Eco-economic decoupling
An economy that would be able to sustain economic growth while reducing the amount of resources such as water or fossil fuels used and delink environmental deterioration at the same time would be said to be decoupled.
[12] Historically there has been a close correlation between economic growth and environmental degradation: as communities grow in size and prosperity, so the environment declines.
This trend is clearly demonstrated on graphs of human population numbers, economic growth, and environmental indicators.
[21] There are conflicting views on whether improvements in technological efficiency and innovation will enable a complete decoupling of economic growth from environmental degradation.
[22][23] On the other hand, an extensive historical analysis of technological efficiency improvements has conclusively shown that improvements in the efficiency of the use of energy and materials were almost always outpaced by economic growth, in large part because of the rebound effect (conservation) or Jevons Paradox resulting in a net increase in resource use and associated pollution.
For example, there are certain minimum unavoidable material requirements for growing food, and there are limits to making automobiles, houses, furniture, and other products lighter and thinner without the risk of losing their necessary functions.
Consequently, long-term sustainability requires the transition to a steady state economy in which total GDP remains more or less constant, as has been advocated for decades by Herman Daly and others in the ecological economics community.
The OECD 2019 Report "Environment at a Glance Indicators – Climate change" points out that the issue of diminishing GHG emissions while maintaining GDP growth is a major challenge for the forthcoming years.
There is no empirical evidence supporting the existence of an eco-economic decoupling near the scale needed to avoid environmental degradation, and it is unlikely to happen in the future.
Environmental pressures can only be reduced by rethinking green growth policies, where a sufficiency approach complements greater efficiency.
[31][32] In 2020, an analysis by Gaya Herrington, then Director of Sustainability Services of KPMG US,[33] was published in Yale University's Journal of Industrial Ecology.
In particular, the 2020 study examined updated quantitative information about ten factors, namely population, fertility rates, mortality rates, industrial output, food production, services, non-renewable resources, persistent pollution, human welfare, and ecological footprint, and concluded that the "Limits to Growth" prediction is essentially correct in that continued economic growth is unsustainable.
[34] The study found that current empirical data is most closely consistent with 2 scenarios: Business as Usual(BAU) and Comprehensive technology(CT).
The author concluded her study saying: "Although SW tracks least closely, a deliberate trajectory change brought about by society turning towards another goal than growth is still possible.
