Why Integrating Ecological Reparations Strengthens the Degrowth Movement
Combining these two approaches can build political bridges and allyship between people from all over the world, while tackling systems of oppression at every level.
An interview with Post Growth Fellow, Tonny Nowshin
Tonny has been active in the degrowth movement since 2017. While studying for her second Master’s, in Economics, she came across the degrowth community. From her experience of that engagement Tonny noticed with frustration that degrowth has a blind spot when it comes to the discussion of the Global South. At that time decolonization was not central to the degrowth discussion — rather, localization and losses in the Global North from the globalization process took a more central stage (something that’s still true today). From her understanding of the limitation in the degrowth discussion of the time, she joined another avid degrowther Matthias Schmelzer in 2018 to give Podelwitz Degrowth Summer School’s opening talk to bring in the Global South perspective. Recently, the two collaborated and published an academic article titled ‘Ecological Reparations and Degrowth: Towards a Convergence of Alternatives Around World-making After Growth’ in the Society for International Development.
We sat down with Tonny to talk about why integrating ecological reparations strengthens the degrowth movement, and vice versa.
Post Growth Institute: What did/do you feel was missing from the degrowth discourse with regards to the Global South?
Tonny Nowshin: The growth paradigm dictates that countries need to grow, and there are certain pathways to achieving a high standard of living. But that is not the full truth, because the growth and development that we see in certain parts of the world is at the cost of extraction. Extracting labor and minerals from the Global South supports the lifestyles of a relatively small number of people in the Global North. So for the Global South to get there, we would need a whole other set of continents to exploit! That’s never mentioned in the mainstream development narrative. On top, we are facing a planetary boundary manifesting as the climate crisis at the moment.
PGI: What led you to thinking about economic reparations as an answer to this quandary?
TN: Imagine the current global economic system as an octopus. The head of the octopus is centered in Europe and the US. If we want to end this cycle of extraction and start moving to a system that’s more focused on fairness and wellbeing, we need to think about giving back and changing the flow of extraction. We need to think about redistribution. Degrowth is a very powerful idea. It opens up the possibility that we could consciously steer away from our current economic system towards a more steady state. But if you don’t include an awareness of the colonial dynamics, then it risks just being another way to ‘kick away the ladder’ and leave the Global South stranded.
Degrowth is a very powerful idea... But if you don’t include an awareness of the colonial dynamics, then it risks just being another way to ‘kick away the ladder’ and leave the Global South stranded.
While we move towards a steady state, the historical injustices of colonialism and extractivism have to be corrected — and degrowth can be a very useful pathway to this if connected rightly with the concept of reparations centered on global justice.
PGI: How do you envision ecological reparations working within the context of degrowth?
TN: There needs to be a way for Global South countries to break the cycle of extraction (and the false growth agenda) while maintaining and increasing people’s wellbeing. For example, if we focus on the extraction of labor, how do people in the Global South earn an income if the Global North reduces consumption of products and services created in the Global South?
Ecological reparations offers a way of redistributing the wealth that is, and has been, generated by the Global South for the Global North and reduces the need for additional extraction.
We also want to account for the destruction of nature, through mineral mining, deforestation, pollution, and so on. Ecological reparations offers a way of redistributing the wealth that is, and has been, generated by the Global South for the Global North and reduces the need for additional extraction to meet the needs of the people.
PGI: You make a convincing argument that without a global justice outlook, degrowth risks becoming inward-looking and provincial — what Max Ajl has called the “thin line between modesty and myopia”. Can you talk more about that?
TN: Majority of the discussion in degrowth was developed by white, academic, middle-class professionals. And also one may notice a romantic anti-modernist way of looking at development present in the degrowth space. With the best intentions, people are aware and trying to not do any harm to the world. There’s a ‘white conscious’ way of living: “I’m vegan, I’m not doing any harm. I don’t buy textiles made in Bangladesh, so I am not supporting sweatshops.”
This approach is limited in its assumption that by changing your consumer behavior and lifestyle, you can redeem yourself and get rid of the guilt of the legacy of enabling all of this extraction and systemic oppression around the world. That you can be free from the legacy of white supremacy.
If we focus on the amount of global extraction that the European economy is built upon, then it’s clear there is a historical responsibility.
But that’s not true, and just focusing on provincializing Europe is not enough. You also have to actively talk about how to account for the history of colonization and address it. Europe may be moving beyond growth, but if we focus on the amount of global extraction that the European economy is built upon, then it’s clear there is a historical responsibility. If you’re not addressing the historical responsibility and the structure that’s based on that legacy, then you’re not addressing one of the key elements.
We need to see more political awareness and an understanding about what the fights in other parts of the world mean. It’s not just NOT participating in extractive consumerism, it’s also being aware and responsible for that stance to its logical endpoint. When you talk about degrowth, when you say you’re not going to buy any more clothes from Bangladesh, what would that mean to that country? And how can we responsibly correct for that? We need a way to actively redeem the mistakes of the past.
The counter to this myopia is showing up in solidarity, being aware of all the privileges that we still hold, and knowing how to actively talk about and engage with these topics with the bigger picture in mind.
PGI: You argue that an internationalist degrowth agenda requires “worldmaking.” What policies do you propose to help this happen?
TN: We want to be humble about this. The table in the article [shown below] is our thought experiment of a set of policies we’d need to move towards a global justice. It’s in no way an exhaustive list, but we wanted to name the element of extraction and look at how we could reverse the destructive elements of mining, of labor exploitation, of capital exploitation etc.
For example during the process of writing, we had a discussion: Can there be anything like an ethical way of collecting minerals from the earth? We, as humans, as a collective society, might still have a need to take out minerals, but we would definitely want to change the way that’s done and how the community that lives in that area must get a say — their needs must take priority. We also wanted to prioritize Indigenous knowledge and rights to land. It was important to mention that we would have to reorganize global governance to prioritize global justice — including ensuring the safety of global citizens, freedom of movement and safe passage (especially in the context of the climate emergency and related migration).
In terms of the transformation of trade, we wanted to bring an awareness of how trade has fundamentally been about power relations and used as a way to extract value from countries producing primary goods. We look at how we can correct for those historical power imbalances while incorporating supply chain justice, and how we can justly and consciously shift the dynamics of neoliberal globalization. Relatedly, on the topic of the knowledge commons and intellectual property, we name that innovations need to benefit collective society.
Our starting point was the idea of a promise of non-continuation. So we began with how to stop the practices of extraction. Then we moved on to ideas and policies that might correct for and reverse past mistakes.
PGI: What is the role of “de-bordering” and freedom of movement in this worldview?
TN: This is connected to acknowledging how we came to be in this situation. The climate crisis is caused by certain parts of the world that are extractive and oppressive towards people and the planet. Already, people need to move away from their homes because of the damage caused by this extraction. The countries that have caused this need to take responsibility. Allowing freedom of movement and safe passage is just one element of acknowledging that responsibility. Beyond that, we envision the future of human civilization as a compassionate collective — and that means taking care of each other.
We envision the future of human civilization as a compassionate collective .
Sometimes people outside of the degrowth movement think degrowth might mean the global population is a problem. I want to say that it’s not a degrowth discourse at all. Connecting population discussion with the climate crisis is false and very reactionary. We know that it’s not the number of people causing the climate crisis, it’s the top ten percent of the population causing 50 percent of global carbon emissions (with one percent driving the 15 percent of emissions). So it’s not the number of people but how we are living on this planet and how our economy is running.
PGI: An interesting and perhaps less obvious argument is that ecological reparations movements would also be strengthened by degrowth. Can you explain how?
There are a few reasons, which we explain in the article, but the one I feel most strongly about is the promise of non-repetition. Degrowth as an approach allows a moving away from the behaviors that have caused harm in the past. It’s about ensuring that wouldn’t be repeated and creating a path towards a society that we want to live in without that process of extraction. For the Global South, it allows for the freedom of where to go, an alternative to the futures imposed by capitalism. This presents opportunities to build political bridges and strong allyship between people from all over the world, while tackling systems of oppression at every level — from the local to the global.
Inspired? Here are some things you can do now:
- Read the full article about degrowth and ecological reparations by Tonny and co-author Matthias Schmelzer.
- Browse the increasingly rich literature on degrowth in our Bookshop.
- Read this article by Franklin Obeng-Odoom who makes the case for ecological reparations in Africa.
