Derailing the Growth Debate

Research output: Other contributionNet publication - Internet publicationCommunication

76 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

The paper analyses the critics of the pioneering and best selling report "The Limits to Growth" from 1972 by D. Meadows et.al., which outlined future global development options, with respect to population, resource depletion, food production, pollution, etc. In the paper is observed that nothing that we know today implies that the report was in any sense fundamentally wrong. A cohort of critics at the time, it can be said, was seriously in error when they managed to derail the debate by rejecting the report’s conclusions, and a lot of the critique was not related to the content of the report. Actually the report seems to be surprisingly right in its agregated analyses of future options, and in the present recognition of climtate change it would be wise to learn from the report and its updating version.
Original languageJapanese
Publication date2009
Publication statusPublished - 2009

Bibliographical note

Another version of the paper is available in Russian with the title: "Once again about 'The limits to Growth' '"

Keywords

  • Limits to Growth
  • Erroneous Critique
  • Growth debate
  • Sustainability
  • Environment
  • Futurology
  • Economics

Cite this

@misc{dd069783570e400dab4158f5b89fda3d,
title = "Derailing the Growth Debate",
abstract = "The paper analyses the critics of the pioneering and best selling report {"}The Limits to Growth{"} from 1972 by D. Meadows et.al., which outlined future global development options, with respect to population, resource depletion, food production, pollution, etc. In the paper is observed that nothing that we know today implies that the report was in any sense fundamentally wrong. A cohort of critics at the time, it can be said, was seriously in error when they managed to derail the debate by rejecting the report’s conclusions, and a lot of the critique was not related to the content of the report. Actually the report seems to be surprisingly right in its agregated analyses of future options, and in the present recognition of climtate change it would be wise to learn from the report and its updating version.",
keywords = "Limits to Growth, Erroneous Critique, Growth debate, Sustainability, Environment, Futurology, Economics",
author = "J{\o}rgen N{\o}rgaard",
note = "Another version of the paper is available in Russian with the title: {"}Once again about 'The limits to Growth' '{"}",
year = "2009",
language = "Japansk",
type = "Other",

}

Derailing the Growth Debate. / Nørgaard, Jørgen.

2009, .

Research output: Other contributionNet publication - Internet publicationCommunication

TY - ICOMM

T1 - Derailing the Growth Debate

AU - Nørgaard, Jørgen

N1 - Another version of the paper is available in Russian with the title: "Once again about 'The limits to Growth' '"

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - The paper analyses the critics of the pioneering and best selling report "The Limits to Growth" from 1972 by D. Meadows et.al., which outlined future global development options, with respect to population, resource depletion, food production, pollution, etc. In the paper is observed that nothing that we know today implies that the report was in any sense fundamentally wrong. A cohort of critics at the time, it can be said, was seriously in error when they managed to derail the debate by rejecting the report’s conclusions, and a lot of the critique was not related to the content of the report. Actually the report seems to be surprisingly right in its agregated analyses of future options, and in the present recognition of climtate change it would be wise to learn from the report and its updating version.

AB - The paper analyses the critics of the pioneering and best selling report "The Limits to Growth" from 1972 by D. Meadows et.al., which outlined future global development options, with respect to population, resource depletion, food production, pollution, etc. In the paper is observed that nothing that we know today implies that the report was in any sense fundamentally wrong. A cohort of critics at the time, it can be said, was seriously in error when they managed to derail the debate by rejecting the report’s conclusions, and a lot of the critique was not related to the content of the report. Actually the report seems to be surprisingly right in its agregated analyses of future options, and in the present recognition of climtate change it would be wise to learn from the report and its updating version.

KW - Limits to Growth

KW - Erroneous Critique

KW - Growth debate

KW - Sustainability

KW - Environment

KW - Futurology

KW - Economics

M3 - Udgivelser på nettet - Net-publikation

ER -