Really nice points, Bob. The growth mindset is pervasive. It's the air we breathe, so to speak...
Some companies are monetizing our growing desire to deal with climate change, e.g. the sketchy tree/credit card connection, while simultaneously encouraging us to maintain the growth economy. Often the language is just greenwashing. Regardless, nearly every entity in and around the marketplace works on the principle of least confrontation with our habits and desires, e.g. wean us off fossil fuels rather than setting quick and hard restrictions. There's also a built-in sense even for environmental groups that net gain toward environmental goals is good enough (thus the expense of unnecessary tote bags in exchange for memberships). And, in terms of reshaping society, it's probably true. Turn the ship by inches rather than suddenly setting her on her beam ends... But that assumes the ship is being turned.
No better way to set the hook in me than referencing green growth and the Stanford prison experiment in the same essay. Though we can argue how much agency one has in a coercive market system :) Relatedly, a certain German philosopher has something to say about the “tendency of the rate of profit to fall”, which explains the link between GDP growth mania and Jevon’s paradox.
Beyond GDP, are you familiar with Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness index? A nice idea.
I was wondering how much more chum I'd have to put in the water.
Given the lack of alternatives, I think agency to change the nature of the market is certainly less than our agency to shape politics. It's the whole "ensnared" thing I've referenced a few times now. So our capacity to revise growth-oriented economies, such as it is, will be in policy rather than the marketplace. The banks and politicians will have to see the shape of the crisis (which means also seeing the maladaptions of growth mania) and agree to aim us toward zero waste, zero emissions, etc.
I'm thinking of Jevon's paradox as more of an observation of human behavior - Gas is cheaper? Drive more! - than a macroeconomic phenomenon, though now that I've written this it's clear than one becomes the other.
I've been thinking it might be interesting to segue or connect this next week's writing on steady-state and degrowth economies to the happiness question. But that might be too much to gnaw on. We'll see.
Great work Jason.
Much of the "environmentalism" I see promotes consumption and growth.
- Electric cars are marketed as a solution to greenhouse gases, but are really meant to allow us to continue driving without restrictions.
- I heard an a on Maine Public Broadcasting the other day for a credit card that plants trees based on how much you spend.
- Many environmental organizations raise money through catalogs of "environmental gifts" that you can buy.
We need to get away from the idea that we can consume wastefully in ways that help the environment.
Really nice points, Bob. The growth mindset is pervasive. It's the air we breathe, so to speak...
Some companies are monetizing our growing desire to deal with climate change, e.g. the sketchy tree/credit card connection, while simultaneously encouraging us to maintain the growth economy. Often the language is just greenwashing. Regardless, nearly every entity in and around the marketplace works on the principle of least confrontation with our habits and desires, e.g. wean us off fossil fuels rather than setting quick and hard restrictions. There's also a built-in sense even for environmental groups that net gain toward environmental goals is good enough (thus the expense of unnecessary tote bags in exchange for memberships). And, in terms of reshaping society, it's probably true. Turn the ship by inches rather than suddenly setting her on her beam ends... But that assumes the ship is being turned.
No better way to set the hook in me than referencing green growth and the Stanford prison experiment in the same essay. Though we can argue how much agency one has in a coercive market system :) Relatedly, a certain German philosopher has something to say about the “tendency of the rate of profit to fall”, which explains the link between GDP growth mania and Jevon’s paradox.
Beyond GDP, are you familiar with Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness index? A nice idea.
I was wondering how much more chum I'd have to put in the water.
Given the lack of alternatives, I think agency to change the nature of the market is certainly less than our agency to shape politics. It's the whole "ensnared" thing I've referenced a few times now. So our capacity to revise growth-oriented economies, such as it is, will be in policy rather than the marketplace. The banks and politicians will have to see the shape of the crisis (which means also seeing the maladaptions of growth mania) and agree to aim us toward zero waste, zero emissions, etc.
I'm thinking of Jevon's paradox as more of an observation of human behavior - Gas is cheaper? Drive more! - than a macroeconomic phenomenon, though now that I've written this it's clear than one becomes the other.
I've been thinking it might be interesting to segue or connect this next week's writing on steady-state and degrowth economies to the happiness question. But that might be too much to gnaw on. We'll see.