The Quakers recently held a one-day conference on the zero growth economy, on what it would mean for the environment, the economy, and for society. The talks, presentations and papers from the conference are all online here, and are well worth browsing.
It’s an interesting set of material, and being the Quakers, social justice is paramount. The Green Economics Institute are there, Richard Douthwaite, Alistair McIntosh, and there’s a great talk on development and growth from Duncan Green, Oxfam’s head of research and writer of the from poverty to power blog. He argues that growth is essential for development, but only up to a point. After about $20,000 per capita, further growth makes no difference to levels of happiness.
If a zero-growth global economy would leave people in poverty, we can’t reasonably campaign for it. What we could do however, is ‘ration’ growth to ensure any further drain on natural resources goes to those who need it most. The climate change negotiations will have certain aspects of this, if it isn’t derailed by the wealthier countries.
There’s a growing discussion about growth economics at the moment, with some quite high profile organisations and thinkers joining in. It remains a tricky subject though, and this conference highlights some of the issues, one of which is the name – ‘zero growth’ isn’t actually helpful or practical. ‘Zero material growth’ is a better concept, but instantly sounds technical. Perhaps we need to find whole new ways of describing these things, ways that don’t raise the defences of the politicians. “If you want an audience in Downing Street” as Green says, “you can’t use the language of limits to growth.”
The Earthbound Report 