14 Green Growth - Decoupling
Decoupling: the end of the correlation between increased economic production and decreased environmental quality.
The needed decoupling does not occur! Not GLOBAL, not FAST-ENOUGH, not LONG-ENOUGH
Vaden (abstract)
The idea of decoupling “environmental bads” from “economic goods” has been proposed as a path towards sustainability by organizations such as the OECD and UN. Scientific consensus reports on environmental impacts (e.g., greenhouse gas emissions) and resource use give an indication of the kind of decoupling needed for ecological sustainability: global, absolute, fast-enough and long-enough. This goal gives grounds for a cate- gorisation of the different kinds of decoupling, with regard to their relevance. We conducted a survey of recent (1990–2019) research on decoupling on Web of Science and reviewed the results in the research according to the categorisation. The reviewed 179 articles contain evidence of absolute impact decoupling, especially between CO2 (and SOX) emissions and evidence on geographically limited (national level) cases of absolute decoupling of land and blue water use from GDP, but not of economy-wide resource decoupling, neither on national nor international scales. Evidence of the needed absolute global fast-enough decoupling is missing.
Vaden 2020 Decoupling for sustainability (pdf)
14.1 Rebound (Jevons Paradox)
Lange
Literature on the rebound phenomenon has grown significantly over the last decade. However, the field is characterized by diverse and ambiguous definitions and by substantial discrepancies in empirical estimates and policy proposals. As a result, cumulative knowledge production is difficult. To address these issues, this article develops a novel typology. Based on a critical review of existing classifications, the typology introduces an important differentiation between the rebound mechanisms, which generate changes in energy consumption, and the rebound effects, which describe the size of such changes. Both rebound mechanisms and rebound effects can be analytically related to four economic levels – micro, meso, macro and global – and two time frames – short run and long run. The typology is populated with eighteen rebound mechanisms from the literature. This contribution is the first that transparently describes its criteria and methodology for developing a rebound typology and that gives clear definitions of all terms involved. The resulting rebound typology aims to establish common con ceptual ground for future research on the rebound phenomenon and for developing rebound mitigation policies.
14.2 Artefact?
Fix
I investigate the hypothesis that the evidence for decoupling is a methodological artifact that arises from the use of monetary value to measure output. As demonstrated below, when the price of energy is used to deflate nominal GDP (rather than the GDP deflator), evidence for decoupling al- most entirely disappears. I hypothesize that monetary value, rather than represent the quantity of output, functions as a feedback device for controlling the flow of resources. Further investigation suggests that this feedback is not random; rather, it is fundamentally related to the biophysical labor productivity of the mining sector.
I should be clear that my argument is not that statistical agencies have somehow made a ‘mistake’ in their calculation of output. To the contrary, I hypothesize that the notion of ‘output’ (and therefore, ‘decoupling’) is a conceptual artifact that re- sults from the misapplication of linear thinking to a non-linear system.
If we think in biophysical terms, the economy is a complex, non-equilibrium system that uses biophysical flows to sustain itself. The only linear output of such a system is its waste.
The economy has no output; rather, it has a resource throughput.
Our mistake comes when we label certain internal pro- cesses as ‘output’: this gives the illusion of linearity where none actually exists. All of the outputs of the myriad of internal processes within the economy are destined to become inputs to other processes. Thus the internal workings of the economy are inherently circular, meaning the notion of a linear output is difficult to justify.
The notion of ‘output’ (at the level of the entire economy) is a con- ceptual artifact that arises from the focus on monetary value. That is, we conflate a sale (a monetized exchange) with the creation of an output. By aggregating sales (and calling this output), we create the illusion that the economy is a linear process.
If we drop the assumption that a sale represents an output, the illusion of linearity disappears: all internal processes become circular and the very notion of output (and hence, decoupling) becomes untenable. At the level of the entire econ- omy, the only linear flow is the stream of biophysical throughput, which ends in the output of waste.
Rather than treat monetary value as an output, I offer the alternative hypothesis that monetary value functions as a feedback device for controlling the flow of bio- physical throughput. We can frame this paradigm shift by asking the following question: how does the economy ‘know’ to consume more resources? In the animal kingdom, the stimulus to consume resources comes from sensory feed- back: animals ‘know’ to consume resources because they ‘feel’ hungry. What is the corollary of this sensory feedback in the economic system? My hypothesis is that monetary value functions as such a feedback mechanism, stimulating or stifling the flow of resources.
Prices constitute a feedback system that regulates the flow of resources through the economy.
By thinking in this way, however, we place a heavy emphasis on the price of energy (the price of electricity in this case). Thus, we must ask – where does the price of energy come from? It is rather disconcerting to think that random market fluctuations might cause a change in the price of energy that somehow leads to a change in the entire economy’s ability to consume useful work. This would lead us straight back to the neoclassical view that the market is the ultimate arbiter of the economy. The task of biophysical economics should be to show that energy prices are, in fact, not random at all. Instead, they are a reflection of a broader biophysical reality.
The nominal price of fossil fuel is a simple function of two variables: nominal GDP and the biophysical productivity of the mining sector.
The evidence for decoupling almost completely disappears when nominal GDP is deflated by the price of electricity, rather than by the GDP deflator. This implies that evidence for decoupling is a methodological artifact – a result of the decision to measure output in terms of monetary value. The evidence presented here supports the alternative hypothesis that monetary value functions as a feedback device for controlling biophysical throughput.
When moving from neoclassical theory to the real world, our ability to measure decoupling is undermined by serious (and I would argue, insurmountable) epistemological difficulties. The conventional measure of decoupling – the energy intensity of GDP – fails all three conditions for an effective efficiency metric. Thus, any evidence for decoupling that is provided by this metric should be met with appropriate scepticism. As such, I argue that the neoclassical notion of decoupling is untestable.
14.3 The Green Growth Delusion
Ketcham
“Green Growth” is the idea that the organizing principle of our civilization — endless growth of economies and populations — can be decarbonized swiftly in a way that will involve no material disruption.
In the annals of industrial civilization, the Green New Deal counts as one of the more ambitious projects. Its scale is vast, promising to reform every aspect of how we power our machines, light our homes and fuel our cars. At this late hour of ecological and climate crisis, the Green New Deal is also an act of desperation.
The consensus on the need for scaling up renewable energy is rarely disturbed by a disquieting possibility: What if techno-industrial society as currently conceived — based on ever-increasing GDP, global trade and travel, and complex global production and distribution chains designed to satisfy the rich world’s unquenchable appetite for bigger, faster, more of everything — what if that simply cannot function without energy-dense fossil fuels?