I have just composed and submitted the abstracts below to the organizers of the ISQOLS 2026 Annual Conference, "Beyond the Bluegrass: Harnessing Research to Enhance Quality-of-Life", which is to be held in Kentucky, USA, August 11-14.
*
Climate imaginaries and the contested future of economic growth
KEYWORDS: Climate economics; climate imaginaries; degrowth; economic growth; green growth
Conflicting views on economic growth comprise a controversial issue related to climate economics. While the mainstream of climate economists assert that continued and practically endless economic growth can be taken for granted, critics dispute this and advance alternative economic ideas about a post-growth, degrowth or steady-state economy. Growth of different magnitudes is likewise expected according to most climate scenarios. I assess different ideas about economic growth in the climate discourse by relating them to the notion of climate imaginaries, which can be understood as socio-semiotic systems of shared ideas about issues related to climate change. The powerful influence of climate imaginaries can be decisive with regard to how climate policy and governance is understood and implemented, for instance whether incremental or radical change is pursued. Climate imaginaries range from anticipating apocalypse or radical societal change to relying on business-as-usual scenarios or techno-optimism. Core issues in climate ethics related to equity and intergenerational justice are often framed on the background of the common expectation that future generations will be better off in economic terms. Using climate imaginaries to frame a discussion of conflicting views on the future of economic growth, I will trace the history of green growth and degrowth ideas as applied to the climate issue, with a main focus on the last 30–40 years.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES / TAKEAWAYS
* Expectations about future economic growth matters for policy discussions
* Climate scenarios incorporate only one side of the debate (pro-growth)
* Criticism of mainstream climate economics is required to account for future welfare
*
Alternative HDI thresholds for maximum income demonstrate significance for policy advice
KEYWORDS: human development; Human Development Index; income; methodology, UNDP
For several years, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) misquoted Kahneman & Deaton´s article “High income improves evaluation of life but not emotional well-being” (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), 2010) in its technical notes, which describes its methodology for computing the Human Development Index (HDI). This article was erroneously used as basis for capping Gross National Income (GNI) per capita at $75,000. Since the HDRO23/24 Technical notes, released in Spring 2024, the reference to Kahneman & Deaton has been removed in the UNDP´s methodological descriptions, but when computing the HDI the UNDP still caps Gross National Income (GNI) per capita at $75,000. On the background of how the HDI is currently computed, the UNDP has been criticized for promoting policies that weaken environmental sustainability by presenting rich yet unsustainable Western countries as role models for economic development. I will describe how the HDI´s income metrics have changed over time, and outline what difference it would make for HDI rankings of various countries if Gross National Income (GNI) per capita were capped at a) a level just above extreme poverty ($1.095); b) the world average ($20.327); c) the OECD average ($52.698), or d) kept but without any maximum. As these alternative HDI computations will show, simply changing the maximum threshold for income per capita radically changes what countries appear as role models for human development.
LEARNING OBJECTIVES / TAKEAWAYS
* The Human Development Index´ maximum income threshold is not justified by current research
* With a high maximum threshold for income, rich yet unsustainable Western countries appear as role models for human development
* Alternative HDI computations, with different thresholds for maximum income, demonstrate what difference these metrics make for policy advice
