As researchers at the forefront of the post-growth movement, we often find ourselves grappling with a fundamental question: how can societies achieve genuine wellbeing while respecting the Earth’s finite resources? Our recent comprehensive review, published in The Lancet Planetary Health, delves into this very question, exploring the historical trajectory of — and recent developments in — post-growth research.
For decades, economic growth, measured by Gross Domestic Product (GDP), has been the dominant goal of most nations. However, we are increasingly confronted by the reality that this pursuit of endless growth is not only environmentally unsustainable but also does not necessarily lead to improved human wellbeing. Our review revisits the seminal 1972 “Limits to Growth” report, highlighting the continuing debate about resource depletion. While some still cling to the belief that technology will solve all our problems, the evidence suggests otherwise. Resource prices are rising, and there’s growing concern that we are indeed approaching critical limits.
Even more worrying than resource depletion, however, is the stark reality that we have already transgressed multiple planetary boundaries. Carbon emissions, biodiversity loss, land-system change, and freshwater use are all exceeding safe operating levels. The idea of “decoupling” economic growth from environmental impact is often presented as a solution. While it is true that we can reduce the environmental intensity of GDP (relative decoupling), what is required is absolute decoupling, where we reduce overall resource use while the economy grows. We find no evidence of sustained absolute decoupling, and global models suggest that such decoupling is unlikely to occur even with optimistic assumptions about technology.
Moreover, there are also social limits to growth. The “Easterlin paradox” has demonstrated that, while income and happiness are related, increased income over time does not lead to a corresponding increase in happiness — and this is a finding that still largely stands. Factors like strong social connections, social safety nets, and public services are much more important for wellbeing.
This is where the post-growth agenda becomes vital. Post-growth is about moving beyond the pursuit of economic growth as a societal goal. It’s about fundamentally shifting our focus from endless quantitative expansion to qualitative improvement. It’s about prioritizing human wellbeing and ecological sustainability. Post-growth research encompasses various approaches, including:
- Doughnut and wellbeing economics: Aiming to meet the basic needs of all within planetary boundaries
- Steady-state economics: Emphasizing the need to stabilize resource use at a sustainable level
- Degrowth: Advocating for a planned and democratic transformation of our economic system
These approaches converge on the need to reduce the production of unnecessary and damaging goods and services while increasing beneficial ones. Post-growth is about recognizing that reducing resource use and emissions is easier if we’re not simultaneously trying to grow the economy.
An important focus of recent post-growth work is the development of ecological macroeconomic models that incorporate economic, social, and environmental variables — and this is an area where MAPS is expected to make a major contribution. Models that simulate post-growth scenarios demonstrate that it’s possible to achieve better climate outcomes and good social outcomes without economic growth.
In our review we examined specific policy proposals that can support a post-growth transition. These include policies such as universal basic services like healthcare and education, an unconditional basic income, job guarantees to ensure full employment, reduced working hours, and carbon and wealth taxes.
These are not just abstract ideas. There is mounting evidence that many of these policies can have positive social and environmental effects. But there is still research to be done on modeling or piloting how precisely different variants of these policies would work in specific contexts, and what undesirable side effects they may have under different scenarios.
Our review also addresses critical North–South dynamics. Economic growth in the Global North has often come at the expense of the Global South, through the appropriation of resources and labour. Post-growth in the Global North could therefore help address this unequal exchange. It is clear from the literature that the Global South needs to pursue its own development paths, focusing on local needs and models of wellbeing, rather than following the unsustainable model of the Global North.
Finally, we recognize in the review that we are still facing knowledge gaps, especially around how post-growth policies may be implemented in different regions and contexts, or the types of international governance systems that could address the unequal exchange between North and South. We need more interdisciplinary research that integrates different methodologies and worldviews.
Read the full article in The Lancet Planetary Health below:
The full article may be cited as:
Kallis, G., Hickel, J., O’Neill, D.W., Jackson, T., Victor, P.A., Raworth, K., Schor, J.B., Steinberger, J.K., Ürge-Vorsatz, D., 2025. Post-growth: the science of wellbeing within planetary boundaries. The Lancet Planetary Health 9 (1), e62-e78. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00310-3