Jean-Pascal Van Ypersele

OA - Liste

filtre:
Growth

2025

Identifying the socio-economic drivers behind greenhouse gas emissions is crucial to design mitigation policies. Existing studies predominantly analyze short-term CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, neglecting long-term trends and other GHGs. We examine the drivers of all greenhouse gas emissions between 1820–2050 globally and regionally. The Industrial Revolution triggered sustained emission growth worldwide—initially through fossil fuel use in industrialized economies but also as a result of agricultural expansion and deforestation. Globally, technological innovation and energy mix changes prevented 31 (17–42) Gt CO2e emissions over two centuries. Yet these gains were dwarfed by 81 (64–97) Gt CO2e resulting from economic expansion, with regional drivers diverging sharply: population growth dominated in Latin America and Sub-Saharan Africa, while rising affluence was the main driver of emissions elsewhere. Meeting climate targets now requires the carbon intensity of GDP to decline 3 times faster than the global
This brief introduces degrowth – intentional downscaling of the global economy to achieve ecological sustainability and social justice – for people working in environmental and social advocacy. It centers the question: “Has the economy outgrown the planet?” because global ecological limits have reshaped the conditions under which we pursue climate action, environmental justice, and many other pressing aims.
J’ai l’habitude de voir les écologistes et les futurologues parler des limites de la croissance (« The Limits to Growth »). Je suis moins habitué à voir des spécialistes de l’investissement mentionner des recherches liées aux limites de la croissance. C’est pourtant ce qu’a fait récemment Joachim Klement dans sa lettre d’information quotidienne. Bien entendu, quiconque écrit sur les limites de la croissance doit d’abord procéder à toutes les vérifications d’usage. En effet, la combinaison des mots « limites » et « croissance » dans le titre a suscité un grand nombre de réactions critiques, allant de la déformation pure et simple de l’ouvrage à l’incompréhension du modèle de dynamique des systèmes qui le sous-tend.
I’m used to environmentalists and futurists writing about The Limits to Growth. I’m less used to seeing investment writers mention research that’s linked to The Limits of Growth. But that’s what Joachim Klement did in his daily newsletter recently.
I’m used to environmentalists and futurists writing about The Limits to Growth. I’m less used to seeing investment writers mention research that’s linked to The Limits of Growth. But that’s what Joachim Klement did in his daily newsletter recently. Of course, anyone who writes about Limits of Growth has to do all the usual disclaimers first. This is because the combination of the words “limits” and “growth” in the title produced a lot of critical responses, on a range from straight-up hatchet jobs which misrepresented the book, to people who didn’t appear to understand the systems dynamics model that sat behind it.
Before you read this, a word of caution. You may want to prepare yourself a stiff drink and sit down before you read the following. I think most people who read this will at some point in their life heard about the Club of Rome’s Limit to Growth publication from the 1970s. Back then, the Club of Rome asked the MIT to produce a series of forecasts for the world’s industrial and services output, food production, and pollution levels to the year 2100. Almost from the get-go, these forecasts were derided as scaremongering and flat out wrong. But were they really?
These are difficult times indeed, with terrible news on many fronts. What are the prospects for the degrowth1 alternative as we move through 2025? Dark times: the current context First, we need to understand what is going on around us: what is the evolving context with which degrowth has to contend, and to which it has to present a viable alternative?
💡 Is our obsession with economic growth leading us to collapse? Economist and research Gaya Herrington joins us to discuss why GDP is a flawed metric, how degrowth can lead to a thriving well-being economy, and why businesses must prioritize resilience over efficiency. Tune in for a critical conversation on reshaping our economic future.
There are increasing concerns that continued economic growth in high-income countries might not be environmentally sustainable, socially beneficial, or economically achievable. In this Review, we explore the rapidly advancing field of post-growth research, which has evolved in response to these concerns. The central idea of post-growth is to replace the goal of increasing GDP with the goal of improving human wellbeing within planetary boundaries. Key advances discussed in this Review include: the development of ecological macroeconomic models that test policies for managing without growth; understanding and reducing the growth dependencies that tie social welfare to increasing GDP in the current economy; and characterising the policies and provisioning systems that would allow resource use to be reduced while improving human wellbeing. Despite recent advances in post-growth research, important questions remain, such as the politics of transition, and transformations in the relationship between the Global Nort

2024

Added complexity allows an economy to grow, even as resource limits are reached. But at some point, the complexity itself becomes a problem.