Should arguments for degrowth be anthropocentric or ecocentric? And what does this mean in practice? There is an interesting discussion going on, starting with two recent court rulings in New Zealand and India about rivers being granted personal rights. We present an article by Ashish Kothari, Mari Margil and Shrishtee Bajpai, first published for The Guardian. Several geographically-distant but related events signalled a dramatic mind shift in humanity’s troubled relationship with nature last month. First, the New Zealand parliament passed the Te Awa Tupua Act, giving the Whanganui River and ecosystem a legal standing in its own right, guaranteeing its “health and well-being”. Shortly after, a court in India ruled that the Ganges and Yamuna rivers and their related ecosystems have “the status of a legal person, with all corresponding rights, duties and liabilities ... in order to preserve and conserve them”. The history of the rivers makes these proclamations remarkable. The Ganges has long been considered sacred and millions of people depend on it for sustenance, yet it has been polluted, mined, diverted and degraded to a shocking extent. The Whanganui has witnessed a century-old struggle between the indigenous Iwi people and the New Zealand government over its treatment. Notably, the Iwi consider themselves and the Whanganui as an indivisible whole, expressed in the common saying: “I am the river, and the river is me.” Rivers are the arteries of the earth, and lifelines for humanity and millions of other animals and plants. It’s no wonder they have been venerated, considered as ancestors or mothers, and held up as sacred symbols. But we have also desecrated them in every conceivable way. Can giving them the legal rights of a human help resolve this awful contradiction? Perhaps, if we are able to think beyond the material limits of how we relate to nature, we can encourage political and economic measures to create a deeper and more ethical relationship. New Zealand and India have recognised the intrinsic rights of rivers, beyond their use for humans. Both recognise rivers as having spiritual, physical and metaphysical characteristics. These crucial extensions of law are based on ethical principles rarely recognised since the industrial age, but this is how indigenous peoples have long treated nature.
By Giorgos Kallis A new Left has to be an ecological Left, or it won’t be left at all. Environmental change ‘changes everything’ for the Left too, Naomi Klein argued. Capitalism requires constant expansion, an expansion predicated on exploitation of humans and non-humans, that irreversibly damages the climate. A non-capitalist economy will have to sustain itself while contracting. But how can ...
Das Statistische Bundesamt schreibt trocken: „Vor dem Hintergrund der steigenden Anforderungen an die Vergleichbarkeit des BIP hat die Europäische Kommission die Mitgliedsstaaten nun aufgefordert, auch verbotene Produktionsaktivitäten spätestens ab September 2014 in das BIP einzubeziehen. Konkret geht es dabei um Drogen, Schmuggel und Prostitution, die EU-weit als signifikant gelten.“ (Statistisches Bundesamt). Wer auch wissen will, [...]
Dieser Artikel ist im Rahmen der Theoriewerkstatt zu Wachstumszwängen entstanden. Wir wollen im ersten Teil dieses Artikels beleuchten, warum die klassischen Wirtschaftswissenschaften Wirtschaftswachstum für notwendig halten, um die Konsumwünsche einer Bevölkerung zu befriedigen, sowie die Fragwürdigkeit dieser Annahme offen legen. Um es nicht bei der Kritik zu belassen, stellen wir im zweiten Teil mögliche [...]