World must abandon obsession with growth

In the midst of a global crisis, with governments and markets worried about a possible global recession, the British New Scientist magazine, was out this week with a cover in which argues that the search for economic growth is killing the planet and needs to be revised.

In a series of interviews and articles from experts on sustainable development, the magazine paints a picture in which all efforts to develop clean fuels, reduce carbon emissions and seek renewable energy sources can be useless while our economic system remains in search of growth.

"Science tells us that if it is to take seriously the attempts to save the planet, we must reshape our economy," says the magazine.

According to analysts consulted by the publication, the big problem in the equation of economic growth lies in the fact that while the economy seeks an infinite growth, natural resources of the earth are limited.

"Economists do not understand a simple fact that for scientists is obvious: the size of Earth is fixed, and it’s mass or the extension of the surface varies. The same is true for energy, water, earth, air, minerals and other resources present on the planet. The Earth is no longer able to sustain existing economy, much less one that continues growing, "says the economist Herman Daly, a professor at the University of Maryland and former adviser to the department for the environment of the World Bank.

For Daly, the fact that our economic system is based on the pursuit of growth above all means that the world is moving towards an ecological disaster and also economic, given the limitations of resources.

"To avoid this disaster, we need to change our focus from growth to qualitative and quantitative imposing limits on rates of consumption of natural resources of the earth," he writes.
"This economy of solid state, the values of the goods could still increase, for example, because of technological innovations and better distribution. But the physical size of the economy should be maintained at a level that can sustain the planet," concludes Daly, who compares the current economy to an airplane at high speed and its proposal to a helicopter, capable of flying without moving.

Reforming the capitalism

But these changes in the system will not be easy. In an interview to the magazine, James Gustav Speth, former advisor to Jimmy Carter administration (1977-1981) and the UN, says the environmental movement can never win within the current capitalist system.

"The only solution is reforming the current capitalism. The United States grew between 3% and 3.5% for a long time. Is there a dividend of this growth being placed on better social conditions? No. The United States has to focus on sustainable industries; Social needs, technology and decent medical care, and not sacrifices that make the economy grow. I do not advocate the socialism, but a non-socialist alternative to capitalism today, "he says.

He also makes criticism of the current environmental movement. "The environmentalist community, at least in the United States, is very weak when we talk about change in lifestyle, consumption and about his reluctance to challenge the growth or the power of corporations. We need a new political movement in the U.S., with values that reflect the human aspirations, and not only make more money.

Obsession with growth

The magazine also carries an article that discusses the argument that economic growth is necessary to eradicate poverty and that the wealthier they get, the lives of the poorest also improved. It is the so-called theory of trickle.

According to Andrew Simms, director of the New Economics Foundation in London, this argument, as well as "not honest" in any assessment, is "impossible".

"During the 1980s, for every $ 100 added in the global economy, about $ 2.20 was shared with those who were below the poverty line. During the 1990s, that figure rose to $ 0.60. This inequality means that for the poor to become a little less poor, the rich have to be very rich. "
According to him, this might seem unfair to some, but is not sustainable.

"Humanity is beyond the capacity of the biosphere support for our annual activities since the mid-1980s. In 2008, we exceeded the annual capacity at September 23, five days before the previous year."

He also says it is impossible that one day all of mankind has the standard of living of developed countries.

"It would take at least three planets Earth to sustain these needs if everyone lived in the patterns of Britain.”

For Simms, the Earth would be uninhabitable for a long time before that economic growth could eradicate poverty.

For the world to have an environmentally sustainable economy, according to Simms, we must put an end to the prejudice of some thought on the concept of "redistribution", which, for him, is the only viable way to end poverty.

"Only a few days it took to the governments of Britain and the U.S. to abandon decades of economic doctrines to try to rescue the financial system from a collapse. Why has it take longer to introduce a plan to halt the collapse of the planet brought by conduct an even more irresponsible and dangerous obsession call for growth? ".