories DEU of biomass is the predominant DMIflow of biomass with a 97 average share DEU flow of biomassis composed of 60 fodder and grazed biomass for livestock 20used crop residues 19 primary crops and only 1 for forestrybiomass The average growth rate of DEU biomass was 253 higherthan the population average growth rate of 178 The growthin biomass extraction was due to an increase in the amount ofbiomass grazed for livestock and primary crops production Anaverage share of biomass import shows only 3 of total DMI andthis decreased during the period of study These figures have beendriven by the Uzbekistanrsquos policy of import substitution focusingon increase of domestic primary food production and achievementself-sufficiency in grain product by 1998 (Olimov and Fayzullaev2011)

The amount of fossil fuels in DMI increased from 48 million tonsin 1992 to 57 million tons in 2011 with an average growth rateof 093 DMI fossil fuels were compiled by DEU and IMP of fossilfuels subcategories (Table 1) DEU flow of fossil fuels is composedby 86 natural gas 12 petroleum only 2 for coal products Anaverage share of DEU and imports in DMI fossil fuels show 96 and4 during the period of study Imports of fossil fuels show a sig-nificant decrease from 77 million tons in 1992 to 05 million tonsin 2011 These trends have been driven by government measuresenergy policy strategic goals adopted by the Government during

sical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in101016jresconrec201405004

pendence and reorientation of the fuel-energy market to achievepriority social goals (Salikhov 2004) The proportion of fossil fuels

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Prop

oro

n

Fossil Fu els Industr ial min eralsampO resConstrucon minerals Bioma ss

Fig 8 Proportion of direct material input (DMI) components for Uzbekistan from1992 to 2011

ARTICLE IN PRESSG ModelRECYCL-2865 No of Pages 10

6 O Raupova et al Resources Conservation and Recycling xxx (2014) xxxndashxxx

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

8019

9219

9319

9419

9519

9619

9719

9819

9920

0020

0120

0220

0320

0420

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

1020

11

tonn

e pe

r cap

ita

Uzbekistan Chin a Cze ch Re public United Kingdo m

Fig 9 Total material requirement (TMR) for Uzbekistan and three other countriesfrom 1992 to 2011

Sources Data for the Czech Republic (1990ndash2006) Kovanda et al (2010) fort(

iw

5bfoifptmaG

lb

tptrTwttDEXcwsitUgtit8pcaA

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

tonn

e pe

r cap

ita

Fossil Fu els Industr ial min eralsampO resConstrucon minerals Biomass

and industrial and innovative development through ldquogrowth polesrdquo

he United Kingdom (1992ndash2010) Environmental Accounts (2012) for China1990ndash2002) Xu and Zhang (2007) in ton per capita

n DMI continued to increase from 20 in 1992 to 24 in 2003 afterhich it began to decrease to 16 by 2011

From 1992 to 2003 construction minerals in DMI increased from0 million tons to high point of 72 million tons and then decreasedack to the initial level in 1992 After 2004 it began to increase againrom 60 million tons to 113 million tons by 2011 The proportionf construction minerals in DMI continued to decrease from 22n 1992 to 21 in 2003 After 2003 it began to be greater thanossil fuels and industrial minerals and ores by equaling the sameroportion as biomass of 32 in 2011 Since 2004 both the growingotal amount and the growing relative proportion of construction

inerals in DMI show their increasingly important role which islso indicated by the corresponding extremely high growth rate ofDP in the construction industry ndash an annual average of 12

In 1992ndash2011 industrial minerals in DMI increased from 51 mil-ion tons to 70 million tons with an average growth rate of 181ut stayed proportionally in the range of 22

For TMR the variation patterns of each component are almosthe same as those for DMI The difference is that the relative pro-ortion of biomass is lower industrial minerals and ores are higherhan those in DMI HF of industrial minerals and ores show a higherate than other components in total HF with a 50 average sharehe TMR per capita for Uzbekistan during 1992ndash2011 associatedith an international comparison is depicted in Fig 9 To conduct

he comparison the following data sources were used Data forhe Czech Republic (1990ndash2006) Kovanda et al (2010) was usedata for the United Kingdom (UK) (1992ndash2010) was taken from UKnvironmental Accounts (2012) For China (1990ndash2002) we usedu and Zhang (2007) In Uzbekistan TMR grew from 15 tons perapita (tcap) in 1992 to 17 tcap in 2011 An average TMR per capitaas 14 tcap with an almost constant trend during the period of

tudy It can be seen in Fig 9 that the TMR per capita in Uzbekistans lower than that of all of the referenced countries We found thathere are two main reasons that may cause lower TMR per capita inzbekistan (1) it is Uzbekistanrsquos policy of import substitution andoals for achieved self-sufficiency in energy and grain productionhat presented low figures of indirect flows associated imports (2)t could be described by smaller UDE indicators due to the domina-ion of natural gas in the DEU fossil fuels components (comprising6) having a lower ratio calculation than other fossil fuels com-onents of UDE It should be noted that HF flows in Uzbekistan

Please cite this article in press as Raupova O et al Assessment of phydeveloping Uzbekistan Resour Conserv Recy (2014) httpdxdoiorg

ontributed to 30 of TMR while in Czech Republic 70 in UK 60nd in China 70 of TMR (Kovanda et al 2010 UK Environmentalccounts 2012 Xu and Zhang 2007)

Fig 10 Domestic material consumption (DMC) for Uzbekistan from 1992 to 2011DMC = DMI minus EXP in ton per capita

32 Material consumption

DMC is measured in order to estimate the quantity of mate-rial consumed by a national economy and it is calculated as thesum of total national minerals extracted and imports less exportsDMC is a crucial indicator of a nationrsquos social metabolism provid-ing a good measurementndashin physical termsndashof the intermediateand final consumption of materials in an economy

Between 1992 and 2011 in Uzbekistan DMC increased from 222million tons to 337 million tons with an average annual growthrate of 261 In relation to the population DMC per capita hadan insignificant change and maintained a stable trend of 10 tcapaverage

Fig 10 shows three trends in DMC (I) an initial decline from1992 to 1995 (II) from 1995 to 2003 DMC increased for a shortperiod and then decreased back to the initial level before the rise(III) from 2003 to 2011 overall growth occurred in three consecutivecycles of growth and decline The initial decline must be understoodas corresponding with the economic stagnation and deteriorationin GDP per capita during this period due to political and macro-economic instability in the early independency of the country Asshown in Fig 10 biomass is the main resource base of this econ-omy followed by minerals and fossil fuels Between 1992 and 2011the share of biomass DMC increased from 32 to 35 This couldbe explained by the increase in crop primary products and grazedbiomass for livestock in DEU share and the reduction in exports ofprimary products during the period of study In relation to popula-tion biomass DMC per capita increased from 35 tcap in 1992 to 4tcap in 2011 with an average growth rate of 04

Between 1992 and 2011 construction and industrial mineralsand ores in DMC stayed proportionally in the range of 24 TotalDMC of both construction and industrial minerals and ores trendsincreased respectively from 50 million tons to 112 million tonsand 51 million tons to 68 million tons with an average growthrate of 61 and 17 during the period of study In 1992ndash2003DMC per capita of construction minerals and industrial miner-als and ores significantly declined with a negative annual growthrate of minus149 and minus063 From 2003 to 2011 in the context ofmacroeconomic stability demand in the construction and indus-trial minerals and ores recovered with an average per capitagrowth rate of 11 and 1 respectively The rapid increase indemand for minerals was fueled by the state urbanization policy

sical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in101016jresconrec201405004

which involves participation in the construction of rural and urbanhousing road construction and the development of regional infra-structure (Center for Economic Research 2009) Government policy

IN PRESSG ModelR

rvation and Recycling xxx (2014) xxxndashxxx 7

atr

2ibicoictiUvUicRUTebi

3

ftiootdim

s6ictf2rs(

3dcs2var2w(

rfwe

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

GDP

DMI (

USD

ton

ne)

Uzbekis tan Chin a Cze ch Re public EU- 15

Fig 11 GDPDMI for Uzbekistan and three other countries from 1992 to 2011

Fig 12 presents the trends of economic demographic andmaterial indicators for Uzbekistan from 1992 to 2011 Material anddemographic indictor kept increasing from 1992 to 2011 During

0

50

100

150

200

250

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Inde

x 19

92=1

00

ARTICLEECYCL-2865 No of Pages 10

O Raupova et al Resources Conse

lso places importance on the development of infrastructure Ashe investment push in targeted sectors have induced demands forelevant infrastructure services (Shadmanov 2010)

In contrast the share of fossil fuels in DMC has decreased from0 in 1992 to 14 in 2011 This could be explained by the increase

n natural gas in the DEU share which is mostly exported It shoulde noted that Uzbekistan has taken the responsibility of supply-

ng 10 billion cubic meters of natural gas to Russia annually Itan be assumed that the Uzbekistan government will not reducether exports as it supplies Russiarsquos gas demands by extensivelyncreasing production by a factor of two (Eshchanov 2006) If weompare the DMC of Uzbekistan with western countries such ashe UK and Czech Republic which had 38 and 7 tons DMCcapitan 2002 (UK National Statistic 2012 Kovanda and Hak 2008)zbekistan fossil fuelsrsquo DMC per capita presents relatively lowalues 2 tonscapitayear on average for the period 1992ndash2011zbekistanrsquos energy matrix (fossil fuels and hydro power) relies

ncreasingly on natural gas (an efficient energy carrier) whichomprised up to 85 of the total supply in 2011 (BP Statisticaleview of World Energy 2013) Despite that the DMC per capita ofzbekistan was low compared with other industrialized countrieshrough consistent pursuit of economic improvement and annergy policy based on the concept of implementing reforms step-y-step Uzbekistan has been able in a relatively short time develop

ts fuel-energy market function sustainably and maintain stability

3 Material efficiency from an economic aspect

The main reason for the consumption of materials is their trans-ormation into economic output which is mostly measured byhe aggregated indicator gross domestic product (GDP) If GDPncreases one can expect either an increase in the consumptionf materials or an increase in the efficiency of the transformationf materials Efficiency gains can be related to both the manufac-uring technology of particular goods and to the overall technologyriving the economic output This refers to whether the economy

s industry oriented or service oriented In general industries areore material intensive than services (Moll and Bringezu 2005)After the economic recession from 1996 to 2011 GDP showed

ignificant growth in Uzbekistan with an average growth rate of (Fig 1) Between 1992 and 2011 GDP share sectors are depicted

n Table 2 In 2011 industry and service sectors made the majorontributions to GDP growth In 1992ndash2003 the share of the indus-ry decreased from 36 to 24 which it continued to grow againrom 33 in 2011 As shown in the previous figures the growth in003ndash2011 periods was fueled by an increase of domestic mate-ial production and by supporting and reforming key industrialectors which was important in the countryrsquos stabilization policyShadmanov 2010)

In contrast the agriculture sector proportionally decreased from5 to 19 during the period of study This can be explained by theecreasing production of cotton crop which was the main exportedommodity from Uzbekistan (Stephen MacDonald 2012) Theervice sector had a significant increase from 29 in 1992 to 48 in011 The growth in the service sector can be explained by the pri-atization of state assets liberalization to induce foreign economicctivity and large-scale investments in the economy The growthate of investments has exceeded 185 per year on average during005ndash2009 peaking at 283 in 2008 The growth of investmentsas primarily supported by increased foreign investment and loans

Olimov and Fayzullaev 2011)Fig 11 shows the trends of GDP per DMI showing the mate-

Please cite this article in press as Raupova O et al Assessment of phydeveloping Uzbekistan Resour Conserv Recy (2014) httpdxdoiorg

ial efficiency of the economy GDP per DMI continued to increaserom 57 US dollar per ton (USDt) in 1992 to 88 USDt in 2011ith an average growth rate of 263 In comparison the material

fficiency of Uzbekistan is much lower than the average level of

Sources Data for the EU-15 Eurostat (2002) for the Czech Republic (1990ndash2006)Kovanda et al (2010) for China (1990ndash2002) Xu and Zhang (2007) in US dollarsper ton (based on 1990 constant prices)

EU-15 Czech Republic and China (Eurostat 2002 Kovanda et al2010 Xu and Zhang 2007 own calculation) Increasing GDP perDMI indicates that there must have been some efficiency gains inthe transformation of material inputs into economic output Dur-ing these two decades the percentage of industry increased to onethird and the service sector comprised half of total GDP (Table 2)Structural reforms related to manufacturing technology of partic-ular goods can be attributed to increase of material efficiency inUzbekistan An example the Uzbekistan primary energy supply isdominated by natural gas with 85 while oil 11 coal 3 hydro 1average during the period of study (IEA 2011) This figure shows themore efficient production of energy as crude oil or natural gas hasin general higher calorific value per mass unit than coal Anotherfactor for material efficiency growth can be explained by struc-tural and governance reforms contributing to the opening up ofmarkets the liberalization of prices and trades decentralizationmassive privatization and corporate and financial restructuringThese factors played a part in the establishment of a dynamic pri-vate sector and a massive flow of foreign direct investment whichattracted advanced technologies and management know-how

4 Macro indictors and policy discussion

sical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in101016jresconrec201405004

GDP DMC DMI TMR PO P CO 2

Fig 12 Relation GDP and DMC with other macro indicators for Uzbekistan from1992 to 2011 (GDP based on 1990 constant prices)

ARTICLE IN PRESSG ModelRECYCL-2865 No of Pages 10

8 O Raupova et al Resources Conservation and Recycling xxx (2014) xxxndashxxx

Table 3EW-MFA based indicators and macro policy implementations in Uzbekistan average annual growth rate (GDP based on 1990 constant US dollar prices)

Period of years IMP DEU EXP DMI DMC TMR GDP Policy implementation

1992ndash1995 minus19 minus2 16 minus3 minus4 minus4 minus2 Increase domestic production Importsubstitution and achieved self-sufficiency ofenergy and grain products

1995ndash2003 7 1 3 3 3 3 4 Price and monetary policy Agreements of theInternational Monetary Fund (IMF) to facilitatecurrent account convertibility of the domesticcurrency 2003

2003ndash2011 6 5 6 5 5 5 10 Liberalization to foreign economic activity and

ti

ccticp

he same period economic indicator GDP shows continuouslyncrease with transitory slump in or after 1993 until 1997

Based on previous discussion the trends of material input indi-ators and material consumption for Uzbekistan from 1992 to 2011an be characterized as three-phased with an initial slump Thehree phases are divided by the years 1995 and 2003 In Table 3t shows average growth rate of macro indicators and macro poli-ies that were implemented by the government during the threehases

(I) 1992ndash1995 Initial economic transformations in the countrystarted in an environment when the priority was given tostabilization processes with drastic production decline underthe collapse of the centrally-planned economy loss off of sav-ings and the decreasing income of households It became clearfor policy-makers that the country needed a strong domes-tic production sector capable of providing basic needs for thepopulation Therefore in the stabilization policy importancewas given to domestic material production The attention wasfocused on the sectors that determine the development trendsof the economy not only in the short term but also in thelonger term These industries included textiles food metal-lurgy chemicals and others that could utilize the potentialof the rich resource of local raw materials Structural reformswere targeting tasks of import substitution export encour-agement and automotive cluster development (Shadmanov2010) After completing the stabilization stage of reformsthe country proceeded to broader structure transformationsintensive modernization and active technical and technologi-cal modernization of production

(II) 1995ndash2003 The Implementation of import-substitution poli-cies by the broad use of direct instruments in economic policiesenabled Uzbekistan to achieve certain results which was facil-itated by the fact that exports were dominated by commoditieswith a low elasticity to exchange rate changes in both theshort- and medium-run The economy of Uzbekistan expe-rienced substantial difficulties in increasing the proceeds offoreign currency due to falling world prices for main exportcommodities and the 1998 Russian financial crisis (Olimov andFayzullaev 2011) In October 2003 commitments were takenaccording to the Agreements of the International MonetaryFund to facilitate current account convertibility of the domes-tic currency (Anderson and Klimov 2012) As a result in thefirst few years after the introduction of the regime of ldquofor-eign currency rationingrdquo the share of investments goods in theoverall imports increased significantly In 2006 the Fund forthe Reconstruction and Development of Uzbekistan was estab-lished with its objectives being to ensure the macroeconomic

Please cite this article in press as Raupova O et al Assessment of phydeveloping Uzbekistan Resour Conserv Recy (2014) httpdxdoiorg

stabilization and utilization of financial resources generated asa result of favorable world prices for the financing of strategi-cally important investment projects in the basic sectors of theeconomy (Olimov and Fayzullaev 2011)

faster development of export capacitylarge-scale investments into the economy andgradual improvement of its composition

(III) 2003ndash2011 The main driving factors of the economic growthin this period were the high rates of economic activity largelyexplained by the liberalization to induce foreign economicactivity and faster development of export capacity large-scaleinvestments in the economy and a gradual improvement of itscomposition The growth of investments was primarily sup-ported by increased foreign investment and loans In 2009the share of foreign direct investments and loans in over-all investments reached 278 against 132 in 2005 (SCS)The continuation of the new investments boom is directlyrelated to the modernization and technical overhaul of compa-nies modernization of fixed assets by the targeted programsfor development of the sectors of the economy construc-tion of industrial infrastructure and social facilities (AsianDevelopment Bank 2010) GDP has increased by a factor oftwo from 2003 to 2011 The most distinct feature of economicgrowth achieved in 2003ndash2011 was the high degree of its sta-bility As shown in Fig 12 relative decoupling has occurredwhich indicated that economic indicator (GDP) grows fasterthan material use (DMC) and other macro indicators grow

5 Conclusions

Uzbekistan emerged as an independent state in 1991 Despitemany negative shocks in the 1990s Uzbekistanrsquos policy models cho-sen by the government have served it reasonably well and werebased on a gradual transformation of the economy

In this paper the assessment of the physical economy in1992ndash2011 for the long-term perspective for Uzbekistan was dis-cussed and analyzed using the EW-MFA method We furtherpresented the pattern of variations trends absolute amounts com-ponents and efficiencies of the physical material indicators ofUzbekistanrsquos economy The following conclusions have been madeaccording to obtained results and discussions

bull Input indicators TMR and DMI continue to increase with thegrowth of domestic material production excluding an initialdecline in 1992ndash1995

bull Trends of TMR DMI DMC and material efficiency GDPDMI indi-cate lower values than other industrialized countries referencedin the international comparison Despite that by consistentlypursuing economic improvement and having an energy policybased on the concept of implementing reforms step-by-stepUzbekistan has been able in a relatively short time to avoid eco-nomic recession and to develop its fuel-energy market functionsustainably and in a stable manner

bull Material efficiency presented that the relationship of GDP to DMIincreased in 1992ndash2011 Related to manufacturing technology

sical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in101016jresconrec201405004

of particular goods and structural and governance reforms thatwould support an increase of material efficiency

bull During (I) and (II) phases the main driving forces for eco-nomic growth were a focus on increase of domestic material

ING ModelR

rvation

bull

Itohpwtieiatoiptmo(

evgmfle

cnfo

tfiWbcwals

A

scac

ARTICLEECYCL-2865 No of Pages 10

O Raupova et al Resources Conse

production and the intensive modernization of industries Whilein (III) phase economic growth was mainly fueled by develop-ment of export capacity and large-scale investment projectsAlthough the economic performance of Uzbekistan showsremarkable success indicators measuring material inputs (TMRand DMI) and domestic consumption reveal an insignificantincrease during 1992ndash2011 Relative decoupling has occurredwhich indicated that economic indicator (GDP) grows faster thanmaterial use (DMC) and other macro indicators grow Hence EW-MFA indicators show that apart from physical dimensions shareof the service sectors primarily liberalization of foreign eco-nomic activities large-scale investments and implementationof policy on improvements for education health social welfaretransportation and communication has been contributing to theeconomic growth of the country

In terms of trade Uzbekistanrsquos economy has a large trade deficitts dependence on export commodities is increasing burdens forhe natural environment Likewise open pit mining intensive usef agrochemicals soil degradation and hazardous wastes threatenuman health and the environment (UNDP SCNP 2008) A decou-ling can only be seen in relative terms but the goal of sustainabilityould make necessary an absolute reduction of material flows The

ask would be to find a path of economic development withoutncreasing material flows in absolute terms Therefore the reboundffect has to be taken into account Technological innovations thatncrease resource efficiency do not automatically lead to decreasingbsolute material flows A sole focus on technology might meanurning a blind eye to environmental impacts and the general statef the environment Changing lifestyles and their environmentalmpact will be another important leverage point for environmentalolicy By understanding the relationship between economic andechnological development changes in lifestyle and their related

aterial flows ways can be found for an absolute decouplingf economic development from material flows and resource useHammer 2003)

The advantage of EW-MFA is that the aggregations of the differ-nt qualities of material flows provide a possibility of comparing thearious physical flows By contrast indicators that are too aggre-ated may conceal the various environmental impacts of differentaterial flows Therefore disaggregated exploration of material

ows by each industry is critical for detecting influence factors onconomic social and environmental issues

In the context of data accuracy in Uzbekistan the physi-al datasets related to the physical economy under the currentational statistical framework are not well developed Thus in

uture research more efforts should be devoted to the investigationf more apparent statistical data and the material flow scene

The study that this paper presents will allow us to advance ono further examine Uzbekistanrsquos economic development This is therst time such a study specific to Uzbekistan has been undertakenith that in mind we should consider what the next steps should

e In particular it would be appropriate to consider the next spe-ific area of study that would enhance and add to the value of theork thus far completed To that end we would recommend that an

ssessment of driving forces on environmental impacts and techno-ogical development in Uzbekistan would be the most logical nexttep

cknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Mr Akrom Sultanov and Ms Yulda-

Please cite this article in press as Raupova O et al Assessment of phydeveloping Uzbekistan Resour Conserv Recy (2014) httpdxdoiorg

heva Marxamat for their helpful work and appreciated support onollection statistical data used Special thanks to Lindsay Prescottnd anonymous reviewers for their comprehensive and detailedomments which helped greatly to improve the clarity of the paper

PRESS and Recycling xxx (2014) xxxndashxxx 9

Appendix A Supplementary data

Supplementary data associated with this article can be foundin the online version at httpdxdoiorg101016jresconrec201405004

References

Ayres RU Industrial metabolism In Ausubel J Sladovich H editors Technology andenvironment Washington DC National Academy Press 1989

Ayres RU Simonis UE Industrial metabolism theory and policy In Industrialmetabolism restructuring for sustainable development Tokyo New York ParisUnited Nations University Press 1994

Asian Development Bank Central Asia ndash atlas of natural resources 2010 p 1ndash211Anderso B Klimov Y Uzbekistan trade regime and recent trade developments

Working paper N4 2012BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2013 London UKBringezu S Schuumltz H Total Material Requirement of the European Union Tech-

nical Part Technical Report No 56 Copenhagen EEA (European EnvironmentAgency) 2001

Bringezu S Schuumltz H Rational Interpretation of Economy-Wide Material Flow Anal-ysis and Derived Indicators J Ind Ecol 20037(2)43ndash64

Bringezu S Moriguchi Y Material flow analysis In Ayres RU Ayres LW editors Ahandbook of industrial ecology 2002

CSIRO the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research OrganizationAustralia httpwwwcsiroau

CER Center for Economic Research Urbanization and industrialization in Uzbek-istan challenges problems and prospects Tashkent Uzbekistan 2009

CER Center for Economic Research Uzbekistan Economic Trends Information andAnalytical Bulletin for 2010 Tashkent Uzbekistan 2010

Daniels PL Moore S Approaches for quantifying the metabolism of physicaleconomies Part I Methodological overview J Ind Ecol 20025(4)69ndash93

de Marco C Lagioia G Mazzacane EP Materials flow analysis of the Italian EconomyJ Ind Ecol 20014(2)55ndash70

EPA Network Delivering the Sustainable Use of Natural Resources A Contributionfrom the Following Members of the Network of Heads of European EnvironmentProtection Agencies on the Thematic Strategy on the Sustainable Use of NaturalResources 2006

Erkman S Industrial ecology a historical view J Clean Product 199751ndash10Eshchanov B How to meet the future energy needs of Uzbekistan Stockholm Royal

Institute of Technology Industrial Ecology 2006 p 1ndash59 [Master of Sciencethesis]

Eurostat Economy-wide material flow accounts and derived indicators In Amethodological guide Luxembourg European Communities 2001

Eurostat Material use in the European Union 1980ndash2000 indicators and analysisLuxembourg Statistical Office of the European Union 2002

Eurostat Economy-wide material flow accounting a compilation guide Luxem-bourg European Statistical Office 2007

Eurostat Economy wide material flow accounts compilation guidelines for repor-ting to the 2009 Eurostat questionnaire Version 01 Luxembourg StatisticalOffice of the European Union 2009a

Eurostat Forestry statistics Luxembourg European Statistical Office 2009bFAO FAO statistical databases 2011 httpfaostat faoorgFederici M Ulgiati S Basosi R A thermodynamic environmental and material

flow analysis of the Italian highway and railway transport system J Energy200833760ndash75

Fischer-Kowalski M Haberl H Socioecological transitions and global change tra-jectories of social metabolism and land use Cheltenham UK Edward Elgar2007

Gonzalez-Martinez AC Schandl H The biophysical perspective of a middle incomeeconomy material flows in Mexico J Ecol Econ 200868317ndash27

Hammer M Hubacek K Material flows and economic development Material flowanalysis of the Hungarian Economy International Institute for Applied SystemsAnalysis Interim Report 2003 p 1ndash53

International Energy Agency (IEA) autonomous organization Energy balances statis-tics Energy flow charts

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Climate change 2014 impactsadaptation and vulnerability Summary for policy makers WGII AR5 ParisIPCC 2014

Krausmann F Erb KH Gingrich S Lauk C Haberl H Global pattern of socioeco-nomic biomass flows in the year 2000 a comprehensive assessment of supplyconsumption and constraints Ecol Econ 200865471ndash87

Krausmann F Gingrich S Eisenmenger N Erb KH Haberl H Kowalski MF Growthin global material use GDP and population during the 20th century Ecol Econ2009682696ndash705

Krausmann F Gingrich S Nourbakhch-Sabet R The metabolic transition in JapanA material flow account for the period from 1878 to 2005 J Ind Ecol

sical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in101016jresconrec201405004

201115(6)877ndash91Kovanda J Weinzettel J Hak T Material flow indicators in the Czech Republic in light

of the accession to the European Union J Ind Ecol 201014(4)650ndash65Kovanda J Hak T Changes in material use in transition economies J Ind Ecol

200812(5)721ndash38

ING ModelR

1 rvation

M

MM

M

O

P

S

S

S

S

S

ARTICLEECYCL-2865 No of Pages 10

0 O Raupova et al Resources Conse

atthews E Bringezu S Fischer-Kowalski M Huttler W Kleijn R Moriguchi Y et alThe weight of nations material outflows from industrial economies Washing-ton DC World Resources Institute 2000

acDonald S Economic policy and cotton in Uzbekistan 2012 p 1ndash26illennium Ecosystem Assessment Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis

Report 2005oll S Bringezu S Aggregated indicators for resource use and resource productiv-

ity Their meaning cross-country comparability and potential driving factorsCopenhagen Denmark European Environment Agency 2005

limov U Fayzullaev Y Assessing development strategies to achieve the MDGs inthe Republic of Uzbekistan United Nations Department for Social and EconomicAffairs 2011 p 1ndash55

erez Manrique PL The biophysical performance of Argentina (1970ndash2009) J IndEcol 20131ndash15

alikhov TP Stages and results of energystrategy realization in Uzbekistan J EconRev 2004

chandl H West J Resource use and resource efficiency in the Asia-Pacific regionGlobal Environ Change 201020636ndash47

CS the State Committee of the Republic of Statistics Uzbekistan Statistical Year-

Please cite this article in press as Raupova O et al Assessment of phydeveloping Uzbekistan Resour Conserv Recy (2014) httpdxdoiorg

book Tashkent Uzbekistan 2012hadmanov E Issues of balanced development in Uzbekistan economy Int Cross-Ind

J 20105(2)43ndash4tern N The Economics of climate change The Stern review Cambridge Cambridge

University Press 2007

PRESS and Recycling xxx (2014) xxxndashxxx

UK United Kingdom Environmental Accounts Agriculture and environmentDepartment of Environmental Sustainability Office for National Statistics 2012p 1ndash48

United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development ldquoOur Com-mon Futurerdquo Brundtland Report 1987

UNEP Emerging issues in our global environment UK 2013UNDP SCNP United Nations Development Program and State Committee for Nature

Protection of Uzbekistan Environmental profile of Uzbekistan based on indica-tors Tashkent Uzbekistan 2008

USGS United States Geological Survey Minerals Information 2011 httpmineralsusgsgovminerals

Weisz H Krausmann F Amann C Eisenmenger N Erb K-H Hubacek K et al Thephysical economy of the European Union cross-country comparison and deter-minants of material consumption Ecol Econ 200558(4)676ndash98

Wirsenius S Human use of land and organic materials Modelling the turnover ofbiomass in the global food system Goteborg Sweden Chalmers University2000

Wuppertal Institute Fair Future Begrenzte Ressourcen und globale Gerechtigkeit[Fair Future Limited Resources and Global Fairness] Wuppertal Institute for Cli-

sical economy through economy-wide material flow analysis in101016jresconrec201405004

mate Environment and Energy CH Beck Muumlnchen 2005WWF UNEP Global Footprint Network Living Planet Report Gland Switzerland

WWF 2012Xu M Zhang T Material flows and economic growth in developing China J Ind Ecol

200711(1)121ndash40