credible, socially just, ecologically sustainable scenario of continually growing incomes for a world of nine billion people. In this context, simplistic assumptions that capitalismâs propensity for efficiency will allow us to stabilise the climate or protect against resource scarcity are nothing short of delusional.
Those who promote decoupling as an escape route from the dilemma of growth need to take a closer look at the historical evidenceâand at the basic arithmetic of growth. Resource efficiency, renewable energy, and reductions in material throughput all have a vital role to play in ensuring the sustainability of economic activity. But the analysis in this chapter suggests that it is entirely fanciful to suppose that âdeepâ emission and resource cuts can be achieved without confronting the structure of market economies.
Iâm most certainly not dismissing the core idea of decoupling or greater resource efficiency. There are enormous benefits on offer in such a strategy, and we will have to pursue it vigorously. My question at this point is simply, âCan we avoid a systemwide crisis?â and my conclusion is that decoupling and efficiency will not come close to that objective, even though they must be pursued for other reasons.
To summarize where we are at this stage:
⢠We have established that the challenge we face is clear, logical, scientifically based, and broadly accepted.
⢠We have identified that bringing the earthâs economy within its operating limits is a herculean task with the size of our present economy.
⢠The math indicates it is an inconceivable task if we carry on growing the economy even modestly.
⢠It is clear that markets and technology will not be capable of adjusting at the scale required.
⢠We have observed that despite all this evidence, humanity is not yet responding with any substantial action at the global scale, let alone with the massive warlike intervention we clearly need.
⢠The science tells us that the lag in the ecosystem between emissions and impact means there is now great momentum racing through the system toward us.
⢠The lack of response to date indicates that the inertia against change in human society and the global economy is very powerful. Given that the change we need to make is much, much greater than the change weâre already resisting, it is clear this resistance will continue and probably strengthen.
⢠This means any hope that we can mobilize the massive intervention required to avert the crisis is a false hope.
In combination, this evidence all points to one conclusion. We cannot now avoid the crisis of the Great Disruption.
How will this manifest?
If you thought the financial situation in 2008 was a crisis, and if you thought climate change was a cultural, economic, and political challenge, then hold on for the ride. We are about to witness humanity deal with its biggest crisis ever, something that will shake it to the coreâthe end of economic growth.
CHAPTER 5
Addicted to Growth
The global economy is almost five times the size it was half a century ago. If it continues to grow at the same rate the economy will be 80 times that size by the year 2100.
So explains Professor Tim Jackson, who is being joined around the world by a chorus of experts now arguing that we have to question economic growth. It seems so obvious to question growth. Indeed, as argued by economist Kenneth Boulding: âAnyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.â Yet growth is the underlying driver behind all economic policy and a sacred tenet of global capitalism.
The numbers referred to by Jackson and others clearly show we will inevitably see an end to economic growth at some point. While there is debate on the timing and the trigger, it is hard to argue that growth can continue forever. As we showed earlier, dramatically
Those who promote decoupling as an escape route from the dilemma of growth need to take a closer look at the historical evidenceâand at the basic arithmetic of growth. Resource efficiency, renewable energy, and reductions in material throughput all have a vital role to play in ensuring the sustainability of economic activity. But the analysis in this chapter suggests that it is entirely fanciful to suppose that âdeepâ emission and resource cuts can be achieved without confronting the structure of market economies.
Iâm most certainly not dismissing the core idea of decoupling or greater resource efficiency. There are enormous benefits on offer in such a strategy, and we will have to pursue it vigorously. My question at this point is simply, âCan we avoid a systemwide crisis?â and my conclusion is that decoupling and efficiency will not come close to that objective, even though they must be pursued for other reasons.
To summarize where we are at this stage:
⢠We have established that the challenge we face is clear, logical, scientifically based, and broadly accepted.
⢠We have identified that bringing the earthâs economy within its operating limits is a herculean task with the size of our present economy.
⢠The math indicates it is an inconceivable task if we carry on growing the economy even modestly.
⢠It is clear that markets and technology will not be capable of adjusting at the scale required.
⢠We have observed that despite all this evidence, humanity is not yet responding with any substantial action at the global scale, let alone with the massive warlike intervention we clearly need.
⢠The science tells us that the lag in the ecosystem between emissions and impact means there is now great momentum racing through the system toward us.
⢠The lack of response to date indicates that the inertia against change in human society and the global economy is very powerful. Given that the change we need to make is much, much greater than the change weâre already resisting, it is clear this resistance will continue and probably strengthen.
⢠This means any hope that we can mobilize the massive intervention required to avert the crisis is a false hope.
In combination, this evidence all points to one conclusion. We cannot now avoid the crisis of the Great Disruption.
How will this manifest?
If you thought the financial situation in 2008 was a crisis, and if you thought climate change was a cultural, economic, and political challenge, then hold on for the ride. We are about to witness humanity deal with its biggest crisis ever, something that will shake it to the coreâthe end of economic growth.
CHAPTER 5
Addicted to Growth
The global economy is almost five times the size it was half a century ago. If it continues to grow at the same rate the economy will be 80 times that size by the year 2100.
So explains Professor Tim Jackson, who is being joined around the world by a chorus of experts now arguing that we have to question economic growth. It seems so obvious to question growth. Indeed, as argued by economist Kenneth Boulding: âAnyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist.â Yet growth is the underlying driver behind all economic policy and a sacred tenet of global capitalism.
The numbers referred to by Jackson and others clearly show we will inevitably see an end to economic growth at some point. While there is debate on the timing and the trigger, it is hard to argue that growth can continue forever. As we showed earlier, dramatically
Similar Books
