The enufism debate commences

Here, Jeroen van de Bergh, of the University of Barcelona, reviews various studies of degrowth (warning: it's an hour-long video).

Degrowth is somewhat akin to enufism, but there are differences, and we believe our model is workable and will involve far less transition pain than simple degrowth.

The biggest challenge to enufism is ourselves, and our natural objections to giving anything up! So how do we get around that, and persuade ourselves to act otherwise?

My instinct is that there are two age groups which would more readily accept the idea (and practicality) of enufism: the old and the young. First, the older generation have done their "peak consuming" earlier in their lives, so will know that more is not necessarily better.

As to the younger generation, they are more ready to take new ideas on board, and also they are more interested in quality of life than quantity. There are of course exceptions, but there are exceptions to all general rules.

The most difficult group to convince, in my view, will be the adults who are, for the most part, career and ambition driven, and see the foreign holidays, bigger house, larger car, and swish clothes as the worthy prizes for their efforts.

But how can we slow down economies to reasonable levels, where people can once again breath clean air, eat wholesome food, and not give themselves heart attacks from overwork on their ambitions?

The answer is, with great difficulty! We know that when economic recessions (or even worse, depressions) hit, people are thrown out of work, as factories and businesses go bust. And as government tax revenues decline, their ability to meet huge social welfare costs also vapourises!

The only way round this conundrum is to phase change gently, so in effect there is a soft landing. A parallel here is Quantitative Easing, a powerful tool used by central banks to stimulate economic activity when traditional monetary policy options become ineffective.

If the developed world suddenly turned its back on a couple of centuries of exponential growth, the shockwaves would be like a tsunami. No earthquakes here please!

Masterstrokes by governments would be disastrous! What's needed is for we the people to change our habits and conceptions of what's "good" for us, thereby to wean us off the consumerist con-trick. At the same time, governments can play their part with tax incentives as carrots to those who play the game of enufism, and a big stick to those who continue to consume excessively.

We may see less Rolls Royces, and other fancy cars, on the road, and less private jets skimming around in the air, but so what? What matters is the well-being of the majority, not the extravagence of the super rich.

Once this caught on, and people realise they can be happier with less, it snowball, with people [metaphorically] out-gunning each other to live the enufist life!

Please Donate To Enuf