🗓️ Session 10: Sustainable Development, Environmental Limits, and Degrowth

Author
Affiliation

Claudius Gräbner-Radkowitsch

EUF and JKU

Published

27 11 2026

Modified

16 09 2026

Abstract

Abstract

This session examines the relationship between economic development and the natural environment — a relationship that runs in both directions and that prior sessions in this course have largely bracketed. We begin by establishing that environmental degradation is not merely a side-effect of development but a structural constraint on it: poorer countries tend to be more vulnerable to climate impacts while contributing least to the stock of accumulated emissions. Joan Martínez-Alier’s concept of the Environmentalism of the Poor challenges the dominant framing that positions environmental protection and poverty reduction as competing goals, arguing instead that for communities directly dependent on natural resources, the two are inseparable.

The session’s empirical core tackles a recurring theme of the course: the theory-ladenness of measurement. Using \(CO_2\) emissions as a case study, we show how different operationalizations yield dramatically different rankings — and different political conclusions — regarding climate change responsability. Kate Raworth’s Doughnut Economics framework is then introduced as a tool for visualising the double challenge: no country currently meets basic social needs without overshooting ecological boundaries. We assess both the framework’s appeal and its limitations, including the risk of depoliticising what are fundamentally distributional conflicts.

The session closes with the debate between green growth and degrowth as competing responses to this challenge. Working through a recent, high-profile academic debate1, we examine what the IPAT identity implies about the feasibility and scale of GDP contraction required if decoupling rates are taken as historically fixed — and what follows if they are not. The session ends with an open discussion on a question that cannot be answered by data alone, but that you are now better equipped to argue about carefully: is economic growth a threat to, or potential savior of the environment.

🖥️ Lecture Slides

The slides will be made available here after the lecture.

Dimension Indicators Used for Measurement
Food 1. Population undernourished
2. Population with moderate to severe food insecurity
Health 1. Population living in countries with under-5 mortality rate exceeding 25 per 1,000 live births
2. Population living in countries without high coverage of essential health services (Universal Health Coverage Index score less than 60 out of 100)
Education 1. Adult population (aged 15+ years) who are illiterate
2. Young adult population (aged 21-23 years) with incomplete upper secondary education
Income and work 1. Population living below the societal poverty line (set at half their country’s median household income or at least $15 a day)
2. Population of young people (aged 15-24 years) not in employment, education or training (NEET)
Water and sanitation 1. Population lacking access to safely managed drinking water
2. Population lacking access to safely managed sanitation
Energy 1. Population lacking access to electricity
2. Population lacking access to clean fuels and technologies for cooking, heating and lighting
Connectivity 1. Urban population lacking convenient access to public transport
2. Population not accessing the internet
Housing 1. Urban population living in slums or informal settlements
Equality 1. Population-weighted score on the Gender Inequality Index (global gap between women and men in reproductive health, empowerment and employment)
2. Racial inequality (no global indicator currently available)
Social cohesion 1. Population stating that they are without someone to count on in times of trouble
2. Population living in countries with a Palma ratio of 2 or more (income share of richest 10% relative to poorest 40%)
Political voice 1. Population living in countries governed by an autocratic regime
Peace and justice 1. Population stating that they perceive widespread corruption in government and business
2. Population living in countries with a homicide rate of 5 or more per 100,000

Time-series data for the period 2000-2022 is available through the supplementary data of Fanning and Raworth (2025).

📚 Mandatory Reading

Read before the lecture:

  • Very concise video by Kate Raworth introducing the idea of doughnut economics
  • Fanning and Raworth (2025)
    • A clear and recent introduction to the doughnut approach; read it after watching the short video
  • Hickel (2020)
    • Concise introduction to what is meant by ‘degrowth’ (for a critical view, see further readings)

🏆 Further Readings

🌿 On Ecological Economics

  • Daly (2005)
    • Accessible and foundational introduction to steady-state economics and the ‘full world’ thesis; argues the economy is a subsystem of a finite biosphere and that growth beyond a certain scale becomes uneconomic. Free full text available at Scientific American.
  • van den Bergh (2001)
    • Short overview clarifying how ecological economics differs from conventional environmental and resource economics, covering the growth debate, trade, and methodological pluralism.

🍩 On Doughnut Economics

  • O’Neill et al. (2018)
    • Empirically operationalises the ‘safe and just space’ framework across 150+ nations, finding that no country currently meets basic social needs within sustainable resource use. The precursor paper to Fanning and Raworth (2025).
  • Fanning et al. (2022)
    • Extends O’Neill et al. (2018) to analyse historical dynamics (1992–2015): countries transgress biophysical boundaries faster than they achieve social thresholds.
  • Anvaari (2025): The Doughnut and the Divide
    • A critical comment on the doughnut concept from a decolonial Marxist perspective.
  • Milanovic (2018)
    • A sceptical review of Raworth’s book, useful as a counterpoint.
  • Raworth (2017)
    • The book behind the framework; for those who want the full argument.

🌍 On Environmentalism of the Poor

  • Anguelovski and Martínez-Alier (2014)
    • Introduction to the ‘environmentalism of the poor’, clearly outlining the bidirectional relationship between well-being and environmental protection. Reading this before the lecture would aid understanding of the first half.

📉 On Degrowth

  • Schmelzer (2023)
    • Clearly explains the distinction between growth critiques and GDP critiques, and places degrowth in historical perspective.
  • Trainer (2021)
    • A response to Hickel (2020), illustrating the heterogeneity of the degrowth movement.
  • Gräbner-Radkowitsch and Strunk (2023)
    • Identifies and discusses two key challenges degrowth poses for the Global South: structural trade dependencies and asymmetric adjustment costs.
  • Gräbner-Radkowitsch and Strunk (2026)
    • Quantifies the short-term trade dependencies of the Global South on the North using global input–output analysis; the empirical follow-up to the above.
    • ⚠️ Ahead of print; full citation details (volume, pages) to be confirmed on publication.

🌐 On Planetary Boundaries

  • Richardson et al. (2023)
    • Description of the planetary boundary concept and its quantification; six of nine boundaries already transgressed. A key reference from earth system sciences.

⚖️ An Important Controversy About Degrowth

  • Hickel and Kallis (2020)
    • The original argument about the infeasibility of continued growth because of limits to decoupling.
  • Warlenius (2023)
    • Quantifies how much GDP contraction would be necessary to meet climate goals if decoupling is as limited as Hickel and Kallis claim.
  • Jackson et al. (2024) and Warlenius (2025)
    • Two rejoinders defending their respective positions; together they illustrate why this debate cannot be settled by data alone.

🗄️ Data

  • ND-GAIN Country Index — Notre Dame Global Adaptation Initiative. Country-level scores for climate vulnerability and readiness to adapt; the data underlying the vulnerability figure in this session.
  • OWID CO₂ and Greenhouse Gas Emissions — Our World in Data. Long-run annual data on CO₂ and GHG emissions by country (production-based, consumption-based, per capita, cumulative); the data underlying the emissions figures in this session.

If you have questions or problems, please post them in the Moodle forum.

References

Anguelovski, I. and Martínez-Alier, J. (2014) “The ‘Environmentalism of the Poor’ revisited: Territory and place in disconnected glocal struggles,” Ecological Economics 102: 167–176.
Bergh, J. C. J. M. van den (2001) “Ecological economics: Themes, approaches, and differences with environmental economics,” Regional Environmental Change 2(1): 13–23.
Daly, H. E. (2005) “Economics in a full world,” Scientific American 293(3): 100–107.
Fanning, A. L., O’Neill, D. W., Hickel, J. and Roux, N. (2022) “The social shortfall and ecological overshoot of nations,” Nature Sustainability 5(1): 26–36.
Fanning, A. L. and Raworth, K. (2025) “Doughnut of social and planetary boundaries monitors a world out of balance,” Nature 646(8083): 47–56, doi:10.1038/s41586-025-09385-1.
Gräbner-Radkowitsch, C. and Strunk, B. (2023) “Degrowth and the global south: The twin problem of global dependencies,” Ecological Economics 213: 107946.
Gräbner-Radkowitsch, C. and Strunk, B. (2026) “Short-term trade dependencies of the global south as an obstacle to degrowth? Quantifying the twin challenge of global dependencies,” New Global Studies.
Hickel, J. (2020) “What does degrowth mean? A few points of clarification,” Globalizations 1–7, doi:10.1080/14747731.2020.1812222.
Hickel, J. and Kallis, G. (2020) “Is Green Growth Possible?” New Political Economy 25(4): 469–486, doi:10.1080/13563467.2019.1598964.
Jackson, T., Hickel, J. and Kallis, G. (2024) “Confronting the dilemma of growth. A response to Warlenius (2023),” Ecological Economics 220: 108089, doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.108089.
Milanovic, B. (2018) Review of Doughnut Economics, available at https://braveneweurope.com/doughnut-economics-seven-ways-to-think-like-a-21st-century-economist-by-kate-raworth.
O’Neill, D. W., Fanning, A. L., Lamb, W. F. and Steinberger, J. K. (2018) “A good life for all within planetary boundaries,” Nature Sustainability 1(2): 88–95.
Raworth, K. (2017) Doughnut economics: Seven ways to think like a 21st-century economist, White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green Publishing.
Richardson, K. et al. (2023) “Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries,” Science Advances 9(37): eadh2458, doi:10.1126/sciadv.adh2458.
Schmelzer, M. (2023) “From Luddites to limits? Towards a systematization of growth critiques in historical perspective,” Globalizations 20(3): 447–464, doi:10.1080/14747731.2022.2106044.
Trainer, T. (2021) “What does Degrowth mean? Some comments on Jason Hickel’s ‘A few points of clarification’,” Globalizations 1–5, doi:10.1080/14747731.2020.1860621.
Warlenius, R. H. (2023) “The limits to degrowth: Economic and climatic consequences of pessimist assumptions on decoupling,” Ecological Economics 213: 107937, doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.107937.
Warlenius, R. H. (2025) “Decoupling pessimism and the dilemma of growth. A reply to Jackson et al (2024),” Ecological Economics 232: 108580, doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108580.

Footnotes

  1. See Hickel and Kallis (2020), Warlenius (2023), Jackson et al. (2024), and Warlenius (2025).↩︎