pot_belly_mole

joined 1 year ago
[–] pot_belly_mole@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Based on the text I would not consider it a functional degrowth economy. What they have so far is the payment system, and some promising emerging use for it. But a great initiative and a great read anyway.

[–] pot_belly_mole@slrpnk.net 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I hope so. Although I'm not sure whether it is solarpunk or some other term under which the ideas will be popularized (eg. degrowth, eco-socialism, minor paradise, doughnut economy, ecological civilization). But I find it likely that solarpunk will be packaged together with communism, as communism, by the right. And demonized.

 

McNeil and Barnes (2025) conducted a survey of 2051 respondents in the UK. The goal was to find out the respondents attitudes on the existence of a tradeoff between the environment and economic growth and their priorities in such a tradeoff.

They found out most people would prioritize the environment over growth.

In their cluster analysis on the responses, they identified the largest group to be "moderate environmentalists" (37 %), followed by a moderate economistic group (20 %) and a strong environmental preference group (19 %). 9% had extreme pro-economic-growth views.

They also tested whether highlighting the existence of a trade-off affected the respondents. They conclude that "greater public attention to the possibility of an environment-economic growth trade-off has only limited effects on support for environmental protection" and "It does not appear that increasing belief in the trade-off is consequential for people's policy positions."

McNeil, A., & Barnes, L. (2025). The environment–economic growth trade-off: Does support for environmental protection depend on its economic consequences? Ecological Economics, 230, 108522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2025.108522