The signs from the Degrowth-Conference having disappeared from the walls of the portentous building of Corvinus University, and the streets of Budapest emptied from the stalls and the babble of the Degrowth-Week, the time is ripe for another evaluation-round. The conference can be assessed from diverse perspectives – with disparate outcomes, I suspect. Even if I am relatively new to the Degrowth-scene, I am strongly persuaded that this is a decisive time in the evolution of the European intellectual and activist degrowth-movement. Therefore, I will look here at the conference as a device for measuring the pulse of the community of degrowth-supporters, and as a milestone to reflect on its overall direction.
A key variable in the complex success-equation of the degrowth movement, it seems to me, would be to generate a more effective and rewarding mutual fertilization between degrowth scholars and degrowth activists. The currently prevailing assessment in the degrowth-community seems to be that there is “too much of academia and not enough activism”. Even if the critique of ‘sterile intellectualism’ should not come as a surprise in the framework of a friction-prone (even if potentially fruitful, better: possibly indispensable!) alliance between the academic and activist spheres, my concern is that bridging the two will probably require a more focused and deliberate effort than is currently the case. Failing to build a strong bridge between the two spheres, I’m afraid, would threaten to dissolve the core of the degrowth discourse(s) via two parallel threats:
How to avoid these dangers? In my understanding, the interface of movements and scholarly knowledge-gain towards challenging a continued growth-path in society at large remains under-explored. Concrete proposals (policy initiatives, collective and individual practices – including political practices, in the broader sense of the term) towards undermining growth-dependency are put forward by several proponents (Tim Jackson, Uwe Schneidewind & Angelika Zahrnt, Serge Latouche, among others). They are worth more serious considerations as guidelines for the action of degrowth-supportive movements (over 150, according to the “Degrowth in Movement(s)" project). There are, of course, many other sources of inspiration for a more fruitful ownership-taking of degrowth by civil society agents. The pocket book “Re.imagining activism. A practical guide towards the Great Transition”, for example, contains tailored reflections and tools for NGOs and SMOs to assess and (re-)design their organizational outlook and strategies to fit the challenge of a “Great Transformation” on a Polanyian-scale.
While the world can be changed through a myriad of micro- and macro-level strategies, from alternative sub-cultures all the way up to international regulatory frameworks, the specificity of degrowth is to seek ways of breaking the vicious cycle of economic growth, private profit-maximizing, and consumerism. And this can neither be achieved by pushing a degrowth-party into power, nor by shouting out to an unresponsive world “make love, not war”, but rather by creating cultural and economic infrastructures that – to borrow Uwe Schneidewind and Angelika Zahrnt’s expression - “make it easier to live the good life” for the many. And social movements, along with NGOs and scholars partnering in the degrowth-community, have a big role to play in this.
Anthropological thoughts on degrowth Degrowth energizes and interconnects remarkably heterodox thinking and surprisingly heterogeneous action. To advance dialogue among diverse pathways, a recent Journal of Political Ecology issue on “Degrowth, Culture and Power” joins studies of 15 initiatives to forge worlds that prioritize well-being, equity and sustainability rather than expansion. My intr...
Auf der Tagung der Attac Gender AG “Schneewittchen rechnet ab” am 3. November 2012 arbeiteten über 100 Teilnehmer_innen gemeinsam dazu, was (queer-)feministische Ökonomie leisten kann. Wo stößt sie an Grenzen und wie kann eine sinnvolle Weiterentwicklung gedacht werden? Welche Alternativen der Arbeit und der Produktion gibt es? Und nicht zuletzt: Wie wollen wir leben? Im [...]
An einem Wochenende im November 2013 fand im Studium Oecologicum der Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen das Seminar “Warum Wachstum? Eine Theoriewerkstatt zu Wachstumszwängen” statt. 20 Teilnehmer_innen beschäftigten sich mit strukturellen Bedingungen und Gründen von Wirtschaftswachstum. Aus ökologischer und kapitalismuskritischer Perspektive sowie aus Perspektive der Glücksforschung existieren gute Gründe, Wirtschaftswachstum als gesellschaftliche und wirtschaftspolitische Zielgröße zu [...]