Dear users, today we have a very personal request. We have decided to offer our learning materials free of charge because we believe in an open, pluralist economic science that is available to everyone, worldwide. We do this without advertising because we want to remain independent of commercial interests. But our commitment to independence and open access also has its price. Every year we have large costs for programming, staff and to support our authors. If everyone reading this gave a small amount, we could keep Exploring Economics thriving for years to come - but 99% of our users don't give. So today we ask you to protect Exploring Economics's independence. The heart and soul of Exploring Economics is a community of people working to bring you unlimited access to high-qualitiy, economic learning and teaching material. Please take just a few moments to help us keep Exploring Economics going. Thank you!
We are a registered non-profit organization | Bank account: Netzwerk Plurale Ökonomik e.V., IBAN: DE91 4306 0967 6037 9737 00, SWIFT-BIC: GENODEM1GLS | Imprint
Degrowth and Environmental Justice: Decoupling
Based on a paper by Jason Hickel and Giorgos Kallis Decoupling refers to the separation of economic value creation material extraction and pollution. Ecological limits pose a challenge to growth-led development and the low historical and predicted rate of decoupling suggests that long-term sustainable growth-led development is impossible. While it is important for some developing countries to increase their ecological impact in order to achieve a minimum social standard of living overall we should try and achieve development goals through extensive redistribution programmes and a direct focus on human welfare rather than economic growth. Further, continued environmental destruction for growth under the current will further worsen environmental injustice. And environmental justice means that only very selective growth should be pursued to remain within a safe ecological limit for humanity. (All ecological overshoots are driven by overconsumption in the global north rather than neo-Malthusian ideas of overpopulation in the global South, but more on this in another video). There has been absolute decoupling of fossil fuel emissions from growth in wealthy countries, and a rapid transition to renewables is a viable option for remaining below a 2-degree increase by 2100 but this is much easier to achieve with very low or growth and easier still with degrowth. Most scenarios that show otherwise depend on bioenergy with carbon capture and storage a highly speculative and probably costly technology. Decarbonization with low rates of growth or 'agrowth' is just about possible though. However, our dependence on material inputs and pollution more generally is much more difficult to decouple. There is no sign of an environmental Kuznets curve regarding dematerialization and a reduction in environmental damage more broadly. If measure using direct material consumption it appears wealthier countries have decoupled, but using material footprint a consumption-based measure this trend reverses.
Comment from our editors:
This is a little decontextualised and doesn't go over the overall concept of regrowth, its political economy or what selective growth may be necessary in the global South in order to provide some minimum acceptable standard of living. But this will be expanded upon in later videos.