Unraveling the claims for (and against) green growth

International Trade Reshapes the Decoupling of Emissions from Economic Growth

Efforts to stabilize the global climate change while also continuing human development depend upon "decoupling" economic growth from fossil fuel CO2 emissions. However, evaluations of such decoupling have typically relied on production-based emissions, which do not account for emissions embodied in international trade. Yet international trade can greatly change emissions accounting and reshape the decoupling between emissions and economic growth. Here, we evaluate decoupling of economic growth from different accounts of emissions in each of the 159 countries and analyze the drivers of decoupling. We find that between 1995 and 2015, although 29 countries exhibited strong decoupling of territorial emissions (growing economies and decreasing emissions), only 19 countries achieved economic growth while their consumption-based emissions decreased. Most developed countries have achieved decoupling of emissions related to domestic goods and services, but have not achieved decoupling of emissions related to imported goods and services. The U-test confirms that the domestic component of consumption-based emissions exhibits a stronger decoupling trend from gross domestic product (GDP) growth than consumption-based emissions, and emissions from imports continue to rise with GDP per capita without a corresponding decline, providing a statistical validation of the decoupling analysis. Moreover, in the countries where economic growth and consumption-based emissions are most decoupled, a key driver is decreasing emissions intensity due to technological progress─and especially reductions in the intensity of imported goods and services. Our results reveal the importance of assessing decoupling using consumption-based emissions; successful decoupling may require international cooperation and coordinated mitigation efforts of trading partners.

Built structures influence patterns of energy demand and CO2 emissions across countries

Built structures, i.e. the patterns of settlements and transport infrastructures, are known to influence per-capita energy demand and CO₂ emissions at the urban level. At the national level, the role of built structures is seldom considered due to poor data availability. Instead, other potential determinants of energy demand and CO₂ emissions, primarily GDP, are more frequently assessed. We present a set of national-level indicators to characterize patterns of built structures. We quantify these indicators for 113 countries and statistically analyze the results along with final energy use and territorial CO₂ emissions, as well as factors commonly included in national-level analyses of determinants of energy use and emissions. We find that these indicators are about equally important for predicting energy demand and CO₂ emissions as GDP and other conventional factors. The area of built-up land per capita is the most important predictor, second only to the effect of GDP.

Exploring socio-economic externalities of development scenarios. An analysis of EU regions from 2008 to 2016

A great debate around development scenarios has come to define conversations around the economy and the environment, two dimensions that struggle to find a proper balance. In this paper we apply unconditional growth model analyses to a new and unique dataset of European regions between 2008 and 2016 and identify four development scenarios - green growth, green de-growth, black growth and black de-growth - characterized by different relationships between CO₂ emissions and economic growth. We then map European regions across these four scenarios and describe the differences that occurred among regions in terms of socio-economic externalities, mainly competences, investments and well-being. Drawing on our analyses, we contribute to the debate on development scenarios and ecological macro-economics, as well as discuss implications for sustainability policy and research.

Mapping Sustainable Development Goals 8, 9, 12, 13 and 15 through a decolonial lens: falling short of 'transforming our world'

The United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs) aspire to be integrated and indivisible, balance the three dimensions of sustainable development and transform our world by going beyond previously agreed language. Focusing on decoloniality and equity, we explore whether these aspirations are met in analysing five goals, their targets and indicators interlinking especially the economy-ecology spheres: SDGs 8 (economic growth), 9 (industry and innovation), 12 (sustainable production and consumption), 13 (climate action) and 15 (life on land). We examine two interconnected foci. Having mapped the connections which exist, according to official UN data, between these goals' indicators, we examine definitions and delineations in SDGs 8, 9, 12, 13 and 15 through a decolonial lens, focusing on universality, absences and modernity-coloniality. A second step investigates the equity implications of these framings, using indicator data to illustrate abiding injustices. Our original contribution is thus retracing these connections and contradictions, their intellectual heritage and their equity implications in the detail of these five SDGs, their targets and indicators, combining the sustainable development and decolonial literatures in novel ways. We find that trade-offs, absences and justice shortcomings call into question the attainment of the SDGs' objectives of leaving no one behind while safeguarding advances for people, planet, prosperity, peace and prosperity. We recognize the SDGs' opportunity to rethink how we want to co-exist in this world. However, we argue that recognizing absences, trade-offs and equity shortcomings are key prerequisites to attain genuine transformations for justice and sustainability through the SDGs.

Proxyeconomics, a theory and model of proxy-based competition and cultural evolution

Competitive societal systems by necessity rely on imperfect proxy measures. For instance, profit is used to measure value to consumers, patient volumes to measure hospital performance, or the journal impact factor to measure scientific value. While there are numerous reasons why proxies will deviate from the underlying societal goals, they will nevertheless determine the selection of cultural practices and guide individual decisions. These considerations suggest that the study of proxy-based competition requires the integration of cultural evolution theory and economics or decision theory. Here, we attempt such an integration in two ways. First, we describe an agent-based simulation model, combining methods and insights from these disciplines. The model suggests that an individual intrinsic incentive can constrain a cultural evolutionary pressure, which would otherwise enforce fully proxy-oriented practices. The emergent outcome is distinct from that with either the isolated economic or evolutionary mechanism. It reflects what we term lock-in, where competitive pressure can undermine the ability of agents to pursue the shared social goal. Second, we elaborate the broader context, outlining the system-theoretic foundations as well as some philosophical and practical implications, towards a broader theory. Overall, we suggest such a theory may offer an explanatory and predictive framework for diverse subjects, ranging from scientific replicability to climate inaction, and outlining strategies for diagnosis and mitigation.

Transition to a Sustainable Circular Plastics Economy in The Netherlands: Discourse and Policy Analysis

The circular economy (CE) has become a key sustainability discourse in the last decade. The Netherlands seeks to become fully circular by 2050 and the EU has set ambitious circularity targets in its CE Action Plan of 2015. The plastics sector, in particular, has gained a lot of attention as it is a priority area of both the EU and Dutch CE policies. However, there has been little research on the different and often contested discourses, governance processes and policy mechanisms guiding the transition to a circular economy and society. This paper aims to fill these gaps by asking what circular discourses and policies are being promoted in the Netherlands and what sustainability implications and recommendations can be drawn from it. It does so through a mix of media analysis, policy analysis, semi-structured interviews, and surveys using Q-methodology. Results indicate a dominance of technocentric imaginaries, and a general lack of discussion on holistic, and transformative visions, which integrate the full social, political, and ecological implication of a circular future. To address those challenges, this research brings key policy insights and recommendations which can help both academics and practitioners better understand and implement the transition towards a sustainable circular plastics economy.

The role of planetary boundaries in assessing absolute environmental sustainability across scales

The idea of revisiting the biophysical limits of human life on planet Earth has gained renewed momentum in the Anthropocene. The planetary boundaries (PBs) framework has emerged as a strong guardrail concept, even though its capacity to inform the development of absolute sustainability assessments and realistic policies remains unclear. In this paper, we present a current synthesis of the development of absolute environmental sustainability (AES) indicators and assessments informed by PBs. We firstly explore how PBs have been considered in AES research at different scales. We then present a critique of how consensus could be reached in standardising and harmonising the share of globally and locally allocated safe operating spaces. We argue that PBs must be linked to human consumption as the main socio-economic driver and that planetary concerns can only be addressed through a holistic perspective that encompasses global tele-connections. Based on our findings, we provide recommendations for the future design of AES indicators and assessments informed by PBs.

Biodiversity conservation in a post-COVID-19 economy

The impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic extend to global biodiversity and its conservation. Although short-term beneficial or adverse impacts on biodiversity have been widely discussed, there is less attention to the likely political and economic responses to the crisis and their implications for conservation. Here we describe four possible alternative future policy responses: (1) restoration of the previous economy, (2) removal of obstacles to economic growth, (3) green recovery and (4) transformative economic reconstruction. Each alternative offers opportunities and risks for conservation. They differ in the agents they emphasize to mobilize change (e.g. markets or states) and in the extent to which they prioritize or downplay the protection of nature. We analyse the advantages and disadvantages of these four options from a conservation perspective. We argue that the choice of post-COVID-19 recovery strategy has huge significance for the future of biodiversity, and that conservationists of all persuasions must not shrink from engagement in the debates to come.

Water Footprint Expands with Gross Domestic Product

The exponential increase in water demand has been a focus since the 1970s in the well-known report on the “Limits to growth” [...]

Decoupling for ecological sustainability: A categorisation and review of research literature

The idea of decoupling "environmental bads" from "economic goods" has been proposed as a path towards sustainability by organizations such as the OECD and UN. Scientific consensus reports on environmental impacts (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions) and resource use give an indication of the kind of decoupling needed for ecological sustainability: global, absolute, fast-enough and long-enough. This goal gives grounds for a categorisation of the different kinds of decoupling, with regard to their relevance. We conducted a survey of recent (1990-2019) research on decoupling on Web of Science and reviewed the results in the research according to the categorisation. The reviewed 179 articles contain evidence of absolute impact decoupling, especially between CO2 (and SOX) emissions and evidence on geographically limited (national level) cases of absolute decoupling of land and blue water use from GDP, but not of economy-wide resource decoupling, neither on national nor international scales. Evidence of the needed absolute global fast-enough decoupling is missing.

Addressing Inequality: The First Step Beyond COVID-19 and Towards Sustainability

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted billions of lives across the world and has revealed and worsened the social and economic inequalities that have emerged over the past several decades. As governments consider public health and economic strategies to respond to the crisis, it is critical they also address the weaknesses of their economic and social systems that inhibited their ability to respond comprehensively to the pandemic. These same weaknesses have also undermined efforts to advance equality and sustainability. This paper explores over 30 interventions across the following nine categories of change that hold the potential to address inequality, provide all citizens with access to essential goods and services, and advance progress towards sustainability: (1) Income and wealth transfers to facilitate an equitable increase in purchasing power/disposable income; (2) broadening worker and citizen ownership of the means of production and supply of services, allowing corporate profit-taking to be more equitably distributed; (3) changes in the supply of essential goods and services for more citizens; (4) changes in the demand for more sustainable goods and services desired by people; (5) stabilizing and securing employment and the workforce; (6) reducing the disproportionate power of corporations and the very wealthy on the market and political system through the expansion and enforcement of antitrust law such that the dominance of a few firms in critical sectors no longer prevails; (7) government provision of essential goods and services such as education, healthcare, housing, food, and mobility; (8) a reallocation of government spending between military operations and domestic social needs; and (9) suspending or restructuring debt from emerging and developing countries. Any interventions that focus on growing the economy must also be accompanied by those that offset the resulting compromises to health, safety, and the environment from increasing unsustainable consumption. This paper compares and identifies the interventions that should be considered as an important foundational first step in moving beyond the COVID-19 pandemic and towards sustainability. In this regard, it provides a comprehensive set of strategies that could advance progress towards a component of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 10 to reduce inequality within countries. However, the candidate interventions are also contrasted with all 17 SDGs to reveal potential problem areas/tradeoffs that may need careful attention.

Biodiversity policy beyond economic growth

Increasing evidence-synthesized in this paper-shows that economic growth contributes to biodiversity loss via greater resource consumption and higher emissions. Nonetheless, a review of international biodiversity and sustainability policies shows that the majority advocate economic growth. Since improvements in resource use efficiency have so far not allowed for absolute global reductions in resource use and pollution, we question the support for economic growth in these policies, where inadequate attention is paid to the question of how growth can be decoupled from biodiversity loss. Drawing on the literature about alternatives to economic growth, we explore this contradiction and suggest ways forward to halt global biodiversity decline. These include policy proposals to move beyond the growth paradigm while enhancing overall prosperity, which can be implemented by combining top-down and bottom-up governance across scales. Finally, we call the attention of researchers and policy makers to two immediate steps: acknowledge the conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation in future policies; and explore socioeconomic trajectories beyond economic growth in the next generation of biodiversity scenarios.