Sustainable degrowth or sustainable growth: a false choice

by Antoine Buéno | 4 Sep 2022 | Our experts in the media, Progress, Resources

Reading time is .

Key points

  • The theory: sustainable degrowth and sustainable growth each rest on a decoupling that has yet to be demonstrated.
  • Realism: no country wants to shrink its economy voluntarily.
  • The open world: a country cannot degrow on its own without lapsing into autarky.
  • Redistribution: the world’s wealth, if shared out, would not be enough to make up for a smaller economy.

📉 Is degrowth an option?

In Le Point, Antoine Buéno, a member of APALA’s expert committee, compares ‘sustainable degrowth’ with ‘sustainable growth’.

🔎 His thesis
In theory, both rest on a decoupling that has yet to be demonstrated. In practice, only sustainable growth is achievable: degrowth has no public support, no possible global coordination and not enough wealth to redistribute.

🧭 Three arguments
1. No country is prepared to reduce its production and consumption voluntarily.
2. A country that degrew on its own would lose its imports and its investment, ending up in autarky.
3. In 2018, sharing out all the world’s private wealth would have given $42,266 to each person: producing less while redistributing more is impossible.

💬 Why we share it
APALA shares this analysis: the transition depends on growth that reduces its footprint. This text raises a concrete question: how would degrowth be implemented?

👉 Our structured summary and the link to the original article:

Is degrowth an option? 📉

In Le Point, Antoine Buéno, a member of our expert committee, judges degrowth impossible to implement: nobody wants it, you cannot degrow alone, and the cake to be shared is too small.

Our summary in three arguments, with the link to the original article 👇

Is degrowth an option? 📉

Antoine Buéno, a member of APALA’s expert committee, responds in Le Point.

His three arguments:
1️⃣ No country wants it
2️⃣ You cannot degrow alone
3️⃣ The cake to be shared is too small

Full summary and link to the article: link in bio.

#APALA #thinktank #transitions #degrowth #growth #economy #climate #debate #LePoint

by Antoine Buéno, Le Point, 4 September 2022

‘Sustainable degrowth’ or ‘sustainable growth’? In theory, both rest on a decoupling that has yet to be demonstrated. In practice, only the latter is achievable: a policy of degrowth has no support, no possible global coordination, and not enough wealth to redistribute.

In brief

  • Degrowth has become unavoidable in the ecological debate, but its theorists, from Georgescu-Roegen to Latouche, do not say how it would be implemented or what its impact would be.
  • From an ecological standpoint, it has an obvious advantage: when activity falls, damage to the environment falls too. From an economic standpoint, growth has proven its ability to raise living standards.
  • Each camp assumes a decoupling: between GDP and environmental footprint for one, between economic activity and living standards for the other. The first is beginning to be observed in the most advanced countries; the second remains a pipe dream.

The article’s three arguments

1. Realism

Nobody wants it

No country is prepared to reduce its production and consumption voluntarily, yet to have any ecological effect, degrowth would have to start right now.

2. The open world

You cannot degrow alone

A country that degrew in isolation could no longer finance its imports or attract investment: it would be condemned to autarky and the disintegration of its economy.

3. Redistribution

A cake that is too small

In 2018, sharing out all the world’s private wealth would have given $42,266 to each of the 7.5 billion human beings, and under $32,000 to each of 10 billion. Producing less while redistributing more is impossible.

In 2025, average global GDP is $21,900 per person (in purchasing power parity, 2021 prices), or 40% of the French level ($55,100). Shared out equally, global output would give everyone 40% of the average French income. GDP measures a year’s output, not the wealth the article refers to.
‘Degrowth is all the less socially conceivable given that sustainable growth is possible.’Antoine Buéno, Le Point, 4 September 2022

Why this debate interests us

Degrowth is one of the most discussed ideas in the public debate on ecology. APALA shares Antoine Buéno’s analysis: the transition depends on growth that reduces its footprint, not on a contraction of the economy that nobody wants and that would impoverish the most vulnerable first. This text has the merit of raising the concrete question that advocates of degrowth often leave aside: how would it be implemented?

Questions for debate

  1. Can the decoupling of growth from emissions become fast enough for the climate?
  2. Can a degrowth policy be anything other than an organised recession?
  3. Can the redistribution of wealth make up for a smaller economy?

To go further on apala.fr

Summary written by Claude (Opus 5.5 model), an artificial intelligence, for APALA, based on the article published in Le Point on 4 September 2022. The positions expressed are those of the author. Spotted a mistake? Write to us.

Read the article on Le Point ↗

Guidance: what if AI governed us through good advice?

In Le Point, Thomas Lepeltier presents Antoine Buéno’s ‘Guidance’: the danger of AI would be less that it exterminates us than that it advises us too well. Our summary in three arguments.

Wildfires of summer 2026: what the global data say

In Causeur, Thomas Lepeltier compares the exceptional wildfires of summer 2026 in France with global satellite data, which describe a rather calm year. Our summary in three arguments.

Does organic farming keep its promises? Naturalness put to the test of the facts

In Atlantico, Thomas Lepeltier challenges the founding principle of organic farming, the preference for the natural over the synthetic, and judges its record to be more nuanced than its image. Our summary in three arguments.

A future without suffering? A video to open the debate

With The Flares, APALA offers a short foresight video: what if reducing avoidable suffering, among humans and other animals alike, were one of the great undertakings of the century?

Biodiversity: a public exchange with Tatiana Giraud

In Causeur, Thomas Lepeltier criticised the way Tatiana Giraud presents biodiversity; she replied, and he responded in turn. Our summary of the three texts: arguments, quotations and questions for debate.

Performance or robustness? Olivier Hamant’s thesis challenged

In Le Point, Thomas Lepeltier challenges the opposition between performance and robustness defended by the biologist Olivier Hamant: in his view, the resilience of societies comes from innovation and efficiency. Our summary in three arguments.

Natural or synthetic? What the ban on copper says about organic farming

In Causeur, Thomas Lepeltier draws a lesson from the withdrawal of copper-based fungicides decided by Anses: judge each product by its effects, not by whether it is natural or synthetic. Our summary in three arguments.

AI and extinction: Yudkowsky and Soares’s thesis in question

In Le Point, Thomas Lepeltier examines the thesis of Eliezer Yudkowsky and Nate Soares that a superintelligent AI would exterminate humanity. Our summary in three arguments.

Climate: why Bill Gates’s change of tone deserves to be welcomed

In Causeur, Thomas Lepeltier analyses Bill Gates’s change of tone on climate: not a repudiation of science, but a reminder that poverty and disease remain the greatest threats. Our summary in three arguments.

Sufficiency: a critique of Philippe Bihouix’s vision

In Le Point, Thomas Lepeltier responds to Philippe Bihouix: choosing sufficiency from today underestimates our capacity to innovate, and abundance would be the condition for sustainability. Our summary in three arguments.

0 comments

make a donation!

Public-interest association: €10 from you means nearly €30 for us, after tax relief.

Understand how it works