|
|
|
|
|
by nozzlegear
564 days ago
|
|
Degrowth doesn't work either, it's not a solution and nobody will ever go for it. From the abstract of Reviewing studies of degrowth: Are claims matched by data, methods and policy analysis?: > (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; Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180092... |
|
It's literally the only mathematically viable option. Either you choose it and plan for it or you hit the wall and deal with the consequences. Just take a gpd per capita world map, superimpose it over a pollution per capita world map, and extrapole the impact of china+india+africa living like the average american or even the average european, it just doesn't work out, but it's coming very soon