TY - JOUR
T1 - Reviewing studies of degrowth: Are claims matched by data, methods and policy analysis?
AU - Savin, Ivan
AU - Van den bergh, Jeroen
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors
PY - 2024/12/1
Y1 - 2024/12/1
N2 - In the last decade many publications have appeared on degrowth as a strategy to confront environmental and social problems. We undertake a systematic review of their content, data and methods. This involves the use of computational linguistics to identify main topics investigated. Based on a sample of 561 studies we conclude that: (1) content covers 11 main topics; (2) the large majority (almost 90%) of studies are opinions rather than analysis; (3) few studies use quantitative or qualitative data, and even fewer ones use formal modelling; (4) the first and second type tend to include small samples or focus on non-representative cases; (5) most studies offer ad hoc and subjective policy advice, lacking policy evaluation and integration with insights from the literature on environmental/climate policies; (6) of the few studies on public support, a majority concludes that degrowth strategies and policies are socially-politically infeasible; (7) various studies represent a “reverse causality” confusion, i.e. use the term degrowth not for a deliberate strategy but to denote economic decline (in GDP terms) resulting from exogenous factors or public policies; (8) few studies adopt a system-wide perspective – instead most focus on small, local cases without a clear implication for the economy as a whole. We illustrate each of these findings for concrete studies.
AB - In the last decade many publications have appeared on degrowth as a strategy to confront environmental and social problems. We undertake a systematic review of their content, data and methods. This involves the use of computational linguistics to identify main topics investigated. Based on a sample of 561 studies we conclude that: (1) content covers 11 main topics; (2) the large majority (almost 90%) of studies are opinions rather than analysis; (3) few studies use quantitative or qualitative data, and even fewer ones use formal modelling; (4) the first and second type tend to include small samples or focus on non-representative cases; (5) most studies offer ad hoc and subjective policy advice, lacking policy evaluation and integration with insights from the literature on environmental/climate policies; (6) of the few studies on public support, a majority concludes that degrowth strategies and policies are socially-politically infeasible; (7) various studies represent a “reverse causality” confusion, i.e. use the term degrowth not for a deliberate strategy but to denote economic decline (in GDP terms) resulting from exogenous factors or public policies; (8) few studies adopt a system-wide perspective – instead most focus on small, local cases without a clear implication for the economy as a whole. We illustrate each of these findings for concrete studies.
KW - Economic growth
KW - environmental policy
KW - GDP
KW - Political feasibility
KW - Post-growth
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85202767909&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/f43d6514-120f-3058-99f8-731213f9c68d/
UR - https://portalrecerca.uab.cat/en/publications/a1595cba-90a3-4b6a-ac81-e988345165ff
U2 - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108324
DO - 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108324
M3 - Review article
SN - 0921-8009
VL - 226
JO - Ecological Economics
JF - Ecological Economics
M1 - 108324
ER -