Masters of Degrowth : Ecological Economics (w.1.2) The biophysical economy: connecting economics with thermodynamics and ecology

 

Class 2: The Biophysical Economy 

Krausmann, F., 2017. Social metabolism. Chapter 11 in Routledge Handbook of Ecological Economics, Routledge: London and New York, 108-118. 

Industrial metabolism has been termed as the integrated collection of physical processes that convert raw materials and energy, plus labor into finished products and wastes (Ayres).

While social economic energy flows have a long history, material flow analysis has been developed only in the last three decades. There exist both material flow data at regional and industrial levels, but also country-level statistics, the latter being standardized. For example, the International Resource Panel of the UN publishes a series of reports on core issues of social metabolism.

Full-scale material flow accounts are compilations of material inputs into national economies, changes in material stock, and the output to other economies or the environment. This is illustrated by Krausman as follows:

We can derive the material intensity from domestic material consumption, as well as waste and emissions. It is also possible to track and measure the flow of a particular material or substance.

Our exploding use of material is a relatively recent phenomenon. First the Neolithic Revolution, the agriculture, and later the industrial revolution. Many countries increase their between 1 and 2 orders of magnitude their MI as a result. It is important to highlight that there is a composition change, from biomass to non metallic minerals, fossil fuel carriers, and ores. The stocks have also increased significantly and as a result of that, there is a strong inertia on emissions and further input for maintenance required in the following decades.

Material flow dynamics are very different across countries, which share stark differences between social metabolism absolute and growth values. Globally, exports and trade have grown more than GDP, while the larger economies remain net importers of materials. This is a phenomenon of unequal exchange, where the global south exports resources at low prices and absorbers pollution coming from finished goods export countries that have higher prices.

The social metabolism and GDP are strongly correlated but cannot be entirely explained by the GDP, as it depends on the composition and key sectors of the country.

One of the most researched questions is the tentative materialization of the economy, resulting in clear relative decoupling of GDP and MR but not sufficient absolute decoupling, even when externalizing to other countries' material-intensive production. This is even more obvious when consumption-based footprints are considered.

While technology has and will help to reduce the MR per unit of GDP, it cannot do it enough to allow for further growth. That means that an industrial complex focus on sufficiency is essential to get back to planetary boundaries and allow every country that wishes to expand industrialization to do it according to its fair share.

• What drivers of increased energy and material flows throughout human history does Krausmann highlight?  

First the Neolithic Revolution, agriculture, and later the industrial revolution and population growth. Many countries increase their between 1 and 2 orders of magnitude their MI as a result. It is important to highlight that there is a composition change, from biomass to nonmetallic minerals, fossil fuel carriers, and ores. The stocks have also increased significantly and as a result of that, there is a strong inertia on emissions and further input for maintenance required in the following decades. This is not yet sufficiently studied and is an essential piece of knowledge to address the circularity and sustainability of the industrial system.

• What insights do we gain from a biophysical perspective of the economy? What remains hidden? 

We can clearly see the metabolic rates, but detailed studies of stocks remain not fully developed. This is essential to improve the implementation of circularity dynamics.

Also, it is important to measure the embedded materials in the consumption of countries to properly assign material footprints not at the production country, but rather on the country where consumption happens. That changes the results of many apparent dematerialization miracles in the global North.

• How can biophysical insights be used for / misused against degrowth arguments? 

MFA allows us to show that green growth or absolute decoupling has not empirical support.

MFA also shows the inequality in material footprints across countries and income groups and starts a dialogue and political agenda for fair shares within planetary boundaries.

MFA has to be used with consumption-based footprints, to not blame emerging economies for the recent boost in material footprint.

MFA can be used with eco-fascist, pro-austerity, and Malthusian rhetorics that focus on the population and not the inequality and social provisioning question.

Norgaard, R., 2017. Coevolutionary social ecological economics. Chapter 13 in Routledge Handbook of Ecological Economics, Routledge: London and New York, 129-137. 

• 
  

Biological systems cannot be modeled and understood with purely Newtonian mechanical frameworks, as the relationships between living organisms change in dynamic and unexpected ways.

Coevolution is the process of mutual selection between interacting species, which describes better the relationships and changes observed in biological systems, where neither the environment nor the species interact in a fixed way towards linear adaptations.

Coevolution frameworks can help us understand how systems build resilience and can become sustainable even while the conditions change.

Coevolutionary though sees uncertainty not as a lack of knowledge, but rather the acceptance that new knowledge is required as change makes past knowledge obsolete.
That also changes and makes less meaningful the nature of social bionomy and the concept of limits, as both coevolve and force each other to change.

The main criticism against the coevolutionary theory is the lack of specificity, making it less testable or contrastable compared to basic physics and chemical principles. Another problem is the lack of normative tools to assess policy, as well as the sufficiently concrete tools to make concrete policy assessments while the lack of capacity to isolate geographically manageable areas for analysis.

Computing can help to make coevolutionary assessments more concrete and accurate, but its validity to raise valid questions over the dogma of mainstream economics and sustainability remains, whether it remains vague or not. A rich heterogeneity of experiments will be required to progress in the knowledge of biological systems.

 

What is “the coevolutionary way of thinking” (p130), especially compared to the mechanistic thinking of mainstream economics. 

The coevolutionary way of thinking reconsiders the relationship between living organisms and their environment as dynamic and less mechanic, where changes in environment and species go together in unpredictable and nonlinear ways. That changes the understanding of uncertainty as an acknowledgment that more knowledge is required or that the old was has become obsolete. It also changes how we understand limits and sustainability as an evolving concept.

How does change happen (from a co-evolutionary perspective)? 

It happens not as a linear process of adaptation of a single species toward a fixed environment, but as a network of interactions between living forms and the environment they can shape.

Do you find this way of thinking about change useful for advancing social-ecological transformations? 

I find it valuable that it forces us to accept the notion of irreducible uncertainty, also the precautionary principle, that reduces confidence in models such as the ones from the economics of climate change. It supports more empirical heterogeneous experiments to gather knowledge rather than numeric and deterministic models and overestimates our understanding of the biological system and our relation with it.