Insight and inspiration in turbulent times.
In a New York Times op-ed published September 18 titled “Errors and Emissions,” economist-columnist Paul Krugman took a swipe at my organization, Post Carbon Institute, lumping us together with the Koch brothers as purveyors of “climate despair.” But not only does Krugman misrepresent our position, he himself is guilty of 5 errors and 3 omissions.
Researchers are finding that the business-as-usual scenario in the 1972 "Limits to Growth" study is unfolding before our eyes. Will reality follow that scenario further into the beginning of industrial decline this decade?
Mutatis mutandis, that’s what happened to most of the other grand visions of transformative technological progress that were proclaimed so enthusiastically over the last century or so.
As production (real GDP) grows, its marginal utility declines, because we satisfy our most important needs first.
In order to fully understand the necessary scale and speed of action required to significantly reduce climate change risks, citizens and governments must first understand the full extent and implications of the carbon budget challenge.
As promising as the Transition movement may be, there are crucial questions it needs to confront and reflect on if it wants to fully realise its potential for deep societal transformation.
Chances are that when you hear the phrase “Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy,” you don’t immediately think of dramatic change in the established political-economic order…
The interests of people and the planet are bound together and depend on each other.
One should be grateful to one’s critics–it is much better to be criticized than ignored.
No respectable person in American politics dares to question the virtue of economic growth even though it is increasingly clear that life on Earth will collapse if current patterns of extraction and consumption continue. So what is the responsible path forward?
It might seem a bit of a jump – talking about "fracking" and food production in the same article. However, when we look at what’s planned for the next phase of intensive agricultural development, what we find is the same economic and political theories at the root of the measures proposed.
What is “vivir bien,” and why is it relevant now?
