Can we live within environmental limits and still reduce poverty? Degrowth or decoupling?

A debate curated by Simon Maxwell Economic growth has resulted in a twin crisis of climate change and environmental breakdown, while millions still live poverty, third crisis. Is it possible to resolve all three, or are there trade-offs? Can the crises be tackled social policies within logic existing economic system, is new paradigm required that rejects GDP as an objective? This brings together two discussants three rounds conversation, propose, test, challenge each other’s ideas. The protagonists are: Jason Hickel Visiting Senior Fellow at International Inequalities Institute London School Economics, Professor for Environmental Science & Technology, Autonomous University Barcelona. His most recent books divide: brief guide global inequality its solutions (Penguin, 2017), Less more: How degrowth will save world 2020). Stéphane Hallegatte lead economist with Climate Change Group World Bank. include Green economy crisis: 30 proposals more sustainable France (Cairn, 2012) Natural disasters change: An perspective (Springer, 2014). He also co-led Bank reports Inclusive green growth: pathway development (2012) Decarbonizing (2015). I am pleased participate this exchange Stéphane. question how solve ecological breakdown same time improving lives achieving human goals one pressing our time. good news economics post-growth scholarship11 Post-growth research proposes that, right policies, economies can kept stable support strong outcomes without (Post-growth, 2021). points toward compelling answers. Let me open making four observations. presently overshooting several critical planetary boundaries—not only terms change, but land-use biogeochemical flows, species extinction (Rockström et al., 2009; Steffen 2015), risks tipping feedback loops increasing concern (Lenton 2019; 2018). Contrary what implied general narrative Anthropocene, not being caused beings such, rather system organized around, dependent on, ever-increasing levels commodity production consumption, which we gloss “growth.” relationship between well established empirical record. Gross domestic product (GDP) tightly coupled resource use (Wiedmann, 2015; see Figure 1), turn damage biodiversity loss (Steinmann 2017). Global rise dramatically over past half century, reaching 100 billion metric tons per year 2020—roughly double industrial ecologists consider maximum boundary level (Bringezu, 2015). happened despite improvements material efficiency dramatic shift services decades. Source: United Nations Resource Panel (UN IRP) (n.d.) Crucially, overshoot driven almost entirely high-income countries. High-income countries consume on average 28 resources person (Figure 2); times capita and, below, significantly excess well-being. vast majority low- middle-income countries, contrast, remain levels. Moreover, excesses rich maintained large net appropriation from South (Dorninger means impact consumption core part offshored periphery. true when comes emissions: North responsible 92% emissions (Hickel, 2020b), impacts disproportionately affect South. If attentive colonial dimensions crisis, missing point. Material Footprint (tons capita) Notes: horizontal black line indicates threshold 2008 2015) UN IRP In light data, dominant response economists policy-makers been say should continue press accelerator seek make “green.” Unfortunately, little grounding. permanent decoupling (absolute relative) impossible … because gains ultimately governed physical limits It therefore misleading develop growth-oriented policy around expectation possible. What about emissions? Unlike use, absolute achieved replacing fossil fuels renewable energy, already happening some But unlikely decarbonization accomplished fast enough stay under 1.5 °C 2 if grow usual rates. problem energy demand, rising demand challenging decarbonize short have left (Hickel Kallis, 2020; Schröder Storm, creates something bind, illustrated Intergovernmental (IPCC). Existing mitigation scenarios start assumption nations pursue rest regardless they become. To reconcile Paris Agreement goals, gamble technological change. Most rely speculative negative technologies get us out trouble, particularly bioenergy carbon capture storage (BECCS), direct air capture. Others instead productivity drive unprecedented use. scientists questioned both these approaches Brockway Scaling BECCS raises serious concerns land water depletion, deforestation, loss, constraints food supply (Creutzig 2021); capture, part, would require up 70% today’s total output (Realmonte 2019). main schemes fail, locked into hothouse trajectory escape (Fuss 2014; Smith 2016; van Vuuren As decoupling, rates assumed high-productivity supported literature (Haberl 2020), scholarship economy, even optimistic assumptions (Brockway 2021; Ward 2016). short, data clear makes difficult achieve objectives. evidence, call fundamentally different approach. do need further growth, indeed abandon growthism reorganize provisioning needs well-being, reducing guaranteeing universal access public goods services. (Jackson, liberate societies scale down unnecessary forms proposed (Demaria 2013; Kallis Degrowth planned reduction aggregate designed bring back balance living safe, just equitable way. approach powerful mitigation, less easier transition renewables (e.g., Keyßer Lenzen Kuhnhenn added benefit damages associated does look like practice? Instead assuming sectors grow, time, decide (sectors value, services, transportation, etc.), industries ecologically destructive socially necessary, shrink: fuels, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), fashion, advertising, obsolescence, McMansions,22 Large houses built upper middle classes suburbs exurbs US cities (McMansion, beef, personal vehicles, private jets, waste, cruise ships, military–industrial complex, etc. people regard sensible, except sticking point: employment? demonstrates full employment shortening working week. requires labour, distribute necessary work evenly, enjoying free care conviviality. ensure livelihoods, national income fairly, wages progressive taxation. egalitarian distribution wealth allow improve people’s having plunder planet more. Of course, scaling likely GDP. might sound troubling, commonly assume progress. after certain threshold, long surpassed, correlation indicators breaks down. For instance, Spain outperforms States (including life expectancy five years longer), 55% capita. Portugal 65% less. There dozens similar examples 2020a). proxy was never intended Stiglitz 2010); rather, measure market price production. Unsurprisingly, no causal outcomes. actually matters well-being long, healthy lives: healthcare education, affordable housing, transport, nutritious food, so on. Societies focus things able high modest Here news: empirically could deliver all, including high-quality healthcare, 80% than (Lettenmeier Millward-Hopkins other words, organize livelihoods needs, elite capital accumulation, boundaries rapid renewables, °C. poses prevailing narratives international development. According discourse, poor regarded “problem,” held models. story problematic reasons. First, characterizes universalizable. tomorrow whole consumed level, triple. compatible habitable planet. Today’s constitute model development; contrary, problem. Excess throughput actively harms developing alone driving insecurity, conflict, mass displacement regions, Central America, Middle East, Africa, Asia. Human collapsing biosphere. another dimension mentioned above relies figures staggering: 10.1 embodied raw materials, 800 million hectares land, equivalent 3.7 barrels oil, 379 hours labour—per Rich leverage their geopolitical power appropriate quantities labour service consumerism accumulation: otherwise mobilized meeting local Sullivan ecology, then. rooted anti-colonial principles. scholars align movements calling end imperial patterns underpin North, order release grip extractivism future breakdown. is, decolonization servicing North. Dependency theorists pointed “catch-up” predicated polarized where depends exploitation claim underscored imperialism. alternative radical convergence: decline boundaries, increase meet converging consistent stability welfare. tenable 21st century (Ajl, significant strategy. Over decades, extraction, exports, interests foreign financiers, structural adjustment programmes imposed Monetary Fund deregulated markets, depressed wages, cut spending. failed meaningful Instead, goal directly: better building sovereign capacity focused freedom protective tariffs, subsidies, controls, nationalization, spending, fiscal monetary policy. history championed leaders Franz Fanon, Gandhi, Patrice Lumumba, Salvador Allende, Julius Nyerere, Thomas Sankara, others who sought sovereignty justice, before vision dismantled Washington Consensus. Theirs insights century. Not ago Europe, many children worked factories. Their were harsh: often terrible conditions, go school, ended physically broken adulthood. When pressure grew ban child school mandatory, thought bad idea: drop, decline, drop families poverty (Gubin, 2002). made mandatory anyway. After period, healthier, happier, better-educated adults contribute much exhausted, predecessors. end, trade-off educating growing income: happier children.33 Economists notice schools across offer lunches. Echoing those critics today hear objections protecting environment inevitably reduce income. investing yield outcome children, richer? Could protection continued accelerated growth? text, discuss questions, Jason’s article great book, thoroughly recommend.44 Many thanks inviting discussion, Lucy Southwood skilfully editing my manuscript. consensus degradation cannot current pace, urgent action losses avoid catastrophic issues may interesting add. agree unsustainable lifestyles richest must there. Note, however, share world’s population fast, happens critical. And footprint needed everywhere. We poorest basic decent life. Today, 2.8 cook traditional fuels—which kills millions, especially through indoor pollution—and 2.4 improved sanitation. Access health, mobility far below considered acceptable Delivering increased priority (Rao, lower footprints higher standards? thinks everything trade-off: you extract (labour nature), output. think nature contributors—with thriving more—then trade-offs last duration period. education generalized, lot said short-term costs, nobody imagined activity run.55 However, had families, lunches interventions implemented family budgets. take obvious synergies priorities long-term goals. world, energy—like solar wind—is now cheaper using scalability provide electricity remote villages, benefits ranging learning reduced gender (Zhang, Improving diets help fight epidemics non-communicable diseases such obesity diabetes high- stop emissions. Landscape watershed management (or restoration) investments revive ecosystems farmers’ incomes (World Bank, n.d.). Actions cope recover COVID-19 pandemic opportunity seize opportunities greener recovery (Hammer Hallegatte, Even taxing emissions—arguably popular policy—can inequality. revenues simply redistributed equally capita, 60 percent receive benefits, top 20 pay (Fay evading tax trickier cheating corporate taxes, rich, fairer ensuring everybody pays fair share. doubt moving three-ton car becomes unaffordable. combine standards footprints, structure produce techniques, reduced. mean decline. want clear. any constraints. very type dedicated maintain pressure. Just break factories, fact grown law nature. initially brought increasingly polluted water, places earth cleanest water. reason happen automatically. clean rules regulations, richer. protect environment, do. Does disagree Jason? this. his defines “degrowth,” decrease GDP, “reducing use.” definition. Protecting necessarily Indeed, definition, uncontroversial, objects throughput. fact, case, indistinguishable growth. historically correlated (Dollar 2013). Concerns slowing hurt understandable. term effect struggle afford—a roof nice neighbourhood, kids, health care—not goods. So, designing target harder, poorest. scarcity, first watering lawn mansion, small farmers irrigating crops? thing cap extraction nature, quite design way efficient, fair, politically feasible. Options firms recycling products along entire lifetime; external costs (from pumping groundwater emissions) regulated directly accounted fee; reforming systems incentivize wasteful natural consumption; investors escaping costs. Countries translate concepts regulations. community major role play—in helping implement co-ordinating goods, hotspots system. noted Dasgupta Review, individuals play also: consume, work, importantly, vote (Dasgupta, One synergy Eradicating declining redistribution.77 exception, redistribution (see Ravallion, 2009). study, Gini Index (a used inequality) 1% effective percentage point (Lakner Reducing increases keeping (Chancel, attractive reasons doing so. discusses inequalities evidence (Ostry democratic processes threatened excessive differences, rebalancing away fully justified. New ideas proposed, taxes income, seriously, toolbox reaches limits. considerations add so, massive element urgency. grateful Stéphane’s comments, glad lot. protection; equality key coherent So far, good. Now, let parse differ. clarify position departs mainstream whether given My argument pursuing task difficult, entails objective own sake, grounds ecology generate know outcomes, why it? metric, frame colleagues put article, Deal (Mastini says aggressive future. Perhaps. But, opening statement, scenarios, narratives. Dittrich al. tested scenario follow best practice efficiency, another. result indicated leads They found relative decoupling. Schandl (2016) USD 236 ton, plus rate improvement 1.5% unprecedented, unproven, 4.5% year). Again, Two 2017 Environment Programme (UNEP) 573, tax, innovation (Bringezu 2017; Ekins Once again, energy. find highly technology “GDP plausibly decoupled question, scientific interesting, false analogy. Ending enabled more, productive, labour. extend analogy introduce somehow enable doe