Max's simple observation > After all, some folks will always want more.
explains why the rebound effect is a fundamental component in the de-growth debate. A steady state with increasing technology has strong tendencies to turn into growth, because the higher technology induces people to consume more. Higher travel speeds mean that people want to travel farther, better higways means more cars, cheaper energy means more energy consumption linked with more consumption of natural resources. Here is a related example: the article starting on p. 53 of the proceedings argues that speedy commuting has negative effects because it reduces the density of cities and therefore makes the center less accessible instead of more accessible, and it provides so much choice that the consumer gets disoriented. Again, here is the web site where the proceedings can be downloaded: http://events.it-sudparis.eu/degrowthconference/en/ Therefore "debound" policies have to be implemented to get persistent de-growth (German: "Nachhaltige Schrumpfung"). One obvious such policy is shorter work hours. Here is another such policy, not in the proceedings: Architect Ed Marzia's 2030 challenge phases out coal-fired power plants and at the same time progressively tightens building energy efficiency to make up for the decline in electricity supply. This can be seen as a debound strategy: the home efficiency gains are not given to the consumer but are used to get rid of coal. De-growth seems to be a helpful paradigm for understanding climate policies. Here is an interview with Ed Marzia: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/02/the_th_intervie_32.php _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
