Economy featured

Degrowth: The awakening of consciousness before an alternative

September 5, 2023

Ed. note: This article was originally written in Spanish. The English was translated by the author and lightly edited by Jane K. Brundage.

How many times have we heard our political leaders talk about economic growth, production or even consumption? These three spheres have dominated political discourse in practically all Western societies, establishing “economic fundamentalism” as the essential basis for consolidating the association of social welfare with money.

While business groups, political parties and other social actors encourage us to “grow and produce”, our conscious awareness may come to assume that such consumption would lead to an increase in levels of happiness, despite the fact that in most cases we consume things we do not really need.

The same thing happens when we hear political discourse revolving around the concept of “development” as a national objective, through a frenzied competition for creating new “needs”, producing more, stimulating more demand and generating growth that, supposedly, benefits everyone. They have also failed to hide the reality of consumerism from us: the more we consume, the greater our use of energy, minerals, water and land, which generates enormous quantities of waste.

Degrowth as a theory has become an alternative to streams of thought that defend a new post-capitalist scenario. Put simply, degrowth is much more than a theory that advocates reducing our economy and production model. It calls for a substantial change at both the individual and social levels that seeks to focus on elements as disparate as they are complex.

In Spain we find different writers who continuously promulgate degrowth ideals. One of them is Carlos Taibo, an economist from Madrid, who defines the demands for degrowth as “endless precise fields such as health and education, the rural world and trade unionism, cities and migrations.” For this reason, degrowth first senses a change in the quotidian life of people associated with a way of living that is friendly to the environment and with an outlook that seeks to resolve what the ideals of economic growth have abandoned.

Degrowth strives to minimize the importance of the dominant discourse, which it bases on that “way of life slavishly obsessed with the generation of capital”, through the practical integration of what we often carry in our consciousness. It incorporates emotional elements associated with our daily lives and responsive to the neoliberal logic that the more we work, the more money we have and the more material goods we can consume, the happier we will be.

Serge Latouche, a French economist and one of the principal promoters of degrowth, analyzes the reasons why the neoliberal model has settled in our societies. Latouche speaks chiefly of three processes, or pillars, that drive our “capitalist being”: The first, advertising, drives individuals to buy products that often are not needed. The second, credit, makes it easier to get the money to buy what is not objectively needed. And finally, expiry, is associated with the usage or functional life of the acquired products that over time stop working, forcing us to buy again.

Latouche’s pillars invoke an awakening of awareness reminding us that the ideals of economic growth do not seek to resolve all the issues involved in the current scenario of polycrisis and the effects of climate change. Even so-called “green capitalism” has taken advantage of the awakening of awareness about the environmental crisis by offering “environmentally friendly” products such as electric vehicles, which certainly do not emit CO2 emissions. This is assumed to be a great achievement, despite the fact that EV components use a range of minerals that are even more scarce than those derived from petroleum, minerals such as lithium, cobalt, nickel or graphite and the so-called rare earths (minerals with highly valued features of conductivity and magnetism).

Despite the scarcity of these metals and the impact of their extraction — as in the case of lithium in which the crushing of hard rocks and separation of minerals in saltwater ponds require large amounts of energy and chemicals — the countries that contain these scarce minerals are diverse and often troubled. The largest lithium reserves are in the triangle formed by Bolivia, Argentina and Chile. Lithium is also found in China. The largest nickel producer today is the Philippines. The largest source of cobalt is the Democratic Republic of the Congo, a country that has become a battleground for control of cobalt.

Degrowth intuitively knows that capitalism with its ideal of economic growth does not assume we have to reduce our levels of consumption to continue having a habitable planet, and thereby lessen the effects of climate change. Given this point of view, degrowth invites us to reconsider neoliberalism from a vantage point acceptable to our conscious awareness, and through a change in the daily life of people whose way of life is already on good terms with the environment and whose outlook seeks to resolve all that has been abandoned by the ideals of economic growth.

It is important to emphasize that the ideals of degrowth do not advocate a defense of economic poverty, but rather call for sufficiency. The emphasis on the true meaning of the term consumption — distinguishing it from consumerism — seeks to introduce a change in our way of life that reflects sufficiency, what we truly need.

The degrowth perspective insists on downplaying the dominant discourse, which it bases on that “way of life slavishly obsessed with the generation of capital.” For this reason, degrowth considers essential the incorporation of emotional elements associated with our daily life as a point of focus and attraction toward the values that many times we carry in our conscious awareness.

Work is one example. For degrowth, work has become a fundamental tool for satisfying the consumption needs imbued in us by the current economic model. These created needs have separated us from elements as fundamental to our well-being as free time. If we abandoned or simply diminished the logic of productivity and competitiveness, decreasing them in this sense, we would not only have more time to dedicate ourselves to those activities, be they family or leisure, for which we work, but we would also considerably reduce the carbon dioxide emissions in our atmosphere.

The reduction of productivity and workday would only bring about a decrease in the hours of work. By reducing the workday, we would have more job opportunities for individuals who have been excluded by capitalist logic, and who are currently unemployed. With this, the distribution of labor in the degrowth proposal is fundamentally associated with the reduction of production and therefore of consumerism.

In the logic of degrowth, a reduction in mass production and consumption promotes the cancellation of entire segments of the economy associated with the unstoppable growth of the pollution levels affecting the environment. This could certainly produce considerable growth in levels of unemployment. For this reason, different degrowthers, among them Carlos Taibo, suppose that it is necessary, first, to promote the development of those economic activities related to the attention of unsatisfied social needs and with respect for the natural environment; and second, to distribute work among the segments of the conventional economy that will inevitably continue to exist.

Degrowth not only responds to the fallacies of the traditional development model, it also promotes a radical change in all spheres of society. Its critical perspective on the existing order — characterized by being anti-patriarchal, self-managed and internationalist — is fundamental, given the introduction of equitable social values that recover the sense of community lost under capitalism, and given the continuous insatiable individualism that it [neoliberal capitalism] promotes. This, in turn, is accompanied by the strength of degrowth, in that it combines the individual and the collective in the search for a change in the daily life of people that recovers certain elements of rural life.

We must consider that degrowth, as a dynamic of change, first seeks to generate awareness of the social and ecological impact that the current development model — through its political current of neoliberalism — has had on our planet. Next, we have to rethink the educational structure that essentially responds to the logic of capital, fostering an ideal that workers adapt to hierarchy and authority, accepting the system´s ´rules of the game´, that is, behaving primarily as mere consumers.

Degrowth is not alien to our consciousness and our “inner voice”. Thus, the incorporation of degrowth elements in our society such as solidarity, cooperation, and mutual aid, are not alien either to the human spirit or to our lives. They are the response of our conscience to what we have perceived as unfair and contemptible. Degrowth fights for the construction of positive, healthy scenarios for future generations, respecting the environment and cultural diversity through a reorientation of economic activity that abandons unlimited individual growth for a social growth that is measured, such that others can simply live.

Juan Ignacio Marín

I have a Masters in International Relations and a Masters in international studies of peace, conflict and development.
I have been writing and investigating about degrowth since 2016, when I founded my blog “Kendu Kateak”, which means breaking chains in the Basque language, in order to promote degrowth values and its perspectives.
I am also a guitarist and I launched my first instrumental rock album, Contracultura, a year ago.

Tags: building resilient societies, degrowth perspectives, human consciousness

Comments

Welcome to the new Resillience commenting system!

We have moved from the former Disqus commenting system to a new system as of September 10, 2026.

  • Your past comments have not disappeared.
  • You can log in with your old Disqus credentials, as well as Gmail credentials or a Resilience account (formerly Resilience+). Login with Facebook and other credentials is coming soon.

We made this change because of privacy concerns regarding Disqus. It's also part of a set of changes to bring more services to the Resilience community under a single login: commenting, (coming September 2026), and online courses (coming 2027). Unfortunately, your old Disqus comments may not reliably link to your account in this new system. Please contact us if you have any questions or concerns.

Subscribe
Notify of
10 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Michael Stevens
Michael Stevens
3 years ago

I think the term “degrowth” , which was originally a term used in biology for the phenomenon of an organizsm losing some mass after a long period of growth, may have been elaborated and altered by ecological economists (and others) to include changes in social structure, society and humans place in the natural world, so that an essential direction for society, and the economy, and the ecosphere is defined by that term. The problem, I believe, for the term is that in the mind of of most people, it evokes a viscerally negative response – loss of well-being, hardship, and simply “going back in time” economically , and societally.
“Rightsize” or “rightsizing” is a term that was not in most dictionaries until 1989 . It is defined in the Merriam-Wester online Dictionary as “to reduce (something) to an optimal size”. I believe this term would have been a better choice to delineate the various meanings that have changed the definition of degrowth in Wikipedia to:

Degrowth (French: décroissance) is a term used for both a political, economic, and social movement as well as a set of theories that criticise the paradigm of economic growth.[1][2][3][4][5][6] Degrowth is based on ideas from political ecology, ecological economics, feminist political ecology, and environmental justice, arguing that social and ecological harm is caused by the pursuit of infinite growth and Western “development” imperatives

Rightsize, although origiinally used in business as a term to disguise a reducition in the worforce of a business, is a word that can mean, since it is relatively etymologically rootless, expand or reduce something to its optimal size. Degrowth implies reduce in its use of de (take away) and growth. However, as the movement has expanded to include (variably) more cooperation, sustainability from an ecospheric and social perspective, and other, related goals, rightsizing is a term that can more easily to be understood to include increasing some actions, and reducing others. Rightsizeing economic activity can include reducing energy throughput, and simultaneously increasing the sustainability of the ecoonomy.

Many of you have worked within the framework of degrowth and have become comfortable with the term. My main argument for a transition to rightsizing as an alternative, is that persuading people who do not now consider the necessary changes ahead positiviely, and who are not familiar with the evidence base for the necessity of at least some of these changes, would be likely viscerally to be neutral to a conversation about rightsizing, and, on the other hand, respond negatively viscerally to a conversation about degrowth.

I welcome any thoughts you may have about this suggestion.

Jody Tishmack
Jody Tishmack
3 years ago

If we take seriously the three pillars outlined by Serge Latouche, I see three solutions.
The pillars:
1. “advertising, drives individuals to buy products that often are not needed.”
solution: determine the difference between needs and wants. The easiest way to accomplish this is to wait before we buy. Allow yourself time to think about the purchase and decide if it is really needed. Time helps us get past the impulse purchases that often accompany advertising.

2. “credit, makes it easier to get the money to buy what is not objectively needed.”
solution: save for purchases as opposed to using credit. Saving also reinforces the solution to #1.

3. “expiry, is associated with the usage or functional life of the acquired products that over time stop working, forcing us to buy again.” (Another term for expiry is ‘planned obsolescence’.)

solution: Do some research and find high quality, durable products. One option my husband and I use to evaluate our future purchases is Consumer Reports. This organization does a very good job comparing and reporting on the quality of various products. We also spend time looking online for reviews on the products we are planning to buy. This allows us to ensure we understand what makes a better quality product and avoid buying ones that won’t last.

We all need to purchase various products. If we take our time, save money needed to buy it, and understand what makes good quality we can avoid poor quality products. We might even pass them on to our children.

I refer to this type of thinking as being a “conscientious consumer”.

Red Hornet
Red Hornet
3 years ago
Reply to  Jody Tishmack

1. End the business deduction for advertising. Restrict the amount of advertising in all media.
Make the slots scarce and charge more for them. This will lead both to improved content and less gratuitous advertising. Enforce truth and accuracy in advertising.
2. Loosen restrictions on Bankruptcy. (Reward savings with higher returns.) Lenders will be more careful when risky or poorly structured loans can be cancelled. Do more sharing of tools and vehicles, maybe set up a neighborhood library of things to be borrowed. Repair broken items. Force manufacturers to make durable and fixable products by regulation.
3. Don’t subscribe to Consumer Reports. It’s mostly advertising. If you must refer to it do so at the public library magazine rack.

Jody Tishmack
Jody Tishmack
3 years ago
Reply to  Red Hornet

Suggestions 1 and 2 are government policy changes that may be difficult to achieve in our highly polarized political environment. I definitely agree with loosening restrictions on bankruptcy, particularly newer ones that prevent families from filing bankruptcy in the case of medical bills. The suggestions I made are things anyone can do and does not require government intervention.

Red Hornet
Red Hornet
3 years ago
Reply to  Jody Tishmack

Such policy changes would be easy if people were educated how they would mitigate global boiling.

Red Hornet
Red Hornet
3 years ago
Reply to  Jody Tishmack

I have read your posts advocating a wealth cap and maximum wage several times.
People like you and I could vote for that. How’s Patrick feel about it?
Add 3 sons, that’s at least 5 votes from your family alone.
But like you often say, we aren’t allowed to vote for these good issues.
Don’t work too hard. Your entire body gets tired on a loader, and climbing up and down.
I have HE experience. Wish I could come up and help.

Jody Tishmack
Jody Tishmack
3 years ago
Reply to  Red Hornet

My husband and I agree on the need to change the system. He feels like there should be a maximum multiplier for highest to lowest wage/salary paid by a company. So the CEO could only earn X times the amount the lowest paid worker. We both agree that employee ownership in a company would help distribute the earnings better too. There are so many different variables it would be difficult to come up with one policy. My sons are just happy to be employed. 🙂
Yeah it’s strange how tiring it is to run a loader all day. I do love operating my loader though. This time of the year is great because it’s getting cooler and still dry so I get a lot of blending and tending piles. Nice to get out of the kitchen and away from the tomatoes for awhile! Soon it will be leaves changing color and bon fires. What type of HE did you operate?

Red Hornet
Red Hornet
3 years ago
Reply to  Jody Tishmack

I’m glad you two agree. Makes me feel good.

Red Hornet
Red Hornet
3 years ago

Bobcat the most, backhoe, farm tractors, trenchers.
I had a 1954 Ford 8N for many years and a variety of attachments and implements.
Traded it for a John Deere 4020 (bigger) when I moved to Plymouth Meeting in 2000.

Red Hornet
Red Hornet
2 years ago

You normally have ease and familiarity with your bodily movement, but it’s extra-natural to assume the extensions of a “great lumbering beast.” It’s a different kinesthesia, and a taxing body awareness. So as much fun as operating machinery can be, it tires your faculties on top of the restricted repetitive motions required.
If you watch gymnasts or acrobats they hyperventilate and seem given out after a performance and it is as much from the intense concentration as from the exertion.