1. Help! Six types of degrowth
Jeroen van den Bergh
ICREA, Barcelona
&
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
&
VU University Amsterdam
Interpretations of degrowth
1. GDP degrowth
2. Consumption degrowth
3. Work-time degrowth
4. Radical degrowth
5. Physical degrowth
6. GDP fetishism degrowth (“GDP agrowth”)
1. GDP degrowth
• Most logical, immediate interpretation to outsiders.
Useful because consistent with use of term “(economic)
growth” by media, economists & politicans
• But blunt instrument of environmental policy
• Dirty degrowth? Smaller not necessarily more beautiful
• Emphasis on size, neglect of composition: shift
from dirty to clean inputs & outputs
• Moreover reversal of causality: effective environmental
regulation will change composition, and will affect GDP
growth – possibly degrowth.
1

2. 2. Consumption degrowth
• In quantity not value terms
• Hoped to cause sustainable resource use & pollution
• Ineffective and inefficient way to reach
environmental sustainability: underrates shift from
dirty to clean consumption (again composition neglected)
• Two approaches to realize consumption degrowth:
– (voluntary) frugality – likely to reach the masses?
– equal individual quota – politically feasible?
3. Work-time degrowth
• Increased labor productivity has been mainly used to
consume more rather than to work less
• Working less means less production & lower wages,
so less consumption, but also less work stress and
more happiness due to more leisure and time for
family and friends, certainly beyond a threshold
income (finding of happiness research)
• “Less work-time” is concrete, one-dimensional aim
unlike “less consumption” (multidimensional)
• Less working/income limits consumption rebound
4. Degrowth as radical change of
the economy
• Ethics, values, finance, markets, work/jobs, money,
or even profit-making & ownership
– “Escaping from the [capitalist] economy” (Fournier 2008)
• Grand ideas without thorough supporting analysis
– No systemic solutions/instrumentation, unclear how to
upscale from niche to society
– Humanistic left-wing ideology attractive: equality,
solidarity, citizenship, locality, “good life”
• Convergence to new system much time & unsure
to meet environmental aim (“no ecological imperative”)
• Notably climate change demands urgent, simpler
strategy: hard environmental constraints to which
economy will adapt
2

3. 5. Physical degrowth
• Isn’t this trivial? Don’t we all want this?
• But be careful:
– Environmentally/resource relevant physical dimensions
– Entropy argument (G-R) often simplistically used
• Old wine in new bottles: sustainable development,
environmental regulation, H. Daly’s “minimal throughput”.
• Does labelling these old ideas as degrowth deliver
any new insights about environmental policy?
• Some assume physical degrowth = GDP degrowth
But past (weak env. regulation) doesn’t reflect future
Intermediate conclusion
• Degrowth types 1, 2 and 4 not very convincing,
while 5 isn’t new. Type 3 makes most sense
• Better worry about effective environmental policies
and getting democratic-political support for these
• Whether such policies will then give rise to GDP
growth or degrowth should be irrelevant, as GDP
(per capita) is not a good proxy of social welfare
• I agree though with Hueting: effective
environmental regulation is likely to result in GDP
degrowth. But don’t reverse the causality (as in
degrowth type 1)
6. Degrowth as opposing growth fetishism
• GDP fundamental problem, not growth
– GDP growth good in some periods / countries
– but growth not generally necessary or sufficient for
progress
– degrowth not necessary or sufficient for sustainability
– also “dirty degrowth” possible
• Goal of unconditional GDP growth is a constraint
on our search for progress – frustrates good policies
(climate, labour, health, public utilities).
– “neoliberal ideology/tyranny of growth” (Fournier 2008), “GDP fetishism”
(Stiglitz 2009)
• But don’t fall in the trap of replacing this by GDP
degrowth fetishism (i.e. degrowth type 1)
3

4. The GDP paradox
• Not useful to spend more time on criticizing
growth or GDP: has proven to be an ineffective
strategy (Galbraith, Mishan, Hueting, Nordhaus/Tobin,
Hirsch, Scitovsky, Daly, etc.)
• Better try to understand the reasons for
persistent support of the GDP indicator:
Despite all theoretical and empirical criticism of
GDP (per capita) as a social welfare and progress
indicator, its role in economics, public policy,
politics and society remains influential
Explanation of the paradox
• Many academic economists accept the criticism of
the GDP indicator but im/explicitly deny its
relevance
• This denial comes in two forms.
1. a belief that the impact of GDP information on economic
reality is modest
2. a belief that despite its shortcomings, GDP still provides
useful information
My proposal
• Without GDP no measurement of growth =>
GDP growth irrelevant - not against & not in
favour but indifferent or neutral
• “Degrowth” (esp. type 1) gives too much credit
to GDP. “Agrowth” as in “atheism” more
precise (Latouche 2010)
• Combine degrowth of types 5 & 6: reduce
physical throughput (Daly) & ignore GDP
information => ”Relax about (de)growth”
4

5. More info
• J.C.J.M. van den Bergh (2009). The GDP
Paradox. Journal of Economic Psychology 30(2):
117–135.
• J.C.J.M. van den Bergh (2010). Relax about GDP
Growth: Implications for climate and crisis
policies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(6):
540-543.
• J.C.J.M. van den Bergh (2010). Six types of
“degrowth” and a plea for “agrowth”. Mimeo.
5