Technology

Introduction
New technologies can create tremendous changes in societies. From China’s military use of gunpowder as early as the eighth century to the creation of the Internet in the United States (US) in the twentieth century, new methods, machinery, and technologies continue to alter the way humans live. For example, the invention of movable-type printing press technology in China and Korea, and the improvements made to printing technology by the German goldsmith Johann Gutenberg in 1455, ultimately facilitated the distribution of thousands of technological advances over the past five centuries.

Technology is a term that encompasses a wide range of ideas, designs, and systems. US physicist Harvey Brooks defines technology as “knowledge of how to fulfill certain human purposes in a specifiable and reproducible way.”¹ In this sense, technology includes not just computers and equipment but also ideas about how to accomplish specific tasks.

New technologies are extremely valuable to corporations and nations. Many governments actively fund and promote the research and development of new technologies by private corporations, educational institutions, and specialized public agencies. These governments then often decide how new technologies will be sold or given to other countries. Technology transfer, the sale and sharing of technology between various countries, plays a major role in the economic development and environmental sustainability of nations.

The introduction of new technology has had both positive and negative results for the environment. Although some technology may be positively applied toward the goal of environmental restoration, it may also result in the production of increased environmental degradation. Technological advances in four areas—natural resources, agriculture, public health, and communications—have had significant environmental impacts. In order to assess the environmental impacts of technology, one must consider three things:

1. The manner in which research and development (R&D) is funded
   
   
2. The environmental impacts of four major areas of technological research:
   a. resource technology
   b. agricultural technology
   c. public health technology
   d. communications technology
   
   
3. The ways in which technological developments are transferred among countries

Technological research is a huge undertaking in many nations. It employs the equivalent of more than four million full-time private, non-profit, and public-sector workers.² Governments actively promote technological development and innovation within their borders through government-funded projects at colleges, universities, and other public agencies (e.g., Electrotechnical Laboratory of Japan, Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, Risø National Laboratory Wind Energy Department of Denmark). Universities all over the world have incorporated publicly and privately funded research into their various graduate-level educational programs.

Nations fund and focus their research efforts in specific ways. For example, human-health related research is heavily emphasized in the United States (US), Japan, and Europe.³ Military research also takes a sizeable portion of government research and development funding in many nations (e.g., the US, United Kingdom, and France).⁴

In addition to directly funding a variety of projects, governments may also provide partial subsidies and tax credits to private corporations in order to stimulate increased spending on R&D for projects that benefit the general public. In some cases, individual corporations will not pursue certain research topics without government assistance because many newly developed ideas are not eligible for patents. When this occurs, the sponsoring corporation's research also benefits its competior. The US government, for example, has spent billions of dollars to fund half the expense of “clean coal” R&D projects undertaken by energy utilities.⁵

1. Geologists locate additional resource deposits using new technologies.
   
   
2. R&D creates methods for utilizing natural resources in more efficient manners.
   
   
3. New technologies allow engineers to substitute a scarce resource with other, more available resources.⁶

1. The invention of new location and mining technologies that will assist with the petroleum extraction process thereby allowing greater extraction of petroleum from the Earth than is currently possible.
   
   
2. The invention of new engine and fuel technologies that enable vehicles to use petroleum products more efficiently.
   
   
3. The invention of new fuel technologies (e.g., hydrogen, ethanol, electricity, solar) as alternatives to petroleum fuels.
   
   
4. The invention of hybrid technologies (e.g., hybrid gasoline-electric engines) that will enable a reduction of petroleum use and dependency.
   

1. What types of technology receive the largest amounts of funding
   
   
2. Which technology enjoys the greatest scientific breakthroughs
   
   
3. Which technology is the most readily accepted by consumers

One of the most pressing contemporary environmental issues is the increased release of atmospheric pollution (especially pollution caused by increases in resource usage). Vehicle emissions (e.g., hydrocarbons and nitrous oxide [which sunlight then converts to ground ozone]), and industrial releases (e.g., the release of a variety of gases, particulates, and aerosols) can cause major health problems (e.g., asthma⁷, cardiac arrhythmia, cardiac arrest, impairment of human reproductive systems, bronchitis, and cancer).⁸ Air pollution also causes damage to local ecosystems and can spread regionally through acid rain. Certain atmospheric pollutants (e.g., carbon dioxide [CO2], methane [CH4], nitrous oxide [N2O], and tropospheric ozone [O3])⁹ may be contributing to changing global climate patterns. These climatic changes have damaged ecosystems, altered agricultural zones, triggered natural disasters, raised sea levels, and spread new diseases throughout many areas of the world.¹⁰

The challenge of reducing pollution raises scenarios similar to those regarding the depletion of natural resources. New technologies will either make pollution reduction economically advantageous to industries, or governments will very likely impose greater emission limits on corporations. While the debate on government regulation wages on, few disagree with the need to also develop less-polluting technologies (e.g., renewable energy sources, zero-emission vehicles, “clean coal” technology). US Ambassador Richard Benedick writes that “the heart of a long-term strategy —against global climate change— is to ensure that sufficient and stable funding is made available to achieve the technological revolution.”¹¹ Though many scientists believe that government regulation and cultural changes will also be necessary for slowing air pollution, the funding of R&D currently represents the primary governmental response to global climate change.

Agricultural Technology
Environmental Impacts of Agricultural Technology
Humans have altered or eliminated many different ecosystems in order to use land and water for their own purposes. The type of agricultural practices utilized in any given area can have significant impacts on the air composition, water resources, and future soil fertility of a particular area.

The history of agriculture is written in technological advances. These advances have all had serious impacts on a variety of local environments. Farming began in broad river valleys during the Neolithic era (at least 8,000 years ago on most continents). Annual floods provided water for the first crops to grow in the rich soils of river valleys in many areas of the world. Even the earliest agricultural technologies proved to be very disruptive to established ecosystems. In Neolithic northern Europe, farmers used slash-and-burn techniques to clear forests for farming, and often had to move their villages once they depleted the fertility of the soil. Later the Greeks and Romans developed crop rotation to enhance soil fertility, and the innovation spread across Europe in the eighth century. Scientists in the nineteenth and twentieth century brought major advances in fertilizers and hybridization.

Many agricultural researchers now seek to develop more “sustainable agricultural technologies.” Sustainable agriculture is defined as the ability of future generations to ensure that they are able to grow enough food to feed themselves without also destroying other ecosystem services. Some believe that newly introduced technologies (e.g., genetically modified organisms [GMOs]) will ensure a sustainable agriculture but others argue that GMOs threaten to destroy almost every type of terrestrial ecosystem. There is still serious debate over the sustainability of many of the latest technologies being introduced into the agricultural industry. That debate originally developed as a result of the Green Revolution.

The Green Revolution
Many developing countries greatly increased their grain production in the 1960s and 1970s through a new generation of agricultural technologies (e.g., chemical fertilizers and herbicides, new seed varieties, monoculture, and mechanical farming equipment). These new technologies were collectively known as the “Green Revolution.” The utilization of these technologies virtually eliminated famines in India; however, they have also had negative impacts on the environment (e.g., soil erosion, groundwater depletion, loss of biological diversity, etc.). New seed varieties introduced at this time required extensive use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. Farmers who used the new seeds but then failed to purchase the necessary chemical fertilizers and herbicides saw their crop yields drop precipitously. Additionally, the increased use of herbicides and pesticides polluted water and terrestrial ecosystems and reduced future soil fertility. The Green Revolution therefore incited greater inequalities between wealthy and poor farmers, driving many poorer farmers out of business in a number of locations around the world.

Widespread use of new seed varieties is also threatening to eliminate the genetic stock content of older seed varieties. Conservation biologists are now attempting to preserve older seed varieties because these seeds may contain important genetic information necessary for the development and advancement of future sustainable agricultural practices.

Genetically Modified Organisms
Biotechnology geneticists now seek a second “Green Revolution” through the invention of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). By changing the gene structure of a plant species, either through the direct manipulation of current genes or through the addition of specific genes from different plant species, these scientists are creating new plant varieties with the claim that they are more resistant to the detrimental effects of disease, pests, and extreme weather conditions.

Genetic manipulation can also have negative environmental effects. It may reduce the nutritional value of plants, thus requiring higher consumption rates in order to gain equal levels of nutrient value. In some cases, virulent versions of GMOs can overtake large land areas, thereby effectively creating monocultures that eliminate indigenous plants, reduce biological diversity, and weaken healthy ecosystems. Opponents of GMOs argue that the effects of these new varieties on other species, and on human health, should be adequately tested before they are put into general use.

Citing health and environmental concerns, the European Union (EU) has restricted imports of GMO crops. Many nations that export food to Europe have outlawed the use of GMOs. In response, the US government has accused the EU of preventing farmers from employing what the US considers an advantageous agricultural technology that can help reduce hunger. The profit motive of biotechnology corporations has fueled the controversy. Anti-GMO activist Vandana Shiva of the India-based Research Foundation for Science, Technology, and Ecology argues, “[w]hile the hunger argument is the most frequently used argument to promote and push genetic engineering, GMOs have more to do with corporate hunger for profits than poor people's hunger for food.”¹²

The economic impact of GMOs on farmers is also somewhat controversial. Five major “Gene Giant” corporations (Pharmacia, DuPont, Syngenta, Aventis, and Dow) have already obtained patents on hundreds of seed varieties, and these patents prohibit farmers from harvesting seeds from mature plants to use as plantings for the following year. Yet many farmers, especially subsistence farmers in developing countries with lax patent enforcement, choose to ignore the patent rules by re-harvesting seeds for the annual sowing of their crops. DuPont and Syngenta continue to experiment with “terminator” seeds —seeds that produce plants with infertile seeds that cannot be utilized in subsequent years. Corporate use of terminator seeds is one way that they can ensure enforcement of their patents. Although terminator seeds have some negative economic results for farmers, they may also have some beneficial environmental effects. Terminator-seed technology may be promoted as a preventative method that ensures that GMO species do not overtake native terrestrial species in pre-existent ecosystems.

Health Technology
Interaction Between the Environment and Public Health Technology
Protecting humans from the dangerous aspects of our environment is one of the best-funded areas of research and development in both developed and developing countries. New public-health technologies affect the size and demographics of human populations, which in turn affects the scale of human impacts on terrestrial, aquatic, and atmospheric ecosystems.

Population and Demographics
Medical technologies have had tremendous impacts on the size and nature of human societies. Improvements in public health over the last few centuries have caused death rates to decline, life spans to lengthen, and national populations to skyrocket. Yet public health initiatives, along with reductions in poverty, are increasing employment opportunities for women, changing cultures and school systems, and enabling birth rates to decline. As population growth returns to near zero, nations emerge with a much older population. Demographers call this phenomenon the “demographic transition.”¹³ Once the demographic transition is complete, national populations emerge at a much higher steady state. Higher populations are creating different sets of environmental challenges, including water scarcity, deforestation, and urban pollution.¹⁴

Disease Eradication
Scientific medical research has developed antibiotics to control tuberculosis, syphilis, and other infections, and vaccines in order to prevent the spread of diseases such as smallpox, typhoid, tetanus, diphtheria, influenza, and polio. Through medical advancements, the implementation of public health procedures, and a variety of educational efforts by public health officials, many major diseases have been completely eradicated in developed countries. Varying levels of progress in addressing major diseases have been made in developing countries.

Environmental and social changes have slowed that progress, and in some cases even reversed it. Three key environmental factors are relevant to disease insurgence, resurgence, and eradication:

1. Global Climate Change
   Atmospheric pollution has increased temperatures in most regions of the world. Regions that were previously too cold to support tropical diseases (e.g., malaria) have warmed and are now experiencing an increase in these diseases. Paul Epstein, the Associate Director of the Harvard University Center for Health and Global Environment, argues that the effects of global climate change are contributing to increased levels of emergent and resurgent diseases around the world.¹⁵



2. Ecosystem Disruption
   Habitat destruction has opened spaces that previously held certain diseases in check. Additionally, humans have reduced the populations of many predators thereby allowing for the increased population of disease-carrying rodents and insects. This type of ecosystem disruption has thus significantly aided in the spread of numerous diseases, including malaria, yellow fever, dengue fever, Lyme disease, and the plague.¹⁶



3. Organism Resistance
   Viruses and pests are building resistance to many of the achievements made by the public health sector. Epstein notes that “[i]ronically, our very means to control infectious disease—antibiotics and insecticides—are, themselves, rapidly driving the evolution of new and unaffected strains.”¹⁷

Development and Distribution of Medical Technology
The development and distribution of medical technologies are literally life-and-death matters for people all over the world. Setting the focus and intensity of research for each disease is among the most significant public policy issues for human society.

National governments are primarily funding public health R&D based on health problems common to the nation funding the research. For example, US government funding focuses on cancer and AIDS rather than on tropical diseases such as malaria and dengue fever. US economist Jeffrey Sachs writes that “global science is directed by the rich countries and for the rich-country markets.”¹⁸ Since most public health research is conducted by wealthy, developed countries, very little research is being conducted on health problems found primarily in tropical regions where many developing countries are located. In these regions, many people are not being vaccinated or receiving proper treatment against diseases (e.g., cholera, diphtheria, and leprosy) for which prevention and treatment are relatively well-understood because their health care systems are inadequate and underfunded. Millions die needlessly each year from preventable and/or curable diseases in undeveloped regions of the world.

The development of medicine by pharmaceutical corporations is also biased toward the needs of wealthier nations. Many drugs are available to most people who need them in developed countries, but are unavailable to low-income people in developing countries. A prime example is the current AIDS treatment regime. AIDS drugs are being widely disseminated in wealthy nations, while millions of people infected with HIV in southern Africa and other developing regions are not provided affordable access to these treatments. Major pharmaceutical corporations have cut prices in southern Africa for patented drug treatments for AIDS but they continue to support strict limits on international trade in generic versions of AIDS drugs.¹⁹

Ethics of Biotechnology
Some medical technologies, no matter how they are distributed, are themselves matters of great debate. In recent years, the development and use of genetic engineering, organ transplants, and biotechnology have introduced major ethical controversies into the medical community. The beliefs of dominant religious communities within a given nation and the different historical experiences of each individual nation, has had a significant impact on how various issues are received in those countries.

Three controversial areas include: human embryo stem cell research, human and animal cloning, and organ transplants. Research on stem cells from human embryos is controversial worldwide, but different nations are making different choices to legalize, ban, or strictly limit the procedure. This research has been legalized in China, Great Britain, India, Israel, Japan, and Saudi Arabia; banned in Italy; and strictly limited in Germany and the United States. Among religious groups, the Catholic Church has most clearly spoken against any kind of embryo experimentation. Opposition in Germany has arisen partially from a concern that the practice resembled the nation’s history of Nazi eugenics. Only Great Britain has clearly legalized studying stem cells taken from cloned embryos.

Some Christian, Muslim, and Jewish leaders, as well as some environmentalists, oppose the cloning of animals, but this practice has not been specifically outlawed in any country. On the other hand, human cloning is illegal in all countries except Great Britain, which has legalized the cloning of embryos to produce new stem cells for research and therapies that could cure a number of diseases. In Japan, stem cell research is not a major issue but human-to-human organ transplants are. Although organ transplants between humans, and even between humans and animals (xenotransplantation), are common throughout most of the world, in Japan, they are a matter of great controversy. Researchers are studying how two key views held by many Japanese citizens impact resistance to organ transplants in this region. The first view is that all parts of the body contain a portion of the soul. The second is that death does not occur until the circulation of blood has stopped, a point at which it is too late to obtain an organ for transplant. The origins of these beliefs in Buddhist traditions are currently being studied.²⁰

Succeeding waves of new communication technologies, including the telegraph, telephone, sound recordings, film, radio, television, data recordings, satellites, and the Internet, have been major factors in cultural change since the nineteenth century. New communication technologies have quickly disseminated Western cultural ideas and information throughout the world. Often touted as the “New Economy,” the development of various forms of communication technology has been more profitable for many corporations than their previous ventures in the “Old Economy”—an economy fueled by heavy industry (e.g., steel production, manufacturing, etc.). This shift from “industrial” production of physical goods to the increased production of mass-marketed information, data services, and information hardware (e.g., computers and other information storage devices) has led some economists and historians to designate this current period as the “Information Age.”²¹

Technology transfers occur primarily for economic reasons. Many nations are seeking to expand foreign trade by employing new technologies for the purpose of producing globally competitive goods and services. Each country develops some new technologies on its own but also needs to import discoveries from other countries in order to attain the highest possible level of economic competitiveness. This type of technology transfer is often provided by high-income or developed countries to lower-income or developing countries as a form of development aid.²² Developing countries have also, at times, pooled their resources by transferring technologies among themselves.

In many cases, developing nations are still building industrial plants with out-of-date technologies that are more harmful to the environment than newer technologies. To avoid this, national and international environmental agencies are assisting developing nations with the use of sustainable technologies as those nations build new industries to alleviate poverty. The combination of sustainable technologies and economic development constitutes “sustainable development,” defined as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”²³

The United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the Global Environment Facility (GEF), the International Council for Science (ICSU), many universities, international aid agencies, and other national and international organizations promote and, in some cases, subsidize technology transfers for economic development and environmental protection in impoverished locations. The 1999 United Nations report, “Business and the United Nations, Partners in Sustainable Development: Industry and Technology,”²⁴ outlined “how governments and international organizations can promote such transfers through information dissemination, facilitating access to capital, encouraging environmental management and accounting, and using environmental regulations to promote cleaner production.”²⁵

Multi-national corporations (MNCs) are also a major conductor of technology transfers. Foreign investment into developing countries increased strongly during the 1990s. This trend included the establishment of new production plants in developing countries by MNCs. As a result, technology transfers have increased, as MNCs bring technologies from their plants in developed nations to their new factories in developing nations.²⁶

The United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) has a record of successfully integrating environmental improvements into industrial development initiatives. For example, with financial support from the government of Switzerland, UNIDO brought several sustainable technologies (e.g., high-exhaustion chrome tanning, low-sulfide dehairing, compact retanning) developed by European leather tanneries to tanneries in central and southern Africa.²⁷ Technology-transfer development projects generally seek to create or grow private markets for sustainable technologies. Thus the projects must include a way for businesses to make a profit with the new technology, taking into account the costs and availability of venture capital, equipment maintenance, and further technological research and development to maintain their competitive edge.

Many projects involving technology transfer seek to enable household consumption patterns to become more sustainable, yet affecting the behavior of individual households is complicated. For example, in Sri Lanka there was an energy supplement project that proposed to rent solar-power systems to individual households in the area. The project failed because it was not able to effectively anticipate the high cost of rental collection.²⁸ Though changes in household behaviors are known to have produced positive environmental effects, marketing new technologies to the general public can be very expensive. International development agencies are learning how to increase the effectiveness of these transfers. These agencies spread their experiences by producing case studies that analyze the successes and failures of technology-transfer projects. They continue to move forward with new technology-transfer projects.

The research and development of new technologies can also affect societies in unexpected and unpredictable ways. Technology, for example, may have both beneficial and detrimental effects. Some technological advances (e.g., pollution control devices, water purification processes, sewage treatment) utilized to protect the environment have had beneficial effects while others (e.g., automobiles, mass communications, home entertainment systems) have incited increases in consumerism that have led to increased production, pollution, consumption, and environmental degradation. It is clear, however, that the acceleration of technological innovation will continue to impact the future of the global environment. The willingness of industrialized nations to share new technologies, and the ability of developing countries to develop technologies that address their own challenges, will be a major factor in the elimination of poverty and the promotion of sustainable development.

Additional Information
For additional information on technology, consider consulting the resources listed in our Technology Links section.

Endnotes
1 Harvey Brooks, “Technology, Evolution, and Purpose,” in “Modern Technology: Problem or Opportunity?” Daedalus 109, no. 1 (Winter 1980): 65–81, quoted in Eugene B. Skolnikoff, The Elusive Transformation: Science, Technology, and the Evolution of International Politics (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1993) 13.
Return to text

2 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), “Key Figures” in Main Science and Technology Indicators (MSTI): 2001–2002 Edition, updated n.d., http://www.oecd.org/pdf/M00026000/M00026476.pdf (cited 15 June 2002).
Return to text

3 The United States government spends more than twenty billion dollars each year on its major public-health research institute, the US National Institutes for Health (NIH).
Return to text

4 Robert M. May, “The Scientific Investments of Nations,” Science 281, no. 5373 (3 July 1998): 49–51.
Return to text

5 For information on research and development initiatives in the energy and transportation sectors, see the Forum on Religion and Ecology’s Energy, Transportation, and Consumer Culture page.
Return to text

6 Mark Sagoff, “Carrying Capacity and Ecological Economics,” Bioscience 45, no. 9 (October 1995): 610–20.
Return to text

7 Robert J. Pandya, Gina Solomon, Amy Kinner, and John R. Balmes, “Diesel Exhaust and Asthma: Hypotheses and Molecular,” Environmental Health Perspectives Supplements 110, no. 1 (February 2002): 103–112.
Return to text

8 Bert Brunekreef and Stephen T. Holgate, “Air Pollution and Health,” Lancet 360, no. 9341 (19 October 2002): 1233–42.
Return to text

9 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2001: Synthesis Report (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001) 4.
Return to text

10 Paul R. Epstein, “Climate, Ecology, and Human Health,” Consequences 3, no. 2 (1997): 3–19, http://www.gcrio.org/CONSEQUENCES/vol3no2/climhealth.html (cited 18 March 2003).
Return to text

11 Richard E. Benedick, “Striking a New Deal on Climate Change,” Issues in Science & Technology 18, no. 1 (Fall 2001): 71–76.
Return to text

12 Vandana Shiva, “Biotech Wars: Food Freedom VS Food Safety,” updated n.d., http://www.vshiva.net/aticles/biotech_wars.htm (cited 27 June 2003).
Return to text

13 Frank W. Notestein, “Economic Problems of Population Change,” in the International Conference of Agricultural Economists, Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference of Agricultural Economists (New York: Oxford University Press, 1953) 13–31.
Return to text

14 For information on the interaction between population, consumption, and the environment, see the Forum on Religion and Ecology’s Population and Consumption page.
Return to text

15 Epstein, Consequences 3, no. 2 (1997): 3–19.
Return to text

16 Ibid.
Return to text

17 Ibid.
Return to text

18 Jeffrey Sachs, “Helping the World’s Poorest,” Center for International Development Policy Paper, updated 14 August 1999, http://www.cid.harvard.edu/cidinthenews/articles/sf9108.html (cited 21 June 2002).
Return to text

19 Bebe Loff, “No Agreement Reached in Talks on Access to Cheap Drugs,” Lancet 360, no. 9349 (14 December 2002): 1951.
Return to text

20 William R. LaFleur, “From Agape to Organs: Religious Difference between Japan and America in Judging the Ethics of the Transplant,” Zygon: Journal of Religion & Science 37, no. 3 (September 2002): 623–42; Helen Hardacre, “Response of Buddhism and Shinto to the Issue of Brain Death and Organ Transplant," Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 3 (1994): 585–601.
Return to text

21 According to two United States scholars of information management, the amount of information in the world is increasing by about fifty percent every year. For additional information see: Peter Lyman and Hal R. Varian, “How Much Information,” Executive Summary, updated 18 October 2000, http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/research/projects/how-much-info/summary.html (cited 21 June 2002).
Return to text

22 Ming Ivory, “Doctrines of Science, Technology, and Development Assistance,” Alternatives: Social Transformation and Humane Governance 23, no. 3 (July-September 1998): 321–72.
Return to text

23 World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987) 43.
Return to text

24 United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Business and the United Nations, Partners in Sustainable Development: Industry and Technology (New York: United Nations, 1999), updated n.d., http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/tech/tsd1.pdf (cited 21 June 2002).
Return to text

25 Ibid., 1.
Return to text

26 Tim Forsyth, “Technology Transfer and the Climate Change Debate,” Environment 40, no. 9 (November 1998): 16–25.
Return to text

27 United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), “Cleaner Leather Production in Africa,” updated 2001, http://www.unido.org/doc/4580 (cited 3 December 2002).
Return to text

28 Eric Martinot, Ramesh Ramankutty, and Frank Rittner, “The GEF Solar PV Portfolio: Emerging Experience and Lessons,” Global Environment Facility Monitoring and Evaluation Working Paper 2 (August 2000): 25, http://gefweb.org/2_Solar_PV-nocov.pdf (cited 4 December 2002).
Return to text