Revision:	
  the	
  earth’s	
  carrying	
  capacity	
  is	
  
finite,	
  and	
  we	
  are	
  already	
  in	
  ‘overshoot’	
  
Rockstrom et al. - 2009 - A safe operating space for humanity
There	
  is	
  a	
  close	
  historical	
  relationship	
  between	
  
growth	
  and	
  energy/material	
  use...	
  
Annual	
  growth	
  of	
  world	
  GDP	
  (grey	
  line,	
  trillions	
  of	
  2000	
  US	
  dollars),	
  	
  
and	
  annual	
  change	
  of	
  estimated	
  CO2	
  emissions	
  (millions	
  of	
  Kt,	
  black	
  dots)	
  	
  
(Granados	
  et	
  al.	
  2012:	
  58)	
  	
  
…If	
  we	
  break	
  this	
  relationship	
  	
  
(absolute	
  decoupling)	
  we	
  can	
  go	
  on	
  growing…	
  	
  
….But for absolute decoupling the rate of efficiency
improvement has to be higher than the rate of GDP
growth.	
  
-­‐67%	
  
-­‐29%	
  
-­‐100	
  
-­‐90	
  
-­‐80	
  
-­‐70	
  
-­‐60	
  
-­‐50	
  
-­‐40	
  
-­‐30	
  
-­‐20	
  
-­‐10	
  
0	
  
-­‐100	
  
-­‐90	
  
-­‐80	
  
-­‐70	
  
-­‐60	
  
-­‐50	
  
-­‐40	
  
-­‐30	
  
-­‐20	
  
-­‐10	
  
0	
  
Reduction	
  in	
  Material	
  Intensity	
  %	
  
%	
  Reduction	
  in	
  Material	
  Intensity	
  (I)	
  
to	
  accommodate	
  four	
  Annual	
  GDP	
  %	
  Growths,	
  
while	
  holding	
  Material	
  Throughput	
  (T)	
  steady.	
  
GDP	
  Growth	
  7.7%	
  
GDP	
  Growth	
  2.0%	
  
GDP	
  Growth	
  1.0%	
  
GDP	
  Growth	
  0.0%	
  
(Email me if you want
to see how this is
calculated)
Decoupling	
  30	
  billion	
  
tonnes	
  
x x
=
6.6 billion $5,900 760g CO2/$
30 billion tonnes
of CO2
IPAT equation from Erlich and Holdren (1971); Figures from Jackson (2009)
Decoupling	
  4	
  billion	
  
tonnes	
  
x x
=
4 billion tonnes
of CO2
Decoupling	
  9	
  billion	
  
people	
  
x x
=
4 billion tonnes
of CO2
9 billion
Decoupling	
  $?	
  
x x
=
4 billion tonnes
of CO2
9 billion $17,000
Decoupling	
  ?gCO2/$	
  
x x
=
4 billion tonnes
of CO2
9 billion $17,000 36gCO2/$
Decoupling	
  ?gCO2/$	
  
x x
=
4 billion tonnes
of CO2
9 billion $17,000 36gCO2/$
Decoupling	
  ?gCO2/$	
  
x x
=
4 billion tonnes
of CO2
9 billion 6gCO2/$
	
  
	
  
bethstratford@gmail.com
The	
  stationary	
  state	
  in	
  classical	
  
thought	
  
¡  Adam	
  Smith	
  –	
  	
  inevitable	
  but	
  “dull”	
  (Wealth	
  of	
  Nations,	
  1776)	
  
¡  Thomas	
  Malthus	
  –	
  our	
  inability	
  to	
  establish	
  a	
  stationary	
  
state	
  would	
  result	
  in	
  ‘vice	
  and	
  misery’	
  (Principle	
  of	
  Population,	
  
1798)	
  
¡  John	
  Stuart	
  Mill	
  –	
  more	
  optimistic	
  (Principle	
  of	
  Political	
  
Economy…,	
  1848)	
  
§  Hoped	
  we	
  would	
  be	
  “content	
  to	
  be	
  stationary,	
  long	
  before	
  
necessity	
  compels	
  them	
  to	
  it”	
  
§  Thought	
  the	
  stationary	
  state	
  could	
  be	
  a	
  considerable	
  improvement	
  
on	
  the	
  present	
  state	
  of	
  social	
  life,	
  characterised	
  by	
  “trampling,	
  
crushing,	
  elbowing,	
  and	
  reading	
  on	
  each	
  others’	
  heals”	
  
§  He	
  envisioned	
  “…a	
  well	
  paid	
  and	
  affluent	
  body	
  of	
  labourers;	
  no	
  
enormous	
  fortunes,	
  except	
  what	
  were	
  earned	
  and	
  accumulated	
  
during	
  a	
  single	
  lifetime”	
  but	
  many	
  more	
  people	
  “not	
  only	
  exempt	
  
from	
  coarser	
  toils,	
  but	
  with	
  sufficient	
  leisure,	
  both	
  physical	
  and	
  
mental,	
  from	
  mechanical	
  details,	
  to	
  cultivate	
  freely	
  the	
  graces	
  of	
  
life”	
  
All	
  quoted	
  in	
  Kerschner	
  (2010)	
  
Herman	
  Daly	
  combined	
  this	
  idea	
  of	
  the	
  
stationary	
  state	
  with	
  Georgescu-­‐Roegen’s	
  work	
  
on	
  materials	
  flows	
  and	
  entropy….	
  
¡  Georgescu-­‐Roegen	
  argued	
  that	
  because	
  of	
  the	
  
laws	
  of	
  thermodynamics,	
  100%	
  recycling	
  is	
  
impossible	
  (see	
  The	
  Entropy	
  Law	
  and	
  the	
  Economic	
  Process,	
  1971)	
  
¡  Insisted	
  humans	
  should	
  live	
  off	
  the	
  ‘services’	
  of	
  
renewable	
  ‘funds’,	
  not	
  the	
  ‘flows’	
  from	
  depletable	
  
‘stock’	
  (see	
  his	
  flow-­‐fund	
  model	
  in	
  ‘The	
  Economics	
  of	
  Production’,	
  1970)	
  
¡  Herman	
  Daly	
  simplified	
  his	
  flow-­‐fund	
  model,	
  and	
  
introduced	
  the	
  concept	
  of	
  overall	
  ‘throughput’.	
  
“A	
  steady-­‐state	
  economy	
  is	
  one	
  that	
  develops	
  qualitatively	
  (by	
  
improvement	
  in	
  science,	
  technology,	
  and	
  ethics)	
  without	
  growing	
  
quantitatively	
  in	
  physical	
  dimensions;	
  it	
  lives	
  on	
  a	
  diet	
  —	
  a	
  
constant	
  metabolic	
  flow	
  of	
  resources	
  from	
  depletion	
  to	
  pollution	
  
(the	
  entropic	
  throughput)	
  maintained	
  at	
  a	
  level	
  that	
  is	
  both	
  
sufficient	
  for	
  a	
  good	
  life	
  and	
  within	
  the	
  assimilative	
  and	
  
regenerative	
  capacities	
  of	
  the	
  containing	
  ecosystem.”	
  	
  
(see	
  http://steadystate.org/)	
  
	
  	
  
	
  
	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  Degrowth	
  
In	
  French:	
  décroissance,	
  in	
  Spanish:	
  decrecimiento,	
  in	
  Italian:	
  decrescita	
  
¡  “political	
  slogan	
  with	
  theoretical	
  implications”	
  (Latouche,	
  2006a:16)	
  	
  
¡  A	
  “missile”	
  word	
  which	
  cannot	
  be	
  co-­‐opted	
  (unlike	
  sustainable	
  
development)	
  (Aries,	
  2005)	
  
¡  Discussed	
  and	
  developed	
  in	
  academic	
  and	
  non-­‐academic	
  circles	
  
	
  
Degrowth	
  is	
  “an	
  equitable	
  downscaling	
  of	
  production	
  and	
  consumption	
  that	
  
increases	
  human	
  well-­‐being	
  and	
  enhances	
  ecological	
  conditions	
  at	
  the	
  local	
  
and	
  global	
  level,	
  in	
  the	
  short	
  and	
  long-­‐term”	
  	
  
(Kallis	
  and	
  Scheider,	
  2008:3)	
  
	
  
	
  “society	
  built	
  on	
  quality	
  rather	
  than	
  on	
  quantity,	
  on	
  cooperation	
  rather	
  than	
  
on	
  competition	
  [...]	
  humanity	
  liberated	
  from	
  economism	
  for	
  which	
  social	
  
justice	
  is	
  the	
  objective.”	
  (Latouche,	
  2006a:16)	
  	
  
	
  
VS	
  	
  	
  	
  
Steady	
  State	
  Economics’	
  
3	
  principles:	
  
1.  Aggregate	
  physical	
  depletion	
  
quotas	
  for	
  stabilizing	
  the	
  stock	
  of	
  
physical	
  artefacts	
  and	
  to	
  keep	
  
throughput	
  below	
  economics	
  
limits	
  
2.  A	
  distributionist	
  institution	
  for	
  
limiting	
  the	
  degree	
  of	
  inequality	
  	
  	
  
3.  Some	
  form	
  of	
  population	
  control	
  
Claims	
  to	
  be	
  compatible	
  with	
  
capitalism	
  
	
  
Degrowth	
  
	
  
¡  Calls	
  not	
  just	
  for	
  stabilisation	
  but	
  for	
  
downscaling,	
  at	
  least	
  in	
  the	
  short	
  
term.	
  	
  
¡  Importance	
  of	
  equity	
  on	
  an	
  
international	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  national	
  basis	
  
VS	
  	
  	
  	
  
Steady	
  State	
  Economics’	
  
3	
  principles	
  (Daly	
  1992):	
  
1.  Aggregate	
  physical	
  depletion	
  
quotas	
  for	
  stabilizing	
  the	
  stock	
  of	
  
physical	
  artefacts	
  and	
  to	
  keep	
  
throughput	
  within	
  ecological	
  
limits	
  
2.  A	
  distributionist	
  institution	
  for	
  
limiting	
  the	
  degree	
  of	
  inequality	
  	
  	
  
3.  Some	
  form	
  of	
  population	
  control	
  
Claims	
  to	
  be	
  compatible	
  with	
  
capitalism	
  
Degrowth	
  
	
  
¡  Calls	
  not	
  just	
  for	
  stabilisation	
  but	
  for	
  
downscaling,	
  at	
  least	
  in	
  the	
  short	
  
term.	
  	
  
¡  Importance	
  of	
  equity	
  on	
  an	
  
international	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  national	
  basis	
  	
  
¡  Population	
  is	
  taboo	
  
¡  Less	
  comfortable	
  with	
  top-­‐down	
  
policy-­‐making	
  
¡  Less	
  confident	
  that	
  degrowth/zero	
  
growth	
  is	
  compatible	
  with	
  capitalism	
  
	
  
(Kerschner,	
  2010)	
  
1.  Resource	
  and	
  CO2	
  caps;	
  extraction	
  limits	
  
2.  Consumption	
  and	
  resource	
  taxes	
  with	
  affordability	
  safeguards	
  
3.  High	
  reserve	
  requirements	
  for	
  banks;	
  possibly	
  new	
  forms	
  of	
  money	
  
4.  Cooperative	
  property	
  and	
  cooperative	
  firms	
  	
  
5.  Reform	
  of	
  national	
  accounts;	
  different	
  ways	
  to	
  measure	
  progress	
  
6.  Support	
  for	
  models	
  of	
  “local	
  living”	
  	
  
SSE	
  and	
  Degrowth	
  policy	
  proposals:	
  	
  
areas	
  of	
  convergence	
  
(Kallis,	
  Kerschner	
  &	
  	
  Martinez-­‐Alier,	
  2012)	
  
	
  
Both	
  SSE	
  and	
  Degrowth	
  literatures	
  converge	
  to	
  a	
  
similar	
  set	
  of	
  proposed	
  policies	
  and	
  institutions	
  	
  
1.  Resource	
  and	
  CO2	
  caps;	
  extraction	
  limits	
  
2.  Consumption	
  and	
  resource	
  taxes	
  with	
  affordability	
  safeguards	
  
3.  High	
  reserve	
  requirements	
  for	
  banks;	
  possibly	
  new	
  forms	
  of	
  money	
  	
  
4.  Cooperative	
  ownership	
  of	
  property	
  and	
  firms	
  
5.  Reform	
  of	
  national	
  accounts;	
  different	
  ways	
  to	
  measure	
  progress	
  	
  
6.  Support	
  for	
  models	
  of	
  “local	
  living”	
  
7.  Commercial	
  and	
  commerce	
  free	
  zones	
  	
  
(Kallis,	
  Kerschner	
  &	
  	
  Martinez-­‐Alier,	
  2012)	
  
SSE	
  and	
  Degrowth	
  policy	
  proposals:	
  	
  
areas	
  of	
  convergence	
  
(Kallis,	
  Kerschner	
  &	
  	
  Martinez-­‐Alier,	
  2012)	
  
	
  
¡  Children	
  see	
  40,000	
  adds	
  per	
  year	
  (Kunkel,	
  2001)	
  
¡  The	
  average	
  American	
  child	
  can	
  identify	
  200	
  logos	
  
¡  Children	
  between	
  the	
  age	
  of	
  6	
  and	
  12	
  spend	
  more	
  time	
  shopping	
  than	
  
reading,	
  attending	
  youth	
  groups,	
  playing	
  outdoors	
  or	
  spending	
  time	
  in	
  
household	
  conversation	
  (Schor,	
  2004)	
  
The	
  manufacture	
  of	
  desire?	
  
Both	
  SSE	
  and	
  Degrowth	
  literatures	
  converge	
  to	
  a	
  
similar	
  set	
  of	
  proposed	
  policies	
  and	
  institutions	
  	
  
1.  Resource	
  and	
  CO2	
  caps;	
  extraction	
  limits	
  
2.  Consumption	
  and	
  resource	
  taxes	
  with	
  affordability	
  safeguards	
  
3.  High	
  reserve	
  requirements	
  for	
  banks;	
  possibly	
  new	
  forms	
  of	
  money	
  
4.  Cooperative	
  property	
  and	
  cooperative	
  firms	
  	
  
5.  Reform	
  of	
  national	
  accounts;	
  different	
  ways	
  to	
  measure	
  progress	
  
6.  Support	
  for	
  models	
  of	
  “local	
  living”	
  	
  
7.  Commercial	
  and	
  commerce	
  free	
  zones;	
  	
  
8.  Measures	
  to	
  tackle	
  inequality	
  and	
  better	
  social	
  security	
  guarantees	
  –
e.g.	
  basic	
  income	
  and	
  income	
  caps	
  
SSE	
  and	
  Degrowth	
  policy	
  proposals:	
  	
  
areas	
  of	
  convergence	
  
(Kallis,	
  Kerschner	
  &	
  	
  Martinez-­‐Alier,	
  2012)	
  
	
  
It	
  takes	
  no	
  account	
  of	
  how	
  wealth	
  
is	
  distributed	
  
What	
  ra'o	
  would	
  represent	
  
real	
  differences	
  in	
  merit	
  and	
  
contribu'on	
  rather	
  than	
  just	
  
amplifying	
  and	
  mul'plying	
  
privilege?
In	
  the	
  US	
  corporate	
  sector	
  
<500:1	
  
	
  
Value	
  added	
  is	
  the	
  difference	
  
between	
  the	
  sale	
  price	
  of	
  a	
  product	
  
and	
  the	
  cost	
  of	
  outside	
  purchases	
  for	
  
materials	
  and	
  services.	
  Roughly	
  
speaking,	
  it’s	
  the	
  revenue	
  to	
  be	
  
shared	
  between	
  labour	
  and	
  capital	
  	
  
Both	
  SSE	
  and	
  Degrowth	
  literatures	
  converge	
  to	
  a	
  
similar	
  set	
  of	
  proposed	
  policies	
  and	
  institutions	
  	
  
1.  Resource	
  and	
  CO2	
  caps;	
  extraction	
  limits	
  
2.  Consumption	
  and	
  resource	
  taxes	
  with	
  affordability	
  safeguards	
  
3.  high	
  reserve	
  requirements	
  for	
  banks;	
  possibly	
  new	
  forms	
  of	
  money	
  
4.  Reform	
  of	
  national	
  accounts;	
  different	
  ways	
  to	
  measure	
  progress	
  
5.  Support	
  of	
  innovative	
  models	
  of	
  “local	
  living”	
  	
  
6.  Cooperative	
  property	
  and	
  cooperative	
  firms	
  	
  
7.  Commercial	
  and	
  commerce	
  free	
  zones;	
  	
  
8.  Measures	
  to	
  tackle	
  inequality	
  and	
  offer	
  better	
  social	
  security	
  guarantees	
  –
e.g.	
  basic	
  income	
  and	
  income	
  caps;	
  
9.  Greater	
  option	
  for	
  part-­‐time	
  or	
  personal	
  work,	
  work-­‐sharing,	
  
sabatticals,	
  paternity,	
  maternity	
  leave	
  etc.	
  	
  
Both	
  SSE	
  and	
  Degrowth	
  literatures	
  converge	
  to	
  a	
  
similar	
  set	
  of	
  proposed	
  policies	
  and	
  institutions	
  	
  
SSE	
  and	
  Degrowth	
  policy	
  proposals:	
  	
  
areas	
  of	
  convergence	
  
(Kallis,	
  Kerschner	
  &	
  	
  Martinez-­‐Alier,	
  2012)	
  
	
  
Cheaper
goods	

Increased
consumer
demand	

Plenty of investment
and confidence	

NEW
factories &
Industries "
producing
NEW
goods &
services	

Competition	

Productivity
improvements	

SPARE
LABOUR	

Fall in
spending	

Fall in profits"
Fall in
confidence"
"
workers
made
redundant"
Cheaper
goods	

Productivity
improvements	

SPARE
LABOUR	

Competition	

SPARE
LABOUR	

High
unemployment	

Fall in
spending	

Fall in profits"
Further fall
in spending	

Fall in
confidence"
"
workers
redundant"
SPARE
LABOUR	

SPARE LABOUR	

Part	
  of	
  the	
  solution:	
  	
  
share	
  work	
  out	
  better?	
  
¡  Reverse	
  the	
  commodification	
  and	
  
monetization	
  of	
  every	
  day	
  life	
  -­‐>	
  social	
  
cohesion	
  and	
  wellbeing	
  benefits?
(Latouche,	
  2009;	
  Hirsch,	
  1976)	
  
¡  Should	
  the	
  distribution	
  of	
  goods	
  and	
  
services	
  depend	
  so	
  heavily	
  on	
  wages	
  
and	
  salaries?	
  See	
  proposals	
  for	
  a	
  
universal	
  basic	
  income	
  (Martinez-­‐Alier,	
  
2009)	
  
¡  On	
  the	
  other	
  hand	
  -­‐	
  productivity	
  is	
  not	
  
an	
  exogenous	
  factor	
  that	
  increases	
  
automatically;	
  productivity	
  gains	
  build	
  
upon	
  cheap	
  energy	
  and	
  as	
  cheap	
  
energy	
  ends,	
  we	
  will	
  need	
  to	
  work	
  
more.	
  	
  
Part	
  of	
  the	
  solution:	
  	
  
Encourage	
  resource	
  efficiency	
  not	
  
labour	
  efficiency?	
  
Sometimes	
  labour	
  productivity	
  
improvements	
  are	
  a	
  good	
  thing.	
  
BUT	
  think	
  about	
  repurcussions	
  for	
  
-­‐	
  environment,	
  	
  
-­‐	
  enjoyment	
  of	
  work,	
  	
  
-­‐	
  quality	
  of	
  service	
  
How?	
  	
  
Ecological	
  Tax	
  Reform?	
  
Greater	
  democracy	
  in	
  workplace	
  ?	
  
Introductory	
  reading	
  
¡  Martínez-­‐Alier,	
  J.	
  et	
  al.,	
  2010.	
  Sustainable	
  de-­‐growth:	
  Mapping	
  the	
  context,	
  criticisms	
  and	
  
future	
  prospects	
  of	
  an	
  emergent	
  paradigm.	
  Ecological	
  Economics,	
  69(9),	
  pp.1741–1747.	
  
¡  Kallis,	
  G.,	
  Kerschner,	
  C.,	
  Martinez-­‐Alier,	
  J.	
  (2012).	
  The	
  economics	
  of	
  degrowth,	
  Ecological	
  
Economics	
  84	
  (2012)	
  172–180	
  	
  
¡  Herman	
  Daly,	
  H.	
  (2008).	
  Towards	
  A	
  Steady-­‐State	
  Economy.	
  Essay	
  for	
  the	
  Sustainable	
  
Development	
  Commission,	
  UK.	
  Download	
  here:	
  http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3941	
  
¡  Bowles	
  S,	
  Park	
  Y.	
  (2005).	
  Emulation,	
  Inequality,	
  and	
  Work	
  Hours:	
  was	
  Thorstein	
  Veblen	
  
Right?	
  The	
  Economic	
  Journal;	
  115	
  (507):	
  F397-­‐F412.	
  
¡  Coote,	
  A.,	
  Franklin,	
  J.	
  and	
  Simms,	
  A.	
  (2010).	
  21	
  Hours:	
  Why	
  a	
  shorter	
  working	
  week	
  can	
  help	
  us	
  
all	
  to	
  flourish	
  in	
  21st	
  century.	
  New	
  Economics	
  Foundation.	
  Download	
  here:	
  
http://www.neweconomics.org/publications/entry/21-­‐hours	
  
¡  Schor,	
  J.	
  (2007).	
  In	
  Defense	
  of	
  Consumer	
  Critique:	
  Revisiting	
  the	
  Consumption	
  Debates	
  of	
  the	
  
Twentieth	
  Century.	
  The	
  ANNALS	
  of	
  the	
  American	
  Academy	
  of	
  Political	
  and	
  Social	
  Science,	
  611;	
  16	
  
Download	
  here:	
  http://www.julietschor.org/academics/selected-­‐publications/	
  
¡  On	
  addressing	
  the	
  social	
  logic	
  of	
  consumerism	
  see	
  also	
  Chapter	
  5,	
  of	
  Jackson,	
  T.	
  (2009).	
  
Prosperity	
  without	
  growth?	
  UK	
  Sustainable	
  Development	
  Commission.	
  Download	
  here:	
  
http://www.sd-­‐commission.org.uk/publications.php?id=914