Jennifer Wilkins’ Post

Want a 30-minute intro to #degrowth and degrowth-aligned #finance? I recently presented on this to the Sustainable Finance Network of the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA), the largest professional body for environmental practitioners in the UK and worldwide. The IEMA has kindly given me permission to share the webinar beyond its members. Thank you to Albert Seoane Miguel and Rufus Howard from IEMA for hosting and to Adrian Vodislav from the European Investment Fund for his presentation on circular economy financing, also in the recording. The Q&A discussion was very good!

I'm sharing my thesis for a master's degree in degrowth, which was on the topic of how Indigenous enterprises help advance Indigenous aspirations - I refer to them as 'agents of aspiration'. As an Aotearoa New Zealand based practitioner, my studies and work on post growth enterprise and economics have consistently led me to consider the Indigenous perspective. I was very privileged to have Professor Jason Mika supervise my research project alongside degrowth scholar Dr Brototi Roy. The thesis will be formally published by the awarding institute in the coming months and also adapted as a chapter in a forthcoming academic encyclopaedia on Indigenous enterprise. https://lnkd.in/gZRuAFFS

Sustainability reports from Google and Microsoft indicate they are struggling on climate action, with both companies citing expansion of data centres for AI, which have high energy and water demands, coupled with a scarcity of renewable energy. Is AI so profitable they are willing to forego environmental goals? Or do they have no control over AI as a force driving the direction of their business? Google's response includes optimising AI training time, adopting next-generation computing power and investing in renewable energy. Microsoft emphasises water and energy efficiency measures (leveraging AI), green steel development, purchasing lower-carbon inputs and carbon removal technology. Additionally, Google and Boston Consulting Group claim that AI could mitigate up to 10% of global emissions by 2030. These approaches are far from progressive: idolising growth without a clear social purpose, speculating on environmental rewards of innovation and overstating the mitigation potential of efficiency and offsets. These merely aim for an increasingly efficient and enhanced capitalist system without questioning whether the system can actually achieve stated sustainability goals. For instance, one reason for the scarcity of renewable energy is that although it is increasingly cheap to produce and attractive to consumers, it does not represent an attractive investment. Capitalism itself is an obstacle to the vision of green capitalism. The capitalist drive for perpetual growth underlies environmental crises, income and wealth inequality and environmental injustices. The purpose of big tech must shift from profitability to social and environmental wellbeing. Without these priorities, profitability is merely another form of extraction and organisational resilience is reduced to financial absorption of shocks. To genuinely provision socially useful technology within planetary and community tolerances for extraction and pollution, big tech companies must dig deeper for effective strategies for the use of AI and AI's use of resources. - AI use should focus on human needs, such as healthcare, education and food production, and concentrate on optimising equitable global trade, resource redistribution, fair labour and ethical sourcing. - AI’s energy and water demands must consider bio-regional limits for regeneration and assume an allocation after community needs are met.

The Washington Post's recent article slamming degrowth smells fishy to me. It can't be a coincidence that it has been written by the editorial board less than a month after the New York Times wrote a balanced article on degrowth and just days before Amazon announced plans for a discount store to compete with Shein and Temu, the antithesis of degrowth or any idea of a sustainable business. If the Washington Post (or Jeff Bezos) wants to publish an article about degrowth that is worth rebutting, best not start it by describing degrowth as "the brand name for neo-Malthusianism". I can't think of a single sensible degrowther advocating the unpalatable ideas of Malthus (who believed inequality was necessary) and Ehrlich (who believes in coercive measures to curb population growth, including forced sterilisation). Conflating population reduction with degrowth, which is about systemic transformation towards universal wellbeing, is a real tell that someone hasn't done their homework. WP article on degrowth (not worth reading): https://lnkd.in/g6ZMmqQp NY Times article on degrowth (worth reading): https://lnkd.in/gWNUmW3E Bloomberg article on Amazon responding to Temu and Shein: https://lnkd.in/gQns5SMM Image by Brian Yurasits on Unsplash.

A new film charts the formation of wellbeing economics, documenting the work of Katherine Trebeck and Lorenzo Fioramonti, launching in June in Iceland. Local showings can be arranged by contacting the director (in the link). In late 2017, Katherine Trebeck initiates the ‘Wellbeing Economy Governments’, an international alliance opposed to the mighty G7. Her plan: a new group of countries that are ready to reshape their politics and redesign their economies. While she works tirelessly to make it happen, the project flounders, gets revived and evolves. Eventually, it unites five countries: Scotland, New Zealand, Iceland, Wales, and Finland. It may turn into a starting point for a new economic vision for the world.Lorenzo Fioramonti helps start the alliance. Then, suddenly, he is invited to run for office in his home country Italy. He wins a parliamentary seat in the general election and hopes to create a wellbeing economy as a Minister for Economic Development. But then he gets sidelined in a troubled government. When it falls apart and a new coalition forms, he unexpectedly becomes Minister for Education and manages to implement some of his bold ideas.  https://lnkd.in/gQRcS_2B

Timothée Parrique calls out large enterprises for low cost greenwashing when asking for lunchtime webinars on the leading edge topic of degrowth. If actually serious about resolving our ecological crises they would be investing in so much more. Damn right, of course. But it is also remarkable how much more advanced along the long curve of action large enterprises are in France, compared to large enterprise in New Zealand, that they are having these webinars at all. 

This simple briefing paper is an aid to understanding the emerging elements of a degrowth-aligned financial system. The goal is to plant seeds to encourage collaboration between scholars and practitioners on this critical topic. Anastasia Linn and I share some initial sketches of what we’re seeing and insights into possibilities, to inform activists, academics, financiers and funders, aiming to connect dots, challenge assumptions and inspire new thinking. This briefing paper also supports the Special Session ‘Investing in Degrowth’ at the 10th International Degrowth Conference and the 15th Conference of the European Society for Ecological Economics, held jointly in Pontevedra, Spain, in June 2024. At the conference on 19 June, we'll be hosting a conversation on degrowth-aligned finance and investment with Hans Stegeman of Triodos Bank, Anja Janischewski of Technische Universität Chemnitz and Alex Lopez of Ekhilur Koop. If you'll be there, please join us! Conferencia Internacional ESEE-Decrecemento 2024 Pontevedra.

This infographic periodic table by EuChemS (European Chemical Society) has two keys: one for availability and one for sustainability. The mobile symbol indicates that the element is used in mobile phones. The dark red colour on nitrogen, phosphorus and carbon denotes that their overuse is severely affecting the biosphere. Available as a free download and for use under Creative Commons licensing.