The energetic metabolism of societies and the degrowth paradigm: analyzing biophysical constraints and realities

Abstract

The belief that it is possible to have a perpetual “economic growth” based on fossil energy has been challenged since the 1970s. However, only in the last decade is this issue re-emerging once again because of the predicaments of climate change and peak oil. Many, finally start to perceive that an “economic degrowth” entailing a downscaling of the current size and pattern of socio-economic systems seem unavoidable. In this paper we analyze the implications, the feasibility and the desirability of possible trajectories of downscaling from an energetic perspective. The quantitative analysis is based on the methodological approach of societal metabolism, and it provides a dynamic accounting of the profile of energy flows required and consumed by societies in relation the expression of a given set of societal functions. This analysis makes it possible to check two types of constraints: external constraints (supply and sink side limits for the whole) and internal constraints (the feasibility of energy budget of the various parts of the society expressing the required functions). The analysis of the metabolic pattern of a sample of developed countries is used to discuss possible implications of: (i) demographic changes; (ii) the declining supply of net energy sources, and (iii) the effects of the Jevons' Paradox. Within such an analysis, a few assumptions and recipes of the degrowth movement seem problematic: (i) population is and will remain as a relevant variable to be considered; (ii) the proposed reduction in working hours seem to be impractical unless a major catastrophe will reset current civilization to pre-industrial standards; and (iii) voluntary reduction of personal energy consumption, even if a welcome adjustment, alone will not solve the existing problems. In the final part of the paper, future energetic road maps are questioned within the realm of post-normal science. Can we “plan” degrowth? If we are serious about the need of doing “something completely different”, societies will have to learn how to deliberate under uncertainty within the realms of flexible management and stop planning for either growth or degrowth. Moreover, before suggesting policies, it would be wise first to try to understand the option space.

Introduction

In the last decades, the sustainability of current patterns of economic growth has progressively been questioned. In relation to the compatibility with ecological processes human pressure on the natural environment is already excessive and keeps growing (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005). In relation to perpetual economic growth strategy implemented by almost every government, biophysical limits are getting extremely evident both: (i) on the supply side, as seen with the shortage of arable land for food, peak oil, peak water, peak minerals (i.e. peak everything (Heinberg, 2007)); and (ii) on the sink side varying from accumulation of Green House Gasses in the atmosphere, soil loss and different types of pollution and waste in the environment (Vitousek et al., 1997).

The debate over sustainability is not at all new (Georgescu-Roegen, 1971; Boulding, 1966; Daly, 1973). In the 1970s Ehrlich and Holdren (1971) proposed the “I = PAT relation” metaphor as a conceptual tool to isolate and study the factors determining the pressure that economic activities entail on the environment. The four terms of the “I = PAT relation” stand for:

I – Impact on the environment; P – Population; A – Affluence; T – Technology.

This relation indicates that the stress on both environment and natural resources is due to a simultaneous increase of human population (number of people – an extensive variable) and the affluence of society (the level of consumption per capita – an intensive variable). According to these authors, the increase in the two terms – P and A cannot be compensated by increases in efficiency – T – that is, better technology.

The analysis of Ehrlich and Holdern developed a furious debate, which, in the 1970s, divided the scientists concerned with sustainability amid the two sides:

• The cornucopians – believers in the perpetual growth. For those, regardless of whatever increase in P (population size) and A (affluence); this will always be compensated by an increase in efficiency T (better technology/silver bullets); and

• The prophets of doom – those saying that in a finite planet perpetual growth is not possible, no matter what technology will be invented. For them, all the three terms on the right side of the equation (PAT) should be changed simultaneously, in an integrated way, to maintain the activity of humankind within the carrying capacity of our planet. We can recall here the famous quote of Kenneth E. Boulding saying that: “Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist”.

These concepts were certainly not new for humankind. The risks associated with the overexploitation of local ecosystems have been painfully discovered, well before the 1970s, over and over by pre-industrial societies through famines, diseases and collapses of whole civilizations (Cottrell, 1955; Tainter, 1990; White, 1959). However, in the 1970s and later on in the 1980s, the situation experienced by “the most technologically advanced part of humankind” was dramatically different from the past. The feast of fossil energy civilizations giving way to new patterns of production and consumption of resources was expanding very fast into an “empty world” (Daly, 1992; Goodland et al. 1992). Because of this peculiar situation, the war between cornucopians and prophets of doom, ended with a clear victory of the cornucopians with the “perpetual growth paradigm” becoming the standard narrative in political, ideological and scientific terms behind policies for economic development adopted all over the world in the last three decades.

Finally, after a long period of oblivion, in the third millennium, the issue of sustainability and carrying capacity is getting back into the public discourse. New sustainability narratives, such as that of degrowth, have emerged in search for an alternative to the pattern of perpetual economic growth fully endorsed by fossil energy civilization. The degrowth paradigm, targeting the Affluence (A) and Technology (T) components of the “I = PAT relation”, aims at powering down levels of consumption of energy and materials whilst also bringing in strong interest for equity, freedom and quality of life (characteristics invisible when using the I = PAT relation) (Schneider et al., 2010).

However, before suggesting any specific policy for downscaling the production and consumption patterns within the economy, it is utmost imperative to primarily understand how societies are currently self-organizing and functioning. Thus, this paper proposes the analysis of sustainability of socio-economic systems from an energetic perspective using an approach called Multi-Scale Integrated Analysis of Societal and Ecosystem Metabolism (MuSIASEM) – (Giampietro et al., 2011). In fact, without a good understanding how the society uses energy for reproducing itself and expressing its typical functions, propositions for downscaling may become futile and even dangerous. Many experts of energetics warn that a significant reduction of the energy consumed by a society can result painful and catastrophic (Smil, 2010; Tainter, 2010). For an online debate on this topic see (http://www.ourenergyfutures.org).

For example, would someone believe that it would be possible to permanently cut 75% of the food energy consumption of a group of human beings without harming them? For this reason, those prescribing diets must have a very good understanding of the metabolism of the human body, before suggesting any prototypical argument on how to reduce energy consumption. Moreover: (i) the diets to be implemented should be different for different persons, depending on the gender, age, level of physical activity; and (ii) the range of reduction of food intake will have to be limited, in any case, by the physiology of the human body. If someone decides to follow an aggressive diet without having the required expertise is at risk of generating serious damage to her/his health.

Therefore, proposing a similar analogy for societal metabolisms, this paper starts with an analysis of energetic trends and profiles of developed countries: how different economies are powered through different metabolic patterns (similar to the example of food intake by humans). In particular, this analysis makes it possible to focus on two types of constraint:

• External constraints – those addressed by the I = PAT relation. In the analogy with the metabolism of human beings, this would represent a constraint referring to boundary conditions – e.g. having enough food, being able to get rid of wastes.

• Internal constraints – those referring to the internal characteristics of the metabolic process. In the analogy with the metabolism of human beings, this would represent a constraint referring to the internal physiology of the body – e.g. failure of some organs to carry out their expected functions, such as “heart failure” or “kidney failure”.