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.
Buchrezension "Smarte Grüne Welt?" Technologien sind schöne Projektionsflächen. Wie die gute (oder böse) Fee im Märchen verkörpern sie häufig, je nach Sichtweise, entweder die Hoffnung auf eine fast magische Lösung unserer Probleme, oder die Bestätigung unserer Ängste. Eine vorurteilsfreie umfassende Auseinandersetzung mit den gesamtgesellschaftlichen Chancen und Risiken neuer Technologien f...
Wenn ich träume, träume ich nicht von Wirtschaft. Ich träume von Räumen und Landschaften, von Geräuschen, von Menschen mit ihren oft seltsamen Beziehungen und Geschichten. Aus der Traumforschung ist bekannt, dass man im Traum nicht rechnen kann, jedenfalls nicht über das Niveau einer ersten Grundschulklasse hinaus. Das deckt sich mit meinem Selbstbeobachtungen. Im Traum ist der berechnende Mens...
In a recently published article in Nature Climate Change, Jeroen van den Bergh argues that neither degrowth nor green-growth strategies might lead to sufficient climate action and hence makes the case for a third option which he calls “agrowth”. While the understanding of degrowth reflected in the article can certainly be disputed – it comes across as mainly targeting a shrinking GDP – his conc...