Idea of green growth losing traction among climate policy researchers, survey of nearly 800 academics reveals

Prosperity via subsidies, making the energy that powers economies more scarce and/or more expensive, always sounded like a fantasy.
– – –
When she took to the floor to give her State of the Union speech on 13 September, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen largely stood by the script, says Phys.org.

Describing her vision of an economically buoyant and sustainable Europe in the era of climate change, she called on the EU to accelerate the development of the clean-tech sector, “from wind to steel, from batteries to electric vehicles.”

“When it comes to the European Green Deal, we stick to our growth strategy,” von der Leyen said.

Her plans were hardly idiosyncratic.

The notion of green growth—the idea that environmental goals can be aligned with continued economic growth—is still the common economic orthodoxy for major institutions like the World Bank and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

The OECD has promised to “strengthen their efforts to pursue green growth strategies […], acknowledging that green and growth can go hand-in-hand,” while the World Bank has called for “inclusive green growth” where “greening growth is necessary, efficient, and affordable.”

Meanwhile, the EU has framed green growth as “a basis to sustain employment levels and secure the resources needed to increase public welfare […] transforming production and consumption in ways that reconcile increasing GDP with environmental limits.”

However, a survey of nearly 800 climate policy researchers from around the world reveals widespread skepticism toward the concept in high-income countries, amid mounting literature arguing that the principle may neither be viable nor desirable.

Instead, alternative post-growth paradigms including “degrowth” and “agrowth” are gaining traction.

Differentiating green growth from agrowth and degrowth

But what do these terms signify?

The “degrowth” school of thought proposes a planned reduction in material consumption in affluent nations to achieve more sustainable and equitable societies.

Meanwhile, supporters of “agrowth” adopt a neutral view of economic growth, focusing on achieving sustainability irrespective of GDP fluctuations.

Essentially, both positions represent skepticism toward the predominant “green growth” paradigm with degrowth representing a more critical view.

Much of the debate centers around the concept of decoupling—whether the economy can grow without corresponding increases in environmental degradation or greenhouse gas emissions.
. . .
Later paragraph heading:
7 out of 10 climate experts skeptical of green growth

Full article here.