In our daily lives we are constantly bombarded with news about advances in energy efficiency, the decarbonisation of the economy, and the possibility of growing without polluting. And yes, decarbonising our economy through the massive deployment of renewable energy and the electrification of production and consumption is, in the current context, a necessity. However, there is very little likelihood of achieving absolute – and (this is crucial) sufficient – decoupling of GDP growth from emissions within a timeframe that would prevent ecological catastrophe (Kallis et al., 2025). And frankly, I believe we would rather not gamble with the habitability of the planet, especially when it is the vast majority of the population who will suffer the most severe consequences.

Starting from the premise that we must rapidly reduce intensive resource use in order to follow a safe path of progress, we need to build systems of provision detached from the need to grow GDP (Bärnthaler & Gough, 2023). Ecological economics has long warned about the problems brought by unrestrained economic growth, especially in economies with a high GDP. Yet as much as eternal economic growth may be a fairy tale – as Greta Thunberg once said – the reality is that our economies and our wellbeing suffer when there is no economic growth. There are multiple mechanisms that generate a dependency of our institutions on growth, whether economic, political, or cultural (Keyßer et al., 2025).

Perhaps one of the clearest ideas, explained brilliantly by Hofferberth (2025), is to understand that capitalism reproduces itself through the accumulation of money and power and through competition for them among those who own the means of production. Workers without capital, living on wages (90% of the population), can only share in the gains of this accumulation if capital reduces its power in favour of workers, or if there is economic growth from which something can be distributed to all. If the pie grows larger, those who control the means of production and money can see their wealth increase while wages are maintained or rise. However, if the pie shrinks and the dynamics of inequality and accumulation remain, poverty will grow rapidly. In short, one of the reasons (among others) why we are dependent on growth is that it offers the promise of peaceful distribution, on the condition that capital is allowed to accumulate.

It must be noted here that the reality of recent decades is that economic growth has not fulfilled this promise, and what little growth there has been has come at the expense of rising inequality, stagnant purchasing power of wages, and a rapid increase in the wealth of the richest (Daly, 2014; Gough, 2017; Jackson, 2021). In other words, today economic growth is not only a problem for the planet, it also fails as a guarantee of rising wellbeing, particularly once a certain level of material development has been reached. In the words of Daly (2014), it is uneconomic growth. We have more and more things, but mental illness, stress and addictions are endemic. Moving away from the pursuit of growth would not only bring ecological and social benefits, but would also allow us to use our resources to prepare our societies for adapting to climate change and mitigating its social and economic consequences.

To protect ourselves in a context of no economic growth, we need to create systems of provision independent from capital accumulation. Recent attempts to model an economy without growth show that it is even possible to maintain profits and positive interest rates, provided that wealth does not accumulate (Hein & Jimenez, 2022; Kemp-Benedict, 2025). But how can economic security be guaranteed without indefinite wealth accumulation or the dominance of the market? The truth is that many of the solutions are well known and are already being implemented successfully: expanding universal basic goods (healthcare, education, care); strengthening economic democracy to pre-distribute gains before they have to be redistributed; reducing working hours to achieve full employment and share essential tasks; or sovereign money to fund missions with social goals, where credit and financing opportunities are not dependent on accumulation and monetary profit (see Kallis et al. (2025) for a good summary).

The main problem is not a lack of ideas about where to go, but how to manage transitions that can transform growth-dependent institutions and cultures into institutions oriented towards generating wellbeing within planetary boundaries. This will require significant social organisation around a programme based on needs and on the creation of desire beyond consumerism, where activities such as care and artistic creation gain in importance. It will also require greater democratic control of physical and social infrastructures, so that the work currently wasted on speculation and the manufacture of consumerist dissatisfaction (in finance, in big tech) can instead be directed towards organisational and technological solutions that allow us to function without growth. In the process, in order to gain social acceptance, it is important that post-growth scholars frame the problem as of the limited resilience of growth dependence and prioritise wellbeing instead of averting environmental loss (Tomaselli et al., 2021). In short, it is the complex but clear task of ensuring that our institutions and their metrics work for wellbeing, capable of redistributing and stabilising our societies without the need to grow.

References

Bärnthaler, R., & Gough, I. (2023). Provisioning for sufficiency: Envisaging production corridors. Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy, 19(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2023.2218690 

Daly, H. (2014). From Uneconomic Growth to a Steady-State Economy. Edward Elgar.

Gough, I. (2017). Heat, greed and human need: Climate change, capitalism and sustainable wellbeing. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781785365119 

Hein, E., & Jimenez, V. (2022). The macroeconomic implications of zero growth: A post-Keynesian approach. https://doi.org/10.4337/ejeep.2022.01.05 

Hofferberth, E. (2025). Post-growth economics as a guide for systemic change: Theoretical and methodological foundations. Ecological Economics, 230, 108521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108521 

Jackson, T. (2021). Post growth: Life after capitalism. Polity Press. 

Kallis, G., Hickel, J., O’Neill, D. W., Jackson, T., Victor, P. A., Raworth, K., Schor, J. B., Steinberger, J. K., & Ürge-Vorsatz, D. (2025). Post-growth: The science of wellbeing within planetary boundaries. The Lancet Planetary Health, 9(1), e62–e78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.106952

Kemp-Benedict, E. (2025). Transitioning to a sustainable economy: A preliminary degrowth macroeconomic model. Ecological Economics, 237, 108700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.106952

Keyßer, L. T., Steinberger, J. K., & Schmelzer, M. (2025). Economic Growth Dependencies and Imperatives: A Review of Key Theories and Their Conflicts. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.106952 

Tomaselli MF, Kozak R, Gifford R, Sheppard SRJ. (2021). Degrowth or not degrowth: the importance of message frames for characterizing the new economy. Ecological Econonomics, 183, 106952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.106952