Steady State Revolution - Fighting for a Sustainable World with a Steady State Economy

Development vs Growth

Posted March 10th, 2009 by Joshua | with 11 comments

In a steady-state economy the focus is on development versus growth. As Herman Daly puts it, growth refers to “physical scale of the matter/energy throughput that sustains the economic activities of production and consumption of commodities.”  In other words, growth is the increasing of production and consumption of goods and services. This is a quantitative increase in scale. Development is a qualitative improvement of the same scale. A contained system (the Earth, for example) can develop inside but does not significantly grow. (Daly, Beyond Growth)

econecosystemWe live in a contained system, of which our economy is a large part of and, currently, the largest driving factor in changes within that system. In our system, we can choose to develop or “grow,” but our growth is limited by the constraints of that same system (e.g. Earth’s natural capital). If we change our focus to development, we will increase the quality of our lives (qualitative development) instead of the amount of production and consumption (quantitative growth).

As our system is right now, we are increasing the production and consumption, but decreasing the quality of our lives.

As we move into a steady-state economy, we will make choices that improve durability of goods and shift to more maintenance then production. There will still be production, to replace goods at the end of their life-cycle; a life-cycle that should be increased and improved as well (no more new computers every other year). We move away from quantity to quality.

Brian Czech and Herman Daly address this in their article for The Wildlife Society Bulletin, “In My Opinion: The steady state economy – what it is, entails, and connotes“:

“Nothing about a steady state economy precludes economic development… Various sectors may come and go in a steady state economy. For example, organic farms may supplant factory farms, the proportion of bicycles to Humvees may increase, and professional soccer may attract more fans while NASCAR attracts fewer. As long as the physical size of the economy remains constant in the long run, a developing economy is a steady state economy.

Nor would any type of cultural stagnation result from a steady state economy… an economy in which physical growth as no longer the goal would be more conducive to political, ethical, and spiritual improvements.”

As we continue to increase our development, we will push for longer live-spans and decreasing birth and death rates. We will have more time to enjoy our community, get outside (Americans currently spend 90% of their time indoors), and tackle the bigger problems of hunger, poverty, homelessness, and maybe even put an end to war.

I know, sounds like a lot to do for a “economic theory,” but just try to imagine a world were we actually focused on these issues instead of focusing on the bottom line. That is a beautiful world. That is a sustainable world. That is a Steady State.

Update August 25, 2009: In a recent article by James Gustave Speth, “Doing Business in a Postgrowth Society,” the author made some good distinctions between quantitative growth and qualitative development:

“It is abundantly clear that even in a postgrowth society, many things do need to grow, such as the number of good jobs; the incomes of the poor; the deployment of climate-friendly and other green technologies; the availability of health care; security against the risks of job displacement, old age, and disability; and investment in public infrastructure and environmental amenity. We need targeted government policies to address such objectives.

Of particular importance are policies that temper growth while improving social and environmental well-being—policies establishing, for instance, shorter workweeks and longer vacations; greater labor protections, job security, and benefits; restrictions on advertising; a new design for the twenty-first-century corporation, one that embraces rechartering and stakeholder primacy rather than shareholder primacy; rigorous environmental, health, and consumer protection; greater economic and social equality; heavy spending on public services; and initiatives to address population growth at home and abroad.”

Related posts (automatically generated):


  1. Uneconomic Growth
  2. Sustainable Scale
  3. Newsweek: The No-Growth Fantasy
  4. Post Growth Reading List
  5. Citizen or Consumer?

If you enjoyed this post, get free updates by email or RSS feed.

11 Responses to 'Development vs Growth'

Subscribe to comments with RSS or TrackBack to 'Development vs Growth'.

  1. [...] us: increased our health and means. That is, until sometime between the 1950s and the 1980s when growth become uneconomic and actually harmful to our [...]

  2. [...] the line it began to fail. We have been down this path for so long that now we only see the means (growth) and fail to see the ends (happiness). This is because the ends are no longer found, we just grow [...]

  3. [...] need an economy that runs not on some insatiable growth-hungry, greedy engine, but a sustainable, development-centered engine. That being said, I agree with Richard on the need to inform people about the risks of [...]

  4. [...] cause in our society to allow destruction of our environment is growth. We will do anything to feed that monkey, even if it costs us our forests, rivers, food-producing [...]

  5. [...] Economy is a sustainable, non-growth-centered economy. It is not communism or even the end of capitalism. It is changing our focus. We [...]

    A Steady State

    19 May 09 at 07:58

  6. [...] all the hype about growth is finally being put into perspective. Economic decline has a way of making us reevaluate many [...]

  7. [...] all the hype about growth is finally being put into perspective. Economic decline has a way of making us reevaluate many [...]

  8. [...] are overrun by corporations and greedy, liquidating politicians that perpetuate the lies of growth for their own [...]

  9. [...] It is time we turned our focus away from growing – getting larger – and push for development – getting better. The steady state economy is the logical next step for a growth economy that [...]

    Uneconomic Growth

    9 Aug 09 at 11:24

  10. [...] us: increased our health and means. That is, until sometime between the 1950s and the 1980s when growth become uneconomic and actually harmful to our [...]

  11. [...] in other countries as well, but we are definitely the pioneers of the industry. I could rant on and on about this, but in the spirit of working less (and more efficiently) I will not re-invent the [...]

Join the Discussion