Recomposing consumption: defining necessities for sustainable and equitable well-being

Gough, Ian

doi:10.1098/rsta.2016.0379

Cited by 50 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 50 publications

(54 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We know quite well what basic human needs are and how they can be fulfilled (meaningful participation in society, access to health care, healthy food, decent housing, etc.) [77,109,110]. It is essential to steer research and build alternative institutions in directions that focus on delivering such ultimate goals directly, rather than indirectly, via intermediate means such as growth, profit-making, employment-or money-creation.…”

Section: Confronting Capitalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Roots, Riots, and Radical Change—A Road Less Travelled for Ecological Economics

Pirgmaier

Steinberger

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we put forward a new research agenda for ecological economics, based on three realisations. We then show how these can be connected through research and used to generate insights with the potential for application in broader, systemic change. The first realisation is that the core ambition of ecological economics, that of addressing the scale of human environmental resource use and associated impacts, often remains an aspirational goal, rather than being applied within research. In understanding intertwined environmental and social challenges, systemic approaches (including system dynamics) should be revitalised to address the full scope of what is possible or desirable. The second realisation is that the focus on biophysical and economic quantification and methods has been at the expense of a comprehensive social understanding of environmental impacts and barriers to change—including the role of power, social class, geographical location, historical change, and achieving human well-being. For instance, by fetishising growth as the core problem, attention is diverted away from underlying social drivers—monetary gains as profits, rent, or interest fuelled by capitalist competition and, ultimately, unequal power relations. The third realisation is that ecological economics situates itself with respect to mainstream (neoclassical) economics, but simultaneously adopts some of its mandate and blind spots, even in its more progressive camps. Pragmatic attempts to adopt mainstream concepts and tools often comfort, rather than challenge, the reproduction of the very power relations that stand in the way of sustainability transitions. We consider these three realisations as impediments for developing ecological economics as an emancipatory critical research paradigm and political project. We will not focus on or detail the failings of ecological economics, but state what we believe they are and reformulate them as research priorities. By describing and bringing these three elements together, we are able to outline an ambitious research agenda for ecological economics, one capable of catalysing real social change.

show abstract

Section: Confronting Capitalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Roots, Riots, and Radical Change—A Road Less Travelled for Ecological Economics

Pirgmaier

Steinberger

2019

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several scholars hold the position that, as a criterion of justice, the concept of human needs is superior to other concepts such as subjective preferences [27][28][29]. Contrary to wants, needs are universal across cultures and generations, are non-substitutable, and are satiable [30,31]. This allows the formulation of social goals that respect ecological carrying capacities and whose achievement enables a good life within the idea of "enough".…”

Section: Guarantee Of Need Satisfactionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Money, Vouchers, Public Infrastructures? A Framework for Sustainable Welfare Benefits

Bohnenberger

2020

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the social consequences of environmental policies are extensively evaluated in sustainability research, few studies exist on the ecological impact of social benefits and the welfare state. Sustainable welfare is a novel research field that seeks to close this knowledge gap and develop integrated eco-social policies. Within this, researchers are starting to ask how citizen’s needs can be guaranteed in an environmentally sustainable way and how their welfare benefits should be delivered. Should citizens receive a universal basic income, be given vouchers for ecologically beneficial or socially needed goods and services, or be provided with access to socio-ecological infrastructures and services? This article develops a framework for sustainable welfare benefits with six criteria of sustainable welfare and nine different types of welfare benefits that belong to the domains of universal basic income (UBI), universal basic services (UBS), and universal basic vouchers (UBV). Using this framework, existing policy proposals are categorized and evaluated. The advantages and disadvantages of the different types of welfare benefits are discussed and new application areas highlighted. The analysis shows that a successful policy will likely include all forms of welfare benefits, with certain types being more adequate for certain fields and societal circumstances. The framework for sustainable welfare benefits can serve as a starting point for further research on integrated policy design and inform policymakers on the selection of eco-social policies.

show abstract

“…It is these impulsive responses which are the target of marketing activities aiming to override considered judgement about needs, with a quick acting reflex. Gough [32] presents a theory of human need that draws a distinction between universal, objective needs and subjective, socially determined ‘need-satisfiers’. He defines these need-satisfiers as the goods, services, activities and relationships that contribute to need satisfaction in any particular context.…”

Section: Insights Into Unlocking a Transition To Industry 161803mentioning

confidence: 99%

Industry 1.61803: the transition to an industry with reduced material demand fit for a low carbon future

Allwood

Gutowski

Serrenho

et al. 2017

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arising from a discussion meeting in September 2016, this editorial introduces a special issue on the transition to a future industrial system with greatly reduced demand for material production and attempts to synthesize the main findings. The motivation for such a transition is to reduce industrial greenhouse gas emissions, but unlike previous industrial transformations, there are no major stakeholders who will pursue the change for their own immediate benefit. The special issue, therefore, explores the means by which such a transition could be brought about. The editorial presents an overview of the opportunities identified in the papers of the volume, presents examples of actions that can be taken today to begin the process of change and concludes with an agenda for research that might support a rapid acceleration in the rate of change.This article is part of the themed issue ‘Material demand reduction’.

show abstract

Recomposing consumption: defining necessities for sustainable and equitable well-being

Cited by 50 publications

References 50 publications

Roots, Riots, and Radical Change—A Road Less Travelled for Ecological Economics

Roots, Riots, and Radical Change—A Road Less Travelled for Ecological Economics

Money, Vouchers, Public Infrastructures? A Framework for Sustainable Welfare Benefits

Industry 1.61803: the transition to an industry with reduced material demand fit for a low carbon future

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About