Showing posts with label overconsumption. Show all posts
Showing posts with label overconsumption. Show all posts

Tuesday, 16 April 2013

Overconsumption

Energy consumption per capita per country in 2001
CO2 emission per capita per year per country pre-2006
Overconsumption is a situation where resource use has outpaced the sustainable capacity of the ecosystem. A prolonged pattern of overconsumption leads to inevitable environmental degradation and the eventual loss of resource bases. Generally the discussion of overconsumption parallels that of overpopulation; that is the more people, the more consumption of raw materials to sustain their lives. Currently, the developed nations of the world consume at a rate of 32, while the rest of the developing worlds’ 5.5 billion people consume at a rate closer to 1."[1]
The theory was coined to augment the discussion of overpopulation, which reflects issues of carrying capacity without taking into account per capita consumption, by which developing nations are evaluated to consume more than their land can support. Green parties and the ecology movement often argue that consumption per person, or ecological footprint, is typically lower in poor than in rich nations.

Contents


[edit] Causes

[edit] Consumerism

The human mind is extremely malleable, and consumers begin to be created from birth. Especially in America, children delight at the sight of a new toy. They spend many hours of their lives watching cartoons, which include consecutive toy commercials in between that easily attract such fragile and innocent minds. These commercials are carefully created by the study of consumer behavior; "The study of individuals, groups, or organizations and the processes they use to select, secure, use, and dispose of products, services, experiences, or ideas to satisfy needs and the impacts that these processes have on the consumer and society." Products are displayed as looking fun, cool, and a symbol of happiness. They quickly grow out of these toys, or break them. Those toys go into the garbage and into a landfill, among millions upon millions of other toys. And every year, millions of these children partake in Christmas; another huge consumer factor, which for many signifies not just religious ceremony, but more prominently in American culture, love for each other based on giving material things.[2]

[edit] Planned Obsolescence

Planned obsolescence is, by definition: "a method of stimulating consumer demand by designing products that wear out or become outmoded after limited use." This is a key factor of over consumption. While we have the capabilities, resources, and technology to create products that could last one a lifetime, producers do not practice this efficient idea because if they did, they would generate little profit and crumble under the competitive free market system. For Example, Apple releases a new iPhone every year, each being slightly improved than the last. Millions of people buy new and dispose of their old iPhones, once again contributing to global material pollution.[3]

[edit] The Monetary System

[edit] Effects

A fundamental effect of overconsumption is a reduction in the planet's carrying capacity. Excessive unsustainable consumption will exceed the long term carrying capacity of its environment (ecological overshoot) and subsequent resource depletion, environmental degradation and reduced ecological health.
The scale of modern life's overconsumption has enabled an overclass to exist, displaying affluenza and obesity. However once again both of these claims are controversial with the latter being correlated to other factors more so than over-consumption.
In the long term these effects can lead to increased conflict over dwindling resources [4] and in the worst case a Malthusian catastrophe. Lester Brown of the Earth Policy Institute, has said: "It would take 1.5 Earths to sustain our present level of consumption. Environmentally, the world is in an overshoot mode."[5]

[edit] Economic growth

The Worldwatch Institute said China and India, with their booming economies, along with the United States, are the three planetary forces that are shaping the global biosphere.[6] The State of the World 2006 report said the two countries' high economic growth exposed the reality of severe pollution. The report states that
The world's ecological capacity is simply insufficient to satisfy the ambitions of China, India, Japan, Europe and the United States as well as the aspirations of the rest of the world in a sustainable way,

[edit] Footprint

The idea of overconsumption is also strongly tied to the idea of an ecological footprint. The term “ecological footprint” refers to the “resource accounting framework for measuring human demand on the biosphere.” A study by Mathis Wackernagel has shown that the global ecological footprint was in overshoot by .4 global hectares per person, or roughly 23%.[7] Of these developing countries, China presents the largest threat. Currently, China is roughly 11 times lower in per capita footprint, yet has a population that is more than four times the size of the USA. It is estimated that if China developed to the level of the United States that world consumption rates would roughly double.[1]

[edit] The Trash Vortex

The North Pacific Garbage Patch, also known as the trash vortex, is an area that resides in the North Pacific Ocean that is approximately the size of Texas. The patch came about by means of the rotational oceanic current of the North Pacific Gyre, which over time has trapped tons of plastic, chemicals, and other waste that disrupt and end the lives of marine wildlife constantly.

[edit] Counteractions

The most obvious solution to the issue of overconsumption is to simply slow the rate at which materials are becoming depleted. To consume less is to watch these economies suffer. Instead, countries must look to curb consumption rates while allowing for new industries, such as renewable energy and recycling technologies, to flourish and deflect some of the economic burden. A fundamental shift in the global economy may be necessary in order to account for the current change that is taking place or that will need to take place. Movements and lifestyle choices related to stopping overconsumption include: anti-consumerism, freeganism, green economics, ecological economics, degrowth, frugality, downshifting, simple living and thrifting.

[edit] The Venus Project

The Venus Project is a potentially world changing idea created by Jacque Fresco.[citation needed] It is seen by some to be one of the most peaceful ways our society could operate as a whole. This idea is based on a high technology, resource based economy that would enrich everyone's lives because there would be no monetary system, means of bartering, or trading for goods. Therefore, production would be based solely on the needs of the human race. Technology would flourish and have no boundaries caused by the expense that money currently puts upon the creation of it. Over consumption would no longer be a worry in this system; which seems odd knowing that everything is priceless. Planned obsolescence would become obsolete in a resource based economy, because the technology is available to create lasting products, not continuous duplicates. Advanced transportation systems could be created as well; this would eliminate the need for everyone to own their own car because transportation would be a public service. Resources available, as well as the demand for them, could be tracked on a global scale allowing for equilibrium of production and distribution. The Venus Project would heighten all aspects of life, and the documentary Zeitgeist: The Movie as well as it's sequels Zeitgeist: Addendum and Zeitgeist: Moving Forward, thoroughly describe the current state of our planet and how Fresco's plan would change it.

[edit] Overconsumption in the USA

The United States uses double the resources that it produces, pulling from other countries to produce the goods for its population to consume. The goods are not just simple perishables like food, energy, and light building materials. The United States also consumes the most clothing items, metals, plastics, electronics, and even health hazardous chemicals. Here are a few examples of over consumption in the United States; According to Environmental Defense, “Americans own 30% of the world’s vehicles, but emit nearly half of the world’s vehicle CO2 emissions. We drive more and our cars are generally less efficient.”[8] Another interesting example is with the most abundant resource on earth. “The average North American uses 400 liters of water every day. The average person in the developing world uses 10 liters of water every day for their drinking, washing and cooking.”[9]

[edit] See also


[edit] References

  1. ^ a b Diamond, Jared: (2008-01-02). "What's Your Consumption Factor?" The New York Times
  2. ^ [1]
  3. ^ [2]
  4. ^ Effects of Over-Consumption and Increasing Populations. 26 September 2001. Retrieved on 19 June 2007
  5. ^ Brown, L. R. (2011). World on the Edge. Earth Policy Institute. Norton. p. 7. ISBN 987-0-393-08029-2 Check |isbn= value (help). 
  6. ^ Renner, Michael (January 2006). "Chapter 1: China, India, and the New World Order". State of the world 2005: A Worldwatch Institute Report on progress toward a sustainable society.. New York: W.W. Norton. ISBN 0-393-32666-7. OCLC 57470324. Retrieved 2009-09-14. 
  7. ^ Wackernagel, Mathis; Russ, Thomas (ed.) (2008). "Ecological footprint." In: Encyclopedia of Earth. Eds. Cutler J. Cleveland (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Information Coalition, National Council for Science and the Environment). [First published in the Encyclopedia of Earth January 23, 2007; Last revised November 18, 2008; Retrieved April 6, 2010]
  8. ^ “The true cost of America’s love affair with the car.” Environmental Defense Magazine. Vol. 73 No. 5
  9. ^ “Water Use.” Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council. (2011-11-22).

[edit] External links


Friday, 30 November 2012

The De-Growth Movement


Pro-degrowth graffiti on the July Column in the Place de la Bastille in Paris during a protest against the First Employment Contract, March 28, 2006
Degrowth (in French: décroissance,[1] in Spanish: decrecimiento, in Italian: decrescita) is a political, economic, and social movement based on ecological economics, anti-consumerist and anti-capitalist ideas. Degrowth thinkers and activists advocate for the downscaling of production and consumption—the contraction of economies—as overconsumption lies at the root of long term environmental issues and social inequalities. Key to the concept of degrowth is that reducing consumption does not require individual martyring and a decrease in well-being.[2] Rather, 'degrowthists' aim to maximize happiness and well-being through non-consumptive means—sharing work, consuming less, while devoting more time to art, music, family, culture and community.[3]

Contents

[hide]

[edit] Background

Anti-consumerism
Ideas and theory
Spectacle ·Degrowth ·Culture jamming ·Corporate crime ·Media bias ·Buy Nothing Day ·Alternative culture ·Simple living ·Do it yourself ·Advanced capitalism ·Microgeneration ·Autonomous building ·Commodity fetishism ·Consumer capitalism ·Cultural hegemony ·Conspicuous consumption ·Ethical consumerism ·Social democracy ·Progressivism
Related social movements
Punk ·Social anarchism ·Libertarian Socialism · Alter-globalization ·Anti-globalization movement ·Environmentalism ·Situationist International ·Diggers ·Postmodernism ·Occupy Wall Street
Popular works
Society of the Spectacle (book) ·Society of the Spectacle (film) ·Evasion ·No Logo ·The Corporation ·Affluenza ·Escape from Affluenza ·The Theory of the Leisure Class ·Fight Club (novel) ·Fight Club (film) ·Steal This Book ·Surplus: Terrorized into Being Consumers ·Profit over People: Neoliberalism and Global Order ·So, What's Your Price? ·What Would Jesus Buy? ·The Atlantic · The Cultural Creatives
Persons and organizations
Adbusters ·Freecycle ·Slavoj Žižek ·Ralph Nader ·Green party ·John Zerzan ·Noam Chomsky ·Ron English ·Naomi Klein ·CrimethInc. ·Thorstein Veblen ·Hugo Chávez ·Abbie Hoffman ·Guy Debord ·Michael Moore ·José Bové ·Michel Foucault ·RTMark ·Rage Against the Machine ·Jello Biafra ·The Yes Men ·Merce & Ruben ·Democracy Now ·Reverend Billy ·Vandana Shiva ·Bill Hicks ·Columnanegra · Anomie Belle ·Occupy Wall Street ·Thom Yorke ·Kurt Cobain · Alex Jones (radio host) · Webster Tarpley · David Icke · George Noory
Related subjects
Advertising ·Capitalism ·Economic problems ·Left-wing politics ·Sweatshops ·Anti-consumerists ·Social movements
The movement arose from concerns over the perceived consequences of the productivism associated with industrialist societies (whether capitalist or socialist):
  • The reduced availability of energy sources (see peak oil)
  • The declining quality of the environment (see global warming, pollution)
  • The decline in the health of flora and fauna, including humans themselves
  • The ever-expanding use of resources by first-world countries to satisfy lifestyles that consume more food and energy, and produce greater waste, at the expense of the third world (see neocolonialism)

[edit] Resource depletion

As economies grow, the need for resources grows accordingly. There is a fixed supply of non-renewable resources, such as petroleum (oil), and these resources will inevitably be depleted. Renewable resources can also be depleted if extracted at unsustainable rates over extended periods. For example, this has occurred with caviar production in the Caspian Sea.[4] There is much concern as to how growing demand for these resources will be met as supplies decrease. Many people look to technology to develop replacements for depleted resources. For example, some are looking to biofuels to meet the demand gap after peak oil. However, others have argued that none of the alternatives could effectively replace versatility and portability of oil.[5]
Proponents of degrowth argue that decreasing demand is the only way of permanently closing the demand gap. For renewable resources, demand, and therefore production, must also be brought down to levels that prevent depletion and are environmentally healthy. Moving toward a society that is not dependent on oil is seen as essential to avoiding societal collapse when non-renewable resources are depleted.[6] "But degrowth is not just a quantitative question of doing less of the same, it is also and, more fundamentally, about a paradigmatic re-ordering of values, in particular the (re)affirmation of social and ecological values and a (re)politicisation of the economy".[7]

[edit] Ecological footprint

The ecological footprint is a measure of human demand on the Earth's ecosystems. It compares human demand with planet Earth's ecological capacity to regenerate. It represents the amount of biologically productive land and sea area needed to regenerate the resources a human population consumes and to absorb and render harmless the corresponding waste.
According to a 2005 Global Footprint Network report,[8] inhabitants of high-income countries live off of 6.4 global hectares (gHa), while those from low-income countries live off of a single gHa. For example, while each inhabitant of Bangladesh lives off of what they produce from 0.56 gHa, a North American requires 12.5 gHa. Each inhabitant of North America uses 22.3 times as much land as a Bangladeshi. Of the 12.5 hectares used by the North American, 5.5 is located in the United States, and the rest is found in foreign countries.[8] According to the same report, the average number of global hectares per person was 2.1, while current consumption levels have reached 2.7 hectares per person.
In order for the world's population to attain the living standards typical of European countries, the resources of between three and eight planet Earths would be required.[citation needed] In order for world economic equality to be achieved with the current available resources, rich countries would have to reduce their standard of living through degrowth.[citation needed] The eventual reduction of all available resources would lead to a forced reduction in consumption. Controlled reduction of consumption would reduce the trauma of this change.[citation needed]

[edit] Degrowth and Sustainable Development

Degrowth thought is in opposition to all forms of productivist economics. It is, thus, also opposed to sustainable development. While the concern for sustainability does not contradict degrowth, sustainable development is rooted in mainstream development ideas that aim to increase capitalist growth and consumption. Degrowth therefore sees sustainable development as an oxymoron,[9] as any development based on growth in a finite and environmentally stressed world is seen as inherently unsustainable. Since current levels of consumption exceed the Earth's ability to regenerate these resources, economic growth will lead to their exhaustion.[citation needed] Those in favor of sustainable development argue that continued economic growth is possible if consumption of energy and resources is reduced.
Furthermore, growth-based development has been shown to be more effective in expanding social inequality, concentrating wealth in the hands of a few, than in actually generating more wealth and increasing living standards.[10][11] Critics of degrowth argue that a slowing of economic growth would result in increased unemployment and increase poverty. Many who understand the devastating environmental consequences of growth still advocate for economic growth in the South, even if not in the North. But, a slowing of economic growth would fail to deliver the benefits of degrowth—self-sufficiency, material responsibility—and would indeed lead to decreased employment. Rather, degrowth proponents advocate for a complete abandonment of the current (growth) economic system, suggesting that relocalizating and abandoning the global economy in the Global South would allow people of the South to become more self-sufficient and would end the overconsumption and exploitation of Southern resources by the North.[12]

[edit] "The Rebound Effect"

Technologies designed to reduce resource use and improve efficiency are often touted as sustainable or green solutions. However, degrowth warns about these technological advances due to the "rebound effect".[13] This concept is based on observations that when a less resource-exhaustive technology is introduced, behaviour surrounding the use of that technology will change and consumption of that technology will increase and offset any potential resource savings.[14] In light of the rebound effect, proponents of degrowth hold that the only effective 'sustainable' solutions must involve a complete rejection of the growth paradigm and a move toward a degrowth paradigm.

[edit] Origins of the movement

The contemporary degrowth movement can trace its roots back to the anti-industrialist trends of the 19th century, developed in Great Britain by John Ruskin, William Morris and the Arts and Crafts Movement (1819–1900), in the United States by Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862), and in Russia by Leo Tolstoy (1828–1911).
The concept of "degrowth" proper appeared during the 1970s, proposed by the Club of Rome think tank and intellectuals such as Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, Jean Baudrillard, André Gorz, Edward Goldsmith and Ivan Illich, whose ideas reflect those of earlier thinkers, such as the economist E. J. Mishan,[15] the industrial historian Tom Rolt,[16] and the radical socialist Tony Turner. The writings of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi also contain similar philosophies, particularly regarding his support of voluntary simplicity.
More generally, degrowth movements draw on the values of humanism, enlightenment, anthropology and human rights.

[edit] The Club of Rome reports

In 1968, the Club of Rome, a think tank headquartered in Winterthur, Switzerland, asked researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for a report on practical solutions to problems of global concern. The report, called The Limits to Growth, published in 1972, became the first important study that indicated the ecological perils of the unprecedented economic growth the world was experiencing at the time.
The reports (also known as the Meadows Reports) are not strictly the founding texts of the movement, as they only advise zero growth, and have also been used to support the sustainable development movement. Still, they are considered the first official studies explicitly presenting economic growth as a key reason for the increase in global environmental problems such as pollution, shortage of raw materials, and the destruction of ecosystems. A second report was published in 1974, and together with the first, drew considerable attention to the topic.

[edit] Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen's thesis

The Romanian economist Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen is considered the creator of degrowth,[dubious ] and its main theoretician.[17] In 1971, he published a book called The Entropy Law and the Economic Process, in which he noted that the neoclassical economic model did not take into account the second law of thermodynamics, by not accounting for the degradation of energy and matter (i.e. increase in entropy). He associated every economic activity with an increase in entropy, whose increase implied the loss of useful resources. When a selection of his articles was translated into French in 1979 under the title Demain la décroissance ("tomorrow, degrowth"), it spurred the creation of the movement in France.

[edit] Serge Latouche

Serge Latouche, a professor of economics at the Paris-Sud 11 University, has noted that:
If you try to measure the reduction in the rate of growth by taking into account damages caused to the environment and its consequences on our natural and cultural patrimony, you will generally obtain a result of zero or even negative growth. In 1991, the United States spent 115 billion dollars, or 2.1% of the GDP on the protection of the environment. The Clean Air Act increased this cost by 45 or 55 million dollars per year. [...] The World Resources Institute tried to measure the rate of the growth taking into account the punishment exerted on the natural capital of the world, with an eye towards sustainable development. For Indonesia, it found that the rate of growth between 1971 and 1984 would be reduced from 7.1 to 4% annually, and that was by taking only three variables into consideration: deforestation, the reduction in the reserves of oil and natural gas, and soil erosion.
[18][19]

[edit] Schumacher and Buddhist Economics

E. F. Schumacher's 1973 book Small is Beautiful predates a unified degrowth movement, but nonetheless serves as an important basis for degrowth ideas. In this book he critiques the neo-liberal model of economic development, noting the absurdity of increasing "standard of living", which is based solely on consumption, as the primary goal of economic activity and development. Instead, under what he refers to as buddhist economics, we should aim to maximize well-being while minimizing consumption.[20]

[edit] Ecological and social issues

In January 1972 Edward Goldsmith and Robert Prescott-Allen—editors of The Ecologist journal—published the Blueprint for Survival, which called for a radical programme of decentralisation and de-industrialisation to prevent what the authors referred to as "the breakdown of society and the irreversible disruption of the life-support systems on this planet". Signed by leading scientists of the day, the Blueprint went on to inspire the establishment of environmentalist political parties around the world.

[edit] Degrowth movement

[edit] 'Buy Nothing Day'

Buy Nothing Day occurs on the Friday following Thanksgiving Day in the United States. This is the unofficial first day of the Holiday shopping season. Typically retail stores offer goods for dramatically reduced prices, prompting consumers to buy more. Buy Nothing Day is a rejection of this unabashed consumption.

[edit] Conferences

The movement has also included conferences in Paris,[21] Barcelona,[22] and Vancouver.[23]

[edit] Barcelona Conference (2010)

The First International Conference on Economic Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity of Paris (2008) was a discussion about the financial, social, cultural, demographical, environmental crisis caused by the deficiencies of the capitalism and an explanation of the main principles of the degrowth. [24] The Second International Conference of Barcelona on the other hand focused on specific ways to implement a degrowth society. It gathered researchers, practitioners, academics and civil society members from forty countries which brought new ideas and allowed the interconnection between social, economic and environmental aspects. The participation of every person was promoted through working groups, each discussing one of the 29 topics of the programme.
The result of this innovative participatory process has brought a major contribution to the Degrowth strategy. Concrete proposals have been developed for future political actions, including:
  • Promotion of local currencies, elimination of fiat money and reforms of interest
  • Transition to non-profit and small scale companies
  • Increase of local commons and support of participative approaches in decision-making
  • Reducing working hours and facilitation of volunteer work
  • Reusing empty housing and co-housing
  • Introduction of the basic income guarantee and an income ceiling built on a maximum-minimum ratio
  • Limitation of the exploitation of natural resources and preservation of the biodiversity and culture by regulations, taxes and compensations
  • Minimize the waste production with education and legal instruments
  • Elimination of mega infrastructures, transition from a car-based system to a more local, biking, walking-based one.
  • Suppression of advertising from the public space [25]
The introduction of these points in our society would require a change of mentality, oriented to a reduction of the consumption and the regrowth of integrity, ethic and social links. This is related to the concept of Simple Living. [26]. It is a personal choice that can be undertaken individually or by small communities, and maybe would grow in larger scale.
In spite of the real willingness of reform and the development of numerous solutions, the conference of Barcelona didn’t have a big influence on our economic and political system. Many critiques have been made concerning the proposals, mostly about the financial aspects, and this has refrained changes to occur. [27]

[edit] Criticisms

[edit] Liberal critique

Supporters of economic liberalism believe that economic growth brings about the creation of wealth, by increasing employment, improving quality of life, and providing better education and healthcare, in other words, there should be more resources in order to make and improve on more things. From this point of view, degrowth constitutes economic recession and is a destroyer of wealth.
An additional liberal criticism of degrowth is that progress is increasingly linked to knowledge rather than the use of physical resources, and that the progress of technology will solve the world's environmental problems. Free-market environmentalism is a position that argues that most environmental problems are caused by a lack of property rights and the extension of such to include externalities.

[edit] Self-regulation of the market

Supporters of the self-regulation of the market believe that if a particular non-renewable resource becomes scarce, the market will limit its extraction via two mechanisms:
This position argues that allowing market forces to take effect is the most rational way of solving the problem, and consider that these forces are more efficient than centralized decision systems (see economic calculation, dispersed knowledge, tragedy of the commons). Market capitalism can take advantage of the exploitation of energy sources that were not economically viable 10 or 20 years prior, because under new conditions the required economic growth will necessitate their use.
In response to the theories of Georgescu-Roegen, Robert Solow and Joseph Stiglitz noted that capital and labor can substitute for natural resources in production either directly or indirectly, ensuring sustained growth or at least sustainable development.[28]

[edit] Creative destruction

The concept of degrowth is founded on the hypothesis that producing more always implies the consumption of more energy and raw materials, while at the same time decreasing the size of the labor force, which is replaced by machines. This analysis is considered misleading from the point of view that technological progress allows us to produce more with less, as well as provide more services. This is what is known as creative destruction, the process by which the "old" companies from a sector (as well as their costly and polluting technologies) disappear from the market as a result of the innovation in that sector that brings down costs while consuming less energy and raw materials in exchange for increased productivity.
At the same time, this reduction in costs and/or increase in profits increases the ability to save, which simultaneously allows for investment in new advances, which will replace the old technologies.

[edit] Marxist critique

Marxists distinguish between two types of growth: that which is useful to mankind, and that which simply exists to increase profits for companies. Marxists consider that it is the nature and control of production that is the determinant, and not the quantity. They believe that control and a strategy for growth are the pillars that enable social and economic development. According to Jean Zin, while the justification for degrowth is valid, it is not a solution to the problem.[29] However, other Marxist writers have adopted positions close to the de-growth perspective. For example John Bellamy-Foster [30] and Fred Magdoff [31], in common with David Harvey, Imanuel Wallerstein, Paul M. Sweezy and others focus on endless capital accumulation as the basic principle and goal of capitalism. This is the source of economic growth and is unsustainable. Foster and Magdoff develop Marx's own concept of the metabolic rift, something he noted in the exhaustion of soils by capitalist systems of food production.

[edit] Third world critique

The concept of degrowth is viewed as contradictory when applied to lesser-developed countries, which require the growth of their economies in order to attain prosperity. In this sense the majority of supporters of degrowth advocate the attainment of a certain, acceptable level of well-being independent of growth. The question of where the balance lies (i.e. how much the developed nations should degrow by, and how much the developing nations should be allowed to grow), remains open.[citation needed]

[edit] Technological critique

Supporters[who?] of scientific progress argue that it will solve the problems of energy supply, waste and the reduction of raw materials. This ideology draws inspiration from the Enlightenment to develop an optimistic technologist vision. They point to the reduction in the relation between energy consumption and production (or energy intensity) over the past twenty years. They propose that research into nuclear energy could provide temporary energy alternatives to the oil crisis, while technologies such as nuclear fusion come online.[citation needed]
This argument is contrasted by the data obtained by the Global Carbon Project in 2007, which notes the stagnation in the aforementioned decrease in energy intensity, which is one of the variables of the Kaya identity, which tends to show that either the economic downturn, or demographic decline are essential to prevent ecological disaster.[citation needed]

[edit] See also

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ Institut d'études économiques et sociales pour la décroissance soutenable.(2003). http://decroissance.org/
  2. ^ Zehner, Ozzie (2012). Green Illusions. Lincoln & London: U. Nebraska Press. pp. 178-183, 339-342. ISBN 0803237758. http://GreenIllusions.org.
  3. ^ Economic Degrowth for Sustainability and Equity.(2009). http://www.degrowth.net/Economic-Degrowth-for
  4. ^ Bardi, U. (2008) 'Peak Caviar'. The Oil Drum: Europe. http://www.energybulletin.net/node/46143
  5. ^ McGreal, R. 2005. 'Bridging the Gap: Alternatives to Petroleum (Peak Oil Part II)'. Raising the Hammer. http://www.raisethehammer.org/index.asp?id=119
  6. ^ Energy Bulletin. (October 20, 2009). Peak Oil Reports. http://www.energybulletin.net/node/50447
  7. ^ Fournier, V. (2008). Escaping from the economy: politics of degrowth. International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. Vol. 28:11/12, pp 528-545.
  8. ^ a b http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/data_sources/
  9. ^ Latouche, S. (2004), "Degrowth economics: why less should be much more", Le Monde Diplomatique, November
  10. ^ Latouche, S. (1993). In the Wake of Affluent Society: An Exploration of Post-development. N.J.: Zed Books.
  11. ^ Harvey, D. (2006, June 16). in Sasha Lilley "On Neoliberalism: An Interview with David Harvey". Monthly Review.
  12. ^ Latouche, S. (2004). Degrowth Economics: Why less should be so much more. Le Monde Diplomatique.
  13. ^ Zehner, Ozzie (2012). Green Illusions. Lincoln: U. Neb. Pr.. pp. 172-73, 333-34.
  14. ^ Binswanger, M. (2001), "Technological progress and sustainable development: what about the rebound effect?", Ecological Economics, Vol. 36 pp.119-32.
  15. ^ Mishan, Ezra J., The Costs of Economic Growth, Staples Press, 1967
  16. ^ Rolt, L. T. C. (1947). High Horse Riderless. George Allen & Unwin. pp. 171. http://www.amazon.co.uk/HIGH-HORSE-RIDERLESS-L-T-C-Rolt/dp/B0006ARC3W/.
  17. ^ Martin Parker, Valérie Fournier, Patrick Reedy, The Dictionary of Alternatives: Utopianism and Organization, Zed Books, 2007, p. 69.
  18. ^ Hervé Kempf, L'économie à l'épreuve de l'écologie Hatier
  19. ^ Latouche, Serge (2003) Decrecimiento y post-desarrollo El viejo topo, p.62
  20. ^ Schumacher, E. F. (1973). Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered. New York: Perennial Library.
  21. ^ "Décroissance économique pour la soutenabilité écologique et l'équité sociale". http://events.it-sudparis.eu/degrowthconference/. Retrieved 16 May 2011.
  22. ^ "Home". http://www.degrowth.eu/. Retrieved 16 May 2011.
  23. ^ "The Tyee – The Degrowth Movement Is Growing". http://thetyee.ca/Life/2010/05/05/Degrowth/. Retrieved 16 May 2011.
  24. ^ Declaration of the Paris 2008 Conference. Retrieved from: http://degrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Declaration-Degrowth-Paris-2008.pdf
  25. ^ 2nd Conference on Economic Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Ethic. 2010. Degrowth Declaration Barcelona 2010 and Working Groups Results. Retrieved from: http://barcelona.degrowth.org/
  26. ^ Simple Living. 2011. Home page. Retrieved November 3rd, 2012, from: http://www.simpleliving.org/
  27. ^ Responsabilité, Innovation & Management. 2011. Décroissance économique pour l’écologie, l’équité et le bien-vivre par François SCHNEIDER. Retrieved from http://www.openrim.org/Decroissance-economique-pour-l.html
  28. ^ William D. Sunderlin, Ideology, Social Theory, and the Environment, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2002, p. 154-155.
  29. ^ L'écologie politique à l'ère de l'information, Ere, 2006, p. 68-69
  30. ^ [1], Monthly Review Press.
  31. ^ [2],.

[edit] External links