Re-imagining Prosperity - Exploring Economic Degrowth
Whilst capitalist hegemony would make most jump at the idea of promoting economic degrowth as a means to environmental sustainability, the body of literature proposing such implementations in policy has been burgeoning with promise, not only of the possibility of an equitable, habitable future planet but also a reckoning with the ideology that has enabled its ecological destruction.
Economic degrowth does not imply an uncontrolled recession but rather proposes an equitable downscaling of production and consumption centred around human well-being and ecological conservation. Degrowth purports that economic growth is not always beneficial or sustainable, especially whilst considering the shortfalls of the metrics used to measure such growth. The most common interpretation of economic degrowth proposes foregoing a high GDP growth in the pursuit of social welfare and environmental sustainability. GDP has, as a metric of assessing economic health, failed to recognise the contribution of unpaid, unorganised, or voluntary labour as well as the viability of resource extraction conducted in pursuit of economic growth and development.
Global economic growth has failed to substantially succeed in bridging inequality between and within countries, a reflection of the purely capitalistic motives that form its bedrock. Eventual limits exist beyond which the ecological sanctions of production and consumption cannot be avoided. This is especially true for the already industrialised nations of the Global North.
The Degrowth Declaration, which was put forth at the International Degrowth Conference for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity in 2008 proposed the concept of ‘right-sizing’ global and national economies. In countries where the per capita carbon footprint is greater than the sustainable global level, this would imply a reduction of the former whereas in poorer countries, right-sizing would imply a sustainable increase in consumption to ensure a decent life through pathways cognizant of local tradition rather than externally imposed plans. Therefore, the terminology of ‘degrowth’ itself is applicable largely to wealthier parts of the world, more prominently advocating for a re-distribution of wealth and income resources on a global scale.
A systematic review of degrowth literature found that it zooms in on the limits of economic growth due to its high dependency of natural resources, the depletion of which and implications arising thereof fail to be factored in as a cost of such growth. Central to the argument of degrowth is the extent to which the growth-centric argument that has shaped contemporary economics is beneficial for all stakeholders involved. Cognisance is taken of the role of policies, in their existing form, in furthering exploitation and poverty. Relations between the Global North and South occur through prescriptions of power that systematise the suppression of the latter for the purported ‘benefit’ of the former. Degrowth calls for an approach that goes beyond Eurocentric perspectives and engagement with scholars, activists and economists from developing and under-developed nations.
Economic degrowth in itself is not a sufficient condition for alleviating pressure on environmental resources but rather, a systemised approach to regulate the most carbon-intensive sectors of the economy, which are usually seen as the most prominent indicators of growth. GDP growth is not the only marker of progress nor is its degrowth a direct marker of sustainability, however, a correlation can be drawn by tracing the origin of the dependence and intensiveness of industries on natural resources. Higher per capita GDP generally points to higher carbon emissions as well. The effects of involuntary economic contraction, which fall hardest on the proletarian classes cannot be not desirable to the social cause heralded by degrowth which aims to ensure a high quality of life where wealth is distributed equitably among nations.
Alternatives to GDP include the Inclusive Wealth Index, which has been developed by the United Nations Environment Programme and considers the social value of human, produced and natural assets of a country to indicate sustainable development, the Index of Sustainable Economic Welfare, an index that accounts for unpaid labour, social costs, environmental damage and income distribution in addition to GDP and the Genuine Progress Indicator, which recognizes economic activity at the cost of natural and social capital, measuring sustainable economic welfare rather than merely economic activity. However, a lack of consensus as well as pushback with regards to the complexities of quantifying environmental damage have toughened the case for GDP alternatives.
The novel and eclectic nature of degrowth, however, has rendered the concept scattered and lacking a common understanding as to what it actually constitutes, inevitably hindering a transparent exchange of ideas. Normative theories championed by degrowth literature such as wellbeing, justice and anti-utilitarianism have their foundation in the Global South, a fact that often remains omitted. For example, Mahatma Gandhi and his economic advisor, JC Kumarappa were proponents of a decentralized village economy built on ecological lines, believing that its industrial counterpart would destroy the planet. The philosophical tradition of these regions, besides presenting a case for the environment centuries before its Western counterpart could catch up, also points to the colonisation that still pervades ideation and policy formation across spheres. Identifying the Global South as a heterogenous body constituting diverse socio-political experiences, each demanding empirical analysis is also imperative to ensure the objectives of degrowth are met.
The case against unchecked, unquestioned affirmative perceptions to economic growth rests not only on its ecological limits but also on the exploitative relations it makes operative. Climate action cannot play out successfully without an overhaul of the systems that enabled its destruction in the first place. Anthropocenic outcomes will not change is law, policy and the economy follow a script that’s been handed over generations when it no longer holds relevance. Such an endeavour would thereby involve an exploration of alternate economic policies.
Comments