Is continuous growth compatible with our sustainable development goals?
The word "degrowth" might be unfamiliar to many ears, but its meaning has never been more critical to understand. Our current economic model's foundation lies in a presumptive flaw—the continuous belief in infinite growth. But what happens when the pillars of this belief crumble?
For years, experts warned of the impending limitations of continuous growth. The groundbreaking 1972 book, “Limits to Growth,” spotlighted our planet's sustainable boundaries. This work evaluated how population, living standards, and resource utilization converge and affect sustainability.
Almost four decades later, Professor Jorgen Randers, one of the book’s authors, published an update titled "2052." Here, he highlighted a critical turning point: our economic model becomes flawed when equity becomes central, and justice prevails.
Consumption and wealth continue to define strategy
Western countries often equate a happy life with high resource consumption and wealth. However, Bhutan offers a contrasting model. It introduced the "happiness economy," where the nation prioritizes citizens' happiness over economic growth, suggesting that happiness can be decoupled from resource-intensive activities.
Yet, the growth principle continues to dominate global strategies, evident in the UN's Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Target number 8, for instance, emphasizes "decent work and economic growth." Recent Holberg Prize awardee, Professor Joan Martinez-Alier, has openly criticized this, arguing that such a goal might be incompatible with other SDGs.
Introducing degrowth and demand reduction
"Degrowth" is a term that advocates for a deliberate, socially just, and equitable reduction in the scale of production and consumption. The goal of degrowth is to achieve better well-being and improved ecological conditions, reducing the size of the global economy to fit within the planet's biophysical limits.
There are several key principles to degrowth, including sustainability, social well-being, equity, direct democracy, and localized economies.
Understanding degrowth also requires us to examine the concept of demand reduction. This can be categorized into three intertwined yet distinct components:
Efficiency: Maximizing output while minimizing resource use. It's about doing more with less.
Sufficiency: Re-evaluating the amount of production and consumption truly necessary for human well-being.
Behavioral Change: Shifting societal habits towards sustainability, wherein society collectively and willingly opts for less consumption.
Demand reduction is usually only discussed in policy debates regarding a short-term response to the energy crisis, and rarely as a prerequisite to reaching net zero.
Sometimes the term degrowth is confused with post-growth, a common designation of the various paths we can take when growth has stopped or declined. This gives more freedom to choose paths that allow a continuation of some practices at a smaller scale, whereas degrowth is a clear strategy to decrease growth. Degrowth is therefore one specific pathway in the post growth concept.
Degrowth requires a mindset shift
Jason Hickel, an economic anthropologist from the University of Barcelona, is a staunch advocate for degrowth. At a recent Brussels conference attended by top EU officials, Hickel emphasized the urgent need to reconsider GDP growth as our benchmark for societal success.
He critiqued the western world's continued exploitation of global resources, effectively maintaining a colonial economy. His take: the real focus should be on meeting human needs, not just growth. However, this suggests a more dominant role for state governance, a model reminiscent of eco-communism, which has been criticized in the past.
Timothy Parrique from Lund University echoed these sentiments. He refuted the idea of producing more while using fewer resources, highlighting the necessity of a complete decoupling to stay within planetary boundaries.
Challengers to degrowth
However, the degrowth principle isn't without its challengers. How, they argue, can we meet the energy and food demands of a growing population without growth? How can we simultaneously tackle climate change, poverty, and other pressing challenges without the momentum that growth provides?
Nobel laureate Joseph Stiglitz raises an essential consideration: while sacrifices may be necessary, ensuring they're fairly distributed is crucial. The core challenge with degrowth lies in this equity—how can we ensure everyone gets a fair share?
We must also consider if degrowth is genuinely a viable economic model. It could be argued that if our growth-centric model continues unchecked, it may simply stagnate and consequently 'degrow' on its own. But what repercussions would such organic degrowth have on our socio-economic structures?
The heart of the matter isn't just about stopping growth but ensuring that any model adopted, whether growth or degrowth-oriented, satisfies people's real needs in a manner that is considered fair and transparent.
Exceeded sustainable limits
Professor Johan Rockström of the Stockholm Resilience Centre, introduced and spent years analyzing the "planetary boundaries" principle. The findings are alarming: we've exceeded sustainable limits in various critical areas, from nitrogen cycles to extinction rates.
Moreover, while technological advances push for efficiency, there’s no evidence to suggest that increased efficiency results in decreased resource use. Instead, it seems to enable more people to use these resources, which again poses the question: how can we truly embrace degrowth?
Looking at unsustainable economic activities brings the issue into sharp focus. For instance, the sight of massive cruise ships and leisure boats at picturesque sites serves as a reminder of our high-resource consumption habits.
Infinite growth in a finite world is, by definition, unsustainable. Yet, as a society, we seem trapped in this growth mindset because we haven't found an alternative. More research, discussions, and debates on these concepts are crucial.
The UN's latest review on SDGs called for a "wholesale reform of our morally bankrupt financial system." While such an acknowledgment is a step forward, the commitment to GDP growth as a primary measure persists. It's high time for a global debate on the sustainability and equity of our growth principles.
