I have been on the degrowth bandwagon for a while now, mostly from academic circles and some select activist ones, but from a more Marxist position than Saito, which indeed does make some hints at a social democratic reformist change rather than a revolutionary one.
My first issue with Saito's brand of degrowth is that it does face an epistemological tension which can't quite be solved: such radical change in the mode of production and reproduction of society has never happened through reform or conservation of a current economic system, but rather through the creation of a new one, paired with a Renaissance-like scientific revolution. It might be the fact that, as you correctly pointed out, Japanese society is still so deeply entrenched in the productivist mindset, they can't truly envision an end of the entire economic system, even in the most intellectually radical circles of society.
As far as the theory of change in itself, I think a very good starting point is one thing that Hickel has been stressing for years now: artificial scarcity. With our technological innovation even as of today, not taking into account future developments, we could easily stop most of the oppression in the world. Even classical and neo-classical economists like Hayek (huge capitalist enjoyer, although one of the few liberal economists that genuinely critique it theoretically) have made the point that what we now know as artificial scarcity is sort of an imperative for capitalism to function. Redistribution is possible, and it will not make the world go up in flames.
However, such redistribution cannot happen when our class society is still dominated by 0.001% of the global population in terms of production, capital flows, investments and ownership over fixed and circulating capital alike.
I think degrowth is very useful in combating accelerationist leftists who believe that, somehow, building 1000 new nuclear plants, 20 gorillion industrial builidings and 100 gazillion units of housing made from reinforced concrete mixed with azbestos and microplastics will somehow create a great leap forward towards an egalitarian society without absolutely destroying the world. We already have an unimaginable ammount of excess, it's just hoarded by a select few.
Also, the point you made about japanese work culture applies outside East Asia as well. If anything, most degrowth inspired Marxists you will encounter will be totally able to describe to you at least one experience with some sort of dogmaticist that idolizes productive work like it's their natural calling as a mammal. Degrowth makes the painful point, for many, that work is just another activity which should totally not become the absolute gravitational center of an individual's life, even less of a whole society's worldview. Dignified work, under a system which does not exploit labour as capitalism does, is still tiring, burnout inducing and time consuming. Humans can (and totally should) do so much more than just work. Be it for a capitalist's deep-running pockets, or a Socialist dream of a Communist society, the idolatrization of productive and unproductive labour is a sin of which both the right and the left are guilty historically speaking.
Well, I think that the idea of degrowth is always implemented when one country is invaded militarily by another one. My question however is: who will make money on the business of degrowthing this or that economy? For if degrowth was something good in peace time then it would happen somehow in a natural way. Apparently it isn’t being instead another Marxist ideology of misleading the masses.
Excellent list! I have read Less is More and the Kwet book on digital degrowth. My service to humanity is a time and relationship app that is modeled somewhat after Nir Eyal’s book Indistractable.
first encountered the concept of degrowth within academic architecture circles. It seems to be one of the more prominent yet often understated ‘schools of thought’ in the field right now, particularly within the academic landscapes of Europe and Asia, as far as I can tell. While its ideas and proposed solutions are often intriguing, I’m hesitant to take a definitive positive stance, as I’m generally turned off by anything that feels too manifesto-like. That said, if framed thoughtfully, it can offer a fertile and refreshing perspective, especially in relation to architecture and urban planning.
Fascinating that degrowth is discussed in architecture. How is it applied / framed in architecture discussions?
I also take your point about degrowth emanating manifesto odors. I guess that's because it's both an academic school of thought while also constituting a clear political and policy agenda, so its proponents feel the need to crystallize their demands and recommendations in easy-to-digest forms.
I’ve been thinking about this a lot recently. Haven’t got to the economic theories that sit behind it in detail, so this is SUCH a helpful explainer and book list. Thank you!! Here’s something I wrote on it: https://open.substack.com/pub/moneybrunch/p/we-should-be-more-keanu
Excited to keep digging into all of this. Honestly, this article is a terrific Christmas present 🙏🎄🫶
Isn’t Japanese culture rooted in a respect for nature? Even a worship of nature? Maybe people are just realizing that we took a wrong turn with industrialization and that we need a course correction.
This is complicated -- Shintoism is associated with vague notions of respecting nature, yes. But like many societies that drank the economic growth coolaid, Japan's industrialization and economic growth since the late 19th century have come at the cost of environmental exploitation and greenhouse gas emissions, both in Japan and in the countries it imports from.
That said, there are still countless natural parks, mountains, rivers, lakes, etc. that are beautifully preserved in Japan, mostly thanks to the local communities' love for the environment.
I was pleasantly surprised to read about this trend in Japan. Thanks as well for the book recommendations. I didn’t read about degrowth but reflected on its underlying ideas a lot while researching and writing my climate fiction book. I find it’s a shame that we allow people to exploit planetary ecosystems that are a ‚common good‘ and shouldn’t belong to anyone for financial gain. I also decry the mindless consumerism of our society. It’s time to find new ideals for our existence on this planet.
I completely agree with your point about exploiting the ecosystem. It really comes down to the fact that industrialized societies have treated pollution and exploitation as mere "externalities" that we can simply ignore without paying the appropriate costs.
The solution is conceptually and technically straightforward (price on carbon and similar measures to "internalize" pollution/waste) but politically challenging...
On a separate note, you're building a fascinating thing over at Story Voyager! I rarely read fiction (although I really should), I subscribed. Keep up the great work!
Instead of price on carbon, I would prefer governments to pay for nature conservation. For example, a country like Albania is paid to conserve the last wild river in Europe and its pristine forest. A country like Romania is paid to conserve its forests and brown bears etc.
Thank you for introducing me to the concept of degrowth, but I fall squarely on the side of the skeptics. It seems like a cop out. Japan should refocus its traditional core competencies to pursue growth more effectively than the status quo. Especially as the country is in the midst of momentous demographic change, if it does not reorganize various structures and old ways of doing things, it will be left in the dust by upstarts like India. Having lived in Japan for more than 30 years, I do not hold out much hope, however. Change here tends to be slow and incremental in the absence of a real crisis. Japan needs a wake-up call to restart growth along a new paradigm.
Thanks so much for reading the post and for your comment. I confess I'm somewhat of a degrowth sympathizer, since I'm persuaded by the sentiment that growth can't continue endlessly.
Your skepticism is well-taken, but I want to caution you from equating degrowth with economic stagnation. Japan is experiencing the latter. True degrowth, as degrowth proponents like Saito and others I mention in my post would say, is intentional equilibrium in which people's well-being is the ultimate goal, national wealth is distributed relatively evenly, natural resources are used in environmentally sustainable ways, etc., all without pursuing infinite growth.
Sounds utopian? Perhaps. But that is conceptually distinct from a policy strategy that's trying to stimulate economic growth but failing, which is what Japan has been doing for several decades now.
I completely agree when you say Japan needs a new paradigm. I'd be curious which paradigm you might have in mind!
Thanks for the clarification. I now have a better understanding of the concept of degrowth.
Especially as someone who moved from downtown Tokyo to a rural part of the country about 5 years ago to pursue a slower pace of life, some of the appeal of the degrowth movement resonates with me. Nevertheless, I continue to invest in economies that are clearly focused on growth.
As for Japan's need for a new paradigm in the face of a massive, long-term depopulation trend, to increase efficiency, Japan should prioritize boosting productivity through automation and innovation, modernizing infrastructure, deregulating the economy, improving education and work-life balance, and streamlining government processes. This multi-pronged approach would enhance competitiveness, improve living standards, and ensure sustainable economic growth.
I guess my main problem with it at a theory is how difficult it is to apply in the real world. It is a good academic discussion to have, and it can bring more creativity to the problem of addressing climate change. But applying degrowth on its own is virtually impossible.
If we look at Europe the past five years since the EU established its Green Deal, there has been a tremendous backlash to initiatives like gas stoves in Germany or EVs across the bloc. Obviously there have been other events that have effected the people since the Green Deal went into place that no one could have anticipated, but the recent electoral backlash against incumbents is a very real event.
People hate being told what to do, and they hate paying higher prices (like really hate it), and that is what degrowth would require to get traction. So in our democratic system, that makes it a virtual non-starter, politically speaking.
That being said, there are ideas coming from degrowth (like placing a value on unpaid labor, improving public services and shifting away from GDP as the end all, be all) that are interesting, and that we could definitely benefit from.
Patrick, thanks for your comment and sorry for the slow reply!
Thank YOU for your post! it goes into far more detail about the actual idea of degrowth than my post.
I agree that implementing degrowth is essentially a political non-starter, at least from a national level and in a top-down manner. But there have been several degrowth experiments at more "micro" levels -- cities, towns and communities -- that might shine some light on how degrowth principles might play out at larger scales (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transition_town?utm_source=chatgpt.com).
(I'm admittedly not well-versed in these experiments, so I won't be able to talk about them intelligently...)
I'm also intrigued by what you wrote in your post: "How will developing countries develop if developed nations actively reduce economic output?" This might be true, but the implication of this statement is that the industrialized world must keep growing for the sake of developing economies. I wonder whether high-income countries that maintain their income levels without growth can still offer the manufactured goods and markets that developing countries need to catch up to the high-income countries. I'd like to think it's possible.
Bottom line is that I literally don't know a single person who's content with the current economic system (especially in the West). Degrowth is one alternative that merits trial-and-error experiments.
Timely post. Been thinking about this for a while, relying on Paul Mason's book "Postcapitalism: A Guide to Our Future," published in 2016. (ISBN 9780374536732) Must get serious and actually read beyond the dense Intro. The chapter titles captured my attention: Chpt 3: Was Marx Right? Chpt. 7: Beautiful Troublemakers and Chpt 10: Project Zero. Mason is a British economist, writes for The Guardian and other news sources as well as other books, so probably has other titles, some of which may be available in Japanese and other languages. I want to learn more.
Thanks for your reply. I haven't heard of that author or book (I'm a dilettante in the world of degrowth) but the chapter titles do sound interesting. I'd be curious to hear your review after you read it.
For the comments section, I'll go with #2, "Do you have a theory on why degrowth seems to be getting attention in Japan?"
After 13 years living in and 20+ studying Japan, my knee jerk reaction to the proposed popularity of degrowth is along the lines of your colleague, who said "It's probably people who are wary of the state of the Japanese economy over the last few decades, people who are tired of working all day for no particular outcome, who are disillusioned by the country's seeming lack of direction." However, I'd add to this that degrowth itself isn't actually popular in the sense that it is being pursued; rather, it's gaining in popularity because it helps to explain away Japan's decline, it let's people say, "this is alright," and blissfully continue sinking into lesser and lesser relevance.
Just to be clear, I don't have a positive read on degrowth or any similar pursuit (SDGs are a great example) simply because the evidence for meaningful action on it is so difficult to locate and because the common perception normalizes Japan's decline.
That's not to say that environmentally conscious or sustainable initiatives don't exist - they are certainly out there - but that they actually walk the walk also means that they necessarily go *against* what any major business or authority wants, and so they receive very little if any tangible support, thus having a particularly difficult time actually gaining traction in the public sphere.
I'm saying all this based on my work over the last 6 years with Japan's national stock of akiya. I've built a business on helping countless people access viable properties (fuck you to the real estate industry), furnish their homes using articles gotten from other vacant homes (fuck you, LIXIL et al), advised on telework setups (fuck you, trad office culture), helped them setup their own companies (fuck you salaryman lifestyle), and more. Degrowth isn't just antithetical to the powers that be, but dangerous, and so I don't see many ways for it to grow through that medium.
I *do* however see media, even major players like NHK, as a potential ally. Like it or not, the *appeal* of a prosperous lifestyle that shirks accepted or standard practices where possible for alternatives that produce a new, arguably better existence for practitioners is immensely attractive, sort of like the opposite of what they say about not being able to stop staring at car crashes.
Apologies for the late reply! And thanks for your nuanced thoughts here.
Your work with clients looking for akiya must be fascinating. Your cynicism for the degrowth idea notwithstanding, I'd venture to say that people like you will be the degrowth vanguard if/when the idea gains momentum ;)
Hey, thanks for bringing up one of my favorite topics. I'm always looking for more to read about degrowth and Japan specifically. Most western degrowth pundits barely if ever touch upon Japan, so that leaves me a Kohei Saito fan wishing for more debate on all that locally.
Before getting into my answers to your questions, I have no qualms with your definition of degrowth, but it maybe could use a bit more focus on the economic and social aspects. Saito and Hickel in particular are heavy on the environmental imperative aspect, but I'd argue the concept is also in equal parts about a social imperative: the growth paradigm has been and continues to be both the justification for and the means by which widening inequality, plutocracy, oppression, colonialism, etc have... grown, I guess. I would say degrowth is as much about social justice for all as it is about environmental sustainability.
I don't know that degrowth is really an idea that's taking hold that powerfully in the country; sure, we have a couple successful writers about it, but it's not really something that permeates into the mainstream discourse about economics and policy, is it? There's certainly an element of "economics and policy don't get airtime in Japan anyway" to it, regardless of topic. But I doubt it's just that. Comparatively, my native France has a significantly more vocal pro-degrowth crowd, with (small ish mostly) political parties actually putting it on their platform - though they usually get shouted off stage quickly by the neoliberal orthodoxy. You could also look at places like Ireland or New Zealand, at least in previous election cycles, going as far as having heads of government publicly repudiating GDP growth for its own sake, and building things like the Wellbeing Economy Alliance - which is very much about degrowth in anything but name (lots of people think "degrowth" is an instant turnoff to too many people and should be retired as a name for a movement; I mostly agree).
I do think there is a kind of unique, or at least very favorable, relationship between the idea (however you call it) and Japan. Japan has been the unwitting pioneer of hyper-aging advanced economies, and demographics is destiny. Combined with 30 years of economic stagnation, people are primed to... (cont)
...to the idea that growth is just not in the cards anymore for the country; many are also acutely aware of how growthist policies of the last decades have utterly failed to bring either growth itself, or any value whatsoever to citizens at large. So I would argue Japanese people, or the minority of Japanese with any interest in economics and policy anyway, are in a place that should make them a lot more receptive to heterodox takes about growth. I also have a pet theory that Japanese animism and even Hayao Miyazaki play a significant part here too (self-plug warning: https://tokyofrenchie.substack.com/p/hayao-miyazaki-new-animism-radical)
On a more quantitative front, the Japanese economy itself should pretty much be the ideal substrate for post-growth economics to take hold in: it's already a rich country. Continuing to pursue growth with a declining population could possibly make sense if the population overall needed to be lifted out of poverty still, but that's obviously not the case. The national wealth is there, and it would be plenty enough for every Japanese citizen to live comfortable and secure lives even if YoY GDP growth never went positive again - IF it were organized and distributed well, which it very pointedly isn't. Steady state economics is a credible, no nonsense rebuttal of the most absurd aspects of neoliberalism (like trickle down economics). But it also has the potential to be the purveyor of real, applicable solutions to Japan's most pressing problems including 少子化, where the reigning gerontocracy has nothing to offer besides increasingly out of touch, comically bad takes.
I guess that's enough words for one comment, but I could go on and on about all that as you see. Thanks for motivating me to research & write more on it, I hope you do so too :)
Hey Thomas, thank you SO MUCH for such a thoughtful reply. And sorry for my own late response.
You’re right that degrowth includes a strong strand of social justice together with environmental concerns. It’s a big body of literature and I’ve only begun biting off a small corner of it — mostly the economic arguments by Saito and Hickel, so that plus my background in political economy explains the economic skew in my definition.
About your point about degrowth not permeating in Japan’s mainstream discourse, again I agree. Political and corporate leaders and media talking heads are entirely about this and that measures to grow the Japanese economy and regain global competitiveness. At best, I see degrowth as an undercurrent among a (still) very limited segment of the population.
I think one thing that could help the idea of degrowth become more mainstream (aside from changing its name to something more politically acceptable :\ ) is if a respected Japanese scholar would spell out, step by step and in great detail, how successful degrowth can be achieved in the Japanese concept. How would corporations work in a degrowth society? How can the average worker ensure that they won’t lose their job, or that their transition into another, more degrowth-oriented career will be painless? How can politicians keep their jobs under degrowth? Will internationally competitive industries today gain or lose?
These are questions I think about, and in my view, people like Saito only speaks at the broad, theoretical level that has little contact with practical policies. If these questions could be answered in the Japanese context, I think degrowth can become a real political program.
I have been on the degrowth bandwagon for a while now, mostly from academic circles and some select activist ones, but from a more Marxist position than Saito, which indeed does make some hints at a social democratic reformist change rather than a revolutionary one.
My first issue with Saito's brand of degrowth is that it does face an epistemological tension which can't quite be solved: such radical change in the mode of production and reproduction of society has never happened through reform or conservation of a current economic system, but rather through the creation of a new one, paired with a Renaissance-like scientific revolution. It might be the fact that, as you correctly pointed out, Japanese society is still so deeply entrenched in the productivist mindset, they can't truly envision an end of the entire economic system, even in the most intellectually radical circles of society.
As far as the theory of change in itself, I think a very good starting point is one thing that Hickel has been stressing for years now: artificial scarcity. With our technological innovation even as of today, not taking into account future developments, we could easily stop most of the oppression in the world. Even classical and neo-classical economists like Hayek (huge capitalist enjoyer, although one of the few liberal economists that genuinely critique it theoretically) have made the point that what we now know as artificial scarcity is sort of an imperative for capitalism to function. Redistribution is possible, and it will not make the world go up in flames.
However, such redistribution cannot happen when our class society is still dominated by 0.001% of the global population in terms of production, capital flows, investments and ownership over fixed and circulating capital alike.
I think degrowth is very useful in combating accelerationist leftists who believe that, somehow, building 1000 new nuclear plants, 20 gorillion industrial builidings and 100 gazillion units of housing made from reinforced concrete mixed with azbestos and microplastics will somehow create a great leap forward towards an egalitarian society without absolutely destroying the world. We already have an unimaginable ammount of excess, it's just hoarded by a select few.
Also, the point you made about japanese work culture applies outside East Asia as well. If anything, most degrowth inspired Marxists you will encounter will be totally able to describe to you at least one experience with some sort of dogmaticist that idolizes productive work like it's their natural calling as a mammal. Degrowth makes the painful point, for many, that work is just another activity which should totally not become the absolute gravitational center of an individual's life, even less of a whole society's worldview. Dignified work, under a system which does not exploit labour as capitalism does, is still tiring, burnout inducing and time consuming. Humans can (and totally should) do so much more than just work. Be it for a capitalist's deep-running pockets, or a Socialist dream of a Communist society, the idolatrization of productive and unproductive labour is a sin of which both the right and the left are guilty historically speaking.
Well, I think that the idea of degrowth is always implemented when one country is invaded militarily by another one. My question however is: who will make money on the business of degrowthing this or that economy? For if degrowth was something good in peace time then it would happen somehow in a natural way. Apparently it isn’t being instead another Marxist ideology of misleading the masses.
Excellent list! I have read Less is More and the Kwet book on digital degrowth. My service to humanity is a time and relationship app that is modeled somewhat after Nir Eyal’s book Indistractable.
It’s a pleasure to discuss this stuff here
first encountered the concept of degrowth within academic architecture circles. It seems to be one of the more prominent yet often understated ‘schools of thought’ in the field right now, particularly within the academic landscapes of Europe and Asia, as far as I can tell. While its ideas and proposed solutions are often intriguing, I’m hesitant to take a definitive positive stance, as I’m generally turned off by anything that feels too manifesto-like. That said, if framed thoughtfully, it can offer a fertile and refreshing perspective, especially in relation to architecture and urban planning.
Fascinating that degrowth is discussed in architecture. How is it applied / framed in architecture discussions?
I also take your point about degrowth emanating manifesto odors. I guess that's because it's both an academic school of thought while also constituting a clear political and policy agenda, so its proponents feel the need to crystallize their demands and recommendations in easy-to-digest forms.
I’ve been thinking about this a lot recently. Haven’t got to the economic theories that sit behind it in detail, so this is SUCH a helpful explainer and book list. Thank you!! Here’s something I wrote on it: https://open.substack.com/pub/moneybrunch/p/we-should-be-more-keanu
Excited to keep digging into all of this. Honestly, this article is a terrific Christmas present 🙏🎄🫶
Thanks for reading, Bhakti. Keanu Reeves might indeed be the perfect embodiment of contentment and balance :)
Isn’t Japanese culture rooted in a respect for nature? Even a worship of nature? Maybe people are just realizing that we took a wrong turn with industrialization and that we need a course correction.
Malika, thank you for your comment!
This is complicated -- Shintoism is associated with vague notions of respecting nature, yes. But like many societies that drank the economic growth coolaid, Japan's industrialization and economic growth since the late 19th century have come at the cost of environmental exploitation and greenhouse gas emissions, both in Japan and in the countries it imports from.
That said, there are still countless natural parks, mountains, rivers, lakes, etc. that are beautifully preserved in Japan, mostly thanks to the local communities' love for the environment.
I was pleasantly surprised to read about this trend in Japan. Thanks as well for the book recommendations. I didn’t read about degrowth but reflected on its underlying ideas a lot while researching and writing my climate fiction book. I find it’s a shame that we allow people to exploit planetary ecosystems that are a ‚common good‘ and shouldn’t belong to anyone for financial gain. I also decry the mindless consumerism of our society. It’s time to find new ideals for our existence on this planet.
Thank you for reading and commenting, Claudia.
I completely agree with your point about exploiting the ecosystem. It really comes down to the fact that industrialized societies have treated pollution and exploitation as mere "externalities" that we can simply ignore without paying the appropriate costs.
The solution is conceptually and technically straightforward (price on carbon and similar measures to "internalize" pollution/waste) but politically challenging...
On a separate note, you're building a fascinating thing over at Story Voyager! I rarely read fiction (although I really should), I subscribed. Keep up the great work!
Instead of price on carbon, I would prefer governments to pay for nature conservation. For example, a country like Albania is paid to conserve the last wild river in Europe and its pristine forest. A country like Romania is paid to conserve its forests and brown bears etc.
Fascinating! These are public policies I hadn't heard of before. If you have any good resources for me to dig into this, let me know!
I don’t think they exist yet…
Thank you for introducing me to the concept of degrowth, but I fall squarely on the side of the skeptics. It seems like a cop out. Japan should refocus its traditional core competencies to pursue growth more effectively than the status quo. Especially as the country is in the midst of momentous demographic change, if it does not reorganize various structures and old ways of doing things, it will be left in the dust by upstarts like India. Having lived in Japan for more than 30 years, I do not hold out much hope, however. Change here tends to be slow and incremental in the absence of a real crisis. Japan needs a wake-up call to restart growth along a new paradigm.
Thanks so much for reading the post and for your comment. I confess I'm somewhat of a degrowth sympathizer, since I'm persuaded by the sentiment that growth can't continue endlessly.
Your skepticism is well-taken, but I want to caution you from equating degrowth with economic stagnation. Japan is experiencing the latter. True degrowth, as degrowth proponents like Saito and others I mention in my post would say, is intentional equilibrium in which people's well-being is the ultimate goal, national wealth is distributed relatively evenly, natural resources are used in environmentally sustainable ways, etc., all without pursuing infinite growth.
Sounds utopian? Perhaps. But that is conceptually distinct from a policy strategy that's trying to stimulate economic growth but failing, which is what Japan has been doing for several decades now.
I completely agree when you say Japan needs a new paradigm. I'd be curious which paradigm you might have in mind!
Thanks for the clarification. I now have a better understanding of the concept of degrowth.
Especially as someone who moved from downtown Tokyo to a rural part of the country about 5 years ago to pursue a slower pace of life, some of the appeal of the degrowth movement resonates with me. Nevertheless, I continue to invest in economies that are clearly focused on growth.
As for Japan's need for a new paradigm in the face of a massive, long-term depopulation trend, to increase efficiency, Japan should prioritize boosting productivity through automation and innovation, modernizing infrastructure, deregulating the economy, improving education and work-life balance, and streamlining government processes. This multi-pronged approach would enhance competitiveness, improve living standards, and ensure sustainable economic growth.
Thank you for the post. I wrote about degrowth last year, which you can find below.
https://nuancematters.substack.com/p/the-degrowth-agenda?r=1cwd5h
I guess my main problem with it at a theory is how difficult it is to apply in the real world. It is a good academic discussion to have, and it can bring more creativity to the problem of addressing climate change. But applying degrowth on its own is virtually impossible.
If we look at Europe the past five years since the EU established its Green Deal, there has been a tremendous backlash to initiatives like gas stoves in Germany or EVs across the bloc. Obviously there have been other events that have effected the people since the Green Deal went into place that no one could have anticipated, but the recent electoral backlash against incumbents is a very real event.
People hate being told what to do, and they hate paying higher prices (like really hate it), and that is what degrowth would require to get traction. So in our democratic system, that makes it a virtual non-starter, politically speaking.
That being said, there are ideas coming from degrowth (like placing a value on unpaid labor, improving public services and shifting away from GDP as the end all, be all) that are interesting, and that we could definitely benefit from.
Patrick, thanks for your comment and sorry for the slow reply!
Thank YOU for your post! it goes into far more detail about the actual idea of degrowth than my post.
I agree that implementing degrowth is essentially a political non-starter, at least from a national level and in a top-down manner. But there have been several degrowth experiments at more "micro" levels -- cities, towns and communities -- that might shine some light on how degrowth principles might play out at larger scales (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transition_town?utm_source=chatgpt.com).
(I'm admittedly not well-versed in these experiments, so I won't be able to talk about them intelligently...)
I'm also intrigued by what you wrote in your post: "How will developing countries develop if developed nations actively reduce economic output?" This might be true, but the implication of this statement is that the industrialized world must keep growing for the sake of developing economies. I wonder whether high-income countries that maintain their income levels without growth can still offer the manufactured goods and markets that developing countries need to catch up to the high-income countries. I'd like to think it's possible.
Bottom line is that I literally don't know a single person who's content with the current economic system (especially in the West). Degrowth is one alternative that merits trial-and-error experiments.
Timely post. Been thinking about this for a while, relying on Paul Mason's book "Postcapitalism: A Guide to Our Future," published in 2016. (ISBN 9780374536732) Must get serious and actually read beyond the dense Intro. The chapter titles captured my attention: Chpt 3: Was Marx Right? Chpt. 7: Beautiful Troublemakers and Chpt 10: Project Zero. Mason is a British economist, writes for The Guardian and other news sources as well as other books, so probably has other titles, some of which may be available in Japanese and other languages. I want to learn more.
Thanks for this recommendation! I’ve heard of him and will pick up the book. Looks fascinating.
Thanks for your reply. I haven't heard of that author or book (I'm a dilettante in the world of degrowth) but the chapter titles do sound interesting. I'd be curious to hear your review after you read it.
For the comments section, I'll go with #2, "Do you have a theory on why degrowth seems to be getting attention in Japan?"
After 13 years living in and 20+ studying Japan, my knee jerk reaction to the proposed popularity of degrowth is along the lines of your colleague, who said "It's probably people who are wary of the state of the Japanese economy over the last few decades, people who are tired of working all day for no particular outcome, who are disillusioned by the country's seeming lack of direction." However, I'd add to this that degrowth itself isn't actually popular in the sense that it is being pursued; rather, it's gaining in popularity because it helps to explain away Japan's decline, it let's people say, "this is alright," and blissfully continue sinking into lesser and lesser relevance.
Just to be clear, I don't have a positive read on degrowth or any similar pursuit (SDGs are a great example) simply because the evidence for meaningful action on it is so difficult to locate and because the common perception normalizes Japan's decline.
That's not to say that environmentally conscious or sustainable initiatives don't exist - they are certainly out there - but that they actually walk the walk also means that they necessarily go *against* what any major business or authority wants, and so they receive very little if any tangible support, thus having a particularly difficult time actually gaining traction in the public sphere.
I'm saying all this based on my work over the last 6 years with Japan's national stock of akiya. I've built a business on helping countless people access viable properties (fuck you to the real estate industry), furnish their homes using articles gotten from other vacant homes (fuck you, LIXIL et al), advised on telework setups (fuck you, trad office culture), helped them setup their own companies (fuck you salaryman lifestyle), and more. Degrowth isn't just antithetical to the powers that be, but dangerous, and so I don't see many ways for it to grow through that medium.
I *do* however see media, even major players like NHK, as a potential ally. Like it or not, the *appeal* of a prosperous lifestyle that shirks accepted or standard practices where possible for alternatives that produce a new, arguably better existence for practitioners is immensely attractive, sort of like the opposite of what they say about not being able to stop staring at car crashes.
Apologies for the late reply! And thanks for your nuanced thoughts here.
Your work with clients looking for akiya must be fascinating. Your cynicism for the degrowth idea notwithstanding, I'd venture to say that people like you will be the degrowth vanguard if/when the idea gains momentum ;)
Hey, thanks for bringing up one of my favorite topics. I'm always looking for more to read about degrowth and Japan specifically. Most western degrowth pundits barely if ever touch upon Japan, so that leaves me a Kohei Saito fan wishing for more debate on all that locally.
Before getting into my answers to your questions, I have no qualms with your definition of degrowth, but it maybe could use a bit more focus on the economic and social aspects. Saito and Hickel in particular are heavy on the environmental imperative aspect, but I'd argue the concept is also in equal parts about a social imperative: the growth paradigm has been and continues to be both the justification for and the means by which widening inequality, plutocracy, oppression, colonialism, etc have... grown, I guess. I would say degrowth is as much about social justice for all as it is about environmental sustainability.
I don't know that degrowth is really an idea that's taking hold that powerfully in the country; sure, we have a couple successful writers about it, but it's not really something that permeates into the mainstream discourse about economics and policy, is it? There's certainly an element of "economics and policy don't get airtime in Japan anyway" to it, regardless of topic. But I doubt it's just that. Comparatively, my native France has a significantly more vocal pro-degrowth crowd, with (small ish mostly) political parties actually putting it on their platform - though they usually get shouted off stage quickly by the neoliberal orthodoxy. You could also look at places like Ireland or New Zealand, at least in previous election cycles, going as far as having heads of government publicly repudiating GDP growth for its own sake, and building things like the Wellbeing Economy Alliance - which is very much about degrowth in anything but name (lots of people think "degrowth" is an instant turnoff to too many people and should be retired as a name for a movement; I mostly agree).
I do think there is a kind of unique, or at least very favorable, relationship between the idea (however you call it) and Japan. Japan has been the unwitting pioneer of hyper-aging advanced economies, and demographics is destiny. Combined with 30 years of economic stagnation, people are primed to... (cont)
...to the idea that growth is just not in the cards anymore for the country; many are also acutely aware of how growthist policies of the last decades have utterly failed to bring either growth itself, or any value whatsoever to citizens at large. So I would argue Japanese people, or the minority of Japanese with any interest in economics and policy anyway, are in a place that should make them a lot more receptive to heterodox takes about growth. I also have a pet theory that Japanese animism and even Hayao Miyazaki play a significant part here too (self-plug warning: https://tokyofrenchie.substack.com/p/hayao-miyazaki-new-animism-radical)
On a more quantitative front, the Japanese economy itself should pretty much be the ideal substrate for post-growth economics to take hold in: it's already a rich country. Continuing to pursue growth with a declining population could possibly make sense if the population overall needed to be lifted out of poverty still, but that's obviously not the case. The national wealth is there, and it would be plenty enough for every Japanese citizen to live comfortable and secure lives even if YoY GDP growth never went positive again - IF it were organized and distributed well, which it very pointedly isn't. Steady state economics is a credible, no nonsense rebuttal of the most absurd aspects of neoliberalism (like trickle down economics). But it also has the potential to be the purveyor of real, applicable solutions to Japan's most pressing problems including 少子化, where the reigning gerontocracy has nothing to offer besides increasingly out of touch, comically bad takes.
I guess that's enough words for one comment, but I could go on and on about all that as you see. Thanks for motivating me to research & write more on it, I hope you do so too :)
Hey Thomas, thank you SO MUCH for such a thoughtful reply. And sorry for my own late response.
You’re right that degrowth includes a strong strand of social justice together with environmental concerns. It’s a big body of literature and I’ve only begun biting off a small corner of it — mostly the economic arguments by Saito and Hickel, so that plus my background in political economy explains the economic skew in my definition.
About your point about degrowth not permeating in Japan’s mainstream discourse, again I agree. Political and corporate leaders and media talking heads are entirely about this and that measures to grow the Japanese economy and regain global competitiveness. At best, I see degrowth as an undercurrent among a (still) very limited segment of the population.
I think one thing that could help the idea of degrowth become more mainstream (aside from changing its name to something more politically acceptable :\ ) is if a respected Japanese scholar would spell out, step by step and in great detail, how successful degrowth can be achieved in the Japanese concept. How would corporations work in a degrowth society? How can the average worker ensure that they won’t lose their job, or that their transition into another, more degrowth-oriented career will be painless? How can politicians keep their jobs under degrowth? Will internationally competitive industries today gain or lose?
These are questions I think about, and in my view, people like Saito only speaks at the broad, theoretical level that has little contact with practical policies. If these questions could be answered in the Japanese context, I think degrowth can become a real political program.