Whether our economies can absolutely decouple from environmental harm at the scale required to mitigate the worst consequences of the socio-ecological crisis is a central debate in sustainability academia. Whilst green growthers and techno-optimists consider these achievable, ecological economists and post-growthers like myself are much more sceptical.
There are many peer-reviewed articles on both sides, with the post-growth movement gaining significant gravitas in economic and policy circles. A global survey of 789 climate policy researchers revealed increased scepticism towards green growth approaches. Following these findings, a vision for how an ecological, post-growth liberal society could work is increasingly necessary.
Our growth economies are designed primarily to generate surplus capital efficiently to fulfil societal needs and wants. An economy designed in such a way is doomed by a hamartia: a constant structural dilemma. Balancing just economic development with protecting necessary ecological spaces, all whilst not aggravating the social-ecological crisis, is developing into a near-Sisyphean task.
Such a dilemma would be eased significantly in a post-growth liberal economy, because it would be designed for ecological stability. The economy would be regenerative by design, with the adoption of the circular economy and technological developments in resource efficiency being core to its success. Whether growth is desirable would be subject to a rigorous cost-benefit analysis, considering both social and environmental factors.
A post-growth liberal economy is grounded in the precautionary principle in environmental law. Whilst the debate of whether absolute decoupling remains ongoing, urgent action is required now. The socio-ecological crisis is much too pressing and urgent to warrant absolute certainty in this central academic debate.