View source for Degrowth

{{Short description|Political, economic and social movement}}
{{distinguish|Downsizing (disambiguation){{!}}downsizing|Shrinkage (disambiguation){{!}}shrinkage}}{{Ecological economics}}{{Green anarchism sidebar|expanded=theory}}
'''Degrowth''' is an [[Academic research|academic]] and social [[Social movement|movement]] critical of the concept of [[economic growth|growth]] in [[Real gross domestic product|gross domestic product]] as a measure of [[Human development (economics)|human]] and [[economic development]].<ref name="kallis2015" /><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schneider |first1=François |last2=Kallis |first2=Giorgos |last3=Martinez-Alier |first3=Joan |title=Crisis or opportunity? Economic degrowth for social equity and ecological sustainability. Introduction to this special issue |journal=Journal of Cleaner Production |date=April 2010 |volume=18 |issue=6 |pages=511–518 |doi=10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.01.014 |bibcode=2010JCPro..18..511S }}</ref><ref name=":9" /> The idea of degrowth is based on ideas and research from [[economic anthropology]], [[ecological economics]], [[environmental science]]s, and [[development studies]]. It argues that modern capitalism's unitary focus on growth causes widespread [[Environmental degradation|ecological damage]] and is unnecessary for the further increase of [[Standard of living|human living standards]].<ref name="gd01" /><ref name="Hickeletal"/><ref>{{cite book |doi=10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.91041-9 |chapter=Degrowth |title=International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences |date=2015 |last1=Kallis |first1=Giorgos |last2=Demaria |first2=Federico |last3=d'Alisa |first3=Giacomo |pages=24–30 |isbn=978-0-08-097087-5 }}</ref> Degrowth theory has been met with both academic acclaim and considerable criticism.<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |date=2022-06-15 |title=Degrowth: what's behind this economic theory and why it matters today |url=https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/06/what-is-degrowth-economics-climate-change/ |access-date=2023-09-11 |website=World Economic Forum |language=en}}</ref><ref name=":10">{{cite news |last1=Horowitz |first1=Julia |title=To save the world, does the economy need to stop growing? |url=https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/13/economy/degrowth-climate-cop27/index.html |work=CNN |date=13 November 2022 }}</ref><ref name=":11">{{cite news |last1=Bokat-Lindell |first1=Spencer |title=Opinion {{!}} Do We Need to Shrink the Economy to Stop Climate Change? |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/16/opinion/degrowth-cllimate-change.html |work=The New York Times |date=16 September 2021 }}</ref>

Degrowth's main argument is that an infinite expansion of the economy is fundamentally contradictory to the [[Resource depletion|finiteness of material resources]] on Earth. It argues that economic growth measured by GDP should be abandoned as a policy objective. Policy should instead focus on economic and social metrics such as [[life expectancy]], [[health]], [[education]], [[housing]], and ecologically sustainable [[Work (human activity)|work]] as indicators of both ecosystems and human well-being.<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |last=Nelson |first=Anitra |date=2024-01-31 |title=Degrowth as a Concept and Practice: Introduction |url=https://commonslibrary.org/degrowth-as-a-concept-and-practice-introduction/ |access-date=2024-02-20 |website=The Commons Social Change Library |language=en-AU}}</ref> Degrowth theorists posit that this would increase human living standards and ecological preservation even as GDP growth slows.<ref name=":12">{{cite book |last1=Hickel |first1=Jason |title=Less is More: How Degrowth Will Save the World |date=2021 |publisher=National Geographic Books |isbn=978-1-78609-121-5 |pages=170–179 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Akbulut |first1=Bengi |title=Degrowth |journal=Rethinking Marxism |date=2 January 2021 |volume=33 |issue=1 |pages=98–110 |doi=10.1080/08935696.2020.1847014 |s2cid=232116190 }}</ref><ref name=":9">{{cite journal |last1=Demaria |first1=Federico |last2=Schneider |first2=François |last3=Sekulova |first3=Filka |last4=Martinez-Alier |first4=Joan |title=What is Degrowth? From an Activist Slogan to a Social Movement |journal=Environmental Values |date=2013 |volume=22 |issue=2 |pages=191–215 |doi=10.3197/096327113X13581561725194 |jstor=23460978 |bibcode=2013EnvV...22..191D |s2cid=55888884 }}</ref>

Degrowth theory is highly critical of [[Free-market capitalism|free market capitalism]], and it highlights the importance of extensive [[public service]]s, [[care work]], [[self-organization]], [[commons]], [[relational goods]], [[community]], and [[work sharing]].<ref name=":14">{{cite book |last1=Demaria |first1=Federico |title=Pluriverse. A Post-Development Dictionary |last2=Kothari |first2=Ashish |last3=Salleh |first3=Ariel |last4=Escobar |first4=Arturo |last5=Acosta |first5=Alberto |date=2019 |publisher=Tulika Books |isbn=9788193732984 |location=New Delhi}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=What is degrowth? |url=https://www.degrowth.info/en/what-is-degrowth/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210130012721/https://www.degrowth.info/en/what-is-degrowth/ |archive-date=30 January 2021 |access-date=29 April 2020 |website=degrowth.info}}</ref>
Degrowth theory partly orients itself as a critique of [[green capitalism]] or as a radical alternative to the market-based, sustainable development goal (SDG) model of addressing [[ecological overshoot]] and environmental collapse.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Saito |first=Kohei |title=Slow Down: A Degrowth Manifesto |date=2023 |publisher=Astra Publishing}}</ref>

According to environmental economist [[Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh]], degrowth is a vague concept that fails to offer an effective strategy for reducing environmental harm, ignores rebound effects, and has little social or political support, whereas price incentives through [[environmental tax]]es or [[emission trading|tradable permits]] are much more effective.<ref name="van den Bergh"></ref> He argues for [[agrowth]], an environmental policy with an agnostic attitude toward economic growth, focusing on reducing environmental damage through effective instruments - regardless of whether the economy is growing, stagnant or contracting.<ref name="3thOption" />

==Background==
The "degrowth" movement arose from concerns over the consequences of the [[productivism]] and [[consumerism]] associated with industrial societies (whether [[Capitalism|capitalist]] or [[Socialism|socialist]]) including:<ref name=fd01/>
* The reduced availability of energy sources (see [[peak oil]]);
* The destabilization of Earth's ecosystems upon which all life on Earth depends (see [[Holocene extinction|Holocene Extinction]], [[Anthropocene]], [[global warming]], [[pollution]], [[Biodiversity#Current biodiversity loss|current biodiversity loss]], [[planetary boundaries]]);
* The rise of negative societal side-effects ([[sustainable development|unsustainable development]], poorer [[health]], [[poverty]], [[social inequality]]); and
* The ever-expanding use of resources by [[Global North and Global South|Global North]] countries to satisfy lifestyles that consume more food and energy, and produce greater waste, at the expense of the Global South (see [[neocolonialism]]).

A 2025 review of research literature on degrowth concluded that degrowth scholars are skeptical of the feasibility of achieving an equitable economic slowdown within a capitalist framework. This skepticism stems from the structural reliance of capitalism on continuous growth driven by competition. As a result, degrowth advocates argue for a deliberate and democratically guided overhaul of the economic system. Such a transformation aims to significantly reduce environmental harm, address inequality, and enhance overall well-being.<ref name=":15" /> 

=== Decoupling ===
{{Main|Eco-economic decoupling}}
[[File:Absolute-decoupling-Growth-and-falling-emissions-all.png|thumb|upright=1.0|Examples of countries with eco-economic decoupling]]
The concept of ''decoupling'' denotes decoupling economic growth, usually measured in [[Economic growth|GDP growth]], [[List of countries by real GDP per capita growth|GDP per capita growth]] or [[List of countries by GNI per capita growth|GNI per capita growth]]<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gupta |first1=Shilpi |title=Decoupling: a step toward sustainable development with reference to OECD countries |journal=International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology |date=2 November 2015 |volume=22 |issue=6 |pages=510–519 |doi=10.1080/13504509.2015.1088485 |bibcode=2015IJSDW..22..510G }}</ref> from the use of natural resources and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. ''Absolute decoupling'' refers to GDP growth coinciding with a reduction in natural resource use and GHG emissions, while ''relative decoupling'' describes an increase in resource use and GHG emissions lower than the increase in GDP growth.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Haberl |first1=Helmut |last2=Wiedenhofer |first2=Dominik |last3=Virág |first3=Doris |last4=Kalt |first4=Gerald |last5=Plank |first5=Barbara |last6=Brockway |first6=Paul |last7=Fishman |first7=Tomer |last8=Hausknost |first8=Daniel |last9=Krausmann |first9=Fridolin |last10=Leon-Gruchalski |first10=Bartholomäus |last11=Mayer |first11=Andreas |date=2020-06-10 |title=A systematic review of the evidence on decoupling of GDP, resource use and GHG emissions, part II: synthesizing the insights |journal=Environmental Research Letters |volume=15 |issue=6 |pages=065003 |doi=10.1088/1748-9326/ab842a |bibcode=2020ERL....15f5003H |s2cid=216453887 |doi-access=free }}</ref> The degrowth movement heavily critiques this idea and argues that absolute decoupling is only possible for short periods, specific locations, or with small [[mitigation]] rates.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Antal |first1=Miklós |last2=Van Den Bergh |first2=Jeroen C.J.M. |title=Green growth and climate change: conceptual and empirical considerations |journal=Climate Policy |date=17 February 2016 |volume=16 |issue=2 |pages=165–177 |doi=10.1080/14693062.2014.992003 |bibcode=2016CliPo..16..165A |s2cid=153816870 }}</ref><ref name="eeb.org">{{Cite web |title=Decoupling debunked – Evidence and arguments against green growth as a sole strategy for sustainability |url=https://eeb.org/library/decoupling-debunked/ |access-date=2022-05-31 |website=EEB – The European Environmental Bureau |language=en-US}}</ref> In 2021 NGO [[European Environmental Bureau]] called stated that there is "no empirical evidence supporting the existence of a decoupling of economic growth from environmental pressures on anywhere near the scale needed to deal with environmental breakdown", and that reported cases of existing eco-economic decouplings either depict relative decoupling and/or are observed only temporarily and/or only on a local scale, arguing that alternatives to eco-economic decoupling are needed.<ref name="eeb.org"/> This is supported by several other studies which state that absolute decoupling is highly unlikely to be achieved fast enough to prevent [[global warming]] over 1.5&nbsp;°C or 2&nbsp;°C, even under optimistic policy conditions.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hickel |first1=Jason |last2=Kallis |first2=Giorgos |title=Is Green Growth Possible? |journal=New Political Economy |date=6 June 2020 |volume=25 |issue=4 |pages=469–486 |doi=10.1080/13563467.2019.1598964 |s2cid=159148524 |url=https://ddd.uab.cat/record/205316 }}</ref>

Major criticism of this view points out that Degrowth is politically unpalatable, defaulting towards the more free market green growth orthodoxy as a set of solutions that is more politically tenable.<ref name=":11" /><ref name=":10" /> The problems with the SDG process are political rather than technical, [[Ezra Klein]] of the [[The New York Times|New York Times]] claims in summary of these criticisms, and degrowth has less plausibility than green growth as a democratic political platform.<ref name=":11" /> However, in a recent review of efforts toward [[Eco-capitalism|Sustain Development Goals]] by the [[Council on Foreign Relations|Council of Foreign Relations]] in 2023 it was found that progress toward 50% of the minimum viable SDG's have stalled and 30% of these verticals have reversed (or are getting worse, rather than better).<ref name=":5" /> Thus, while it may be true that Degrowth will be 'a difficult sell'<ref name=":10" /> (per Ezra Klein) to introduce via democratic voluntarism, the critique of SDG's and decoupling against green capitalism leveled by Degrowth theorists appear to have predictive power.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":14" />

===Resource depletion===
{{Main|Resource depletion}}
Degrowth proponents argue that economic expansion must be met with a corresponding increase in resource consumption.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Spangenberg |first1=Joachim H. |last2=Polotzek |first2=Lia |date=19 March 2019 |title=Like blending chalk and cheese - the impact of standard economics in IPCC scenarios |url=https://p.feedblitz.com/t3.asp?/973841/5804514/6455707_/www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue87/SpangenbergPolotzek87.pdf |journal=Real-World Economics Review |volume=87 |pages=196–213 |via=Paecon}}</ref> Non-renewable resources, like petroleum, have a limited supply and can eventually be exhausted. Similarly, renewable resources can also be depleted if they are harvested at unsustainable rates for prolonged periods. An example of this depletion is evident in the case of caviar production in the [[Caspian Sea]].<ref>{{cite web |last=Bardi |first=Ugo |date=2018-08-05 |title=Peak Caviar |work=The Oil Drum: Europe |url=http://theoildrum.com/node/4367}}</ref>

Supporters of degrowth contend that reducing demand is the sole permanent solution to bridging the demand gap. To sustain renewable resources, both demand and production must be regulated to levels that avert depletion and ensure environmental sustainability. Transitioning to a society less reliant on oil is crucial for averting societal collapse as non-renewable resources dwindle.<ref>{{cite web|website = Resilience.org|date =October 20, 2009|title = Peak Oil Reports|url = http://www.resilience.org/stories/2009-10-20/peak-oil-reports-oct-20}}</ref> Degrowth can also be interpreted as a plea for resource reallocation, aiming to halt unsustainable practices of transforming certain entities into resources, such as non-renewable natural resources. Instead, the focus shifts towards identifying and utilizing alternative resources, such as renewable human capabilities.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Corvellec |first1=Hervé |last2=Paulsson |first2=Alexander |date=2023-03-01 |title=Resource shifting: Resourcification and de-resourcification for degrowth |journal=Ecological Economics |volume=205 |pages=107703 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107703 |s2cid=254388285 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2023EcoEc.20507703C }}</ref>

===Ecological footprint===
{{Main|Ecological footprint}}

The ecological footprint measures human demand on the Earth's ecosystems by comparing human demand with the Earth's ecological capacity to regenerate. It represents the amount of biologically productive land and sea area required 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,<ref name=footprintnetwork>{{cite web|url=http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/data_sources/|title=Data Sources|work=footprintnetwork.org|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091001074513/http://www.footprintnetwork.org/en/index.php/GFN/page/data_sources/|archive-date=2009-10-01}}</ref> inhabitants of high-income countries live off of 6.4 [[global hectare]]s (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 America]]n requires 12.5 gHa. Each inhabitant of North America uses 22.3 times as much land as a Bangladeshi. 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. For the world's population to attain the living standards typical of European countries, the resources of between three and eight planet [[Earth]]s would be required with current levels of efficiency and means of production. For world [[Equality (economics)|economic equality]] to be achieved with the currently available resources, proponents say rich countries would have to reduce their [[standard of living]] through degrowth. The constraints on resources would eventually lead to a forced reduction in consumption. A controlled reduction of consumption would reduce the trauma of this change, assuming no [[technological change]]s increase the planet's [[carrying capacity]]. Multiple studies now demonstrate that in many affluent countries per-capita energy consumption could be decreased substantially and quality living standards still be maintained.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Merz |first1=Joseph J |last2=Barnard |first2=Phoebe |last3=Rees |first3=William E |last4=Smith |first4=Dane |last5=Maroni |first5=Mat |last6=Rhodes |first6=Christopher J |last7=Dederer |first7=Julia H |last8=Bajaj |first8=Nandita |last9=Joy |first9=Michael K |last10=Wiedmann |first10=Thomas |last11=Sutherland |first11=Rory |date=July 2023 |title=World scientists' warning: The behavioural crisis driving ecological overshoot |journal=Science Progress |volume=106 |issue=3 |doi=10.1177/00368504231201372 |pmc=10515534 |pmid=37728669 }}</ref>

=== Sustainable development ===
{{Further|Sustainable development}}
Degrowth ideology opposes all manifestations of productivism, which advocates that economic productivity and growth should be the primary objectives of human organization. Consequently, it stands in opposition to the prevailing model of [[sustainable development]].<ref>{{Cite journal|doi = 10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.08.008|title = Strong sustainable consumption governance – precondition for a degrowth path?|journal = Journal of Cleaner Production|volume = 38|pages = 36–43|year = 2013|last1 = Lorek|first1 = Sylvia|last2 = Fuchs|first2 = Doris|bibcode = 2013JCPro..38...36L|s2cid = 49362153|url = https://degrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Lorek-_Fuchs-2013.pdf|access-date = 2020-01-17|archive-date = 2024-01-05|archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20240105011140/https://degrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Lorek-_Fuchs-2013.pdf|url-status = dead}}</ref> While the concept of sustainability aligns with some aspects of degrowth philosophy, sustainable development, as conventionally understood, is based on mainstream development principles focused on augmenting economic growth and consumption. Degrowth views sustainable development as contradictory because any development reliant on growth within a finite and ecologically strained context is deemed intrinsically unsustainable.<ref name=Latouche/>

Critics of degrowth argue that a slowing of [[economic growth]] would result in increased [[unemployment]], increased [[poverty]], and decreased income per capita. Many who believe in negative environmental consequences of growth still advocate for economic growth in the South, even if not in the North. Slowing economic growth would fail to deliver the benefits of degrowth — self-sufficiency and material responsibility — and would indeed lead to decreased employment. Rather, degrowth proponents advocate the complete abandonment of the current (growth) economic model, suggesting that relocalizing 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.<ref name="Latouche">Latouche, S. (2004). [https://mondediplo.com/2004/11/14latouche Degrowth Economics: Why less should be so much more.] ''Le Monde Diplomatique''.</ref> Supporters of degrowth view it as a potential method to shield ecosystems from human exploitation. Within this concept, there is an emphasis on communal stewardship of the environment, fostering a symbiotic relationship between humans and nature. Degrowth recognizes ecosystems as valuable entities beyond their utility as mere sources of resources.<ref name="fd01" /> During the Second International Conference on degrowth, discussions encompassed concepts like implementing a maximum wage and promoting open borders. Degrowth advocates an ethical shift that challenges the notion that high-resource consumption lifestyles are desirable. Additionally, alternative perspectives on degrowth include addressing perceived historical injustices perpetrated by the global North through centuries of colonization and exploitation, advocating for wealth redistribution. Determining the appropriate scale of action remains a focal point of debate within degrowth movements.<ref name="fd01" />

Some researchers believe that the world is poised to experience a Great Transformation, either by disastrous events or intentional design. They maintain that [[ecological economics]] must incorporate [[Postdevelopment theory|Postdevelopment theories]], [[Buen vivir]], and degrowth to affect the change necessary to avoid these potentially catastrophic events.<ref>{{cite journal |title=Discursive Synergies for a 'Great Transformation' Towards Sustainability: Pragmatic Contributions to a Necessary Dialogue Between Human Development, Degrowth, and Buen Vivir |journal=Ecological Economics |date=11 September 2017 |volume=144 |pages=304–313 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.08.025 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319639847 |access-date=21 July 2020|last1=Beling |first1=Adrián E. |last2=Vanhulst |first2=Julien |last3=Demaria |first3=Federico |last4=Rabi |first4=Violeta |last5=Carballo |first5=Ana E. |last6=Pelenc |first6=Jérôme }}</ref>

A 2022 paper by Mark Diesendorf found that limiting global warming to 1,5 degrees with no overshoot would require a reduction of energy consumption. It describes (chapters 4–5) degrowth toward a steady state economy as possible and probably positive. The study ends with the words: "The case for a transition to a steady-state economy with low throughput and low emissions, initially in the high-income economies and then in rapidly growing economies, needs more serious attention and international cooperation."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Diesendorf |first1=Mark |title=Scenarios for mitigating CO2 emissions from energy supply in the absence of CO2 removal |journal=Climate Policy |date=22 April 2022 |volume=22 |issue=7 |pages=882–896 |doi=10.1080/14693062.2022.2061407 |bibcode=2022CliPo..22..882D |hdl=1959.4/unsworks_80159 |url=https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/bitstreams/1939a9dc-6769-4b99-8084-2fdba88ca62c/download |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

==="Rebound effect"===
{{Main|Rebound effect (conservation)}}
Technologies designed to reduce resource use and improve efficiency are often touted as sustainable or green solutions. Degrowth literature, however, warns about these technological advances due to the "[[Rebound effect (conservation)|rebound effect]]", also known as [[Jevons paradox]].<ref>{{harv|Zehner|2012}}, pp.172–73, 333–34</ref> This concept is based on observations that when a less resource-exhaustive technology is introduced, behavior surrounding the use of that technology may change, and consumption of that technology could increase or even offset any potential resource savings.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Binswanger |first=M. |year=2001 |title=Technological Progress and Sustainable Development: What About the Rebound Effect? |journal=Ecological Economics |volume=36 |issue=1 |pages=119–32 |doi=10.1016/S0921-8009(00)00214-7|bibcode=2001EcoEc..36..119B |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222122872 }}</ref> 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 to a degrowth paradigm. There are also fundamental limits to technological solutions in the pursuit of degrowth, as all engagements with technology increase the cumulative matter-energy [[throughput]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Heikkurinen |first1=Pasi |title=Degrowth by means of technology? A treatise for an ethos of releasement |journal=Journal of Cleaner Production |date=October 2018 |volume=197 |pages=1654–1665 |doi=10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.07.070 |bibcode=2018JCPro.197.1654H |url=http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/105233/1/Heikkurinen%202016.pdf }}</ref> However, the convergence of [[digital commons]] of knowledge and design with [[distributed manufacturing]] technologies may arguably hold potential for building degrowth future scenarios.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kostakis |first1=Vasilis |last2=Latoufis |first2=Kostas |last3=Liarokapis |first3=Minas |last4=Bauwens |first4=Michel |title=The convergence of digital commons with local manufacturing from a degrowth perspective: Two illustrative cases |journal=Journal of Cleaner Production |date=October 2018 |volume=197 |pages=1684–1693 |doi=10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.077 |bibcode=2018JCPro.197.1684K }}</ref>

===Mitigation of climate change and determinants of 'growth'===
[[File:1.5 °C scenario map under different levels of energy-GDP decoupling, RE speed and NETs.webp|thumb|1.5 °C scenario map under different levels of energy-GDP decoupling, RE speed and NETs<ref name="10.1038/s41467-021-22884-9"/>]]
Scientists report that degrowth scenarios, where economic output either "declines" or declines in terms of contemporary [[Economic indicator|economic metrics]] such as current [[GDP]], have been neglected in considerations of [[Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C|1.5 °C scenarios]] reported by the [[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change]] (IPCC), finding that investigated degrowth scenarios "minimize many key risks for feasibility and sustainability compared to technology-driven pathways" with a core problem of such being feasibility in the context of contemporary decision-making of [[politics]] and [[Economic globalization|globalized]] rebound- and relocation-effects.<ref>{{cite news |title=1.5°C degrowth scenarios suggest need for new mitigation pathways |url=https://phys.org/news/2021-05-degrowth-scenarios-mitigation-pathways.html |access-date=14 June 2021 |work=phys.org |language=en }}[https://scienmag.com/1-5c-degrowth-scenarios-suggest-need-for-new-mitigation-pathways-research/ Alternative Link] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230410002250/https://scienmag.com/1-5c-degrowth-scenarios-suggest-need-for-new-mitigation-pathways-research/ |date=2023-04-10 }}</ref><ref name="10.1038/s41467-021-22884-9">{{cite journal |last1=Keyßer |first1=Lorenz T. |last2=Lenzen |first2=Manfred |title=1.5 °C degrowth scenarios suggest the need for new mitigation pathways |journal=Nature Communications |date=2021-05-11 |volume=12 |issue=1 |pages=2676 |doi=10.1038/s41467-021-22884-9 |pmid=33976156 |pmc=8113441 |bibcode=2021NatCo..12.2676K }} [[File:CC-BY icon.svg|50px]] Available under [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ CC BY 4.0].</ref> However, structurally realigning 'economic growth' and socioeconomic activity determination-structures may not be widely debated in both the degrowth community and in degrowth research which may largely focus on reducing economic growth either more generally or without structural alternative but with e.g. nonsystemic political interventions. Similarly, many [[green growth]] advocates suggest that contemporary socioeconomic mechanisms and metrics – including for economic growth – can be continued with forms of nonstructural "energy-GDP decoupling".<ref name=":7">{{cite web |title=Green growth vs degrowth: are we missing the point? |url= https://www.resilience.org/stories/2020-12-07/green-growth-vs-degrowth-are-we-missing-the-point/ |website=Resilience |access-date=23 June 2021 |date=2020-12-07}}</ref>{{additional citation needed |date= June 2021}} A study concluded that [[public services]] are associated with higher human [[need]] satisfaction and lower energy requirements while contemporary forms of economic growth are linked with the opposite, with the contemporary [[economic system]] being fundamentally misaligned with the twin goals of meeting human needs and [[sustainable development|ensuring ecological sustainability]], suggesting that prioritizing human well-being and ecological sustainability would be preferable to overgrowth in current metrics of economic growth.<ref>{{cite news |title=Securing decent living standards for all while reducing global energy use |url=https://phys.org/news/2021-06-decent-standards-global-energy.html |access-date=10 July 2021 |work=phys.org |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |title=Socio-economic conditions for satisfying human needs at low energy use: An international analysis of social provisioning |journal=Global Environmental Change |date=29 June 2021 |pages=102287 |doi=10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102287 |last1=Vogel |first1=Jefim |last2=Steinberger |first2=Julia K. |last3=O'Neill |first3=Daniel W. |last4=Lamb |first4= William F. |last5=Krishnakumar |first5=Jaya |volume=69 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2021GEC....6902287V }}</ref> The word 'degrowth' was mentioned 28 times in the United Nations IPCC Sixth Assessment Report by Working Group III published in April 2022.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Bordera |first1=Juan |title=How the corporate interests and political elites watered down the world's most important climate report |url=https://mronline.org/2022/04/27/how-the-corporate-interests-and-political-elites-watered-down-the-worlds-most-important-climate-report/ |work=Monthly Review |date=27 April 2022 }}</ref>

=== Open Localism ===

Open localism is a concept that has been promoted by the degrowth community when envisioning an alternative set of social relations and economic organization. It builds upon the political philosophies of [[Localism (politics)|localism]] and is based on values such as diversity, ecologies of knowledge, and openness. Open localism does not look to create an enclosed community but rather to circulate production locally in an open and integrative manner.<ref>{{cite conference |url=https://co-munity.net/system/files/3750.pdf |title=open localism |last1=Schneider |first1=Francois |author-link1= |last2=Sekulova |first2=Filka |author-link2= |date= |publisher= |book-title= |pages= |location= |conference=Leipzig |id=}}</ref>

Open localism is a direct challenge to the acts of closure regarding identitarian politics.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Schneider |first=François |title=Open-localism: degrowth as a way to challenge social closure |url=https://conferences.leeds.ac.uk/esee2015/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2015/10/0694.pdf |archive-date= |access-date= |website=University of Leeds}}</ref> By producing and consuming as much as possible locally, community members enhance their relationships with one another and the surrounding environment.

Degrowth's ideas around open localism share similarities with ideas around the commons while also having clear differences. On the one hand, open localism promotes localized, common production in cooperative-like styles similar to some versions of how commons are organized. On the other hand, open localism does not impose any set of rules or regulations creating a defined boundary, rather it favours a cosmopolitan approach.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Schneider |first1=François |first2=Anitra |last2=Nelson |chapter='Open localism'–on Xue and Vansintjan III |pages=223–230 |editor1-last=Nelson |editor1-first=Anitra |editor2-last=Schneider |editor2-first=François |title=Housing for Degrowth: Principles, Models, Challenges and Opportunities |date=2018 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-351-36523-9 }}</ref>

=== Feminism ===

The degrowth movement builds on [[feminist economics]] that has criticized measures of economic growth like the [[GDP]] as it excludes work mainly done by women such as unpaid [[care work]] (the work performed to fulfill people's needs) and [[Reproductive labor|reproductive work]] (the work sustaining life), first argued by [[Marilyn Waring]].<ref name="waring 1989">{{cite book |last1=Waring |first1=Marilyn |title=If Women Counted: A New Feminist Economics |date=1989 |publisher=Macmillan |location=London |isbn=0-333-49262-5}}</ref> Further, degrowth draws on the critique of socialist feminists like [[Silvia Federici]] and [[Nancy Fraser]] claiming that capitalist growth builds on the exploitation of women's work.<ref name="federici 2022">{{cite web |last1=Federici |first1=Silvia |title=Feminism and the Politics of the Commons |date=17 June 2020 |url=https://thecommoner.org/tribute/tribute-to-the-work-of-silvia-federici/ |access-date=4 April 2022}}</ref><ref name="fraser 2017">{{cite book |last1=Fraser |first1=Nancy |title=Crisis of Care? On the Social-Reproductive Contradictions of Contemporary Capitalism |date=2017}} In: {{cite book |last1=Bhattacharya |first1=Tithi |title=Social Reproduction Theory: Remapping Class, Recentering Oppression |publisher=Pluto Press |location=London |pages=21–36}}</ref> Instead of devaluing it, degrowth centers the economy around care,<ref name="kallis2015">{{cite book |last1=Kallis |first1=Giorgos |author-link1= |last2=Demaria |first2=Federico |author-link2= |last3=D'Alisa |first3= Giacomo |title= Introduction: Degrowth |date=2015 }} In: {{cite book |last1=Kallis |first1=Giorgos |author-link1= |last2=Demaria |first2=Federico |author-link2= |last3=D'Alisa |first3= Giacomo |title= Degrowth: Vocabulary for a New Era |pages=1–17 |location= New York |publisher= Routledge}}</ref> proposing that care work should be organized as a [[commons]].<ref name="dengler 2022">{{cite journal |last1=Dengler |first1=Corinna |last2=Lang |first2=Miriam |title=Commoning Care: Feminist Degrowth Visions for a Socio-Ecological Transformation |journal=Feminist Economics |date=2022 |volume=28 |issue=1 |pages=1–28 |doi=10.1080/13545701.2021.1942511|s2cid=240534324 }}</ref>

Centering care goes hand in hand with changing society's time regimes. Degrowth scholars propose a [[working time]] reduction.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Kallis |first1=Giorgos |title=Degrowth |date=2018 |publisher=Agenda Publishing |isbn=978-1-911116-79-0}}</ref> As this does not necessarily lead to gender justice, the redistribution of care work has to be equally pushed.<ref name="dengler 2022" /> A concrete proposal by [[Frigga Haug]] is the 4-in-1 perspective that proposes 4 hours of wage work per day, freeing time for 4 hours of care work, 4 hours of political activities in a [[direct democracy]], and 4 hours of personal development through learning.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Haug |first1=Frigga |title=Die Vier-in-einem-Perspektive. Politik von Frauen für eine neue Linke |date=2009 |publisher=Argument Verlag |location=Hamburg |isbn=978-978-3-88619-3}}</ref>

Furthermore, degrowth draws on materialist [[ecofeminism]]s that state the parallel of the exploitation of women and nature in growth-based societies and proposes a subsistence perspective conceptualized by [[Maria Mies]] and [[Ariel Salleh]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Mies |first1=Maria |last2=Bennholdt-Thomsen |first2=Veronika |title=The Subsistence Perspective: Beyond the Globalised Economy |date=1999 |publisher=Zed Books}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Salleh |first1=Ariel |title=Ecofeminism as Politics; Nature, Marx and the Postmodern. When Feminism Fails |date=1997 |pages=153–174 |doi=10.1080/08854300.2018.1509619|s2cid=149712144 }}</ref> Synergies and opportunities for cross-fertilization between degrowth and feminism were proposed in 2022, through networks including the Feminisms and Degrowth Alliance (FaDA).<ref name="dengler 2022" /> FaDA argued that the 2023 launch of ''Degrowth Journal'' created "a convivial space for generating and exploring knowledge and practice from diverse perspectives".<ref name="DegrowthJ_Why_are_feminist">{{cite Q|Q118151474}}</ref>

===Decolonialism===

A relevant concept within the theory of degrowth is [[decolonialism]], which refers to putting an end to the perpetuation of political, social, economic, religious, racial, gender, and epistemological relations of power, domination, and hierarchy of the global north over the global south.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gómez Vélez |first1=Martha Isabel |last2=Saldarriaga Grisales |first2=Dora Cecilia |last3=López Gil |first3=María Claudia |last4=Zapata Botero |first4=Lina María |title=Estudios decoloniales y poscoloniales. Posturas acerca de la modernidad/colonialidad y el eurocentrismo |trans-title=Decolonial and postcolonial studies. Positions on modernity/coloniality and Eurocentrism |language=es |journal=Ratio Juris |date=2017 |volume=12 |issue=24 |pages=27–60 |doi=10.24142/raju.v12n24a2 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

The foundation of this relationship lies in the claim that the imminent socio-ecological collapse is caused by [[capitalism]], which is sustained by [[economic growth]]. This economic growth in turn can only be maintained under the eaves of colonialism and [[extractivism]], perpetuating asymmetric power relationships between territories.<ref name="hickel 2021">{{cite journal |last1=Hickel |first1=Jason |title=The anti-colonial politics of degrowth |journal=Political Geography |date=June 2021 |volume=88 |pages=102404 |doi=10.1016/j.polgeo.2021.102404 |url=http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/110918/ }}</ref> Colonialism is understood as the appropriation of [[common goods]], resources, and labor, which is antagonistic to degrowth principles.

Through colonial domination, capital depresses the prices of inputs and colonial cheapening occurs to the detriment of the oppressed countries.{{citation needed|date=July 2023}} Degrowth criticizes these appropriation mechanisms and [[enclosure]] of one territory over another and proposes a provision of human needs through disaccumulation, de-enclosure, and decommodification. It also reconciles with [[social movements]] and seeks to recognize the [[ecological debt]] to achieve the [[catch-up]], which is postulated as impossible without decolonization.<ref name="hickel 2021"/><ref>{{cite web |last1=Wuttke |first1=Tobias |title=Reconciling catch-up industrialisation with de-growth |work=LSE International Development |url=https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/internationaldevelopment/2021/01/19/reconciling-catch-up-industrialisation-with-de-growth/ |date=19 January 2021 }}{{self-published inline|date=July 2024}}</ref>

In practice, decolonial practices close to degrowth are observed, such as the movement of Buen vivir or [[sumak kawsay]] by various indigenous peoples.

=== Policies ===
There is a wide range of policy proposals associated with degrowth. In 2022, Nick Fitzpatrick, Timothée Parrique and Inês Cosme conducted a comprehensive survey of degrowth literature from 2005 to 2020 and found 530 specific policy proposals with "50 goals, 100 objectives, 380 instruments".<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Fitzpatrick |first1=Nick |last2=Parrique |first2=Timothée |last3=Cosme |first3=Inês |title=Exploring degrowth policy proposals: A systematic mapping with thematic synthesis |journal=Journal of Cleaner Production |date=September 2022 |volume=365 |pages=132764 |doi=10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132764 |bibcode=2022JCPro.36532764F |doi-access=free |hdl=10362/150706 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> The survey found that the ten most frequently cited proposals were: [[Universal basic income|universal basic incomes]], [[Working time|work-time]] reductions, [[Job guarantee|job guarantees]] with a [[living wage]], [[Maximum wage|maximum income]] caps, declining caps on resource use and [[Emission cap|emissions]], not-for-profit [[Cooperative|cooperatives]], holding [[Deliberative democracy|deliberative forums]], reclaiming the [[commons]], establishing [[Ecovillage|ecovillages]], and [[Housing cooperative|housing cooperatives]].

To address the common criticism that such policies are not realistically financeable, [[economic anthropologist]] [[Jason Hickel]] sees an opportunity to learn from [[modern monetary theory]], which argues that [[Monetary sovereignty|monetary sovereign]] states can issue the money needed to pay for anything available in the national economy without the need to first tax their citizens for the requisite funds.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Olk |first1=Christopher |last2=Schneider |first2=Colleen |last3=Hickel |first3=Jason |title=How to pay for saving the world: Modern Monetary Theory for a degrowth transition |journal=Ecological Economics |date=December 2023 |volume=214 |pages=107968 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.107968 |bibcode=2023EcoEc.21407968O }}</ref> Taxation, credit regulations and price controls could be used to mitigate the inflation this may generate, while also reducing consumption.

=== Popularity ===
Recent survey data suggest that degrowth is gaining popularity as a framework for policies that prioritize ecological sustainability and social well-being over perpetual economic growth.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Arellano |first=JP |date=13 February 2025 |title=Degrowth is Popular! |url=https://explore.degrowth.net/degrowth/degrowth-is-popular/ |access-date=13 February 2025 |website=Explore Degrowth}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Taylor |first=Matthew |last2= |first2= |date=27 August 2024 |title='These ideas are incredibly popular': what is degrowth and can it save the planet? |url=https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/aug/27/what-is-degrowth-can-it-save-planet |access-date=2025-02-13 |work=The Guardian |language=en-GB |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> For instance, a pan-European survey reported that 61% of respondents favor post-growth approaches, and a study by the German Environment Agency found that 88% agree on the need to “live well regardless of economic growth."<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Paulson |first1=Lily |last2=Büchs |first2=Milena |date=2022-10-01 |title=Public acceptance of post-growth: Factors and implications for post-growth strategy |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328722001203 |journal=Futures |volume=143 |pages=103020 |doi=10.1016/j.futures.2022.103020 |issn=0016-3287|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Brinker |first=Lina-Sophie |url=https://www.umweltbundesamt.de/publikationen/umweltbewusstsein-in-deutschland-2022 |title=Umweltbewusstsein in Deutschland 2022 |date=2023-07-18 |publisher=Umweltbundesamt |language=de}}</ref> Similarly, a survey of nearly 800 climate policy researchers around the world found that 73% support post-growth (agrowth and degrowth) positions.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=King |first1=Lewis C. |last2=Savin |first2=Ivan |last3=Drews |first3=Stefan |date=November 2023 |title=Shades of green growth scepticism among climate policy researchers |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-023-01198-2 |journal=Nature Sustainability |language=en |volume=6 |issue=11 |pages=1316–1320 |doi=10.1038/s41893-023-01198-2 |bibcode=2023NatSu...6.1316K |issn=2398-9629|hdl=10630/34655 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Moreover, widespread public support for measures such as job guarantees, universal basic income, and shorter working weeks—policies that seek to redistribute resources and reduce overconsumption—underscores a growing appetite for alternatives to traditional growth models.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2020-04-28 |title=Public support universal basic income, job guarantee and rent controls to respond to coronavirus pandemic, poll finds |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/coronavirus-poll-universal-basic-income-rent-control-job-safety-a9486806.html |access-date=2025-02-13 |website=The Independent |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Merwe |first=Ben van der |date=2022-07-05 |title=Brits support universal basic income by 20-point margin |url=https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/polling/2022/07/exclusive-poll-uk-support-universal-basic-income |access-date=2025-02-13 |website=New Statesman |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Evans |first=Erica |date=2022-02-24 |title=The numbers behind four-day work weeks |url=https://www.qualtrics.com/blog/four-day-work-week/ |access-date=2025-02-13 |website=Qualtrics |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=CAST Data Portal: Trust and Action dashboard |url=https://cast.ac.uk/cast-data-portal-trust-and-action-dashboard/ |access-date=2025-02-13 |website=cast.ac.uk |language=en-GB}}</ref>

== Degrowth in the Global South ==
{{main|Degrowth in the global south}}
The discussion around degrowth in the Global South highlights the importance of moving beyond a one-size-fits-all model of socio-ecological transformation. Rather than applying degrowth uniformly, scholars emphasize the need for context-specific approaches that account for historical inequalities, global economic dependencies, and diverse local realities. Emerging frameworks call for greater inclusion of Southern perspectives, attention to structural imbalances in global trade and finance, and the recognition of alternative visions of prosperity rooted in indigenous knowledge and post-development thought. In this sense, degrowth is increasingly framed not as a prescriptive agenda, but as an open, evolving dialogue shaped by multiple pathways toward ecological balance and social justice. <ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gräbner-Radkowitsch |first=Claudius |last2=Strunk |first2=Birte |date=2023-11-01 |title=Degrowth and the Global South: The twin problem of global dependencies |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800923002094?via=ihub |journal=Ecological Economics |volume=213 |pages=107946 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.107946 |issn=0921-8009|hdl=10419/273780 |hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Dengler |first=Corinna |last2=Seebacher |first2=Lisa M. |date=2019-03-01 |title=What About the Global South? Towards a Feminist Decolonial Degrowth Approach |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800918301228?via=ihub |journal=Ecological Economics |volume=157 |pages=246–252 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.11.019 |issn=0921-8009|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gerber |first=Julien-François |last2=Raina |first2=Rajeswari S. |date=2018-08-01 |title=Post-Growth in the Global South? Some Reflections from India and Bhutan |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800916315567?via=ihub |journal=Ecological Economics |volume=150 |pages=353–358 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.02.020 |issn=0921-8009|hdl=1765/114743 |hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Labrecque |first=Marie France |date=1996 |title=Arturo ESCOBAR, 1995, Encountering Development. The Making and Unmaking of the Third World. Princeton, N.J., Princeton University Press, 290 p. |url=https://doi.org/10.7202/015405ar |journal=Anthropologie et Sociétés |volume=20 |issue=1 |pages=222 |doi=10.7202/015405ar |issn=0702-8997}}</ref>

==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]] (1828–1910).<ref name=":8">{{cite book |last1=D'Alisa |first1=Giacomo |last2=Demaria |first2=Federico |last3=Kallis |first3=Giorgos |title=Degrowth: A Vocabulary for a New Era |date=2014 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-134-44977-4 |page=134 }}</ref>

Degrowth movements draw on the values of [[humanism]], [[Age of Enlightenment|enlightenment]], [[anthropology]] and [[human rights]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=D'Alisa |first1=Giacomo |last2=Demaria |first2=Federico |last3=Cattaneo |first3=Claudio |title=Civil and Uncivil Actors for a Degrowth Society |journal=Journal of Civil Society |date=June 2013 |volume=9 |issue=2 |pages=212–224 |doi=10.1080/17448689.2013.788935 }}</ref>

=== Club of Rome reports ===
{{Rquote |align=right |quote=The world's leaders are correctly fixated on economic growth as the answer to virtually all problems, ''but they're pushing it with all their might in the wrong direction.'' |author=[[Donella Meadows]] |source=''Thinking in Systems''<ref>{{cite book |last1=Meadows |first1=Donella H. |editor1-first=Diana |editor1-last=Wright |title=Thinking in Systems: A Primer |date=2008 |publisher=Chelsea Green Publishing |isbn=978-1-60358-055-7 |page=146 }}</ref>}}

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 the limits of our world system and the constraints it puts on human numbers and activity. The report, called ''[[The Limits to Growth]]'', published in 1972, became the first significant study to model the consequences of economic growth.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Limits to Growth+50 |url=https://www.clubofrome.org/ltg50/#:~:text=This%20report%20%E2%80%93%20first%20published%20on,at%20some%20point%20in%20the |website=Club of Rome |access-date=7 November 2023}}{{rs|date=July 2024}}</ref>

The reports (also known as the Meadows Reports) are not strictly the founding texts of the degrowth movement, as these reports only advise [[Steady-state economy|zero growth]], and have also been used to support the [[sustainable development]] movement. Still, they are considered the first studies explicitly presenting economic growth as a key reason for the increase in global [[environmental issue|environmental problems]] such as pollution, shortage of raw materials, and the destruction of [[ecosystem]]s. ''The Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update'' was published in 2004,<ref name="LtG+30-2004">{{cite book |last1=Meadows |first1=Donella H. |last2=Randers |first2=Jørgen |last3=Meadows |first3=Dennis L. |title=The Limits to Growth: The 30-year Update |date=2004 |publisher=Chelsea Green |isbn=978-1-931498-51-7 }}{{pn|date=July 2024}}</ref> and in 2012, a 40-year forecast from [[Jørgen Randers]], one of the book's original authors, was published as ''2052: A Global Forecast for the Next Forty Years''.<ref name="LtG+40-2012">{{cite book |last1=Randers |first1=Jorgen |title=2052: A Global Forecast for the Next Forty Years |date=2012 |publisher=Chelsea Green Publishing |isbn=978-1-60358-422-7 }}{{pn|date=July 2024}}</ref> In 2021, Club of Rome committee member Gaya Herrington published an article comparing the proposed models' predictions against empirical data trends.<ref name=":4">{{cite journal |last1=Herrington |first1=Gaya |title=Update to limits to growth: Comparing the World3 model with empirical data |journal=Journal of Industrial Ecology |date=June 2021 |volume=25 |issue=3 |pages=614–626 |doi=10.1111/jiec.13084 |bibcode=2021JInEc..25..614H |s2cid=226019712 }}</ref> The BAU2 ("Business as Usual 2") scenario, predicting "collapse through pollution",<ref name=":4" /> as well as the CT ("Comprehensive Technology") scenario, predicting exceptional technological development and gradual decline, were found to align most closely with data observed as of 2019.<ref name=":4" /> In September 2022, the Club of Rome released updated predictive models and policy recommendations in a general-audiences book titled ''Earth for all – A survival guide to humanity.''<ref>{{cite book |last1=Dixson-Declève |first1=Sandrine |last2=Gaffney |first2=Owen |last3=Ghosh |first3=Jayati |last4=Randers |first4=Jørgen |last5=Rockström |first5=Johan |last6=Stoknes |first6=Per Espen |title=Earth for All: A Survival Guide for Humanity |date=2022 |publisher=New Society Publishers |isbn=978-0-86571-986-6 |oclc=1315537859 }}{{pn|date=July 2024}}</ref>

=== Lasting influence of Georgescu-Roegen ===
{{Main|Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen}}
{{See also | Steady-state economy #Declining-state economy }}

The degrowth movement recognises [[Romanian Americans|Romanian American]] [[mathematician]], [[statistician]] and [[economist]] [[Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen]] as the main intellectual figure inspiring the movement.<ref name=sl01/><ref name=ck01/>{{rp|548f}} <ref name=jm01/>{{rp|1742}} <ref name=mb01/>{{rp|xi}} <ref name=gd01/>{{rp|1f}} In his 1971 work, ''[[The Entropy Law and the Economic Process]]'', Georgescu-Roegen argues that economic scarcity is rooted in physical reality; that all [[natural resource]]s are irreversibly degraded when put to use in economic activity; that the [[Sustainability#Carrying capacity|carrying capacity]] of Earth—that is, Earth's capacity to sustain human populations and consumption levels—is bound to decrease sometime in the future as Earth's finite stock of mineral resources is presently being extracted and put to use; and consequently, that the [[world economy]] as a whole is heading towards an inevitable future collapse.<ref name=ngr01/>{{primary inline|date=July 2024}}

Georgescu-Roegen's intellectual inspiration to degrowth dates back to the 1970s. When Georgescu-Roegen delivered a lecture at the [[University of Geneva]] in 1974, he made a lasting impression on the young, newly graduated French historian and philosopher, [[Jacques Grinevald]], who had earlier been introduced to Georgescu-Roegen's works by an academic advisor. Georgescu-Roegen and Grinevald became friends, and Grinevald devoted his research to a closer study of Georgescu-Roegen's work. As a result, in 1979, Grinevald published a French translation of a selection of Georgescu-Roegen's articles entitled ''Demain la décroissance: Entropie – Écologie – Économie'' ('Tomorrow, the Decline: Entropy – Ecology – Economy').<ref name=ngr03/> Georgescu-Roegen, who spoke French fluently, approved the use of the term ''décroissance'' in the title of the French translation. The book gained influence in French intellectual and academic circles from the outset. Later, the book was expanded and republished in 1995 and once again in 2006; however, the word ''Demain'' ('tomorrow') was removed from the book's title in the second and third editions.<ref name=jm01/>{{rp|1742}}<ref name=ngr03/><ref name=jg01/>{{rp|15f}}

By the time Grinevald suggested the term ''décroissance'' to form part of the title of the French translation of Georgescu-Roegen's work, the term had already permeated French intellectual circles since the early 1970s to signify a deliberate political action to downscale the economy on a permanent and voluntary basis.<ref name=fd01/>{{rp|195}} Simultaneously, but independently, Georgescu-Roegen criticised the ideas of ''[[The Limits to Growth]]'' and [[Herman Daly]]'s [[Steady-state economy#Herman Daly's concept of a steady-state economy|steady-state economy]] in his article, "Energy and Economic Myths", delivered as a series of lectures from 1972, but not published before 1975. In the article, Georgescu-Roegen stated the following:

{{cquote | [Authors who] were set exclusively on proving the impossibility of growth ... were easily deluded by a simple, now widespread, but false [[syllogism]]: Since exponential growth in a finite world leads to disasters of all kinds, ecological salvation lies in the stationary state. ... The crucial error consists in not seeing that not only growth, but also a zero-growth state, nay, even a declining state that does not converge toward annihilation, cannot exist forever in a finite environment.<ref name=ngr02/>{{rp|366f}}<br />... [T]he important, yet unnoticed point [is] that ''the necessary conclusion of the arguments in favor of that vision'' [of a stationary state] ''is that the most desirable state is not a stationary, but a declining one.'' Undoubtedly, the current growth must cease, nay, be reversed.<ref name=ngr02/>{{rp|368f}} [Emphasis in original] }}

When reading this particular passage of the text, Grinevald realised that no professional economist of any orientation had ever reasoned like this before. Grinevald also realised the congruence of Georgescu-Roegen's viewpoint and the French debates occurring at the time; this resemblance was captured in the title of the French edition. The translation of Georgescu-Roegen's work into French both fed on and gave further impetus to the concept of ''décroissance'' in France—and everywhere else in the francophone world—thereby creating something of an intellectual feedback loop.<ref name=jm01/>{{rp|1742}} <ref name=jg01/>{{rp|15f}} <ref name=fd01/>{{rp|197f}}

By the 2000s, when ''décroissance'' was to be translated from French back into English as the catchy banner for the new social movement, the original term "decline" was deemed inappropriate and misdirected for the purpose: "Decline" usually refers to an unexpected, unwelcome, and temporary economic [[recession]], something to be avoided or quickly overcome. Instead, the [[neologism]] "degrowth" was coined to signify a deliberate political action to downscale the economy on a permanent, conscious basis—as in the prevailing French usage of the term—something good to be welcomed and maintained, or so followers believe.<ref name=ck01/>{{rp|548}} <ref name=jg01/>{{rp|15f}} <ref name=gk01/>{{rp|874–876}}

When the first international degrowth conference was held in Paris in 2008, the participants honoured Georgescu-Roegen and his work.<ref name=ff01/>{{rp|15f, 28, ''et passim''}} In his [[manifesto]] on ''Petit traité de la décroissance sereine'' ("Farewell to Growth"), the leading French champion of the degrowth movement, [[Serge Latouche]], credited Georgescu-Roegen as the "main theoretical source of degrowth".<ref name=sl01/> Likewise, Italian degrowth theorist [[Mauro Bonaiuti]] considered Georgescu-Roegen's work to be "one of the analytical cornerstones of the degrowth perspective".<ref name=mb01/><!---please recover the page number in this citation--->

=== 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 [[Neoliberalism|neo-liberal]] model of economic development, arguing that an increasing "standard of living", based on consumption is absurd as a 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.<ref>Schumacher, E. F. (1973). ''Small is Beautiful: Economics as if People Mattered''. New York: Perennial Library.</ref>

=== Ecological and social issues ===
In January 1972, [[Edward Goldsmith]] and Robert Prescott-Allen—editors of ''[[The Ecologist]]''—published ''[[A Blueprint for Survival]]'', which called for a radical programme of decentralisation and [[deindustrialization]] to prevent what the authors referred to as "the breakdown of society and the irreversible disruption of the life-support systems on this planet".<ref>{{Cite web |url=http://www.theecologist.info/page34.html |title=A Blueprint for Survival, The Ecologist Vol. 2, No. 1. Preface |access-date=2008-04-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090907143122/http://www.theecologist.info/page34.html |archive-date=2009-09-07 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

In 2019, a summary for policymakers of the [[Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services|largest, most comprehensive study to date of biodiversity and ecosystem services]] was published by the [[Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services]]. The report was finalised in Paris. The main conclusions:

#Over the last 50 years, the state of nature has deteriorated at an unprecedented and accelerating rate.
#The main drivers of this deterioration have been changes in land and sea use, exploitation of living beings, [[climate change]], pollution and invasive species. These five drivers, in turn, are caused by societal behaviors, from consumption to governance.
#Damage to ecosystems undermines 35 of 44 selected UN targets, including the UN General Assembly's [[Sustainable Development Goals]] for poverty, hunger, health, water, cities' climate, oceans and land. It can cause problems with food, water and humanity's air supply.
#To fix the problem, humanity needs transformative change, including [[sustainable agriculture]], reductions in [[Consumption (economics)|consumption]] and waste, fishing quotas and collaborative water management. Page 8 of the report proposes "enabling visions of a good quality of life that do not entail ever-increasing material consumption" as one of the main measures. The report states that "Some pathways chosen to achieve the goals related to energy, economic growth, industry and infrastructure and sustainable consumption and production (Sustainable Development Goals 7, 8, 9 and 12), as well as targets related to poverty, food security and cities (Sustainable Development Goals 1, 2 and 11), could have substantial positive or negative impacts on nature and therefore on the achievement of other Sustainable Development Goals".<ref>{{cite book |title=Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services |date=6 May 2019 |publisher=the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services |url=https://www.ipbes.net/sites/default/files/downloads/spm_unedited_advance_for_posting_htn.pdf |access-date=10 May 2019}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |title=Why Biodiversity Loss Hurts Humans as Much as Climate Change Does|work=Deutsche Welle |url=https://www.ecowatch.com/biodiversity-loss-human-health-2636410357.html |access-date=10 May 2019 |date=May 6, 2019}}</ref>

In a June 2020 paper published in ''[[Nature Communications]]'', a group of scientists argue that "green growth" or "[[sustainable growth]]" is a myth: "we have to get away from our obsession with economic growth—we really need to start managing our economies in a way that protects our climate and natural resources, even if this means less, no or even negative growth." They conclude that a change in economic paradigms is imperative to prevent [[environmental destruction]], and suggest a range of ideas from the reformist to the radical, with the latter consisting of degrowth, [[eco-socialism]] and [[eco-anarchism]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Overconsumption and growth economy key drivers of environmental crises |url=https://phys.org/news/2020-06-overconsumption-growth-economy-key-drivers.html |website=Phys.org |publisher=University of New South Wales |access-date=22 June 2020 |format=Press release}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wiedmann|first1=Thomas |last2=Lenzen|first2=Manfred |last3=Keyßer|first3=Lorenz T. |last4=Steinberger|first4=Julia K.|author-link4=Julia Steinberger|title=Scientists' warning on affluence |journal=[[Nature Communications]] |date=2020 |volume=11 |issue=3107 |page=3107 |doi=10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y |pmid=32561753 |pmc=7305220 |bibcode=2020NatCo..11.3107W }}</ref>

In June 2020, the official site of one of the organizations promoting degrowth published an article by Vijay Kolinjivadi, an expert in political ecology, arguing that the emergence of [[COVID-19]] is linked to the ecological crisis.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Kolinjivadi |first1=Vijay |title=This pandemic IS ecological breakdown: different tempo, same song |url=http://unevenearth.org/2020/04/this-pandemic-is-ecological-breakdown-different-tempo-same-song/ |website=Uneven Earth |date=2 April 2020 |access-date=20 July 2020}}</ref>

The 2019 [[World Scientists' Warning to Humanity#2019 warning on climate change and 2021 and 2022 updates|World Scientists' Warning of a Climate Emergency]] and its 2021 update have asserted that [[economic growth]] is a primary driver of the [[overexploitation]] of ecosystems, and to preserve the biosphere and mitigate climate change civilization must, in addition to other fundamental changes including stabilizing [[population growth]] and adopting largely [[plant-based diets]], "shift from GDP growth and the pursuit of affluence toward sustaining ecosystems and improving human well-being by prioritizing basic needs and reducing inequality."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ripple |first1=William J |last2=Wolf |first2=Christopher |last3=Newsome |first3=Thomas M |last4=Barnard |first4=Phoebe |last5=Moomaw |first5=William R |title=World Scientists' Warning of a Climate Emergency |journal=BioScience |date=5 November 2019 |doi=10.1093/biosci/biz088 |hdl=1808/30278 |hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ripple |first1=William J |last2=Wolf |first2=Christopher |last3=Newsome |first3=Thomas M |last4=Gregg |first4=Jillian W |last5=Lenton |first5=Timothy M |last6=Palomo |first6=Ignacio |last7=Eikelboom |first7=Jasper A J |last8=Law |first8=Beverly E |last9=Huq |first9=Saleemul |last10=Duffy |first10=Philip B |last11=Rockström |first11=Johan |title=World Scientists' Warning of a Climate Emergency 2021 |journal=BioScience |date=September 2021 |volume=71 |issue=9 |pages=894–898 |doi=10.1093/biosci/biab079 |hdl=1808/30278 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> In an opinion piece published in [[Al Jazeera Media Network|Al Jazeera]], [[Jason Hickel]] states that this paper, which has more than 11,000 scientist cosigners, demonstrates that there is a "strong scientific consensus" towards abandoning "GDP as a measure of progress."<ref>{{cite news |last= Hickel|first=Jason|date=6 December 2019 |title=The dark side of the Nordic model|url=https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2019/12/6/the-dark-side-of-the-nordic-model|work= Al Jazeera|location= |access-date=3 July 2023|quote=The first step is to abandon GDP as a measure of progress – as New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern recently pledged to do – and focus instead on human well-being and ecology. There is a strong scientific consensus forming around this approach. A new paper signed by more than 11,000 scientists argues that high-income nations must shift to post-growth economic models if we are going to have any chance of preventing climate breakdown. }}</ref>

In a 2022 comment published in ''[[Nature (journal)|Nature]]'', Hickel, [[Giorgos Kallis]], [[Juliet Schor]], [[Julia Steinberger]] and others say that both the [[IPCC]] and the [[IPBES]] "suggest that degrowth policies should be considered in the fight against climate breakdown and biodiversity loss, respectively".<ref name="Hickeletal">{{cite journal |last1=Hickel |first1=Jason |last2=Kallis |first2=Giorgos |last3=Jackson |first3=Tim |last4=O’Neill |first4=Daniel W. |last5=Schor |first5=Juliet B. |last6=Steinberger |first6=Julia K. |last7=Victor |first7=Peter A. |last8=Ürge-Vorsatz |first8=Diana |title=Degrowth can work — here's how science can help |journal=Nature |date=15 December 2022 |volume=612 |issue=7940 |pages=400–403 |doi=10.1038/d41586-022-04412-x |pmid=36510013 |bibcode=2022Natur.612..400H }}</ref>

== Movement ==
=== Conferences ===
The movement has included international conferences promoted by the network Research & Degrowth (R&D).<ref>{{cite web |title=Research & Degrowth homepage |url=https://degrowth.org/ |website=Degrowth.org}}</ref> The First International Conference on Economic Degrowth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity in [[Paris]] (2008) was a discussion about the financial, social, cultural, demographic, and environmental crisis caused by the deficiencies of [[capitalism]] and an explanation of the main principles of degrowth. Further conferences were in [[Barcelona]] (2010), [[Montreal]] (2012), [[Venice]] (2012), [[Leipzig]] (2014), [[Budapest]] (2016), [[Malmö]] (2018), and [[Zagreb]] (2023). The 10th International Degrowth Conference will be held in Pontevedra in June 2024. Separately, two conferences have been organised as cross-party initiatives of Members of the [[European Parliament]]: the Post-Growth 2018 Conference<ref>{{cite web |date=September 2018 |title=Post-Growth 2018 Conference |url=https://www.postgrowth2018.eu/}}</ref> and the Beyond Growth 2023 Conference,<ref>{{cite web |date=May 2023 |title=Beyond Growth 2023 Conference |url=https://www.beyond-growth-2023.eu/}}</ref> both held in the European Parliament in Brussels.

=== International Degrowth Network ===
The conferences have also been accompanied by informal degrowth assemblies since 2018, to build community between degrowth groups across countries.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Movement History |url=https://degrowth.net/about/history/ |access-date=2024-05-20 |publisher=International Degrowth Network}}</ref> The 4th Assembly in Zagreb in 2023 discussed a proposal to create a more intentional organisational structure and led to the creation of the International Degrowth Network, which organised the 5th assembly in June 2024.<ref>{{cite web |date=June 2024 |title=Pontevedra Assembly 2024 |url=https://degrowth.net/assemblies/pontevedra-assembly-2024/ |website=International Degrowth Network}}</ref>

=== Relation to other social movements ===
The degrowth movement has a variety of relations to other social movements and alternative economic visions, which range from collaboration to partial overlap. The Konzeptwerk Neue Ökonomie (Laboratory for New Economic Ideas), which hosted the 2014 international Degrowth conference in Leipzig, has published a project entitled "Degrowth in movement(s)" in 2017, which maps relationships with 32 other social movements and initiatives.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Degrowth in movement(s): exploring pathways for transformation |date=2020 |publisher=Zero Books |isbn=978-1-78904-186-6 |editor-last=Burkhart |editor-first=Corinna |location=Winchester, UK Washington, USA |editor-last2=Schmelzer |editor-first2=Matthias |editor-last3=Treu |editor-first3=Nina}}</ref> The relation to the [[environmental justice]] movement is especially visible.<ref name=":8" />

Although not explicitly called degrowth, movements inspired by similar concepts and terminologies can be found around the world, including ''Buen Vivir''<ref>{{cite news |last1=Balch |first1=Oliver |title=Buen vivir: the social philosophy inspiring movements in South America |url=https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/buen-vivir-philosophy-south-america-eduardo-gudynas |work=The Guardian |date=4 February 2013 }}</ref> in Latin America, the [[Zapatista Army of National Liberation|Zapatistas]] in Mexico, the Kurdish [[Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria|Rojava]] or ''Eco-Swaraj'' in India, and the [[sufficiency economy]] in Thailand.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kothari |first1=Ashish |last2=Demaria |first2=Federico |last3=Acosta |first3=Alberto |title=Buen Vivir, Degrowth and Ecological Swaraj: Alternatives to sustainable development and the Green Economy |journal=Development |date=December 2014 |volume=57 |issue=3–4 |pages=362–375 |doi=10.1057/dev.2015.24 }}</ref> The [[Economy of Cuba|Cuban economic]] situation has also been of interest to degrowth advocates because its limits on growth were socially imposed (although as a result of geopolitics), and has resulted in positive health changes.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Cederlof |first1=Gustav |title=The Low-Carbon Contradiction: Energy Transition, Geopolitics, and the Infrastructural State in Cuba |date=2023 |publisher=Univ of California Press |isbn=978-0-520-39313-4 }}{{pn|date=July 2024}}</ref>

Another set of movements the degrowth movement finds synergy with is the wave of initiatives and networks inspired by the [[commons]], where resources are sustainably shared in a decentralised and self-managed manner, instead of through capitalist organization.<ref name=":6" /><ref name=":8" /><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Asara |first1=Viviana |last2=Profumi |first2=Emanuele |last3=Kallis |first3=Giorgos |title=Degrowth, Democracy and Autonomy |journal=Environmental Values |date=April 2013 |volume=22 |issue=2 |pages=217–239 |doi=10.3197/096327113X13581561725239 |bibcode=2013EnvV...22..217A }}</ref> For example, initiatives inspired by commons could be food cooperatives, open-source platforms, and group management of resources such as energy or water. [[Commons-based peer production]] also guides the role of technology in degrowth, where [[conviviality]] and socially useful production are prioritised over capital gain.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Robra |first1=Ben |last2=Pazaitis |first2=Alex |last3=Giotitsas |first3=Chris |last4=Pansera |first4=Mario |title=From creative destruction to convivial innovation - A post-growth perspective |journal=Technovation |date=July 2023 |volume=125 |pages=102760 |doi=10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102760 |hdl=11093/4788 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> This could happen in the form of [[Cosmopolitan localism|cosmolocalism]], which offers a framework for localising collaborative forms of production while sharing resources globally as digital commons, to reduce dependence on global value chains.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Kostakis |first1=Vasilis |last2=Niaros |first2=Vasilis |last3=Giotitsas |first3=Chris |title=Beyond global versus local: illuminating a cosmolocal framework for convivial technology development |journal=Sustainability Science |date=September 2023 |volume=18 |issue=5 |pages=2309–2322 |doi=10.1007/s11625-023-01378-1 |bibcode=2023SuSc...18.2309K |doi-access=free }}</ref>

== Recent scholarly reviews ==
Several systematic reviews and critical assessments of degrowth literature have been published since 2017. <ref name=":15">{{Cite journal |last1=Kallis |first1=Giorgos |last2=Hickel |first2=Jason |last3=O’Neill |first3=Daniel W |last4=Jackson |first4=Tim |last5=Victor |first5=Peter A |last6=Raworth |first6=Kate |last7=Schor |first7=Juliet B |last8=Steinberger |first8=Julia K |last9=Ürge-Vorsatz |first9=Diana |date=2025-01-01 |title=Post-growth: the science of wellbeing within planetary boundaries |journal=The Lancet Planetary Health |volume=9 |issue=1 |pages=e62–e78 |doi=10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00310-3 |issn=2542-5196|doi-access=free |pmid=39855235 }}</ref><ref name=":16">{{Cite journal |last1=Lauer |first1=Arthur |last2=Capellán-Pérez |first2=Iñigo |last3=Wergles |first3=Nathalie |date=2025-01-01 |title=A comparative review of de- and post-growth modeling studies |journal=Ecological Economics |volume=227 |pages=108383 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108383 |issn=0921-8009|doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name=":17">{{Cite journal |last1=Engler |first1=John-Oliver |last2=Kretschmer |first2=Max-Friedemann |last3=Rathgens |first3=Julius |last4=Ament |first4=Joe A. |last5=Huth |first5=Thomas |last6=von Wehrden |first6=Henrik |date=2024-04-01 |title=15 years of degrowth research: A systematic review |journal=Ecological Economics |volume=218 |pages=108101 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.108101 |issn=0921-8009|doi-access=free |bibcode=2024EcoEc.21808101E }}</ref><ref name=":18">{{Cite journal |last1=Weiss |first1=Martin |last2=Cattaneo |first2=Claudio |date=2017-07-01 |title=Degrowth – Taking Stock and Reviewing an Emerging Academic Paradigm |journal=Ecological Economics |volume=137 |pages=220–230 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.01.014 |pmid=28674463 |pmc=5421156 |bibcode=2017EcoEc.137..220W |issn=0921-8009}}</ref><ref name="savin">{{Cite journal |last1=Savin |first1=Ivan |last2=van den Bergh |first2=Jeroen |date=2024-12-01 |title=Reviewing studies of degrowth: Are claims matched by data, methods and policy analysis? |journal=Ecological Economics |volume=226 |pages=108324 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108324 |issn=0921-8009 |doi-access=free|hdl=1871.1/c67d1da2-4c62-4e4c-ae4a-06f215317b25 |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

A 2025 review in ''The Lancet Planetary Health'' surveyed 201 recent studies to assess the field of [[post-growth]] research. The authors highlighted advances in ecological macroeconomic models, including testing post-growth policies, addressing GDP-linked welfare dependencies, and identifying systems to reduce resource use while enhancing wellbeing. The review is authored by leading experts across multiple subfields of post-growth research and highlights key recent contributions without adhering to traditional systematic review criteria, such as requiring explicit use of 'post-growth' terminology. <ref name=":15" />

A 2025 comparative review of degrowth and post-growth modeling studies published in Ecological Economics analyzed 75 peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2023. The review found that "the reviewed studies represent a broad quantitative knowledge base demonstrating that, at least in the Global North, further growth is not necessary to achieve well-being while a reduction of the socio-economic metabolism would considerably facilitate the pursuit of ambitious [[Paris Agreement|climate goals]]." However, the authors noted that many models rely on a narrow set of policy proposals (like working time reduction, [[maximum income]] caps, [[Carbon tax|carbon taxes]], or a [[universal basic income]]) and call for more inclusive, geographically diverse approaches. <ref name=":16" />

A 2024 systematic review of 951 peer-reviewed articles (2008–2022) identified seven thematic clusters in degrowth research along methodological and scale dimensions. The review noted that although degrowth scholarship is expanding, there is a low degree of collaboration among authors and the literature could benefit from more discussion of the political implications of its proposals. <ref name=":17" />

A 2024 systematic review of degrowth studies over the past 10 years showed that most were of poor quality: almost 90% were opinions rather than analysis, few used quantitative or qualitative data, and even fewer ones used formal modelling; the latter used small samples or a focus on non-representative cases. Also most studies offered subjective policy advice, but lacked policy evaluation and integration with insights from the literature on environmental/climate policies.<ref name="savin" />

A 2017 review of 91 articles (2006-2015) found a gradual shift from activist-driven narratives and conceptual essays to increasing academic rigor, branching into modelling, empirical assessments and the study of concrete implementations. However, they highlighted the need to identify concrete well-being benefits and potentials for non-market value creation. <ref name=":18" />

== Criticisms, challenges and dilemmas ==
Critiques of degrowth concern the ambiguity of the concept, negative connotation that the term "degrowth" imparts, the misapprehension that growth is seen as unambiguously bad, the challenges and feasibility of a degrowth transition, as well as the entanglement of desirable aspects of modernity with the growth paradigm.

=== Criticisms ===
According to a paper of environmental economist [[Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh]], degrowth is often seen as an ambiguous concept due to its various interpretations, which can lead to confusion rather than a clear and constructive debate on environmental policy. Many interpretations of degrowth do not offer effective strategies for reducing environmental impact or transitioning to a sustainable economy. Additionally, degrowth is unlikely to gain significant social or political support, making it an ineffective strategy for achieving environmental sustainability.<ref name="van den Bergh">{{Cite journal
|last=van den Bergh
|first=Jeroen C.J.M.
|date=2011
|title=Environment versus growth — A criticism of "degrowth" and a plea for "a-growth"
|journal=Ecological Economics
|volume=70
|issue=5
|pages=881–890
|doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.09.035
|bibcode=2011EcoEc..70..881V
|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800910004209
|url-access=subscription
}}</ref>

====Ineffectiveness and better alternatives====
In his paper, Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh highlights that a focus solely on reducing consumption (or consumption degrowth) may lead to [[rebound effect]]s. For instance, reducing consumption of certain goods and services might result in an increase in spending on other items, as [[disposable income]] remains unchanged. Alternatively, it could lead to savings, which would provide additional funds for others to borrow and spend.

He emphasizes the importance of (global) environmental policies, such as pricing [[externalities]] through [[environmental tax]]es or [[emission trading|tradable permits]], which incentivize behavior changes that reduce environmental impact and which provide essential information for consumers and help manage rebound effects.<ref name="van den Bergh" />

Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh argues for an agnostic attitude toward economic growth, called [[agrowth]]. According to him, environmental policy should not be aimed at pursuing or avoiding growth in the hope of reducing environmental damage, but at direct deployment of effective instruments such as pricing externalities (for example, via carbon taxes or emission rights). Whether the economy grows, stagnates or shrinks as a result is of secondary importance.<ref name="3thOption">{{cite journal |last1=van den Bergh |first1=Jeroen C. J. M. |title=A third option for climate policy within potential limits to growth |journal=Nature Climate Change |date=February 2017 |volume=7 |issue=2 |pages=107–112 |doi=10.1038/nclimate3113 |bibcode=2017NatCC...7..107V |hdl=1871.1/55d55cfa-2617-4e8a-b21c-fbc02ee19eea |url=https://research.vu.nl/en/publications/55d55cfa-2617-4e8a-b21c-fbc02ee19eea |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

====Negative connotation====
The use of the term "degrowth" is criticized for being detrimental to the degrowth movement because it could carry a negative connotation,<ref name="Drews&Antal20162">{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.04.001 |title = Degrowth: A 'missile word' that backfires?|journal = Ecological Economics|volume = 126|pages = 182–187|year = 2016|last1 = Drews|first1 = Stefan|last2 = Antal |first2 = Miklós}}</ref> in opposition to the positively perceived "growth".<ref name="Warriner&al20132">{{Cite journal |doi = 10.3758/s13428-012-0314-x|pmid = 23404613|title = Norms of valence, arousal, and dominance for 13,915 English lemmas|journal = Behavior Research Methods|volume = 45|issue = 4|pages = 1191–1207|year = 2013|last1 = Warriner|first1 = Amy Beth|last2 = Kuperman|first2 = Victor|last3 = Brysbaert|first3 = Marc|doi-access = free}}</ref> "Growth" is associated with the "up" direction and positive experiences, while "down" generates the opposite associations.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Meier |first1=Brian P. |last2=Robinson |first2=Michael D. |title=Why the Sunny Side Is Up: Associations Between Affect and Vertical Position |journal=Psychological Science |date=April 2004 |volume=15 |issue=4 |pages=243–247 |doi=10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00659.x |pmid=15043641 |s2cid=31201262 }}</ref> Research in [[political psychology]] has shown that the initial negative association of a concept, such as of "degrowth" with the negatively perceived "down", can bias how the subsequent information on that concept is integrated at the unconscious level.<ref>{{cite book |doi=10.1017/cbo9781139032490 |title=The Rationalizing Voter |date=2013 |last1=Lodge |first1=Milton |last2=Taber |first2=Charles S. |isbn=978-0-521-76350-9 }}{{pn|date=July 2024}}</ref> At the conscious level, degrowth can be interpreted negatively as the contraction of the economy,<ref name="Drews&Antal20162" /><ref name=":0">{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.09.035 |title = Environment versus growth — A criticism of "degrowth" and a plea for "a-growth"|journal = Ecological Economics|volume = 70|issue = 5|pages = 881–890|year = 2011|last1 = van den Bergh|first1 = Jeroen C.J.M.| bibcode=2011EcoEc..70..881V |author-link1=Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh}}</ref> although this is not the goal of a degrowth transition, but rather one of its expected consequences.<ref name="annual">{{cite journal |last1=Kallis |first1=Giorgos |last2=Kostakis |first2=Vasilis |last3=Lange |first3=Steffen |last4=Muraca |first4=Barbara |last5=Paulson |first5=Susan |last6=Schmelzer |first6=Matthias |title=Research On Degrowth |journal=Annual Review of Environment and Resources |date=17 October 2018 |volume=43 |issue=1 |pages=291–316 |doi=10.1146/annurev-environ-102017-025941 |doi-access=free }}</ref> In the current economic system, a contraction of the economy is associated with a [[recession]] and its ensuing [[austerity]] measures, job cuts, or lower salaries.<ref name=":0"/> [[Noam Chomsky]] commented on the use of the term: "When you say 'degrowth' it frightens people. It's like saying you're going to have to be poorer tomorrow than you are today, and it doesn't mean that."<ref>{{cite web|url= https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/the-greening-of-noam-chomsky-a-conversation |title=The greening of Noam Chomsky: a conversation|last1=Levy|first1=Andrea|last2=Gonick |first2=Cy|date=January 22, 2014|website=Canadian Dimension|publisher=Open Publishing|access-date=March 27, 2019|last3=Lukacs|first3=Martin}}</ref>

Since "degrowth" contains the term "growth", there is also a risk of the term having a [[backfire effect]], which would reinforce the initial positive attitude toward growth.<ref name="Drews&Antal20162" /> "Degrowth" is also criticized for being a confusing term, since its aim is not to halt economic growth as the word implies. Instead, "[[Agrowth|a-growth]]" is proposed as an alternative concept that emphasizes that growth ceases to be an important policy objective, but that it can still be achieved as a side-effect of environmental and social policies.<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{cite journal |last1=van den Bergh |first1=Jeroen C. J. M. |title=A third option for climate policy within potential limits to growth |journal=Nature Climate Change |date=February 2017 |volume=7 |issue=2 |pages=107–112 |doi=10.1038/nclimate3113 |bibcode=2017NatCC...7..107V |hdl=1871.1/55d55cfa-2617-4e8a-b21c-fbc02ee19eea |url=https://research.vu.nl/en/publications/55d55cfa-2617-4e8a-b21c-fbc02ee19eea |hdl-access=free }}</ref>

====Systems theoretical critique====
In stressing the negative rather than the positive side(s) of growth, the majority of degrowth proponents remain focused on (de-)growth, thus giving continued attention to the issue of growth, leading to continued attention to the arguments that [[sustainable growth]] is possible. One way to avoid giving attention to growth might be extending from the economic concept of growth, which proponents of both growth and degrowth commonly adopt, to a broader concept of growth that allows for the observation of growth in other [[Differentiation (sociology)|sociological characteristics]] of society. A corresponding "recoding" of "growth-obsessed", capitalist organizations was proposed by Steffen Roth.<ref name=Roth-2015>{{cite journal |last1=Roth |first1=Steffen |title=Growth and function: a viral research program for next organisations |journal=International Journal of Technology Management |date=2016 |volume=72 |issue=4 |pages=296–309 |doi=10.1504/IJTM.2016.081574 }}</ref>

====Marxist critique====
{{See also|Steady-state economy #Capitalism without growth}}
Traditional [[Marxism|Marxists]] distinguish between two types of value creation: that which is useful to humankind, and that which only serves the purpose of accumulating capital.<ref name=gd01/>{{rp|86–87}} Traditional Marxists consider that it is the exploitative nature and control of the capitalist production relations that is the determinant and not the quantity. According to Jean Zin, while the justification for degrowth is valid, it is not a solution to the problem.<ref>''L'écologie politique à l'ère de l'information'', Ere, 2006, p. 68-69</ref> Other Marxist writers have adopted positions close to the de-growth perspective. For example, [[John Bellamy Foster]]<ref name="The Ecological Rift">{{cite book |last1=Foster |first1=John Bellamy |author-link1=John Bellamy Foster |last2=Clark |first2=Brett |last3=York |first3=Richard |date=2010 |title=The ecological rift : capitalism's war on the earth |url=https://archive.org/details/ecologicalriftca0000fost_c2n0 |isbn=9781583673898 |oclc=823169963 |via=[[Internet Archive]] |url-access=registration |publisher=[[Monthly Review]]}}{{Page needed|date=September 2024}}</ref> and Fred Magdoff,<ref name="Harmony and Ecological Civilization, Monthly Review, Vol 44 (2), 1-9">{{cite web|url=https://monthlyreview.org/2012/06/01/harmony-and-ecological-civilization|title=Harmony and Ecological Civilization: Beyond the Capitalist Alienation of Nature|date=June 2012|work=Monthly Review}}</ref> in common with [[David Harvey]], [[Immanuel Wallerstein]], [[Paul Sweezy]] and others focus on endless [[capital accumulation]] as the basic principle and goal of capitalism. This is the source of economic growth and, in the view of these writers, results in an unsustainable [[growth imperative]]. 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, though this is not unique to capitalist systems of food production as seen in the [[Aral Sea]]. Many degrowth theories and ideas are based on neo-Marxist theory.<ref name=gd01/> Foster emphasizes that degrowth "is not aimed at austerity, but at finding a 'prosperous way down' from our current extractivist, wasteful, ecologically unsustainable, maldeveloped, exploitative, and unequal, class-hierarchical world."<ref>{{cite web |url=https://monthlyreview.org/2023/07/01/planned-degrowth/|title=Planned Degrowth: Ecosocialism and Sustainable Human Development|last=Foster|first=John Bellamy|author-link=John Bellamy Foster|date=July 1, 2023 |website=[[Monthly Review]] |publisher= |access-date=August 20, 2023 |quote=}}</ref>

=== Challenges ===

==== Lack of macroeconomics for sustainability ====
It is reasonable for society to worry about recession as economic growth has been the unanimous goal around the globe in the past decades. However, in some advanced countries, there are attempts to develop a model for a regrowth economy. For instance, the [[Cool Japan]] strategy has proven to be instructive for Japan, which has been a static economy for almost decades.<ref>{{cite web |last=Tunstall |first=Elizabeth Dori |date=2015-05-05 |title=Degrowth: Japan models design for steady state economies |website=[[Swinburne University of Technology]] |url=https://www.swinburne.edu.au/news/2015/05/degrowth-japan-models-design-for-steady-state-economies/}}</ref>

==== Political and social spheres ====
According to some scholars in Sociology, the [[growth imperative]] is deeply entrenched in [[Market capitalism|market capitalist]] societies such that it is necessary for their stability.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Rosa |first1=Hartmut |last2=Dörre |first2=Klaus |last3=Lessenich |first3=Stephan |title=Appropriation, Activation and Acceleration: The Escalatory Logics of Capitalist Modernity and the Crises of Dynamic Stabilization |journal=Theory, Culture & Society |date=January 2017 |volume=34 |issue=1 |pages=53–73 |doi=10.1177/0263276416657600 |url=http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:19-epub-42046-5 }}</ref> Moreover, the institutions of [[Modernity|modern]] societies, such as the [[nation state]], [[welfare spending|welfare]], [[labor market]], [[education]], [[Academy|academia]], [[law]] and [[finance]], have co-evolved with growth to sustain them.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Luhmann|first=Niklas|date=1976|title=The Future Cannot Begin: Temporal Structures in Modern Society|journal=Social Research|volume=43|pages=130–152}}</ref> A degrowth transition thus requires not only a change of the economic system but of all the systems on which it relies. As most people in modern societies are dependent on those growth-oriented institutions, the challenge of a degrowth transition also lies in individual resistance to move away from growth.<ref name=":1">{{cite journal |last1=Büchs |first1=Milena |last2=Koch |first2=Max |title=Challenges for the degrowth transition: The debate about wellbeing |journal=Futures |date=January 2019 |volume=105 |pages=155–165 |doi=10.1016/j.futures.2018.09.002 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

==== Land privatisation ====
Baumann, Alexander and Burdon suggest that "the Degrowth movement needs to give more attention to land and housing costs, which are significant barriers hindering true political and economic agency and any grassroots driven degrowth transition."<ref>{{cite journal |id={{Gale|A663469452}} {{ProQuest|2539941234}} |last1=Baumann |first1=Alex |last2=Alexander |first2=Samuel |last3=Burdon |first3=Peter |title=Land Commodification as a Barrier to Political and Economic Agency: A Degrowth Perspective |journal=Journal of Australian Political Economy |date=Summer 2020 |issue=86 |pages=379–405 |url=https://www.ppesydney.net/content/uploads/2021/01/19_Baumann-Alexander-and-Burdon.pdf }}</ref>

They claim that land – a necessity like land and air – privatisation creates an absolute economic growth determinant. They point out that even one who is fully committed to degrowth nevertheless has no option but decades of market growth participation to pay rent or mortgage. Because of this, land privatisation is a structural impediment to moving forward that makes degrowth economically and politically unviable. They conclude that without addressing land privatisation (the market's inaugural privatisation – primitive accumulation) the degrowth movement's strategies cannot succeed. Just as land enclosure (privatisation) initiated capitalism (economic growth), degrowth must start with reclaiming land commons.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Baumann |first1=Alex |last2=Alexander |first2=Samuel |title=Access to land is a barrier to simpler, sustainable living. Public housing could offer a way forward |url=https://theconversation.com/access-to-land-is-a-barrier-to-simpler-sustainable-living-public-housing-could-offer-a-way-forward-121246 |work=The Conversation |date=21 August 2019 }}</ref>

==== Agriculture ====
When it comes to agriculture, a degrowth society would require a shift from [[industrial agriculture]] to less intensive and more sustainable agricultural practices such as [[permaculture]] or [[organic agriculture]]. Still, it is not clear if any of those alternatives could feed the [[World population|current]] and [[Projections of population growth|projected global population]].<ref name=":2">{{cite journal |last1=Gomiero |first1=Tiziano |title=Agriculture and degrowth: State of the art and assessment of organic and biotech-based agriculture from a degrowth perspective |journal=Journal of Cleaner Production |date=October 2018 |volume=197 |pages=1823–1839 |doi=10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.237 |bibcode=2018JCPro.197.1823G |s2cid=157265598 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ferguson |first1=Rafter Sass |last2=Lovell |first2=Sarah Taylor |title=Permaculture for agroecology: design, movement, practice, and worldview. A review |journal=Agronomy for Sustainable Development |date=April 2014 |volume=34 |issue=2 |pages=251–274 |doi=10.1007/s13593-013-0181-6 |doi-access=free |bibcode=2014AgSD...34..251F }}</ref> In the case of organic agriculture, Germany, for example, would not be able to feed its population under ideal organic yields over all of its [[arable land]] without meaningful changes to patterns of consumption, such as reducing meat consumption and [[food waste]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Muller |first1=Adrian |last2=Schader |first2=Christian |last3=El-Hage Scialabba |first3=Nadia |last4=Brüggemann |first4=Judith |last5=Isensee |first5=Anne |last6=Erb |first6=Karl-Heinz |last7=Smith |first7=Pete |last8=Klocke |first8=Peter |last9=Leiber |first9=Florian |last10=Stolze |first10=Matthias |last11=Niggli |first11=Urs |title=Strategies for feeding the world more sustainably with organic agriculture |journal=Nature Communications |date=14 November 2017 |volume=8 |issue=1 |page=1290 |doi=10.1038/s41467-017-01410-w |pmid=29138387 |pmc=5686079 |bibcode=2017NatCo...8.1290M }}</ref><ref name=":2" /> Moreover, [[Workforce productivity|labour productivity]] of non-industrial agriculture is significantly lower due to the reduced use or absence of fossil fuels, which leaves much less labour for other [[Sectors of the economy|sectors]].<ref>{{cite book |doi=10.4324/9780203635926 |title=The Metabolic Pattern of Societies |date=2011 |last1=Giampietro |first1=Mario |last2=Mayumi |first2=Kozo |last3=Sorman |first3=Alevgül |isbn=978-1-136-61994-6 }}{{pn|date=July 2024}}</ref> Potential solutions to this challenge include scaling up approaches such as community-supported agriculture (CSA).

=== Dilemmas ===
Given that modernity has emerged with high levels of energy and material [[throughput]], there is an apparent compromise between desirable aspects of modernity<ref>{{Cite book|title=Enlightenment Now|last=Pinker, Steven|isbn=9780141979090|oclc=1083713125|date=2019-01-03|publisher=Penguin Books }}</ref> (e.g., [[social justice]], [[gender equality]], long [[life expectancy]], low [[infant mortality]]) and [[unsustainable]] levels of energy and material use.<ref name=":3">{{cite journal |last1=Quilley |first1=Stephen |title=De-Growth Is Not a Liberal Agenda: Relocalisation and the Limits to Low Energy Cosmopolitanism |journal=Environmental Values |date=April 2013 |volume=22 |issue=2 |pages=261–285 |doi=10.3197/096327113X13581561725310 |bibcode=2013EnvV...22..261Q }}</ref> Some researchers, however, argue that the decline in income inequality and rise in social mobility occurring under capitalism from the late 1940s to the 1960s was a product of the heavy bargaining power of labor unions and increased wealth and income redistribution during that time; while also pointing to the rise in income inequality in the 1970s following the collapse of labor unions and weakening of state welfare measures.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Nelson |first1=Joel I. |title=Inequality in america: The case for post-industrial capitalism |journal=Research in Social Stratification and Mobility |date=January 2001 |volume=18 |pages=39–62 |doi=10.1016/S0276-5624(01)80022-6 }}</ref> Others also argue that modern capitalism maintains gender inequalities by means of advertising, messaging in consumer goods, and social media.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gill |first1=Rosalind |last2=Kanai |first2=Akane |title=Mediating Neoliberal Capitalism: Affect, Subjectivity and Inequality |journal=Journal of Communication |date=April 2018 |volume=68 |issue=2 |pages=318–326 |doi=10.1093/joc/jqy002 }}</ref>

Another way of looking at the argument that the development of desirable aspects of modernity require unsustainable energy and material use is through the lens of the [[Marxism|Marxist tradition]], which relates the [[Superstructure (Marxism)|superstructure]] (culture, ideology, institutions) and the [[Base and superstructure|base]] (material conditions of life, division of labor). A degrowth society, with its drastically different material conditions, could produce equally drastic changes in society's cultural and ideological spheres.<ref name=":3" /> The [[political economy]] of global capitalism has generated a lot of social and environmental ''bads'', such as [[socioeconomic inequality]] and [[Environmental degradation|ecological devastation]], which in turn have also generated a lot of ''goods'' through [[Personalization|individualization]] and increased spatial and [[social mobility]].<ref name=":43">{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.08.008|title = Wicked Dilemmas of Scale and Complexity in the Politics of Degrowth|journal = Ecological Economics|volume = 142|pages = 306–317|year = 2017|last1 = Kish|first1 = Kaitlin|last2 = Quilley|first2 = Stephen| bibcode=2017EcoEc.142..306K }}</ref> At the same time, some argue the widespread individualization promulgated by a capitalist political economy is a ''bad'' due to its undermining of [[solidarity]], aligned with [[democracy]] as well as collective, secondary, and primary forms of caring,<ref name="Lynch Kalaitzake Affective and calculative solidarity">{{cite journal |last1=Lynch |first1=Kathleen |last2=Kalaitzake |first2=Manolis |title=Affective and calculative solidarity: The impact of individualism and neoliberal capitalism |journal=European Journal of Social Theory |date=May 2020 |volume=23 |issue=2 |pages=238–257 |doi=10.1177/1368431018786379 |hdl=10197/9557 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> and simultaneous encouragement of mistrust of others, highly competitive interpersonal relationships, blame of failure on individual shortcomings, prioritization of one's self-interest, and peripheralization of the conceptualization of human work required to create and sustain people.<ref name="Lynch Kalaitzake Affective and calculative solidarity"/> In this view, the widespread individuation resulting from capitalism may impede degrowth measures, requiring a change in actions to benefit society rather than the individual self.

Some argue the political economy of capitalism has allowed social emancipation at the level of gender equality,<ref>{{Cite book|title=Gender of Modernity|last=Felski, Rita|date=2009|publisher=Harvard University Press|isbn=9780674036796|oclc=1041150387}}</ref> disability, sexuality and anti-racism that has no historical precedent. However, others dispute social emancipation as being a direct product of capitalism or question the emancipation that has resulted. The feminist writer Nancy Holmstrom, for example, argues that capitalism's negative impacts on women outweigh the positive impacts, and women tend to be hurt by the system. In her examination of China following the [[Chinese Communist Revolution]], Holmstrom notes that women were granted state-assisted freedoms to equal education, childcare, healthcare, abortion, marriage, and other social supports.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Cudd |first1=Ann E. |last2=Holmstrom |first2=Nancy |title=Capitalism, For and Against: A Feminist Debate |date=2011 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |isbn=978-1-139-49379-6 }}{{pn|date=July 2024}}</ref> Thus, whether the social emancipation achieved in Western society under capitalism may coexist with degrowth is ambiguous.

Doyal and Gough allege that the modern capitalist system is built on the exploitation of female reproductive labor as well as that of the Global South, and [[sexism]] and [[racism]] are embedded in its structure. Therefore, some theories (such as [[Ecofeminism|Eco-Feminism]] or [[political ecology]]) argue that there cannot be equality regarding gender and the hierarchy between the Global North and South within [[capitalism]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Chertkovskaya |first1=Ekaterina |last2=Paulsson |first2=Alexander |last3=Barca |first3=Stefania |title=Towards a Political Economy of Degrowth |date=2019 |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield International |isbn=978-1-78660-896-3 |page=77 }}</ref>

The structural properties of growth present another barrier to degrowth as growth shapes and is enforced by institutions, norms, culture, technology, identities, etc. The social ingraining of growth manifests in peoples' aspirations, thinking, bodies, mindsets, and relationships. Together, growth's role in social practices and in socio-economic institutions present unique challenges to the success of the degrowth movement.<ref name=":13">{{cite journal |last1=Büchs |first1=Milena |last2=Koch |first2=Max |title=Challenges for the degrowth transition: The debate about wellbeing |journal=Futures |date=January 2019 |volume=105 |pages=155–165 |doi=10.1016/j.futures.2018.09.002 |doi-access=free }}</ref> Another potential barrier to degrowth is the need for a rapid transition to a degrowth society due to climate change and the potential negative impacts of a rapid social transition including disorientation, conflict, and decreased well-being.<ref name=":13"/>

In the United States, a large barrier to the support of the degrowth movement is the modern education system, including both primary and higher learning institutions. Beginning in the second term of the Reagan administration, the education system in the US was restructured to enforce [[Neoliberalism|neoliberal]] ideology by means of privatization schemes such as commercialization and performance contracting, implementation of standards and accountability measures incentivizing schools to adopt a uniform curriculum, and higher education accreditation and curricula designed to affirm market values and current power structures and avoid critical thought concerning the relations between those in power, ethics, authority, history, and knowledge.<ref>{{cite book |doi=10.4324/9780203465585 |title=Education as Enforcement |date=2003 |isbn=978-1-134-00081-4 |editor-last1=Saltman |editor-last2=Gabbard |editor-first1=Kenneth |editor-first2=David A. }}{{pn|date=July 2024}}</ref> The degrowth movement, based on the empirical assumption that resources are finite and growth is limited,<ref name=":23" /> clashes with the limitless growth ideology associated with neoliberalism and the market values affirmed in schools, and therefore faces a major social barrier in gaining widespread support in the US.{{citation needed|date=July 2023}}

Nevertheless, co-evolving aspects of global capitalism, liberal modernity, and the market society, are closely tied and will be difficult to separate to maintain [[Liberalism|liberal]] and [[Cosmopolitanism|cosmopolitan]] values in a degrowth society.<ref name=":43" /> At the same time, the goal of the degrowth movement is progression rather than regression, and researchers point out that neoclassical economic models indicate neither negative nor zero growth would harm economic stability or full employment.<ref name=":23">{{cite journal |last1=Kallis |first1=Giorgos |last2=Kerschner |first2=Christian |last3=Martinez-Alier |first3=Joan |title=The economics of degrowth |journal=Ecological Economics |date=December 2012 |volume=84 |pages=172–180 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.08.017 |bibcode=2012EcoEc..84..172K }}</ref> Several assert the main barriers to the movement are social and structural factors clashing with implementing degrowth measures.<ref name=":23" /><ref name=":13"/><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Akbulut |first1=Bengi |title=Degrowth |journal=Rethinking Marxism |date=2 January 2021 |volume=33 |issue=1 |pages=98–110 |doi=10.1080/08935696.2020.1847014 }}</ref>

==== Healthcare ====
It has been pointed out that there is an apparent trade-off between the ability of modern healthcare systems to treat individual bodies to their last breath and the broader global ecological risk of such an energy and resource intensive care. If this trade-off exists, a degrowth society must choose between prioritizing the ecological integrity and the ensuing collective health or maximizing the healthcare provided to individuals.<ref>{{Cite journal |doi = 10.1057/s41285-017-0051-4|title = Health systems in an era of biophysical limits: The wicked dilemmas of modernity|journal = Social Theory & Health|volume = 16|issue = 2|pages = 188–207|year = 2018|last1 = Zywert|first1 = Katharine|last2 = Quilley|first2 = Stephen|s2cid = 149177035}}</ref> However, many degrowth scholars argue that the current system produces both psychological and physical damage to people. They insist that societal prosperity should be measured by well-being, not GDP.<ref name="gd01" />{{rp|142}}

== See also ==
{{cols|colwidth=21em}}
* ''[[A Blueprint for Survival]]''
* [[Agrowth]]
* [[Anti-consumerism]]
* [[Critique of political economy]]
* [[:Category:Degrowth advocates|Degrowth advocates]] (category)
* [[Political ecology]]
* [[Postdevelopment theory]]
* ''[[Power Down: Options and Actions for a Post-Carbon World]]''
* [[Paradox of thrift]]
* ''[[The Path to Degrowth in Overdeveloped Countries]]''
*[[Post-capitalism]]
* [[Post-growth]]
* [[Productivism]]
* ''[[Prosperity Without Growth]]''
* [[Slow movement (culture)|Slow movement]]
* [[Steady-state economy]]
* [[Transition town]]
* [[Uneconomic growth]]
{{colend}}

== References ==
{{Creative Commons text attribution notice|cc=by4|author=Savin and van den Bergh|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800924002210?via%3Dihub}}
{{Reflist|refs=

<ref name=mb01>
{{cite book |editor-last=Bonaiuti |editor-first=Mauro|editor-link=Mauro Bonaiuti |date=2011 |title=From Bioeconomics to Degrowth: Georgescu-Roegen's "New Economics" in eight essays. |url=https://www.routledge.com/From-Bioeconomics-to-Degrowth-Georgescu-Roegens-New-Economics-in-Eight/Georgescu-Roegen-Bonaiuti/p/book/9781138802964 |format=Book info page at publisher's site |location=London |publisher=Routledge |isbn=9780415587006 }}</ref>

<ref name=gd01>
{{cite book |editor-last=D'Alisa |editor-first=Giacomo|display-editors=et al| title=Degrowth: A Vocabulary for a New Era|url=https://vocabulary.degrowth.org/look/ |format=Book info page containing download samples |location=London|publisher=Routledge|isbn=9781138000766|year=2015}}</ref>

<ref name=fd01>{{cite journal |last1=Demaria |first1=Federico |last2=Schneider |first2=Francois |last3=Sekulova |first3=Filka |last4=Martinez-Alier |first4=Joan |title=What is Degrowth? From an Activist Slogan to a Social Movement |journal=Environmental Values |date=April 2013 |volume=22 |issue=2 |pages=191–215 |doi=10.3197/096327113X13581561725194 |bibcode=2013EnvV...22..191D }}</ref>

<ref name=ff01>
{{cite conference|editor1-last=Flipo |editor1-first=Fabrice |editor2-last=Schneider |editor2-first=François |editor2-link=:fr:François Schneider |date=2008 |title=Proceedings of the First International Conference on Economic De-Growth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity |url=http://degrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Degrowth-Conference-Proceedings.pdf |format=PDF contains all conference proceedings |location=Paris|publisher=European Society of Ecological Economics }}</ref>

<ref name=ngr01>
{{cite book |last=Georgescu-Roegen |first=Nicholas |author-link=Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen |date=1971 |title=The Entropy Law and the Economic Process |url=https://archive.org/details/entropylawe00nich |format=Full book accessible at Scribd |location=Cambridge, Massachusetts |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-0674257801 |url-access=registration }}</ref>

<ref name=ngr02>
{{cite journal |last=Georgescu-Roegen |first=Nicholas |author-link=Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen |date=1975 |title=Energy and Economic Myths |url=http://www.uvm.edu/~jfarley/EEseminar/readings/energy%20myths.pdf |journal=Southern Economic Journal |volume=41 |issue=3 |doi=10.2307/1056148 |pages=347–381|jstor=1056148 }}</ref>

<ref name=ngr03>
{{cite book |last=Georgescu-Roegen |first=Nicholas |author-link=Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen |date=1995 |orig-year=1979 |editor1-last=Grinevald |editor1-first=Jacques |editor1-link=:fr:Jacques Grinevald |editor2-last=Rens |editor2-first=Ivo |editor2-link=:fr:Ivo Rens |title=La Décroissance: Entropie – Écologie – Économie |edition=2nd |url=http://classiques.uqac.ca/contemporains/georgescu_roegen_nicolas/decroissance/la_decroissance.pdf |format=PDF contains full book |location=Paris |publisher=[[:fr:Sang de la terre|Sang de la terre]] }}</ref>

<ref name=jg01>
{{cite conference|last=Grinevald |first=Jacques |author-link=:fr:Jacques Grinevald |date=2008 |chapter=Introduction to Georgescu-Roegen and Degrowth |editor1-last=Flipo |editor1-first=Fabrice |editor2-last=Schneider |editor2-first=François|editor2-link=:fr:François Schneider |title=Proceedings of the First International Conference on Economic De-Growth for Ecological Sustainability and Social Equity |chapter-url=http://degrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Degrowth-Conference-Proceedings.pdf |chapter-format=PDF contains all conference proceedings |location=Paris |pages=14–17|publisher=European Society of Ecological Economics }}</ref>

<ref name=gk01>
{{cite journal |last=Kallis |first=Giorgos |date=2011 |title=In defense of degrowth |url=http://www.degrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/In-defense-of-degrowth.pdf |journal=[[Ecological Economics (journal)|Ecological Economics]]|volume=70 |issue=5 |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.12.007 |pages=873–880 |bibcode=2011EcoEc..70..873K }}; {{cite journal |last=Kallis |first=Giorgos |date=February 2015 |title=The Degrowth Alternative |url=https://greattransition.org/publication/the-degrowth-alternative |journal=[[Great Transition Initiative]]}}</ref>

<ref name=ck01>{{cite journal |last=Kerschner |first=Christian |date=2010 |title=Economic de-growth vs. steady-state economy |url=http://degrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Kerschner-2010.pdf |journal=[[Journal of Cleaner Production]] |volume=18 |issue=6 |doi=10.1016/j.jclepro.2009.10.019 |pages=544–551 |bibcode=2010JCPro..18..544K |access-date=2016-07-19 |archive-date=2020-04-17 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200417112607/https://degrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/Kerschner-2010.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref>

<ref name=sl01>{{harv|Latouche|2009}}, pp. 13-16</ref>

<ref name=jm01>
{{cite journal |last=Martínez-Alier |first=Juan |author-link=Joan Martinez Alier |date=2010 |title=Sustainable de-growth: Mapping the context, criticisms and future prospects of an emergent paradigm |url=http://degrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/martinez-alier_mapping-the-context.pdf |journal=[[Ecological Economics (journal)|Ecological Economics]] |volume=69 |issue=9 |display-authors=etal |doi=10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.04.017 |pages=1741–1747|bibcode=2010EcoEc..69.1741M }}</ref>
}}

===Reference details===
* {{cite book |last =Latouche |first =Serge |author-link =Serge Latouche |year =2009 |orig-year =2007 |title =Farewell to Growth |url =http://sduk.us/2011/latouche_farewell_to_growth.pdf |format =PDF contains full book |location =Cambridge |publisher =Polity Press |isbn =978-0-7456-4616-9 }}
* {{cite book |last =Zehner |first =Ozzie|author-link =Ozzie Zehner |title =Green Illusions |year =2012 |publisher =U. Neb. Press |location =Lincoln & London |isbn =978-0803237759 |url =http://GreenIllusions.org }}

==Further reading==
* {{cite news |last=Berwyn|first=Bob |date=January 9, 2024|title=New Research Explores a Restorative Climate Path for the Earth|url=https://insideclimatenews.org/news/09012024/new-research-explores-a-restorative-climate-path-for-the-earth/|work=[[Inside Climate News]]|location= |access-date=}}
* {{cite web |last1=Hickel |first1=Jason|author-link=Jason Hickel|title=Degrowth: A Response to Branko Milanovic|url=https://www.jasonhickel.org/blog/2017/11/19/why-branko-milanovic-is-wrong-about-de-growth |website=Jason Hickel |access-date=25 November 2020 |date=October 27, 2020}}
* {{cite book |doi=10.4324/9781003174356 |title=Foundations of Real-World Economics |date=2023 |last1=Komlos |first1=John |isbn=978-1-003-17435-6 }}
* {{cite web |last1=Milanovic |first1=Branko|author-link=Branko Milanović |title=The illusion of 'degrowth' in a poor and unequal world |url=https://glineq.blogspot.com/2017/11/the-illusion-of-degrowth-in-poor-and.html |website=globalinequality |access-date=25 November 2020 |date=November 18, 2017}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Kronenberg |first1=Jakub |last2=Andersson |first2=Erik |last3=Elmqvist |first3=Thomas |last4=Łaszkiewicz |first4=Edyta |last5=Xue |first5=Jin |last6=Khmara |first6=Yaryna |title=Cities, planetary boundaries, and degrowth |journal=[[The Lancet Planetary Health]] |date=2024 |volume=8 |issue=4 |pages=e234–e241 |doi=10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00025-1 |doi-access=free|pmid=38580425 }}
* {{cite book |last=Saito|first=Kohei |date=2024 |title=Slow Down: The Degrowth Manifesto|url= |location= |publisher=Astra House|page= |isbn=978-1662602368|access-date=}}

==External links==
{{Scholia}}
* [https://degrowth.org/ Research and Degrowth International]
* [https://degrowth.net/ International Degrowth Network]
* [https://degrowth.info/ Degrowth.info]
* [https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18Z7kTs0smhOU9S3DyGNJ_MBQeu3XKW2qdxa3unOEn6I/edit#gid=1830686244/ Degrowth Database]
* [https://www.degrowthjournal.org/ Degrowth Journal]
* [https://explore.degrowth.net/ Explore Degrowth]
* [https://monthlyreview.org/2023/07/01/planned-degrowth/ Planned Degrowth: Ecosocialism and Sustainable Human Development.] ''[[Monthly Review]] issue on "Planned Degrowth"''. July 1, 2023.

{{Simple living}}
{{Environmental social science}}
{{Portal bar|Business and economics|Society|Environment}}


{{DEFAULTSORT:De-Growth}}
[[Category:Degrowth| ]]
[[Category:Simple living]]
[[Category:Sustainability]]
[[Category:Green politics]]
[[Category:Ecological economics]]
[[Category:Environmental movements]]
[[Category:Environmental ethics]]
[[Category:Environmental economics]]
[[Category:Environmental social science concepts]]