This is an important debate. Get a coffee and watch
3 Likes
An important assumption of âGreen Growthâ as popularly framed is renewables, at a demand scale much larger that todayâs. This points in the direction of a much more material hungry planet, esp for the rapid transition we need.
Just âdecarbonizingâ will not cut it if our hunger for other non renewables grows to enable that. âInnovationâ has to be strongly oriented towards regenerative else avoidable.
Weâre at a stage where everything needs to change, and fast. Economics, politics, assumptions and definitions of much weâve taken for granted?
Can/will we create an alternative world?
Ref point for the extractive mining for renewables: Thread by @Mining_Atoms on Thread Reader App â Thread Reader App
This debate is highly academic and also highly thought provoking!
Neither green growth nor degrowth can be considered a silver bullet for achieving sustainable development, and that a combination of both approaches may be necessary.
It is also important to note that both degrowth and green growth are not mutually exclusive, and they can be complementary in certain contexts. Eg: a degrowth approach that prioritizes social justice can be combined with a green growth approach that promotes development of new green technologies. The choice between degrowth and green growth will depend on a variety of factors, and a nuanced approach that takes into account multiple perspectives and values may be necessary to address the complex challenges we face.
However, the empirical evidence supporting both approaches finds that while green growth may have some positive effects on the environment, it is unlikely to be sufficient to achieve sustainable development goals in the long run. On the other hand, the evidence supporting degrowth is mixed, and there is a need for further research to determine its feasibility as a strategy for achieving sustainability.
The question is how to arrive at a comprehensive and integrated approach to sustainability?
One that recognizes the fundamental interdependence between economic, social, and environmental systems. And this approach should prioritize-
1. The reduction of material throughput.
2. Promotion of alternative models of development that are not dependent on endless economic growth which is beyond GDP (GDP only measures the speed at which the total economy grows, and that is a very limited measurement).
Hereâs a nice visual narrative to nourish our discussion.
In terms of the debate between green growth and degrowth, doughnut economics can be seen as a potential solution that incorporates elements of both the approaches. The concept recognizes the need to address the environmental and social challenges of the current economic system, but also emphasizes the importance of economic development and human well-being.
Doughnut economics is a concept developed by Kate Raworth, it aims to provide a framework for a sustainable and just economy. It proposes that economies should be designed to operate within the âdoughnutâ, which represents a safe and just space for humanity to thrive, while also respecting the limits of the planetâs resources and the 9 critical planetary boundaries.
At its core, doughnut economics proposes a fundamental shift in the way that we measure and prioritize economic success. Rather than just focusing solely on economic growth and GDP, it provides a more holistic approach that takes into account a range of environmental and social factors, such as resource use, inequality, and human well-being.
Overall, it represents an approach to achieving sustainability and justice in the economy. While it does not explicitly advocate for either green growth or degrowth, it provides a framework for a more balanced and sustainable approach to economic development.
P.S. while all of this might slightly seem hypothetical, Amsterdam is embracing this economic theory.
2 Likes
As planetary systems unravel, should we consider some core economic ideas?
1 Like
Changing economic model to be restorative and regenerative is critical.
Degrowth doesnât have to mean GDPs donât grow or losing technological advances:
-
GDPs can continue to grow by supporting local businesses meeting local needs sustainably. By growing climate action as an economic output, âgrowing GDPsâ then wouldnât be a bad thing for the planet.
-
Enabling more accessibility of technology to more people, would only result in greater potential for more technological advances. 8 billion humans could be working on 8 billion technological advances, as long as they are done sustainably degrowth is not anti-technology. (which is the main argument against it).
1 Like