War of the World Views

Green Growth vs. Scale Down

“With infinite complacency men went to and fro over this globe about their little affairs, serene in their assurance of their empire over matter” ― H.G. Wells, The War of the Worlds

Green Growth: a term to describe a hypothetical path of economic growth that is environmentally sustainable — Wikipedia

Scale Down: making something smaller in size, amount, or extent than it used to be [in order to achieve sustainability] — Collins English Dictionary

THE GLOBAL establishment understands that its hegemony is threatened by climate change. For one thing, an army of young climate activists is raising hell and pushing for actions unacceptable to it. There’s also the possibility, however small, that the views of opposition economists — the steady-staters — could begin to take hold. Lastly, there is genuine fear that climate change could seriously harm us, the most righteous species in Earth’s history, if not in the entire universe.

Leaders of great nations, their huddled economists and corporate sponsors, have an answer for our time — “green growth.” The term conjures up a nature-positive future without sacrifice on the part of the affluent, an absence of human poverty, and above all, wonderful technologies that allow humans to transform the face of the Earth and colonize distant worlds. Like a newly fertilized golf course, nothing could be brighter than green growth.

Green growth is now the mantra of the Group of Seven (G7), the World Bank, The World Trade Organization, the International Monetary Fund, and the World Economic Forum (an exclusive club for the most powerful and arguably most influential people on Earth). It’s the perfect label for a new era of financially lucrative industrialization.

In the other corner is a far weaker opponent that sees the need to scale down the human enterprise for the wellbeing of people and nature. It includes organizations like Earth Overshoot, the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy, the Alliance of World Scientists, and noted public figures for nature such as David Attenborough, Jane Goodall, and David Suzuki. This alternative worldview is reflected in documentaries such as 8 Billion Angels, Endgame 2050, and Attenborough’s A Life on Our Planet.

Here's my tabulation of the values, emphasis, and goals of these two radically different views of the world and humanity’s place in it (click on the table to enlarge it):

There you have it, take your pick: Scale Down or Green Growth, David vs. Goliath. For those who can barely recognize nature as they once knew it, and for those who can only envision a wonderfully diverse, living planet that once was, there is hope.

But it’s going to be one hell of a war — and one infinitely worth fighting.

Postscript

A war of world views does not mean that opposing parties cannot or should not agree on anything. There are important goals in common that should be pursued, albeit for different reasons. For example, both sides want renewable energy but for markedly different reasons. Where green growth advocates see more power for an expanding global civilization free from climate chaos, scale down advocates see a great opportunity to reinvent our relationship with nature in a post-fossil fuel world.

Likewise, both sides support education for girls, reproductive and sexual health, and furthering economic opportunities for women. For green growth supporters, this signals a larger global economy; for scale down advocates, a population drawdown to a level consistent with Earth’s ecological carrying capacity. As for stopping biodiversity loss, green growth sees species and ecosystem services as resources for humanity, while scale down champions want to restore the natural world for its intrinsic worth and for its incalculable value to people.