The growth paradigm: History, hegemony, and the contested making of economic growthmanship

Schmelzer, Matthias

doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.07.029

Cited by 134 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The idea of economic growth was termed the most important conceptual innovation of the 20th century (McNeill 2000) and it has become synonymous with limitless societal progress and improved wellbeing for many politicians and large parts of the general public (Schmelzer 2015(Schmelzer , 2016. While criticism of GDP as the central policy indicator and its growth as a political achievement is mounting (Costanza et al 2014, Hickel and Kallis 2019, Hoekstra 2019, Jackson and Victor 2019, Parrique et al 2019, the growth imperatives for firms and corporations and, by extension, for their political champions, give it staying power in the actions of business managers and policymakers.…”

Section: Conclusion: Status Quo For Decoupling Studies and The Way Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part I: bibliometric and conceptual mapping

Wiedenhofer

Virág

Kalt

et al. 2020

Environ. Res. Lett.

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As long as economic growth is a major political goal, decoupling growth from resource use and emissions is a prerequisite for a sustainable net-zero emissions future. However, empirical evidence for absolute decoupling, i.e. decreasing resource use and emissions at the required scale despite continued economic growth, is scarce and scattered across different research streams. In this two-part systematic review, we assess how and to what extent decoupling has been observed and what can be learnt for addressing the sustainability and climate crisis. Based on a transparent approach, we systematically identify and screen more than 11 500 scientific papers, eventually analyzing full texts of 835 empirical studies on the relationship between economic growth (GDP), resource use (materials and energy) and greenhouse gas emissions. Part I of the review examines how decoupling has been investigated across three research streams: energy, materials and energy, and emissions. Part II synthesizes the empirical evidence and policy implications (Haberl et al 2020 Environ. Res. Lett. 15 065003). In part I, we examine the topical, temporal and geographical scopes, methods of analysis, institutional networks and prevalent conceptual angles. We find that in this rapidly growing literature, the vast majority of studies-decomposition, 'causality' and Environmental Kuznets Curve analysis-approach the topic from a statistical-econometric point of view, while hardly acknowledging thermodynamic principles on the role of energy and materials for socio-economic activities. A potentially fundamental incompatibility between economic growth and systemic societal changes to address the climate crisis is rarely considered. We conclude that the existing wealth of empirical evidence merits braver conceptual advances than we have seen thus far. Future work should focus on comprehensive multi-indicator long-term analyses, conceptually grounded on the fundamental biophysical basis of socio-economic activities, incorporating the role of global supply chains as well as the wider societal role and preconditions of economic growth.

show abstract

Section: Conclusion: Status Quo For Decoupling Studies and The Way Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part I: bibliometric and conceptual mapping

Wiedenhofer

Virág

Kalt

et al. 2020

Environ. Res. Lett.

128

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Two of the main drivers of both poverty reduction and emission levels have been identified as economic growth and inequality, both of which are central policy issues (Freistein and Mahlert 2016;Schmelzer 2015). Overall, empirical evidence shows that, over the past two centuries, economic development has resulted in a sharp decrease in absolute poverty worldwide.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Trade-off Between Poverty Reduction and Carbon Emissions, and the Role of Economic Growth and Inequality: An Empirical Cross-Country Analysis Using a Novel Indicator

Malerba

2020

Soc Indic Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Is it possible for countries to eradicate poverty while also meeting environmental goals? Despite the passage of international agreements calling for these issues to be addressed simultaneously, little is known about the direct relationship between them. This study addresses this gap by proposing a new and composite indicator that integrates measures for both poverty and environmental outcomes (carbon emissions) into a single variable, the carbon intensity of poverty reduction (CIPR). This variable defines the trade-off between the proportional changes of emissions per capita and of the share of the population above the poverty line. In parallel an analytic framework is developed to formulate propositions concerning the possible effects of growth and inequality on the CIPR. The propositions are tested empirically using data from 135 countries across a 30-year time period . The findings confirm that the carbon intensity of poverty reduction is heterogeneous across countries. This heterogeneity is partly explained by economic growth, which is found to have a negative effect on the CIPR up to a certain income level, defined here as a "turning point". Above that turning point, economic growth increases the CIPR. By contrast, inequality reduction is shown to have a significant negative effect on the CIPR. This study contributes to the literature on sustainable development by analytically and quantitatively linking its three dimensions (social, economic and environmental) and by employing a composite indicator that directly measures the trade-off between poverty reduction and emission levels across countries.

show abstract

“…Scholars in different fields have criticized this as a lopsided and unreflecting clinging to growth, but are far from being unanimous whether this is caused 'only' by political will or whether systemic 'growth imperatives' exist (Daly, 1973;Kallis, 2011;Schmelzer, 2015). For the question 'Why can't we stop clinging to growth?'…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An offer you can't refuse: Enhancing personal productivity through ‘efficiency consumption’

Siemoneit¹

2019

Technology in Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte.Abstract: Worldwide, economic growth is a prominent political goal, despite its severe conflicts with ecological sustainability. Contributing to the debate on economic 'growth imperatives', this article explores the thesis that firms and consumers both frequently acquire goods that increase their efficiency (productivity). For firms, efficiency is accepted as a main investment motive, but for consumers it is usually framed as convenience, ease, or comfort. Via social diffusion processes consumption goods that can save time and costs are transformed from a welcome expansion of possibilities into a social imperative whose noncompliance over time also has economic drawbacks. Positive feedback mechanisms not only lead to an acceleration of private life but favor ever more efficient industry and trade structures on the supply side, contributing to a redistribution of incomes and revenues. Eventually a comprehensive consumption pattern leads to a new 'normality' and makes the renunciation of consumption goods like cars, computers or smartphones literally impossible. Both microeconomics and consumption sociology usually assume fundamental differences of motivations, goals and structural overall conditions for firms and consumers. Some reasons for this scholarly asymmetry are discussed and a more symmetrical consumption model is proposed. As a political dimension the increasing resource use of this quest for efficiency is addressed.Licence: Creative-Commons CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0.Herausgeber / Publisher: ZOE. Institut für zukunftsfähige Ökonomien e. V., Thomas-Mann-Straße 36, 53111 Bonn. info@zoe-institut.de · www.zoe-institut.de · ISSN 2627-9436. ZOE Diskussionspapiere präsentieren wirtschafts-und sozialwissenschaftliche Analysen von Potentialen und Hemmnissen für eine zukunftsfähige Wirtschaftsordnung. ZOE discussion papers present economic and socio-scientific analyses of potentials and barriers for a future-fit economic system.

show abstract

The growth paradigm: History, hegemony, and the contested making of economic growthmanship

Cited by 134 publications

References 14 publications

A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part I: bibliometric and conceptual mapping

A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part I: bibliometric and conceptual mapping

The Trade-off Between Poverty Reduction and Carbon Emissions, and the Role of Economic Growth and Inequality: An Empirical Cross-Country Analysis Using a Novel Indicator

An offer you can't refuse: Enhancing personal productivity through ‘efficiency consumption’

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About