Does post-growth economics belong in the Liberal Democrats? Questioning the principle of eternal economic growth is such a heresy to the orthodox economic order, that by most it is rejected outright. We live in a world so addicted to growth that envisioning a world that exists outside this paradigm is seen as almost impossible.
We are currently experiencing a social-ecological polycrisis: rising inequality, climate change, it is all driven by the economy transgressing several planetary boundaries. Green growthers respond to this by rightly identifying that green investment and a path to net zero is essential to tackling the climate crisis. They also correctly cite examples of countries such as the UK managing to relatively decouple GDP growth from carbon emissions, which is great.
However, GDP growth must not just be relatively decoupled but absolutely decoupled from environmental impact. Green growthers argue that green growth will provide the necessary technological innovations required for absolute decoupling to occur.
However, when you apply the laws of thermodynamics to analyse the relationship between our natural environment and the economy, a different picture emerges. We can consider earth to be a closed system for materials and an open system for energy because Earth receives solar energy. The second law of thermodynamics sets the physical limits for economic processes from physical work and production to the energy needed to use information (Landauer’s Principle).


