A Brief Introduction to Ecological Economics - The Sane Path Forward

Preface

If we are to avoid an ecological catastrophe, then a relatively rapid paradigm shift must occur in a number of key areas.  One of those areas is economics, specifically, the neoliberal/neoclassical economic system that currently is dominant worldwide.  In this essay, I'll explain why I think the shift should be to ecological economics (EE).  The Intro here shall be bare bones; subsequent posts will cover in some depth various aspects (including criticisms) of the subject.

For two-plus decades, I've been puzzled (baffled, really) as to why neoliberal thinking views the economic system as separate from Nature.  Any economic system is embedded in the natural world - in ecosystems, in biogeochemical cycles, and is subject to the Laws of Nature, so to speak.  Do we not extract timber, other plant products, common minerals, rare earth minerals, water, fish, etc. from the natural world?  Do we not all breathe air?  Are not all businesses (and consumers) sometimes subject to the whims of flooding, storms, droughts, natural vectors of disease, and the like?  Obviously, the answer to each question above is YES.  Consequently, it makes no sense to me for anyone to believe that any economic system is not a smaller piece of the natural world.  In a very real sense, even though this planet has innumerable ecosystems, Earth itself is one giant ecosystem.  No artificial system is separate from or larger than that.
..................................
Why Ecological Economics (EE) is the Sane Path Forward

William Rees, founding member and past president of the Canadian Society for EE, wrote a brilliant piece five years ago for the Great Transition Initiative:   https://greattransition.org/publication/economics-vs-the-economy  In that essay, he makes the point that EE recognizes the economy as "an open, wholly dependent subsystem of the ecosphere...".  [Emphasis added.]   Natural resources are extracted from, and wastes are injected back into, Nature.  Any material transformations in these processes are subject to Natural Law (e.g., the Laws of Thermodynamics).  In other words, any economy is not outside of or separate from the natural world.

The neoliberal economic paradigm operates as if the opposite were true.  As a result, our world is now mired in a plethora of ecological disasters:  loss of biodiversity, which is damaging ecosystem services to humanity and nonhuman life; habitat destruction causing (among other things) disease proliferation; crucial ecosystem damage (e.g., to wetlands & their critical functions of flood control and removal of toxic substances from water); acidification of the ocean; the sixth mass extinction event on Earth; air pollution; water pollution, and unsustainable use of water; climate disruption; and more.

EE also takes into consideration the concept of ecological constraints on what Bucky Fuller long ago called "Spaceship Earth".  Except for incoming solar energy (and some meteorites), we live in a finite, closed habitat.  It's not growing larger.  Fortunately for life here, there are many, many ongoing regenerative and biogeochemical cycles of materials on this ship.  When we interfere with those cycles beyond sustainability, we threaten our life support system's proper functioning.  When we do not properly manage industrial wastes, and when we overharvest natural resources beyond sustainability, essentially we are committing species suicide.  EE recognizes these problems, but neoliberal economics mostly ignores them.

In addition to those mentioned above, key elements of EE include the following:
1.  a transition to a steady-state (not stagnant), sustainable economy, rather than the current unlimited growth model;
2.  the incorporation and evaluation of natural capital and ecosystem services in the economic system;
3.  socially fair distribution of goods & services;
4.  sustainable development and growth;
5.  local/regional procurement of goods & services whenever possible;
6.  reduction of material "throughput" in the economy;
7.  a transition away from fossil fuels; and,
8.  the incorporation of ecoethics into economics and the economy in general.
..................................
Conclusion

As we navigate through the Anthropocene geologic time period, we must face up to a few facts that we've been avoiding.
1.  As Rees and others have pointed out:  the finite ecosphere in which we live has highly variable, but limited, regenerative and waste assimilating capacities.
2.  Our current economies around the globe, and all the activities associated with them, are destroying significant sections of our natural life support system.
3.  That destruction primarily is due to the pursuance of unlimited growth, unlimited development, and over-consumption.
4.  The main driver of the above pursuits is essentially unlimited population growth.
5.  Despite some positive applications, our technology has not slowed the pace toward impending, massive ecocatastrophe.  Arguably and overall, it has instead increased that pace.
6.  To avert disaster, we are in need of a rapid cultural and ethical evolutionary change in our thinking and behavior.
7.  A significant part of that change should be the shift away from neoliberal economics.
8.  After much examination of the factors involved, I believe we should adopt and implement some version of ecological economics in as many countries as possible.  That would be a big step toward improving and preserving organized human existence on Spaceship Earth.
................................
Not only my opinion.  Be Well