A research topic related to ecological modernization in recent years has been the sustainable house, that is, the remodeling of the environment oriented to lifestyles, consumption patterns, and the control of demand in supply chains (Vergragt, 2000; OECD 2002). Some scholars of ecological modernization share an interest in industrial symbiosis, that is, in situ recycling that helps reduce resource consumption by increasing efficiency (in other words, pollution prevention coupled with waste reduction), usually by removing externalities in the production process from one economic point of view and using them as raw material inputs for another (Christoff, 1996). Ecological modernization is also based on the assessment of the product life cycle, the analysis of product materials and their energy flows. In this context, ecological modernization promotes "cradle-to-cradle" manufacturing (Braungart and McDonough, 2002), in contrast to the usual forms of "cradle-to-grave" manufacturing - where waste is not reintegrated into a new production process. The literature has also been interested in ecological modernization in terms of its relationship with social movements and civil society as a key agent of change (Fisher and Freudenburg, 2001).

As a strategy for change, some forms of ecological modernization may be favored by business interests since it apparently meets the triple bottom line of economy, society and environment, which upholds the principle of sustainability, but does not question the principles of the free market. This differs from many perspectives of environmental movements, since they consider free trade and its self-regulation as a crucial part of the problem or even one of the origins of environmental degradation. Under ecological modernization, the State has to carry out a variety of functions and capacities: as a facilitator for Markets that help produce technological advances through competition; and which functions as a mediating regulation, by which corporations are forced to 'recover' their various waste and reintegrate it in some way into the production of new goods and/or services (for example, the way in which German companies are forced to accept cars that they themselves manufactured, once they have reached the end of their useful life); and in some cases as an institution that is unable to address critical local, national and global environmental problems. In the latter case, ecological modernization actions with Ulrich Beck (1999, 37-40) and other concepts of the need for the emergence of new forms of environmental governance, sometimes referring to these as subpolitics or political modernization, where environmental movements, community groups, businesses and other stakeholders increasingly take direct and leadership roles in promoting environmental transformation. A political modernization of this type requires certain supporting norms and institutions such as a free, independent, or at least critical press, fundamental human rights of expression, organization, and assembly, etc. New media such as the Internet greatly facilitate this.

Critics argue that ecological modernization will fail to protect the environment and do nothing to alter the impulses within the capitalist mode of economic production, which inevitably leads to environmental degradation (Foster, 2002).

Critics question whether technological advances alone can achieve resource conservation and better environmental protection, especially if left to self-regulatory business practices (York and Rosa, 2003). As an example we can take the fact of the existence of many technological improvements currently viable, but not widely used. The most environmentally friendly product manufacturing process (which is often also the most economically efficient) is not always the one automatically chosen by self-regulating corporations (for example, hydrogen or biofuel compared to peak oil). Additionally, some critics have argued that ecological modernization does not redress injustices produced within a capitalist system, such as environmental racism - where people of color and low-income people bear a disproportionate burden of environmental harms such as pollution, and lack access to environmental benefits such as parks, and social justice issues such as eliminating unemployment (Bullard, 1993; Gleeson and Low, 1999; Harvey, 1996) - environmental racism is also known as issues of unbalanced distribution of environmental resources and services (Everett & Neu, 2000). On the other hand, the theory seems to have limited effectiveness globally, as it applies mainly in its countries of origin - Germany and the Netherlands, and has little to say about developing countries (Fisher and Freudenburg, 2001). Perhaps the harshest criticism is that ecological modernization is based on the notion of "sustainable growth", and in reality this is not possible, since growth leads to the consumption of natural and human capital at great cost to ecosystems and societies.

Ecological modernization, its effectiveness and applicability, as well as its advantages and limitations, remains a dynamic and contentious area of ​​research in environmental social science and political discourse in the early 21st century.

A research topic related to ecological modernization in recent years has been the sustainable house, that is, the remodeling of the environment oriented to lifestyles, consumption patterns, and the control of demand in supply chains (Vergragt, 2000; OECD 2002). Some scholars of ecological modernization share an interest in industrial symbiosis, that is, in situ recycling that helps reduce resource consumption by increasing efficiency (in other words, pollution prevention coupled with waste reduction), usually by removing externalities in the production process from one economic point of view and using them as raw material inputs for another (Christoff, 1996). Ecological modernization is also based on the assessment of the product life cycle, the analysis of product materials and their energy flows. In this context, ecological modernization promotes "cradle-to-cradle" manufacturing (Braungart and McDonough, 2002), in contrast to the usual forms of "cradle-to-grave" manufacturing - where waste is not reintegrated into a new production process. The literature has also been interested in ecological modernization in terms of its relationship with social movements and civil society as a key agent of change (Fisher and Freudenburg, 2001).

As a strategy for change, some forms of ecological modernization may be favored by business interests since it apparently meets the triple bottom line of economy, society and environment, which upholds the principle of sustainability, but does not question the principles of the free market. This differs from many perspectives of environmental movements, since they consider free trade and its self-regulation as a crucial part of the problem or even one of the origins of environmental degradation. Under ecological modernization, the State has to carry out a variety of functions and capacities: as a facilitator for Markets that help produce technological advances through competition; and which functions as a mediating regulation, by which corporations are forced to 'recover' their various waste and reintegrate it in some way into the production of new goods and/or services (for example, the way in which German companies are forced to accept cars that they themselves manufactured, once they have reached the end of their useful life); and in some cases as an institution that is unable to address critical local, national and global environmental problems. In the latter case, ecological modernization actions with Ulrich Beck (1999, 37-40) and other concepts of the need for the emergence of new forms of environmental governance, sometimes referring to these as subpolitics or political modernization, where environmental movements, community groups, businesses and other stakeholders increasingly take direct and leadership roles in promoting environmental transformation. A political modernization of this type requires certain supporting norms and institutions such as a free, independent, or at least critical press, fundamental human rights of expression, organization, and assembly, etc. New media such as the Internet greatly facilitate this.

Critics argue that ecological modernization will fail to protect the environment and do nothing to alter the impulses within the capitalist mode of economic production, which inevitably leads to environmental degradation (Foster, 2002).

Critics question whether technological advances alone can achieve resource conservation and better environmental protection, especially if left to self-regulatory business practices (York and Rosa, 2003). As an example we can take the fact of the existence of many technological improvements currently viable, but not widely used. The most environmentally friendly product manufacturing process (which is often also the most economically efficient) is not always the one automatically chosen by self-regulating corporations (for example, hydrogen or biofuel compared to peak oil). Additionally, some critics have argued that ecological modernization does not redress injustices produced within a capitalist system, such as environmental racism - where people of color and low-income people bear a disproportionate burden of environmental harms such as pollution, and lack access to environmental benefits such as parks, and social justice issues such as eliminating unemployment (Bullard, 1993; Gleeson and Low, 1999; Harvey, 1996) - environmental racism is also known as issues of unbalanced distribution of environmental resources and services (Everett & Neu, 2000). On the other hand, the theory seems to have limited effectiveness globally, as it applies mainly in its countries of origin - Germany and the Netherlands, and has little to say about developing countries (Fisher and Freudenburg, 2001). Perhaps the harshest criticism is that ecological modernization is based on the notion of "sustainable growth", and in reality this is not possible, since growth leads to the consumption of natural and human capital at great cost to ecosystems and societies.

Ecological modernization, its effectiveness and applicability, as well as its advantages and limitations, remains a dynamic and contentious area of ​​research in environmental social science and political discourse in the early 21st century.