- James Allan, N. Belkin, Paul N. Bennett, Jamie Callan, C. Clarke, Fernando Diaz, S. Dumais, N. Ferro, D. Harman, D. Hiemstra, I. Ruthven, T. Sakai, Mark D. Smucker, J. Zobel. 2003. An overview of the special issue. Abstract: This special issue is devoted to the concept of Industrial Ecology, which has engendered both excitement and criticism in its claim of providing a new unifying principle for operationalizing sustainable development. This volume explores the history and evolution of the concept; its various meanings; methodologies for its operationalization; its relationship to pollution control, pollution prevention, and accident prevention; and finally, its relationship with biological ecosystems. Suren Erkman provides a useful and brief history of industrial ecology, tracing its multi-nation origins as far back as 1970 or even 1955. He argues that it is a more expansive concept than either pollution control or pollution prevention-and, in fact, encompasses and integrates both into new management practices-a point others would disagree with. Erkman sees industrial ecology as correcting the ‘disconnect’ of industrial systems with the ecosystem, and with each other. He cites the important work of Robert Ayres on tracking materials Aows and promoting increased recovery/recovery/se, and credits Robert Frosch and Nicholas Gallopoulos with reviving and propelling the concept into prominence with their classic 1989 article in Scientific American, emphasizing ‘industrial metabolism’ while acknowledging the imperfectness of industrial ecosystems to completely mimic the biological ecosystem and eliminate all adverse environmental effects. The author acknowledges Chihiro Watanabe’s work in Japan which is ‘the only country where ideas on industrial ecology were ever taken seriously and put into practice on a large scale. . .’ Finally, Erkman sees the evolution of industrial ecology into two main directions: (1) eco-industrial parks and islands of sustainability and (2) dematerialization, decarbonization,
