Gowdy, John M. 1994. "Discussion Papers: Progress and Environmental Sustainability." Environmental Ethics 16: 41-55.

Thesis:

"Once we give up the idea of progress, we can concentrate on making do with what we have rather than placing our hopes on some future material or ethical utopia" (p.55).

Summary:

INTRODUCTION (pp.41-43):

The notion of progress, while a relatively new idea, provides the dominant view for human society, in economic, biological, and ethical realms. "Progress" has provided justification for the reign of the free market, for colonial exploitation of non-Western societies, and for the manipulation and exploitation of the biosphere. The decade of the 1990's has produced a body of literature questioning the validity of "progress." The roots of this disillusionment may be found in the limits of the economy and the environment.

ECONOMIC GROWTH AND PROGRESS (pp.43-46):

Among economists, the notion of progress is generally equated with economic growth. Until the industrial revolution, most societies had economies that would be considered "unprogressive," as they maintained a steady state rather than achieving growth. "Growth" has taken on an ethical fervor, as the solution to our problems with poverty, inequality, and environmental degradation. The neoclassical model of "perfect competition" holds that each firm will be "inexorably pulled toward maximum efficiency" (p.44).

Since the 1980's, "sustainability" has emerged as a principle in opposition to unlimited growth. The notion of "steady-state economics" is gaining respectability. However, if Georgescu-Roegen's law of entropy holds (1971), what is needed is a declining state. However, the dominant opinion remains that economic growth is necessary for progress. Gowdy questions whether economic growth in the past has ever led to progress.

CRITERIA FOR PROGRESS -- HAS THERE BEEN ANY? (pp.46-48):

Gowdy utilizes Nitecki's (1988) criteria for progress, to evaluate whether human society has in fact ever progressed. These criteria, and historical evidence for progress in light of each criterion are presented as follows:

Morphological complexity -- Drawing upon Polanyi (1957), Gowdy argues that human society is becoming simpler and more homogeneous rather than more complex. The relentless march of the market has eliminated many traditional cultures and values in the twentieth century.

Adaptive ability -- Survival is dependent upon flexibility and diversity. Human society has become increasingly dependent upon one type of market and technological system, leaving less capacity for adaptability and flexibility.

Accumulation of genetic information -- We have lost much of the genetic information for survival within our own species, and among other species. With the explosion of technological information, how much of it is relevant for the survival of our species, especially if we are faced with an economic/technological collapse?

Increasing biomass -- The rapid growth of our population poses a threat, rather than a step forward for our survival.

Increasing resistance to extinction -- Our adaptation now depends almost entirely upon technological advances. Even if this were enough, much of the world's population remains on the brink of starvation. Those of the hunter-gatherer societies were stronger, healthier, and had more sustainable economies.

PROGRESS AND ENVIRONM'NTAL ETHICS (pp.48-52):

Two notions of 'progress" prevail when discussing the environment-economy link. The first is the free market ideology, in which the economy is usually seen as independent from Nature. Even in its environmental economics form, market based environmental incentives still hold the market as the 'savior of the environment'.

The second notion of progress is expressed as 'the enlightenment fallacy' in which progress in environmental enlightenment will save us. Gowdy quotes Robinson to argue that the threat to biodiversity in the Third World is not due to a lack of enlightenment, but "derive[s] from the poverty of the poor, and the greed of the rich" (p.50). If enlightenment is based upon reason and scientific thinking, these seem to be increasingly restricted to an elite few. As long as our policies are based upon an illusion of progress, enlightened attitudes will do little to move us toward sustainability.

TOWARD A DECLINING STATE (pp.52-55):

Gowdy argues that environmental sustainability requires a decline in our economy. While changes in values and consumption patterns have their roles, what is needed is to "decouple the well-being of the human species from economic growth and dependence on ever-widening markets" (p.52). In order that this decline be chosen rather than imposed by nature, Gowdy recommends changes on the following levels: (1) stopping governmental subsidies of ecologically destructive activities; (2) correcting those instances of market failure where natural resources are used at unsustainable rates; and (3) looking beyond growth theory to decouple well-being from market activities. In order to move toward the third policy level, Gowdy recommends policies that: lead toward a declining population by providing economic security and old age pension; move us toward a declining per capita income, in order to reduce consumption; promote a declining work week, where more time is traded off for fewer material goods; make it possible for people to leave the market system altogether, perhaps through guaranteed income and universal health care, so that people may explore alternative, less consumptive lifestyles.

Gowdy concludes that there is no reason to believe that human "progress" has ever taken place. We must give up the ideology of progress if we are to learn to make do with what we have.

Keywords: progress, growth, environmental ethics, declining-state economy