Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen and degrowth

Abstract

As a peculiar economist of the twentieth century, Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen gave birth to many controversies. Since the 1970s, in particular in the French language literature, Georgescu-Roegen's ecological claim has often been considered as a promotion of degrowth. In this paper, I challenge this usual interpretation. I conclude that Georgescu-Roegen might be a source of inspiration for degrowth defenders only in a very narrow sense. A cautious reading of his bioeconomic paradigm shows that Georgescu-Roegen's stance was different from the growth/degrowth debate, and might be more accurately linked with an “agrowth” option.

Keywords:

• History of economic thought
• Georgescu-Roegen
• degrowth
• bioeconomics
• agrowth

JEL codes:

• B1
• Q3
• Q5

Acknowledgements

I thank Ludovic Frobert who gave me the opportunity to go deeper in my understanding of Georgescu-Roegen; Véronique Dutraive, Christophe Salvat and the participants in the 2014 ESHET Conference for helpful comments on a former draft of this paper; and Philippe Quirion for inspiring discussions on the topic. Thanks also to the anonymous referees who have soundly oriented my inquiry.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 Alfred Lotka played a great part in Georgescu-Roegen's intellectual background, with his definition of biological evolution. Vladimir Vernadsky coined the concept of biosphere. Even if his influence on Georgescu-Roegen has been indirect, it keeps interest.

2 See for instance, Bayon et al. (2012), Bobulescu (2013), Bürgenmeier (2008), Durand (2008), Grinevald (1992, 2008), Levallois (2010), Petit (1997), and Vivien (1994, 2005a, 2005b).

3 Kallis et al. (2012, p. 175) state that “degrowth entails [...] GDP decline, [even if it] is not reducible to [it]”. See also Paris Décroissance (2008, p. 317).

4 Georgescu-Roegen has mostly been contested on this fourth law (see Cleveland and Ruth 1997).

5 Mainly but not totally because the increase or decrease of aggregate production may also result from qualitative changes (techniques of production, business organisation, etc.) – a way of reconciling some definitions of degrowth with bioeconomics.