Capitalist pursuit of growth is often critiqued as being detrimental to the environment by scholars arguing from different disciplinary lenses such as environmental sociology, ecology, and political economy (and also by some peers in this class, apparently, judging from the poster topics that are headed in a similar direction). For example, Longo, et al. (2016) identify and give an overview of three frameworks from environmental sociology – human ecology, treadmill of production, and social metabolic analysis – that scholars use to argue that capitalist economic order predicated on the need for growth is incompatible with sustainability. If this “growth” is the culprit behind harmful levels of greenhouse gas emissions, depletion of natural resources, biodiversity loss and a myriad more environmental problems, then, will technological solutions to these problems be enough? Will the duct tape (or several pieces of duct tape on top of another) on a leaky pipe with an ever increasing flow hold? If this need for growth is truly incompatible with sustainability, then I would argue that, in addition to the quick technological solutions for our environmental problems, it is necessary to locate where this need for growth come from and address the fundamental factors that give rise to it. What are then the imperatives behind growth and what makes capitalism tick?
Literature on analyses of capitalism is broad and the discussion is far from being exhausted, ranging from classical writings such as those by Max Weber and Karl Marx, and in the numerous works of scholars that follow. A recent work by Cahen-Fourot (2022) discusses some of the growth imperatives under capitalism and identifies them as properties emergent from fundamental capitalist social relations – market relations and wage labour – reproduced by institutions. If growth stems from specific institutional and relational configurations, then rethinking them could form the basis for alternatives that do not depend on continuous economic expansions. What can such a structural analysis, of institutions and social relations, tell us about how to make changes? But perhaps a more important question for now is: is this discussion of growth being incompatible with the finiteness of resources a relevant discussion at all, especially in the timescales concerned with the climate problem?
References
Longo, S. B., Clark, B., Shriver, T. E., & Clausen, R. (2016). Sustainability and Environmental Sociology: Putting the Economy in its Place and Moving Toward an Integrative Socio-Ecology. _Sustainability_, _8_(5), 437. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8050437
Cahen-Fourot, Louison (2022) : Looking for growth imperatives under capitalism:
money, wage labour, and market exchange, Working Paper Series, No. 01/2022, Post-growth
Economics Network (PEN), s.l.
Hi Garmani,
Your idea addresses the big elephant in all the discussions around our way of living, which often is hidden or avoided. To me it is not completely clear, where you want to go from here. Do you want to explore alternative economic models? Do you want to deconstruct capitalism or on the contrary want to rehabilitate it? When looking at your claim to understand the mechanisms of growth, I think the two papers point into the right direction, but are they clear enough. Is your question really answerable?
I would encourage you to look for a more precise research question, and maybe you could invert your process: first look for interesting literature and then formulate the question that can be answered from that. If you formulate your question too ambitiously, you may stay superficial. And after all, the poster is no PhD topic 😉
I am looking forward to your solution to this dilemma, and am sure you will have a nice and inspiring poster in the end.