214 CHAPTER 10
‘Freedom in a commons brings ruin to all’, an outcome that in his view could only be prevented by either stronger government or population control. Nevertheless, green economics is not only about warnings and threats; it is also about solutions. Entropy may be an inevitable process; however, its effects can be slowed down or delayed considerably if governments and private citizens respect ecological principles. Green thinkers argue that the human species will only survive and prosper if it recognizes that it is merely one element of a complex biosphere, and that only a healthy, balanced biosphere will sustain human life. Policies and actions must therefore be judged by
the principle of ‘ sustainability ’. Sustainability sets clear limits on human ambitions and material dreams because it requires that production does as little damage as possible to the fragile global ecosystem. This can be ensured not merely through the implementation of government controls or tax regimes to discourage the over-exploitation of natural resources, but, at a deeper level, by the adoption of an alternative approach to economic activity.This is what E. F. Schumacher sought to offer in his idea of ‘Buddhist economics’. For Schumacher, this would involve humankind abandoning its obsession with wealth creation, and focusing instead on ‘right livelihood’, a transformation facilitated in large part by a shift to smaller-scale living and working arrangements. There is nevertheless considerable debate about what sustainability implies in practice. Reformist or modernist ecologists support ‘weak’ sustainability, which tries to reconcile ecology with economic growth through getting richer but at a slower pace. This is often conveyed by the notion of limits to growth . However, radical ecologists, who include both social ecologists and deep ecologists, support (if to different degrees) ‘strong’ sustainability, which places far greater stress on preserving ‘natural capital’ and is more critical of economic growth. If, as some radical ecologists argue, the origin of the ecological crisis lies in materialism, consumerism and a fixation with economic growth, the solution would appear to lie in ‘zero growth’ and the construction of a ‘postindustrial age’ in which people live in small, rural communities and rely on craft skills. This could mean a fundamental and comprehensive rejection of industry and modern technology – literally a ‘return to nature’. The idea of degrowth has become increasingly influential in environmental circles as a means of advancing a critique of
Sustainability: The capacity of a system to maintain its health and continue in existence over a period of time. Modernist ecology: A reformist tendency within green politics that seeks to reconcile ecology with the key features of capitalist modernity. Limits to growth: The tendency for the environmental and other drawbacks of economic growth to expand to the point at which further increases in material prosperity are unachievable. Social ecology: A broad tendency within green politics that links ecological sustainability to radical social change, or the eco- anarchist principle that human communities should be structured according to ecological principles. Degrowth: A broad term that reflects the desire to move beyond the paradigm of economic growth for either or both practical or moral reasons.
KEY FIGURE
ERNST FRIEDRICH (‘FRITZ’) SCHUMACHER (1911–77) A German-born UK economist and environmental theorist, Schumacher championed the cause of human-scale production and advocated ‘Buddhist economics’, or ‘economics as if people mattered’. In his seminal work Small Is Beautiful (1973), Schumacher attacked conventional economic thinking for its obsession with growth for growth’s sake, and condemned the value system on which it is based, particularly the fact that it is divorced from nature. In contrast, he stressed the importance of morality and ‘right livelihood’.
Keystone Press/Alamy Stock Photo
Powered by FlippingBook