Beyond Growth Conference: Talking about system change in the European Parliament
Beyond Growth Conference: Talking about system change in the European Parliament
This piece was composed by Femke Schootstra, Economics master student Radboud University
Last week the ground-breaking conference ‘Beyond Growth’ was held in the European Parliament. 2500 people came to Brussels and another 5000 joined online to talk for three days about the path to a sustainable and equitable future by economic system change. I was one of those people and came home with a lot of motivation and insights. In this article I will share my take aways from the conference, explain why eternal economic growth and sustained life on earth are fundamentally incompatible and talk about the Post-Growth movement.
The conference opened with a speech from Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission. She talked about the Limits to Growth report from 1972, that stated that endless economic growth is not possible on a finite planet:
‘What the Limits to Growth model was right on without doubt: that a growth economy based on fossil fuels is simply obsolete.’
The whole audience applauded and cheered. But then she continued:
‘But what the Club of Rome could not completely envision for example is the potential for green technologies like clean hydrogen or the type of electric cars that we drive today.’
This belief in technology is the basis of the European Green Deal and the underlying Green Growth paradigm: innovation of can solve the climate crisis by decoupling economic growth from environmental impact. However, the crucial basis of the whole conference, driven by increasing scientific evidence: decoupling is a myth to keep the story of economic growth alive.
Although it might be possible to decouple growth from carbon emissions, what is actually happening is a mere shift from one resource to the other: we’re moving from an economy that runs on fossil fuels to one that is based on metals and minerals. Realize this: companies are already starting to extract the metals and minerals from places like the deep sea, to obtain the necessary resources for the energy transition, instantly creating new ecological problems. Additionally, more efficient use of resources by innovation does not naturally lead to less resource extraction. As the inputs of production decrease, prices are driven down, which then leads to more demand. This is known as the rebound effect: efficiency gains lead mostly to a reduced price, and much less to reduced demand for resources and thus not to lower environmental impact. Lastly, the idea of decoupling comes from the hyper-focus on the single planetary boundary of climate change. Other planetary boundaries like biodiversity loss and the phosphorous cycle are not accounted for in the Green Growth paradigm, while we are nowhere near solving these crises. This can only lead to one simple conclusion: technology cannot fix it. Eternal economic growth and sustained life on earth are fundamentally incompatible.
And this is not just any other conclusion. We cannot simply say, ‘well, then we will focus on other goals instead of GDP growth.’ Moving to a non-growing economy requires fundamental restructuring of the economic system. Our current economy is founded on the prospect of growth, with employment and debt as main drivers. However, this doesn’t at all mean that an healthy economy without growth is not possible. Unemployment doesn’t evolve from some natural process, but is an organizational issue. Debts have been created by ourselves and although it requires large sacrifices, they can be cancelled if necessary. Economics is not a mathematical science with universal laws like physics. It is by nature a social science, shaped by how we view the world, by our values of freedom and individuality, and by a sense of superiority over nature and other cultures. The economy would look completely different if we start from balancing the value of freedom with the values of justice and solidarity. And above all, it would start from a completely different place once the health of the planet is acknowledged as the ultimate foundation of the economy.
More and more people are becoming aware that putting economic growth at the heart of the economy does not maximize welfare at this stage, and have started to think about alternative economic systems. This resulted in the Degrowth movement and the development of new paradigms, that can be captured with the umbrella term ‘Post-Growth’. The gathering of this movement in the European Parliament during three full days, was a significant sign of the institutionalization of the debate about system change.
One of the most common responses to the idea of post-growth or degrowth is: “But if the economy would not grow, then how are we ever going to pay for all those investments for the climate and also still for the increasing costs of healthcare, enlarging the public transport system, improving education and paying all these people an even higher wage, like they’re demanding now? We simply won’t have the money!” Let me tell you: we do have the money. I quote Jakob Hafele, who spoke decisively: “It’s sitting on the Kayman Islands, and it’s not doing its job.” Take a look at the massive inequality in our society, and everyone should realize that having enough money is not the problem. It’s a matter of redistribution.
Moreover, what is ignored in the Green Growth narrative, is the extreme inequality of environmental impact between rich and poor: the richest 1% causes twice as much carbon emission as the poorest 50%. The conference delivered fact after fact about the entwined environmental and inequality crises. While the billionaires sail around in their yachts and send space ships into the sky, we worry about how we can ever solve the climate crisis if the people in growing economies like Indonesia, India and Brazil will also start consuming more due to higher incomes. The answer to this couldn’t be more obvious and emphasizes again: redistribution.
Of course political leaders are not eager, to put it lightly, to bring this debate to the table. But we have to demand them to do so. To demand this, you need power, as emphasized by some speakers. The corporate lobby is extremely strong. But maybe even more important is the power that evolved from the narrative of neoliberalism. The ideology of the free market and a small state has become deeply embedded in people’s minds, backed up by distrust in the government and the neoclassical principle of market efficiency. Another major barrier for change is the belief that even if theoretically feasible, moving to a Post-Growth economic system is politically not possible. I disagree. It is about developing a new narrative for people to believe in, imagining a better future along with a convincing plan of how to get there. That does not mean that it is not extremely difficult, but it is the only way. So let´s start believing, I am sure future generations will thank you for your courage.
If you want to contribute and learn more post-growth, I recommend reading the book ‘Less is more: How degrowth will save the world’ by Jason Hickel, or listing to the podcast episode from Upstream where he talks about his book and the movement. But above all, let’s start shaping and sharing the new narrative together by talking about it with the people around us, because I believe that’s where the real change begins.
Femke studies Economics, while also understanding the earth system and ecology after studying a natural science Bachelor. She is active for Rethinking Economics: an international student organisation that criticizes economics education for ignoring the issues of sustainability, equality and decolonization and pushes for a positive change.