- Erik Gomez-Baggethun: Key challenges for ecological economics
2. News from ESEE and its members
- ESEE ecological economics training institute 2019
- ESEE ecological economics training institute 2020: Call for applications
- Prioritising well-being on a finite planet: A Research manifesto
- Environmental Policy and Governance Journal
3. Hot topic
- Anke Schaffartzik et al.: Transitions – stories from a messy field of struggle
- Clive Spash: End jet-set academic lifestyles
- Sarah Hafner: Activism meets ecological economics
4. Student spotlight
- Kreinin Halliki: Bridging the gap between environmental and labour movements
5. Events, jobs and publications
- Job Opportunity: Research associate, Martin-Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
- Training opportunity: Oxford Summer School in Ecological Economics 2019, UK, August 25th to 31st, 2019
- Training opportunity: 14th BiGSEM Doctoral Workshop on Economic Theory, University of Bielefeld, Germany, November 20th to 21st, 2019
- Call for papers: Special issue of the journal ‘Papers in political economy’: ‘Economics and the environment since the 1950s: History, methodology, and philosophy'
- Call for papers: Special issue of the journal ‘Ecosystems and people’: ‘Human-nature connectedness’
- 7th International Degrowth Conference/ 16th ISEE International Joint Conference: ‘Building alternative livelihoods in times of ecological and political crisis’, Manchester, UK, September 1st to 5th, 2020
- Degrowth Conference 2020: ‘Strategies for Degrowth’, Vienna, Austria, May 29th to June 1st, 2019
Key challenges for ecological economics: A call for input from ESEE members
Erik Gomez-Baggethun, President of ESEE
Leading up to our conference this year in Turku I contacted previous ESEE Presidents to ask their views regarding key challenges for ecological economics in the coming years. Some of the key themes that were raised in our conversations and e-mail exchanges include: i) the identity of ecological economics, ii) maintaining a stable and committed membership, and iii) relations with other emerging scientific communities. A further issue that was raised is our strategy in relation to scientific journals and publishers. This issue is particularly pertinent as discontent with the practices of major for-profit publishers increases within and beyond our community, and as major national research agencies from European countries call for open-access science publishing. This editorial focuses on the first three aspects. We will come back to the last point in a future newsletter.
First, the issue of the identity of ecological economics was discussed during a round table organized at a recent conference of the Andean Society for Ecological Economics (SAEE), held in Lima 9th to 11th April 2019. Ecological economics initially presented itself as ‘the science and management of sustainability’. Since then, a scientific community on sustainability science has been established with its own conferences and journals. Is ecological economics different from the broader field of the sustainability science? If so, in which ways? Should ecological economics be able to accommodate most theories and methods across the field of sustainability science or should it define more clearly its core themes, theories, and methods? How can identity, openness, and interdisciplinarity best be harmonized?
Second, ecological economics has contributed to spreading research areas like biophysical economics, resilience, ecosystem services, and Degrowth. Interest in these themes has grown rapidly, leading to the emergence of new academic communities, often with their own scientific journals, international societies, and conferences. Ecological economists should be proud for having contributed to the establishment of these important fields. However, we are also faced with the challenge of retaining a stable and committed membership as other scientific societies addressing sustainability topics are on the rise.
Third, and related to the former point, other established or emerging communities are addressing important themes for ecological economics, including Degrowth (R&D), the commons (IASC), political ecology (POLLEN), ecosystem services (ESP), sustainability science (ISSS), and various fields in heterodox economics, including institutional economics, feminist economics, and behavioural economics. What can ecological economics learn from this blooming scientific landscape? What strategic or tactical alliances can be forged with other communities sharing our concerns for a just and sustainable future? (See further discussion on this theme from Federico Demaria in our Autumn 2018 newsletter). Ecological economics is already taking steps to forge alliances across academic communities. For example, the last conference of the SAEE called for a dialogue with political ecology in our common search for environmental justice, and the next ISEE conference in Manchester will be held jointly with the Degrowth community.
Our recent conference in Turku, Finland (18th to 21st June 2019), had co-creation as its core theme and was an excellent opportunity to reflect collectively on how to find shared answers to the challenges we face. If you were able to attend we hope you enjoyed the conference and the chance to reflect on the future of our field.
ESEE Ecological Economics Training Institutes 2019
The ESEE board received two applications for the Training Institute to be held in 2019. The board decided to grant 2000 euros to ‘Proposing pathways outside the growth, closure and depressive narratives. An international summer school on methods, practices and activism around Degrowth and Environmental Justice’, organized by the Institute of Environmental Science and Technology of the Autonomous University of Barcelona (ICTA-UAB).
ESEE ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS TRAINING INSTITUTES
CALL FOR APPLICATIONS
ESEE board is pleased to open its call for a series of transdisciplinary and collaborative training institutes on ecological economics aimed at early career researchers, practitioners, and decision-makers in Europe. Events can be focused on any of the diverse range of topics associated with ecological economics but will share a common participatory approach and structure. Local organisers can (annually) bid for up to 2000 euros for events that meet a number of criteria, as detailed below:
- Highly collaborative and participatory; not just a series of lectures and presentations.
- Transdisciplinary: including participants beyond academia, e.g. decision-makers, practitioners, community representatives, etc.
- Students are heavily involved in organising the event.
- Zero or low cost for participation, with some kind of bursary opportunities for those in a low-income situation.
- The organisers have to record participant feedback on the event and make this available to ESEE.
- Environmental awareness: a plan to minimise (and potentially compensate) the carbon footprint and other environmental costs.
- Involvement of one or more ESEE board members to guarantee criteria are met and to further year-on-year learning regarding format and engagement.
FURTHER GUIDELINES AND SUGGESTIONS
In addition to mandatory criteria, ESEE suggests the following guidelines for the events. These guidelines will also be used to decide between competing applications if more than one application is made for sponsorship in an annual round.
- Duration: 2 days for pre-conference events, 3-5 days for other events
- Number of participants: 20-30 participants; a relatively small group of students helps to build group cohesiveness and identity.
- A mix of student and post-doc with at least a third post-docs.
- Provide opportunities for publication of outputs.
- Provide opportunities for ECTL credits associated with courses.
- Remote locations preferred to maximise engagement.
- Family friendly with childcare options available.
- As the decision on competing proposals is taken by the ESEE Board, active ESEE Board members are excluded from submitting applications for competition. However, they are still free to submit applications, but these will only be considered in the case of no other eligible application(s) being made from applicants outside the ESEE Board for the next year to come.
- ESEE membership: participants must be told about ESEE, and provided the opportunity to join ESEE (or ISEE) as part of the event.
PROCEDURE FOR APPLICATIONS
Candidates can apply annually for up to 2000 euros towards the cost of an event to be held within the following two years, provided it meets the criteria, but are responsible for the remainder of funding. Applications will include a short rationale for the meeting including a description of the meeting format (max 2 pages), a budget, an indication of what budget items ESEE funds will be spent on, and an overview of other (potential) funding sources.
Applications for events in 2020 have to be submitted before February 28th, 2020 the decision will be published by April 30th 2020.
Applications for 2021 can be submitted at any time by October 31st, 2020, and will be decided upon in November 2020.
Prioritising well-being on a finite planet: A Research manifesto
At the ESEE conference 2019 in Turku a team of researchers including Julia Steinberger and ESEE Secretary Elke Pirgmaier launched a research manifesto for prioritising well-being on a finite planet.
Academics, activists, policy-makers and members of civil society, who are dedicated to prioritising human well-being within planetary boundaries are all invited to read and sign the manifesto which you can find here.
Environmental Policy and Governance Journal
The ESEE affiliate journal, Environmental Policy and Governance, is now in its 29th volume, with an ISI Impact Factor of 1.268, and seeks to advance interdisciplinary environmental research and its use to support novel approaches and solutions.
The journal publishes innovative, high quality articles which examine, or are relevant to, the environmental policies that are introduced by governments or the diverse forms of environmental governance that emerge in markets and civil society. The journal is deliberately inter-disciplinary, seeking to publish articles that build the understanding of environmental issues not only by drawing upon and contributing to the environmental social sciences, but also by linking the social and natural sciences and beyond.
The journal encourages methodological innovation and diversity in order to foster interdisciplinary, problem-oriented environmental research. As competition to be published in Environmental Policy and Governance is high, we ask authors to place the major emphasis of their papers on conceptual issues of wider interest and importance, and the minor emphasis on case studies or particular issues or contexts.
We welcome the submission of papers to the journal, and aim to offer speedy and constructive responses to all paper submissions whether through our initial editorial review or for selected papers through our refereeing process. We also welcome ideas for special issues, and have spaces for special issues to be published from 2018 onwards. Submission details and contact information can be found on https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/17569338
Table of contents for current issues March/April (vol 29/02) and May/June (vol 29/03)
Transitions – stories from a messy field of struggle
Anke Schaffartzik, Anna Petit-Boix, Mélanie Wary, Sonia Graham, David Villota*, Ola Stedje Hanserud, Tristan Partridge, Santiago Gorostiza
Institut de Ciència i Tecnologia Ambientals, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ICTA-UAB)
*Professional facilitator (http://elcaminodelelder.org/)
Our offering is based on the generously shared insights, concerns, and visions of the scholars attending a recent workshop on ‘Climate in Transition’ in the María de Maeztu Unit of Excellence at the Institute of Environmental Science and Technology at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ICTA-UAB). As a topic for ecological economics, ‘transitions’, may feel lukewarm rather than hot. But, as any frog would tell you if it could: Act before the water boils! Unlike the frog, we are ill-equipped to recognize imminent tipping points of the systems on which we depend for survival. We may realize that we are approaching a ‘critical threshold at which a tiny perturbation can qualitatively alter the state or development of a system’ but may not know when we will or whether we already have reached that point. And, of course, for the case of the climate system, we can’t just jump out.
These tipping points in the climate transition are described in research results published in high-ranking academic journals. They also represent one manner of viewing transitions, one narration of the challenge we face. Ecological economics research adds many perspectives: we distinguish transitions as planned societal shifts, often with defined, desired outcomes from the transitions in our societal pasts which led to unintended outcomes (e.g., the fossil-fuel based energy system leading to anthropogenic climate change). The transitions to low-carbon economies, to renewable energy systems, to steady-state economies, to resource-efficiency, to the green economy, to the service economy, or the degrowth transition, as examples of the former, represent vastly differing notions of the change we want, of the actors we need to engage and how, and of what can be achieved by which means. What we expect of these transitions and how we assess the ongoing processes that they are up against is informed by our understanding of past and already (or still) ongoing transitions, i.e., metabolic transitions such as the agrarian-industrial transitions or forest transitions.
Looking at this semantic mess, we could be tempted to clean it up (or alternatively to think that someone really should clean it up). Let’s suppress these urges, leave the calls for an ecological economics conceptualization of transition aside, and instead consider the already existing transition concepts as (potentially competing) claims to what transition means in theory and could look like in practice. What we see then is a field of struggle in which, in academia and in real life outside the ivory tower, dominant transition (theories) point not (only) to convincing arguments but to power relations and dominance. The transition story each of us chooses to tell is situated in this struggle.
The transition narrative then is not only a powerful tool for communicating ecological economics but also potentially changes the way we think about and research transitions. A systematic analysis of discourses can help us identify how transition policies are defined and how certain actors become relevant through their narratives. The transition story of degrowth, for example, could see overproduction and overconsumption rising to a dramatic climax in the destruction of the ecosystems on which we depend for survival, to be resolved only by structural change allowing for absolute reductions in resource use. This narrative, however, might not resonate with environmental justice movements in the Global South, with the experience of those coerced into contributing to and barred from partaking in growth-led development. The aim of a just and sustainable future shared by degrowth and environmental justice movements allows these stories to augment each other. As these movements resist or demand transition, they are confronted by very powerful counterforces. In numerous cases of conflict and struggle, the environmental justice transition sees the irreconcilable competing claims to land climax in often violent confrontations requiring shifts in the underlying and otherwise cemented power relations. The field of struggle extends far beyond interpretational sovereignty.
If we understand the stories of transition as being told from a messy field of struggle, then in it even seemingly exclusive and competing narratives can co-exist. Even a low-carbon transition of technological solutions and command-and-control implementation may provide opportunities to (re)claim actual and figurative space for low-carbon reproductive activities, unintentionally giving previously disempowered actors a say in the configuration of their environment, mobilizing potential for wholly unexpected outcomes.
The transition story cannot only be fuelled by fear, of being boiled alive, for instance, but can also be framed by hope, not only for an environmentally more benign but also a more fulfilling and meaningful way of life. Ours is a call not for us all to tell the same transition story but to consider how the story we’re telling affects our research and the messages we’re sending.
Ending Jet-Set Academic Lifestyles
Clive Spash, Chair of Public Policy and Governance, Vienna University of Economics and Business
Children across the globe are calling for environmental action, shaming their parents and politicians alike for their inaction and hypocrisy. Flying is a paradigmatic case. If aviation were a nation state it would be the seventh largest CO2 emitter. Airbus (half the manufacturing duopoly with Boeing) boasts that every 1.5 seconds one of its aircraft takes-off or lands. Governments subsidise and protect the industry and support its expansion.
Indeed, flying is at the leading edge of economic growth. Manufacturers expect to double the passenger aircraft fleet, with ‘emerging’ economies, and especially China, tripling those flying. The bill? A cool $5.3 trillion by 2036 for the new commercial fleet. Over half a million new pilots would be required. Already 423 new airports are planned or under construction. Christiana Figueres, (former Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change) justifies the expansion as ‘carbon neutral growth’ (i.e. hypothesising future decoupling).
Politicians and bureaucrats fly regularly to ‘planet saving’ conferences, as do environmental activists and academics. Despite being a small minority, flyers regard the practice as unquestionably ‘normal’, even if they are environmentally concerned. Greenpeace allows executives to commute on short-haul flights. A leading ecovillage found that members fly as often as ordinary Westerners, blowing-out their ecological footprints. Climate scientist, Kevin Anderson campaigns against flying, but his colleagues at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research average 2.3 flights each per year. Closer to home, most ESEE and even degrowth attendees fly to conferences. Flying is normal, expected and even demanded in academic, scientific, business, and policy circles.
Yet, flying-less offers the biggest opportunity for reducing personal CO2 emissions (e.g., eighteen times the emissions of a train per 1000 passenger-kilometres travelled). Besides greenhouse gas emissions, flying has numerous other undesirable features: kerosene health impacts on take-off, noise pollution, rural land grabbing, infrastructure subsidies, regional domination, property speculation, airport consumerism, support of the military-industrial complex, reinforcing inequity (only 5-7% have ever flown) and elitism (private jets as status symbols). On both social and ecological grounds, the ESEE should actively oppose flying (see also December 2015 ESEE Newsletter).
The ESEE can help encourage action. Ecological economists need to connect academia to activism and policy change, and flying provides an opportunity to exemplify this. This means overcoming common excuses for flying. The same old excuses: I have to fly because of my… job; family; friends; the price. We need to change both structures and how we act as individuals, and so transform society.
Changing the social norm. Here are ten suggestions:
Academic success needs to be divorced from jet-set lifestyles, and academics need to behave consistently with their knowledge claims and values. This involves criticising and seek to change structure, while encouraging and supporting personal action and responsibility. Ecological economists should be an advanced guard on such issues, not those dragging their feet at the back and making excuses. Children have been exposing the failures of adults and our community needs to improve basic social ecological practice. Doing so empowers us and improves our credibility as individuals and a community, while simultaneously encouraging others.
- Stop promoting flying as the first, and often only, travel option.
- Conferences/meetings should promote cycling, trains, buses and car-sharing.
- On conference/meeting websites, provide no information on flying at all and only information on alternatives. Avoid conference subcontractors who promote flying.
- Tele-conferencing should be normal at conferences, not an exception regarded as a problem due to ‘difficult people.
- Offer conference attendee prizes for the most environmental-friendly travel; some associations already do so.
- Lobby university administrations (and others) to change their practices (e.g., expense refund policies) preventing alternative travel. They should reward non-flyers, not punish them via their rules and regulations.
- The ESEE should: (i) have clear anti-flying statements; (ii) sign-up as an institution to https://stay-grounded.org/position-paper/; (iii) lobby ISEE, degrowth community and others to improve practice; (iv) establish an ‘action/good practice’ committee.
- Academics should support ‘Stay Grounded’, commit to ‘Fly Less’ (sign-up at https://www.change.org/ and email firstname.lastname@example.org).
- Advance research and policy mechanisms to de-grow flying.
- Campaign for slow (not high speed, high emissions) travel, night trains, protect existing slow and low-tech travel infrastructure and get more built.
Environmental activism meets ecological economics
Sarah Hafner, PhD Researcher, Centre for Understanding Sustainable Prosperity (CUSP) and the Anglia Ruskin University Global Sustainability Institute (GSI)
On 15th of March 2019, increasing environmental pressures caused more than 1.4 million young people around the world to take part in school strikes asking for rapid and large-scale government action, responding to the scale and urgency of the ‘climate emergency’. For a similar purpose, Extinction Rebellion held huge nonviolent civil disobedience protests occupying public spaces in London, including the London Stock Exchange and the House of Commons. These protests caused mass disruption in the British capital for a duration of ten days in April 2019.
While climate concerns are increasingly becoming a mainstream issue for governments and other major players, including but not limited to, institutional investors and central banks (e.g. Breeden, 2019; Bank of England, 2019; HM Government, 2017), these actors and in particular the above mentioned environmental socio-political movements ask for further, urgent, large-scale action.
This brings us to the important questions, what exactly should governments do? Ecological economics has a long tradition of studying the economy as an open sub-system that is embedded in a larger, but finite, biophysical system (e.g. Georgescu-Roegen,1971; Daly, 1973; 1991; Costanza, 1992). In particular, Daly introduced the concept for a steady state economy, including the three goals of sustainable scale, just distribution, and efficient allocation (Daly, 1973; 1991). Current ecological economists work on holistic approaches to policy, considering the environmental, social and economic dimensions of sustainably, thus providing relevant and important inputs to current challenges and decision makers.
I would argue that the current political momentum behind climate action provides an excellent opportunity for ecological economists to offer important inputs to policymakers and to increase the policy relevance of ecological economics. To illustrate, first, the concept of the steady state economy as introduced by Daly could serve as a theoretical underpinning of current discussions and for future policy intervention. Second, the ‘precautionary principle’ could be applied as a criteria for determining priorities among different environmental, social and economic policy objectives. Third, research has shown interrelated and systemic characters among different policy objectives and the current climate challenge, thus matching with the holistic and interdisciplinary research approach of ecological economics (e.g. EC, 2019). However, as has been written in previous ESEE newsletters, this would require ecological economists (i) to link their research to current policy challenges in a direct way and (ii) to communicate its relevance in a clear and meaningful way to decision makers.
Bank of England (2019). Climate change. Available at: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/climate-change (01.05.2019).
Breeden, S. (2019). Avoiding the storm: Climate change and the financial system. Bank of England speech. Available at: https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/speech/2019/sarah-breeden-omfif (01.05.2019).
Costanza, R. (1992). Ecological economics: the science and management of sustainability. Columbia University Press.
Daly, H. E., & Daly, H. E. (Eds.). (1973). Toward a steady-state economy (Vol. 2). San Francisco: WH Freeman.
Daly, H. E. (1991). Steady-state economics: with new essays. Island Press.
European Commission (2019). Reflection Paper. Towards a sustainable Europe by 2030. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/rp_sustainable_europe_30-01_en_web.pdf (30.04.2019).
Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1971). The Entropy Law and the Economic Process. Harvard University Press. Cambridge.
HM Government (2017). Clean Growth Strategy. Leading the way to a low carbon future. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/clean-growth-strategy (01.05.2019)
Interview with Kreinin Halliki, PhD Researcher, Vienna University of Economics and Business
Tell us about yourself.
I am a first year PhD candidate and Research Associate at the Institute for Ecological Economics at the Vienna University of Economics and Business.
Although I am originally Estonian, I grew up in Hungary and in Scotland and studied International Relations and Economics at St Andrews as an undergraduate. I moved to Vienna to do the SEEP MSc (Socio-Ecological Economics and Policy) at the Vienna University of Economics and Business. Although I had received a critical education through International Relations (for example in critical development studies, feminist theory, cultural hegemony and other neo-Marxist critiques), SEEP enabled me to connect the dots between the many interrelated crises facing society today with the environmental crises.
Vienna is a great place to study and live, with a very active environmental movement and I am also a part of a group of academics, students and civil society members working on organising the Degrowth Conference on Strategies in Vienna (May 29th to June 1st 2020).
What are you researching?
My research focus is on environmental labour studies and the contradictions of work, society and the environment. Specifically, I am interested in how to bridge the gap between environmental and workers movements to identify strategies and leverage points for trade union environmentalism. It is the perfect example of an issue where many ‘fields’ of study (history, economics, sociology, psychology, gender studies) and problems (climate crisis, inequality, crisis of work, economic crises, nationalism, masculinism) coalesce.
If you were in charge of the world economy for one day, tell me one thing what you would do and why?
I would institute a global social-ecological tax system to get rid of tax havens, including progressive global wealth and carbon taxes (including aviation) and use the income from this to fund public services at a massive scale.
If I had a second act as a benevolent global dictator, I would reduce maximum legal working hours to 24 hours per week (and set them on a gradually decreasing scale).
If I could pass a third global act, I would train and employ millions of therapists and make it possible for every citizen to have access to one. People could discuss the meaning of life, their fear of death, and the reasons why we need power, wealth and material goods to create our identities and give us a sense of control and safety (an illusion).
Tell me one thing that you think many ecological economists don’t realise, but should.
Although ecological economics is (or can be) a multi-disciplinary and trans-disciplinary field, I think many researchers are still working in small silos on their own narrow topics, without seeing the interrelations between the ecological, societal, and economic crises facing society. Since the looming environmental crises challenge our economic and social systems ‘all the way down’, I would like to see a more critical unitary voice from ecological economists. This needs to start with researchers acknowledging, and taking on, the challenges of voicing concerns about our hegemonic economic regime and capitalism itself; also in the public sphere.
Interviewer: Ernest Aigner, ESEE Student Representative
Job Opportunity: Research associate, Martin-Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Germany
The Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Food Policy with a focus on Governance and Natural Resources in the Institute of Agricultural and Nutritional Sciences of the Faculty of Natural Sciences at the Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg is currently advertising for a research associate.
Deadline: August 9th, 2019
Contact: Prof. Insa Theesfeld, email@example.com
Training opportunity: Oxford Summer School in Ecological Economics 2019, UK, August 25th to 31st, 2019
The School will address key elements of the new economy transformation, exploring the cutting-edge methods and policy applications in ecological economics. With a clear sustainable development focus, it will draw on the expertise of a range of disciplines: economics, ecology, physics, environmental sciences, sociology, psychology, complex systems theory, etc. to address the current challenges: climate change, biodiversity loss, resource depletion, water shortages, social cohesion and achieving sustainability.
Deadline: August 1st, 2019 (late applications)
Training opportunity: 14th BiGSEM Doctoral Workshop on Economic Theory, University of Bielefeld, Germany, November 20th to 21st, 2019
This international workshop is designed to provide PhD students in theoretical economics with an opportunity to present their research and to discuss new developments in their fields. Both days of the workshop will be dedicated to the presentation of contributed papers from the doctoral students. Each presentation will be discussed by another participant. The workshop will include about 8 presentations per day, each lasting 30 minutes.
Deadline: August 31st, 2019
Call for papers: Special issue of the journal ‘Papers in political economy’: ‘Economics and the environment since the 1950s: History, methodology, and philosophy'
Environmental concerns emerged in the field of economics during the 1950s. Some economists had focused on these issues before, but it was not until then that the environment became an autonomous subject of economic study. During this period of strong demographic and economic growth in industrialized countries, this progressive recognition of environmental issues by economists was caused by natural resources depletion, ecosystems degradation, and pollution and its harmful effects. This special issue is devoted to the contemporary history of environmental economic thought, and to the transition from the marginal specialization of a few pioneers to an established academic field.
Deadline: November 1st, 2019
Contact: Dr Nathalie Berta, Nathalie.firstname.lastname@example.org
Call for papers: Special issue of the journal ‘Ecosystems and people’: ‘Human-nature connectedness’
This special issue is based on the great success of the Leverage Points 2019 Conference at Leuphana University in Lüneburg, particular on its theme of human-nature connectedness. Contributions are invited which present innovative and new ideas, concepts and methods, empirical case studies such as, but not limited to, the use of relational values, local indigenous knowledge, biocultural diversity, gender aspects, transdisciplinary and alternative science communication/arts-based approaches that increase human-nature connectedness.
Deadline: September 12th, 2019
7th International Degrowth Conference/ 16th ISEE International Joint Conference: ‘Building alternative livelihoods in times of ecological and political crisis’, Manchester, UK, September 1st to 5th, 2020
We face a worsening ecological and climate crisis. An urgent transformation of the social practices that underpin the ways we produce and consume is needed. We will need to develop alternative livelihoods that keep within the limits set by this finite planet while providing for everyone’s needs, caring for each other and democratising the economy. What kind of supply and service systems can be used in a society that has gone beyond economic growth? What are the alternative livelihoods which ensure the future conditions of well being for all? This conference will bring together academics, policy-makers, artists and activists in order to discuss these many challenges.
Degrowth Conference 2020: ‘Strategies for Degrowth’, Vienna, Austria, May 29th to June 1st, 2019
Degrowth community has some pretty good idea of how we would want a degrowth-world to look like. What is often lacking, however, is an understanding and a strategy of how to get there, considering the growth-orientated world we live in today. Academics, activists, artists and friends of the degrowth idea are invited to come to Vienna, May 29th to June 1st 2020 to learn and think about strategies for making degrowth a reality. A detailed programme is currently being worked on. You can expect more information, call for contributions soon.