A compa a i e e iew o de- and pos -g ow h modeling s udies
A hu Laue
a,b,*
, I˜
nigo Capell´
an-P´
e ez
a,c
, Na halie We gles
a
a
G oup o Ene gy, Economy and Sys ems Dynamics (GEEDS), Uni e si y o Valladolid, Paseo del Cauce s/n, 47011 Valladolid, Spain
b
Depa men o Applied Economics, Uni e si y o Valladolid, A . Valle Esgue a 6, 47011 Valladolid, Spain
c
Depa men o Sys ems Enginee ing and Au oma ic Con ol, Escuela de Ingenie ías Indus iales, Uni e si y o Valladolid, Paseo del Cauce s/n, 47011 Valladolid, Spain
ARTICLE INFO
Keywo ds:
Deg ow h
Pos -g ow h
Modeling
Policy e alua ion
Scena ios
T ansi ion
ABSTRACT
In ecen yea s, a small bu apidly g owing ield o modeling al e na i es o g ow h as ep esen ed by he de-
(DG) and pos -g ow h (PG) discou ses has eme ged. We compa e selec ed model cha ac e is ics o 75 DG and PG
ela ed modeling s udies, compiled h ough a sys ema ic li e a u e e iew (2000−2023), and link model
s uc u es and esul s o di e en heo e ically con es ed deba es su ounding DG/PG. The e iewed s udies
co e di e en geog aphical and empo al scopes, economic heo ies, modeling echniques and ope a ionaliza-
ions o DG/PG. The majo i y o s udies models DG/PG as in en ional ansi ion and does no ques ion i s
compa ibili y wi h a capi alis sys em, while mo e adical s ands o he DG/PG discou se a e excluded. Al hough
DG/PG modeling exe cises equen ly explo e he e ec s o sus ainabili y policies, hey ep esen only a ac ion
o heo e ical DG policy p oposals, wi h he mos equen being: wo king ime educ ion, maximum income
caps, ca bon axes and a uni e sal basic income. DG/PG modeling s udies ha e demons a ed he impo ance o
in eg a ing biophysical cons ain s in economic modeling bu also ha e quan i a i ely assessed he easibili y o
en i onmen al in eg i y and social well-being wi hou g ow h. None heless, u u e modeling could be ende ed
mo e ealis ic by paying mo e a en ion o he Global Sou h, in oducing he e ogeneous agen s d i ing sus-
ainabili y ansi ions and including mul iple plane a y bounda ies.
1. In oduc ion
In he con ex o he pe sis en ailu e o he wo ld economy o
deli e ‘g een g ow h’, i.e. o apidly and s ongly decouple economic
g ow h om ecological de e io a ion (Habe l e al., 2020; Pa ique
e al., 2019), concep s ha p o ide al e na i es o a g ow h-based eco-
nomic sys em, such as ‘De(−)g ow h’ (DG) and ‘Pos -g ow h’ (PG), a e
on he ise. Ne e heless, as ‘umb ella e ms’ (Che ko skaya, 2022;
Ge be and Raina, 2018; Ha d and O’Neill, 2017) wi hou a uni e sally
accep ed de ini ion, hei conc e e meanings a e dynamically e ol ing.
Fo example, PG has been used in e changeably wi h DG (e.g. Koch,
2020a; Koch and Buch-Hansen, 2021) bu also as concep o i s own
(Paech, 2012), and he concep s ha e been in e p e ed as a olun a y
socie al ansi ion owa d highe wel a e, lowe en i onmen al
des uc ion and mo e ‘democ acy/au onomy’ (Asa a e al., 2013; Co le
Walke e al., 2021; Kallis e al., 2018), bu also as an ex e nally imposed
hal and e e sal o economic g ow h (C ownshaw e al., 2019; Dou h-
wai e, 2012; D ews and An al, 2016).
Despi e he po en ial o o mal/quan i a i e models o complemen
heo e ical analysis by assessing he easibili y and plausibili y o
sus ainabili y p oposals, iden i ying le e age poin s in he sys em, and
de ec ing unin ended side e ec s (Capell´
an-P´
e ez e al., 2015; Đula
e al., 2021; Giampie o e al., 2009; S e man, 2000), he ield o DG/PG
modeling is s ill small. This is in pa due o he posi ion o DG/PG
ou side he (social and scien i ic) mains eam, skep icism wi hin some
pa s o he DG mo emen owa d quan i a i e (economic) modeling
app oaches (Jackson and Vic o , 2020) and he ac ha economic DG/
PG heo y is s ill in de elopmen . Recen yea s ha e seen a s ong in-
c ease in a emp s o model dynamics desc ibed as ‘DG’ o ‘PG’. This ise
o DG/PG ela ed modeling can be linked o ad ances in ecological
mac oeconomics, a ield ha has de eloped economic models capable o
ep esen ing al e na i es o g ow h-based sys ems (Ha d and O’Neill,
2017), as well as o epea ed calls o di e si y exis ing In eg a ed
Assessmen and Clima e Economics esea ch by gi ing up on he
assump ion o con inuous GDP g ow h (Hickel e al., 2021). The small
bu g owing ield o DG/PG ela ed modeling cons i u es a p omising
de elopmen which has he po en ial o con ibu e o a ce ain o mal-
iza ion o he e ms, he eby ende ing hem mo e angible. Howe e , a
sys ema ic analysis o exis ing DG/PG modeling e o s, and how hey
ela e o di e en unde s andings o DG/PG, is cu en ly missing.
* Co esponding au ho a : G oup o Ene gy, Economy and Sys ems Dynamics (GEEDS), Uni e si y o Valladolid, Paseo del Cauce s/n, 47011 Valladolid, Spain.
E-mail add esses: [email p o ec ed] (A. Laue ), [email p o ec ed] (I. Capell´
an-P´
e ez), [email p o ec ed] (N. We gles).
Con en s lis s a ailable a ScienceDi ec
Ecological Economics
jou nal homepage: www.else ie .com/loca e/ecolecon
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2024.108383
Recei ed 26 Feb ua y 2024; Recei ed in e ised o m 12 July 2024; Accep ed 7 Sep embe 2024
Ecological Economics 227 (2025) 108383
A ailable online 11 Sep embe 2024
0921-8009/© 2024 The Au ho s. Published by Else ie B.V. This is an open access a icle unde he CC BY-NC license ( h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by-
nc/4.0/ ).
Likewise, i is unclea o which ex en di e en policy p oposals made by
he quali a i e DG/PG li e a u e a e explo ed by means o modeling
echniques.
Consequen ly, in his a icle we sys ema ically e iew modeling
s udies ha make explici e e ence o he e ms ‘de-‘ and/o ‘pos -
g ow h’ since 2000. Ou analysis pu sues wo main objec i es:
Fi s , we aim a p o iding a e iew o ele an model ela ed cha -
ac e is ics o cu en DG/PG s udies ha migh p o e use ul o modele s
in e es ed in explo ing DG/PG dynamics. The e o e, we analyze (1) he
g ow h o DG/PG ela ed s udies o e ime as a p oxy o he g owing
impo ance o he opic; (2) hei geog aphical scope o highligh bo h
well co e ed and unde - esea ched e i o ies; (3) he dimensions
(economic, biophysical…) ep esen ed in he models o illus a e he
deg ee and impo ance o in e disciplina i y o DG/PG modeling; and
inally, di e en modeling echniques (4) and ways o ope a ionalize
DG/PG (5) in o de o show he di e si y o possibly sui able modeling
app oaches ha a e employed o s udy DG/PG.
Second, we wan o shed ligh on whe he and how selec ed heo-
e ical deba es on DG/PG, ha a e s ill no ully esol ed bu highly
ele an o a clea -cu de ini ion o DG/PG, a e e lec ed in/ ansla ed
in o he models. These deba es in ol e a ound (1) he ela ion be ween
DG/PG, GDP and socio-economic me abolism; (2) he (un)in en ionali y
o DG/PG p ocesses; (3) he (in)compa ibili y o DG/PG wi h a capi alis
sys em; as well as (4) key ac o s and (5) sui able policies o a DG/PG
ansi ion (c . sec ion 2.2). This heo y-in o med analysis allows us o
assess on he one hand whe he he esul s o modeling s udies helps o
cla i y hese open heo e ical deba e, and on he o he hand, which as-
pec s o heo e ical deba es ecei e mo e o less a en ion by he
modeling li e a u e.
Thus, al hough he s a ing poin and ocus o ou wo k a e modeling
s udies, h ough he bipa i e analysis we in end o b idge quali a i e
and quan i a i e app oaches o DG/PG: In o med by ou analysis,
modele s in e es ed in DG/PG will be able o gain insigh abou he
achie emen s and blind spo s o modeling s udies conduc ed so a ,
while heo e icians migh be p omp ed o imp o e quali a i e wo k
ela ed o DG/PG aking in o conside a ion he esul s o quan i a i e
s udies and hei in e p e a ion o DG/PG.
In wha ollows, we will ou line he me hods used o ou li e a u e
e iew and summa ize sho ly key heo e ical deba es be o e p esen ing
he esul s o ou analysis ega ding he model- and heo y- ela ed as-
pec s o he e iewed s udies. The discussion ocuses on achie emen s
and limi a ions o he s udies e iewed, as well as on oppo uni ies o
u u e quali a i e and quan i a i e esea ch on DG and PG, while he
conclusion syn hesizes he p incipal esul s o he a icle.
2. Me hods and heo e ical backg ound
2.1. Sys ema ic li e a u e e iew
We conduc ed a sys ema ic li e a u e e iew ollowing he PRISMA
2020 me hod (Page e al., 2021) o build a comp ehensi e da abase
ep esen ing he s a e o he a in economy- ela ed DG/PG modeling.
Ou p incipal sea ch was ca ied ou in Google Schola wi h he sea ch
s ing: ((“quan i a i e model”) OR (“IAM”) OR (“simple model”) OR
(“ma hema ical model”) OR (“mac oeconomic model”) OR (“quan i ica-
ion”) OR (“modeling”)) AND ((“pos -g ow h”) OR (“de-g ow h”) OR
(“deg ow h”) OR (“pos g ow h”)) AND ((“economic”) OR (“economy”))
[que y da e: 28.11.2023]. We limi ed he sea ch o he pe iod
2000–2023 and only conside ed he i s 900 esul s.
1
We com-
plemen ed ou sea ch by using he same sea ch s ing in Scopus.
2
As he
sea ch s ing shows, we equi ed he modeling s udies o ha e an explici
e e ence o he e ms ‘De-‘ o ‘pos -g ow h’ since we a e in e es ed in
he use o hese e ms by modele s, a he han in an ex an e imposed
de ini ion o DG/PG. This also had he consequence ha s udies
modeling a ‘s eady s a e’ o a ‘ze o g ow h’ economy wi hou making
e e ence o ‘DG/PG’ did no en e in o he scope o he sys ema ic
li e a u e e iew al hough hey could be a gued o be ela ed o DG/PG
deba es (c . Blauwho , 2012; Wiedmann e al., 2020). The discussion
sec ion co e s he implica ions and limi a ions o his sel - epo ed PG/
DG sea ch c i e ia o he analysis.
A e emo ing duplica es, we sc eened all he iden i ied 885 esul s
and emo ed hose ha desc ibed DG/PG in ields no ela ed o he
ecology-economy-socie y nexus (e.g. om chemis y, enginee ing, ed-
uca ion…) as well as hose ha ea ed DG/PG in a pu ely heo e ical
way. A e he sc eening p ocess we e ie ed 165 esul s and assessed
hem o eligibili y by eading he abs ac and he pa s o he pape s
ela ed o DG/PG. Applying he same exclusion c i e ia as in he
sc eening s age we iden i ied 61 sui able esul s. Addi ionally, we
iden i ied, sc eened and assessed 14 pape s h ough o he me hods
(snowballing and b oade non-sys ema ic li e a u e e iews), inc easing
he body o ou li e a u e e iew o 75 scien i ic wo ks.
3
The whole
p ocedu e is depic ed in a PRISMA 2020 low diag am (Fig. 1). Table A.1
in Appendix A lis s all pape s included in he e iew wi h hei assigned
ID ha we will use when e e ing o speci ic pape s.
Once he whole body o sui able li e a u e was iden i ied, he ele-
an in o ma ion was ex ac ed h ough an i e a i e con en analysis
p ocess, which included he pape s hemsel es as well as hei igu es,
e e ences, appendices and supplemen a y ma e ial.
2.2. Theo e ical backg ound: DG and PG as con es ed discu si e concep s
The exac meaning o ‘DG’ and ‘PG’ emains con es ed and is
dynamically e ol ing. While one s and o he li e a u e uses ‘DG’ and
‘PG’ in e changeably (Vincen and B andelle o, 2023) ano he uses ‘PG’
as umb ella e m including a ious ‘al e na i es o g ow h’ such as ‘DG’,
s eady-s a e economics, p ospe i y economics, a-g ow h and/o pos -
de elopmen (Ge be and Raina, 2018; Ha d and O’Neill, 2017). A
hi d s and a emp s o d aw clea di e ences be ween he e ms. Fo
example, Wiedmann e al. (2020) desc ibe ‘DG’, oge he wi h eco-
ana chism and eco-socialism as ‘ adical’ app oach o sus ainable p os-
pe i y, whe eas ‘PG’ is seen as pa o a ‘ e o mis ’ app oach ha also
co e s a-g ow h, s eady-s a e economics o p ospe i y wi hou g ow h.
Likewise, Likaj e al. (2022) a emp a an explici di e en ia ion be-
ween ‘DG’ and ‘PG’, placing ‘PG’ oge he wi h ‘a-g ow h’ and ‘beyond
g ow h’ a a middle g ound posi ion be ween ‘DG’ and ‘g een g ow h’.
Pa ly due o he lack o a commonly accep ed clea -cu de ini ion o
he e ms, i e key ques ions ega ding DG/PG dynamics emain
con es ed:
1
They keywo ds ‘economy’ and ‘economic’ na owed he sea ch o economy-
ela ed esul s and kep he amoun o esul s in a manageable scope.
2
Exac sea ch s ing in Scopus: TITLE-ABS-KEY ((“quan i a i e model” OR
“IAM” OR “simple model” OR “ma hema ical model” OR “mac oeconomic
model” OR “quan i ica ion” OR “modeling”) AND (“pos -g ow h” OR “de-
g ow h” OR “deg ow h” OR “pos g ow h”) AND (“economic” OR “economy”))
AND PUBYEAR >2000 AND SUBJAREA (econ OR soci). Que y da e:
28.11.2023, all esul s conside ed.
3
These 75 esul s comp ise pee - e iewed a icles, wo king pape s epo s,
PhD heses and book chap e s. Howe e , in ou analysis, we do no dis inguish
be ween di e en published o ma s and e e o all o hem as ‘pape s’ o
‘s udies’.
A. Laue e al.
Ecological Economics 227 (2025) 108383
2
Fi s , in he DG/PG con ex , he e olu ion o GDP and socio-
economic me abolism ( h oughpu ) o e ime is c ucial. Depending on
assump ions abou he (im)possibili y o ‘decoupling’ GDP g ow h om
g ow h in h oughpu (Habe l e al., 2020), and on assump ions abou
he long- e m sus ainable scale o he global socio-economic me abolism
(Daly, 1992; Geo gescu-Roegen, 1975), DG/PG can be concep ualized as
a educ ion o s abiliza ion o GDP and/o socio-economic me abolism
on a global o egional scale (only he Global No h) (c . De Mooij and
an Den Be gh, 2002; Kallis, 2011; Kallis e al., 2018; Van den Be gh,
2011). The li e a u e s essing di e ences be ween ‘DG’ and ‘PG’ holds
ha , while DG sees he downscaling o p oduc ion and consump ion as
ine i able, PG appea s o ocus on low o ze o g ow h which does no
o ce ully ansla e in o economic con ac ion (Polewsky e al., 2024).
Since modeling necessa ily has o make assump ions abou hese wo
a iables (GDP and h oughpu ), hey could help o inc ease concep ual
cla i y on his ques ion.
Second, a deba e s ill unse led, conce ns he ex en o which he
e ms ‘DG/PG’ can be used o desc ibe in en ional and olun a y p o-
cesses o unin en ional, undesi able ‘imposed’ eali ies. Al hough
widely ci ed au ho s o he sel -denomina ed ‘ esea ch on DG’ li e a u e
(Kallis e al., 2018) ha e epea edly s essed ha ‘DG’ should be un-
de s ood as an in en ional and olun a y p ocess in ol ing he (selec-
i e) downscaling o he economy (Hickel, 2021; Smi h e al., 2021),
mains eam economics s ill ela es he e m ‘DG’ o an unplanned, un-
in en ional educ ion o GDP (Blauwho , 2012). The ac ha concep s
such as ‘DG by disas e ’ (Elga s and Rena s, 2023) a e used by schola s,
shows ha in p ac ice mul iple, di e en meanings a e asc ibed o he
e m. The same is ue o ‘PG’ which has been used o desc ibe imposed
limi s o g ow h, due o en i onmen al and esou ce deg ada ion
(C ownshaw e al., 2019) o ‘secula s agna ion’ (Jackson, 2019) bu
also s ands o in en ional ans o ma i e p ocess owa d mo e social
equali y and ecological in eg i y (Ge be and Raina, 2018) o a new
economic pa adigm (D ews and An al, 2016). In es iga ing how models
depic DG/PG dynamics, hus, shows o which ex en modele s adhe e o
‘mains eam’ o ‘ ans o ma i e’ uses o he e ms DG/PG.
Thi d, he compa ibili y o PG/DG wi h a capi alis sys em emains a
con es ed issue, pa ly also due o di e en concep ions o ‘capi alism’
among di e en heo e icians. D awing on posi ions ha clea ly di e -
en ia e be ween ‘DG’ and ‘PG’, a gene al endency in he li e a u e
conside s ‘DG’ o be ‘an i-capi alis ’ (Boons a and Joosse, 2013; Kallis,
2019) and ‘PG’ o be mo e in line wi h a e o med capi alism
(Wiedmann e al., 2020) al hough his iew could be con es ed (Jackson,
2021; Vincen and B andelle o, 2023). Paying a en ion o his ques ion
could be c ucial o modeling s udies since, depending on he di e en
assump ions o he main mechanisms ope a ing in he economic sys em
ep esen ed in di e en schools o economic hough (neoclassical, pos -
Keynesian, Ma xis e c.), modeling esul s ega ding (in)compa ibili y o
DG/PG wi h capi alism will a y signi ican ly. Also, in eg a ing eal-li e
cha ac e is ics o con empo a y capi alism in o models could help he-
o e icians o de ec ba ie s o success ul DG/PG ansi ions.
Fou h, he key ac o s o ( olun a y as well as imposed) DG/PG dy-
namics a e subjec s o deba e (Koch, 2020a). He e, he li e a u e mo es
be ween decen alized bo om-up ansi ions by local ac o s and op-
down s a e-led ansi ions (D’Alisa and Kallis, 2020; Koch, 2020b,
2022). A sensi i i y o hese heo e ical deba es would allow modele s o
sys ema ically compa e he oppo uni ies, ba ie s and consequences o
Fig. 1. P isma low diag am o he pe o med sys ema ic li e a u e e iew.
A. Laue e al.
Ecological Economics 227 (2025) 108383
3
DG/PG ansi ions led (and opposed) by di e en ype o ac o s.
Las , in he con ex o an inc easing ocus on s a e-led ansi ions, he
de elopmen o policies labelled as ‘DG’ o ‘PG’ has gained impo ance.
The wo mos ex ensi e compila ions o DG/PG policies known o he
au ho s a e hose o Ha d and O’Neill (2017) and Fi zpa ick e al.
(2022). Al hough he o me ocuses on ‘PG’ and he la e on ‘DG’, in
p ac ice, hey e e o bo h e ms and do no es ablish clea di e ences
be ween DG and PG. Gi en hei abili y o compa e, assess and e alua e
di e en policies wi h ega d o hei e ec i eness, e iciency and
easibili y, modeling s udies could p o e especially aluable o his pa
o he heo e ical DG/PG li e a u e.
3. Resul s
3.1. Model- ela ed aspec s
Ou o he 75 e iewed modeling s udies, which comp ise 55 pee -
e iewed a icles, 12 wo king pape s, 3 s udies o epo s, 3 PhD he-
ses and wo book chap e s, 53 make e e ence o a DG discou se and 16
ela e o he e m PG.
4
6 s udies could no be unequi ocally ma ched o
ei he a ‘DG’ o ‘PG’ discou se since hey ei he used he e ms in e -
changeably (ID56, 70, 31, 36) o e e ed o bo h wi hou displaying a
clea p io i y o one e m (ID45, 71). The modeling li e a u e, hence,
mi o s he heo e ical li e a u e, wi h some s udies di e en ia ing be-
ween he e ms while o he s using hem as synonyms. Thus, in he
g aphs shown h oughou his a icle, he e iewed s udies we e di ided
in h ee g oups acco ding o hei discou se (DG/PG/bo h) o illus a e
o which ex en di e en discou ses ansla e in o di e en model
cha ac e is ics and esul s. This di e en ia ion migh be o in e es o
hose modele s and heo e icians s i ing o cla i y he di e ences be-
ween ‘DG’ and ‘PG’.
3.1.1. G ow h in DG/PG modeling
The numbe o DG and/o PG modeling exe cises has inc eased
exponen ially in he las 10 yea s (Fig. 2a), e lec ing he inc eased
a en ion paid o quan i a i e aspec s o DG/PG. Al hough modeling
s udies e e ing o ‘DG’ a e clea ly he majo i y, ‘PG’ inc easingly gains
ac ion. In e es ingly, none o he s udies e e ing o bo h concep s
wi hou clea ly dis inguishing hem, was published be o e 2020, indi-
ca ing ha a ce ain ‘me ge’ be ween ‘DG’ and ‘PG’ has only aken place
in ecen yea s.
The i s pape (Vic o , 2012) ha explici ly explo es a DG scena io
wi h he LowG ow model was published in 2012 which coincides
oughly wi h he su ge o he DG discou se in academia (Kallis, 2011;
Ma ínez-Alie , 2012). The e m ‘PG’ was i s in oduced by Jackson &
Vic o (Jackson and Vic o , 2011), wi h he i s complex models
e e ing explici ly o PG being he EUROGREEN and he FALSTAFF
models published in 2016 (Ca aneo e al., 2016; Jackson e al., 2016).
3.1.2. Geog aphical scope
The geog aphical scope o he modeling exe cises is global (26 pa-
pe s) o co e s speci ic egions o coun ies o he Global No h (28
pape s) (Fig. 2b). 16 pape s model abs ac sys ems ins ead o conc e e
e i o ies. Compa ing he sha e o ‘DG’ and ‘PG’ ela ed pape s in he
di e en geog aphical scope, ‘DG’ has a ela i ely high p esence in
s udies o global scope, whe eas ‘PG’ is mo e equen in abs ac
s udies. The la e is explained by he high sha e o abs ac economic
models using he ‘PG’ discou se (c . sec ion 3.1.3), which do no include
an empi ical ep esen a ion o geog aphical e i o ies.
The Global No h is no only he main objec o DG/PG modeling bu
also he main p oduce o DG/PG ela ed knowledge, since he esea ch
ins i u ions ha (co)p oduce quan i a i e DG/PG esea ch a e mainly
loca ed in he Global No h: 96 % o he analyzed pape s a e (co)p o-
duced by au ho s a ilia ed o a esea ch ins i u ion based in a high-
income coun y (acco ding o he Wo ld Bank classi ica ion) wi h
F ance, UK, Spain and Ge many alone (co)p oducing 72 % o all pub-
lica ions. Au ho s’ a ilia ions also explain he high p opo ion o ‘PG’
ela ed s udies ocusing on Canada, he UK and Ge many, since h ee
impo an au ho s o en linked o he ‘PG’ discou se – Vic o , Jackson
(2018), and Paech (2012) - a e based in hese coun ies.
Only 4 % o he e iewed s udies we e (co-)p oduced in uppe
middle income coun ies, namely China and Ecuado , while esea ch
ins i u ions om low and lowe middle income coun ies we e
comple ely absen . Fu he mo e, all s udies dealing wi h DG in he
Global Sou h e lec an unde s anding o he e m ha di e s om he
‘ esea ch on deg ow h’ li e a u e: The wo publica ions dealing wi h DG
in Ecuado do no model in en ional sus ainabili y ansi ions bu a he
ex e nally en o ced economic con ac ion (Espinoza, Fon al o, Ma í-
He e o, e al., 2022; Espinoza, Fon al o, Ramí ez, e al., 2022) while
he s udy co e ing he achie emen o SDGs in I an ope a ionalizes DG
as ze o GDP g ow h in a ‘S eady-S a e Economy’, which pe o ms wo se
han he al e na i e scena io ‘Well-being o people and plane ’
(Chapa iha, 2022). In a simila way, he s udy co e ing dema e ializa-
ion pa hways o Beijing (China) (Dai and Shan, 2020) ope a ionalizes
DG as educed GDP g ow h which pe o ms wo se han al e na i e
sus ainabili y s a egies.
Fig. S.4 A and B in he Supplemen a y Ma e ial compa e he
geog aphical scope o he s udies wi h he geog aphical a ilia ion o he
modele s.
3.1.3. Dimensions ep esen ed
Models also a y wi h ega d o he dimensions hey co e : They a e
mos ly bi/plu idimensional (36 pape s) o unidimensional (27 pape s).
Howe e , 12 pape s also use mul idimensional In eg a ed Assessmen
Models (IAMs). IAMs could po en ially ep esen a la ge numbe o
aspec s o DG/PG as hey in eg a e knowledge om mul iple scien i ic
disciplines (Beck and K uege , 2016), bu commonly ely on he ‘de aul ’
assump ion o con inuous economic g ow h (e.g. Hickel e al., 2021).
The IAMs used in he analyzed pape s do no ex an e assume posi i e
g ow h a es o he economy and a e mos ly newly de eloped IAMs,
excep o an adap ed e sion o MESSAGEix-GLOBIOM used in 2 pa-
pe s. All plu i- and mul idimensional modeling exe cises use empi ical
da a as model inpu whe eas hal o he pape s wi h a unidimensional
model (13 pape s) a e abs ac economic models elying pu ely on
o mal ma hema ics.
Table S1 in he Supplemen a y Ma e ial displays he names o IAMs
and bi/plu idimensional models used in he publica ions.
Fig. 2 esumes hese h ee cha ac e is ics o he e iewed s udies.
3.1.4. Modeling echniques
The modeling li e a u e e e s o a la ge a ie y o modeling ap-
p oaches and echniques employed in he s udy o di e en DG/PG
ela ed ques ions.
Fi s , models can be di e en ia ed on he basis o he school o
economic hough hey d aw on. We ound ha pos -Keynesian (e.g.
ID12, 19, 20, 40) and neoclassical (e.g. ID9, 17, 21) heo ies a e well
ep esen ed in he modeling li e a u e while he e was only one pape
using classical economics (Obe holze , 2023) and no pape elied on
Ma xis schools o hough o conduc modeling s udies. Also, some
wo ks d ew on s a is ical echniques (ID6, 57, 66) o used inpu -ou pu
(IO) analysis as heo e ical amewo k (ID11, 27).
Second, models use di e en me hods o ep esen he sys ems hey
a e in e es ed in: Biophysical ep esen a ion is achie ed h ough LCA,
physical (ene gy) low accoun s o en i onmen ally ex ended IO ables
(e.g. 33, 42, 46), while he mone a y dimension o eali y can be ep-
esen ed h ough ools such as s ock- low consis en modeling (e.g.
ID14, 15, 19). Sys em dynamics and agen -based modeling a e wo
4
In he la e case, his does no mean ha he wo d ‘DG’ is absen in he
s udies bu ha i is clea ha he concep o ‘pos -g ow h’ is he main poin o
e e ence. See e.g. Jackson and Vic o (2011).
A. Laue e al.
Ecological Economics 227 (2025) 108383
4
gene ic ools o en used o ackle he complexi y o he sys ems unde
s udy (e.g. 13, 31, 64, 75).
Thi d, we ound ha modele s o en combine di e en app oaches,
such as pos -Keynesian heo y, IO analysis and sys em dynamics, o
build hei models (e.g. ID31, 36, 39, 60). Howe e , un il now only one
pape (Jackson e al., 2023) has added s ock- low consis ency on op o
he h ee app oaches, he eby ea u ing he 4 cha ac e is ic echniques
o ecological mac oeconomic modeling iden i ied by Ha d and O’Neill
(2017).
Las , ac oss all e iewed s udies, simula ions a e employed wi h
g ea equency since hey allow he s udy o ime-dependen sys ems.
Al hough he ime pe iods o he simula ions a y g ea ly, simula ions
co e ing mo e han 100 yea s only make up 11 % o he simula ions,
while mos simula ions a e sho e han 50 yea s (43 %), be ween 50
and 75 yea s (26 %) o co e be ween 75 and 100 yea s (19 %). While
he g ea majo i y o simula ions un olds h oughou he 21s cen u y,
he e a e also six pape s (ID12, 23, 43, 56, 71, 74) ha use abs ac ime
uni s o ‘yea s’ wi hou e e ing o a speci ic ime pe iod (Fig. 3).
Mo e in o ma ion on modeling cha ac e is ics (use o empi ical da a,
scena ios, model names e c.) is p o ided in Tables S1 – S3 o he Sup-
plemen a y Ma e ial.
3.1.5. Ope a ionaliza ion o DG/PG
The he e ogenei y o modeling app oaches ansla es in o a g ea
di e si y wi h ega d o how ‘DG/PG’ is ope a ionalized and in oduced
in he di e en models. In models whe e key aspec s o he economic
sys em like g ow h in GDP, consump ion, esou ce demand o wo king
ime a e exogenous a iables, hese a iables can be se o ze o o o
nega i e alues by he model use (e.g. ID23, 65). Models in which
demand is based on u ili y unc ions can in oduce DG/PG by modi ying
his unc ion so ha economic ac o s display ‘sa ie y’ beha io (e.g.
ID24, 70). In o he models which do no use u ili y unc ions bu whe e
key aspec s o he economic sys em a e endogenously p oduced, DG/PG
dynamics can esul o ins ance om in oducing bo h cons ain s on
ene gy a ailabili y and ene gy in ensi y educ ions o by educing GDP
g ow h a ge s (e.g. ID36, 13, 49, 54). Las , cons uc ing DG/PG sce-
na ios allows modele s o sys ema ically compa e ‘DG/PG’ ansi ions
wi h ‘business-as-usual’ scena ios o al e na i e s a egies (such as
G een G ow h) o achie e sus ainabili y.
Ne e heless, he implemen a ion o DG/PG o en emains simplis ic
compa ed o he complexi y o a DG/PG ansi ion in eali y, which is
explici ly acknowledged by some modele s (e.g. Li e al., 2023).
3.2. Linking DG/PG modeling and heo y
3.2.1. Changes in GDP and socio-economic me abolism o e ime
Analyzing how GDP and he socio-economic me abolism
( h oughpu ) changes in he e iewed s udies a i ms he hypo hesis
aised in he quali a i e li e a u e acco ding o which ‘DG’ s esses he
downscaling o bo h GDP and h oughpu while ‘PG’ does no neces-
sa ily consis o absolu e educ ions (sec ion 2.2): Al hough ‘DG’ ela ed
s udies di e in hei desc ip ions o ‘DG’, anging om DG as olun a y
equi able downscaling (majo i y o s udies), ‘pa adigm’ (ID25 & 51) o
g ass oo mo emen (Millo e al., 2018) o he de elopmen o mo e
u al and de- echnologized economies (Lallana e al., 2021), in he g ea
majo i y o hese s udies ‘DG’ dynamics a e exp essed in he models
h ough educ ions in GDP (48 pape s) and/o educ ions in he socio-
economic me abolism (36 pape s) (Table 1).
In con as , in mos ‘PG’ ela ed s udies GDP g ow h a es a e low o
ze o (13 pape s). The pape s e e ing o bo h concep s end o model
nega i e g ow h a es and educ ions in h oughpu al hough ze o
g owing GDP and h oughpu a e also p esen . Two no able ou lie s
om hese pa e ns a e A amendia e al. (2023) and Bas in and Cassie s
(2013) ha make e e ence o a sh inking me abolism while GDP
g ow h a es app oach ze o. Analogously o he ‘G een G ow h’
discou se (Van Vuu en e al., 2017), his unde s anding assumes a
ce ain deg ee o decoupling be ween g ow h and h oughpu .
Fig. 2. O e iew o basic cha ac e is ics o he analyzed pape s. (a): E olu ion o o al publica ions o e ime, (b) Geog aphical scope o he modeling exe cises, (c)
Model dimensions.
A. Laue e al.
Ecological Economics 227 (2025) 108383
5
3.2.2. In en ionali y o DG/PG
We ind elemen s o in en ionali y and unin en ionali y o economic
downscaling in bo h DG and PG ela ed modeling s udies, illus a ing
ha modele s use he e ms bo h in hei ‘mains eam’ and ‘ ans-
o ma i e’ meanings (c . sec ion 2.2). Among he DG ela ed modeling
exe cises, a su p isingly high sha e (12 ou o 53 pape s) po ay unin-
en ional ‘DG’ dynamics.
5
Mos o hese s udies ha e in common ha
hey inco po a e some biophysical limi s o g ow h in hei models,
which d i es he economy o educe i s size. These limi s include
inc easing sca ci y o ossil uels (ID22, 49, 54, 4) and clima e damages
des oying p oduc ion and capi al (e.g. ID26, 28, 75). Some s udies
explici ly es ablish a link be ween clima e damages and inancial in-
s abili ies ha migh lead o a collapse o he global economy (e.g. ID55,
20, 67).
The g ea majo i y o DG s udies, howe e , unde s ands DG as an
in en ional ansi ion p ocess in ol ing di e en social, ecological and
economic policies. P ecisely o a oid a “DG by disas e ” (Kuhnhenn
e al., 2020, p. 9), he li e a u e makes an e o o design iable an-
si ion pa hways (e.g. ID11, 13, 30) and o e alua e di e en policy in-
s umen s ha migh a o such pa hways (e.g. ID50, 18, 24). S udies on
‘DG’ pa hways in he Global No h unambiguously s ess he ad an ages
o ‘DG’ since i educes he necessa y a e o echnological inno a ion
and p og ess such as nega i e emission echnologies (Kuhnhenn e al.,
2020; Se s, 2022) o ene gy e iciency (D’Alessand o e al., 2020) while
simula ions wi h a global scope poin o he isk ha a global ‘DG’
ansi ion o each clima e goals could esul in an inc ease o ex eme
po e y (Moye , 2023).
In con as , in he case o he PG ela ed s udies he line be ween
in en ionali y and unin en ionali y ge s blu ie . In h ee pape s
(Ca aneo e al., 2016; Ha ley e al., 2020; Jackson and Vic o , 2018),
‘PG’ is linked o he empi ically obse able phenomenon o declining
g ow h a es in indus ialized coun ies. Whe he hese a e ela ed o
biophysical limi s o g ow h emains an open ques ion. Thus, he pos -
g ow h wo ld e lec ed in low o ze o (possibly e en nega i e) g ow h
is assumed o be an ex e nally imposed eali y. Consequen ly, hese
s udies ocus on he modeling o policies ha educe inequali y and
main ain o inc ease employmen in a PG wo ld, i.e. an in en ional
adap a ion o ex e nally imposed limi s o g ow h. In a ou h s udy
(Jackson e al., 2023), PG could be unde s ood bo h as imposed eali y
as well as a ansi ion p ocess owa d mo e sus ainabili y. The case o
Janischewski (2021) is also in e es ing, gi en ha he au ho models he
po en ial unin ended side-e ec s, namely a s ock ma ke c ash, o an
in en ional pos -g ow h ansi ion mo i a ed by s ingen clima e mi i-
ga ion, demons a ing ha he dis inc ion be ween in en ionali y and
unin en ionali y canno always be upheld. Howe e , in he emaining 11
pape s, PG is clea ly ela ed o a desi able ansi ion p ocess simila o
‘DG’ in he sense ha i is in en ional and ha i should imp o e social
and en i onmen al condi ions. Fo example, Jacques e al. (2023) ind
ha slowe g ow h a es acili a e a apid ene gy ansi ion in line wi h
he 1.5 ◦C goal, and, hus, a gue o an (in en ional) PG ansi ion wi h
espec i e policies. Simila ly, A amendia e al. (2023) who ope a ion-
alize a PG scena io h ough declining GDP g ow h a es, ind ha in a PG
pa hway, he ene gy consump ion o he mining indus y is h ee o i e
imes lowe compa ed o con en ional g een g ow h scena ios.
Las , all six s udies ha canno be ma ched unequi ocally wi h one
discou se, po ay DG/PG as in en ional ansi ion p ocess.
Thus, he dominan app oach o he modeling o bo h DG and PG
consis s in ocusing on an in en ional s abiliza ion o educ ion o GDP
and h oughpu .
3.2.3. Compa ibili y wi h capi alism
Al hough he e a e some clea s a emen s in he heo e ical li e a u e
wi h ega d o he incompa ibili y be ween ( olun a y) DG and capi-
alism, in he DG modeling li e a u e he p oblem ba ely ecei es
Fig. 3. Time pe iod co e ed by he pape s. The lines s a ing in 2100 depic
simula ions in ‘abs ac ’ ime uni s, e.g. om ‘0’ o ‘50’ o ID12. Poin s depic
pape s wi hou a empo al analysis and only indica e he da e o hei publi-
ca ion. Excep ion: ID63 comp ises an analysis o he yea 2030.
Table 1
Numbe o pape s whose models exhibi ce ain cha ac e is ics ega ding GDP
and h oughpu /socio-economic me abolism.
Type o S udy DG PG Bo h
Nega i e GDP g ow h a es 48 3 4
Reduc ion o socio-economic me abolism 36 4 3
Low posi i e g ow h GDP a es ending o ze o 4 13 2
Low- o non-g owing me abolism 2 2 1
5
In e es ingly, also some ‘PG‘ ela ed s udies use he e m de-g ow h/
deg ow h in a con en ional way o desc ibe a educ ion in GDP while ‘PG’ is
used o desc ibe a social/s uc u al ansi ion p ocess.
A. Laue e al.
Ecological Economics 227 (2025) 108383
6
a en ion. Fo a mino i y o s udies dealing mainly wi h echnical bio-
physical ques ions (e.g. ID60,68) his is due o hei ocus on he ‘bio-
physical’ easibili y o DG/PG a he han on i s poli ico-economic
easibili y. Fo o he s udies, i migh be pa ly explained by he ac ha
complex economic models, especially when hey a e based on empi ical
da a, ine i ably ep esen he cu en capi alis eali y, and modeling
ansi ions om a capi alis o a pos -capi alis economy could p o e o
be ex emely challenging.
In only 11 DG and 5 PG ela ed modeling s udies he p oblems o a
g ow h based capi alis sys em such as ising inequali y o ecological
deg ada ion a e p oblema ized. Ou o hese s udies, only a mino i y
makes clea assump ions ha migh be incompa ible wi h capi alism
such as a democ a iza ion o economic decision-making (Kuhnhenn
e al., 2020), o highligh s he ex eme di e ence be ween ins i u ions in
he cu en and a po en ial u u e economic egime which would likely
no be desc ibed as ‘capi alis ’ anymo e (B iens, 2015; Keyße and
Lenzen, 2021). The pape which aises he clea es doub s on he
compa ibili y be ween capi alism and a olun a ily sh inking economy
is Li e al. (2023) who poin o a se ies o ba ie s and g ow h impe a-
i es in he cu en capi alis economy.
The pa o he DG modeling li e a u e ocused on olun a y
simplici y o a pa o he popula ion due o wel a e conside a ions (e.g.
ID3, 9, 17) ends o igno e he powe ul capi alis incen i es o inc ease
consump ion and he sp ead o p eca ious wo k which ende s ‘happy
deg ow h’ (Bilancini and D’Alessand o, 2012; Nø gå d, 2013) un-
hinkable o a g ea pa o he popula ion e en in iche coun ies.
Wi h he excep ion o he s udies wi h ‘unin en ional DG’, po aying he
ailu e o con inued capi alis de elopmen , DG ela ed s udies, hus,
end o a oid he ‘capi alis ’ ques ion.
Con e sely, among he s udies e e ing o ‘PG’ he e is a clea e
analy ical amewo k, which allows d awing conclusions ega ding he
u u e o capi alism unde PG. The modeling esul s o wo au ho s who
explici ly p oblema ize PG ansi ions unde capi alism (Janischewski,
2021; Obe holze , 2023), poin o po en ial ins abili ies o a PG capi-
alis egime while he o e whelming majo i y o he emaining s udies
is designed o model policies implemen ed h ough he exis ing in-
s i u ions (e.g. ID14, 38, 19, 52, 32). In none o hese s udies, he
compa ibili y wi h capi alis s uc u es is ques ioned, indica ing ha
policies designed o deal wi h a PG eali y do no need a adical de-
pa u e om he cu en economic sys em. Ba e (2018) e en a emp s
o show ha he s abili y o he capi alis sys em does no depend on i s
g ow h a e.
Thus, while modeling conce ned wi h olun a y DG ansi ions
ei he s esses he g ea s uc u al di icul ies o he changes modeled, o
a oids o discuss he ques ion, modeling conce ned wi h PG economies
no only discuss he ques ion mo e openly bu also end o ind less
di icul ies o ende ing e o mis social and en i onmen al policies
compa ible wi h exis ing economic egimes. Howe e , gi en he ela i e
sca ci y o modeling s udies explici ly p oblema izing economic s uc-
u es, and he unde ep esen a ion o ce ain s ands o economic heo y
in DG/PG modeling (e.g. Classical o Ma xis app oaches) hese esul
mus be conside ed p elimina y.
3.2.4. Ac o s o he ansi ion
E en hough many models a e in p inciple capable o ep esen ing
ac o he e ogenei y and e en con lic s o in e es be ween ac o s,
especially be ween di e en economic subjec s such as wo ke s and
capi alis s o di e en income g oups (e.g. ID17, 19, 31, 32, 51), he
ques ion o s a egic ac o s ha could ini ia e and implemen DG/PG
emains unde explo ed in he e iewed pape s. Fo example, di e en
social g oups o ac o s wi h di e en o ganiza ional capaci ies and
powe esou ces such as social mo emen s, business associa ions,
mul ina ional companies, ac i is s o co po a e media a e no ably ab-
sen in he modeling exe cises. Ins ead, many models ep esen he so-
cie y and he economy a highly agg ega ed le els, he eby hiding socio-
economic di e si y o ac o s (e.g. ID2, 7, 13, 16, 22, 28, 37, 41). In he
modeling o decen alized DG/PG ansi ions ac o s a e educed o hei
oles as anonymous pa icipan s in he economy (e.g. ID9, 17) while
mos models employ a op-down app oach h ough he in oduc ion o
ce ain DG/PG policies wi hou aking in o accoun di e en in e es
g oups shaping he s a e’s policies. Thus, he po en ial o modeling o
en ich he heo e ical deba e on key ac o s o he ansi ion has no ye
been ansla ed in o conc e e modeling esul s.
3.2.5. Policies
While 21 modeling s udies do no include any policies, ei he
because hey model ‘unin en ional’ DG/PG dynamics o because hey
deal wi h abs ac p oblems, he emaining 54 s udies aim o in es iga e
he e ec s o he in oduc ion o ce ain policies in hei models. Fig. 4
shows he policies ound in hose s udies, as well as he equency wi h
which hey appea . The di e en names o policy measu es wi h
essen ially he same con en we e homogenized, using as e e ence he
lis o DG/PG policy p oposals de eloped by Fi zpa ick e al. (2022),
since i is he mos ecen and comp ehensi e me a s udy on DG/PG
policy p oposals known o he au ho s. Policies no men ioned by Fi z-
pa ick e al. we e homogenized acco ding o he mos equen ly used
denomina ions. Also, we only conside ed public policies ha can be
expec ed o be ealized by public ac o s and ins i u ions.
The policies modeled wi h he g ea es equency a e hose e med
‘co e policies’ by Fi zpa ick e al. (2022) and comp ise a Maximum
Income Cap, Wo king Time Reduc ion, Uni e sal Basic Income and
declining caps on esou ces use and emissions. Toge he , hey we e
modeled 42 imes, which is he same equency as all he anspo , ood
and housing policies oge he . Two o he policy ypes equen ly
modeled we e axes (on ca bon, ene gy, p o i , weal h, income e c.) and
subsidies (mos ly o he de elopmen o g eene ene gy), as well as
policies p omo ing s uc u al change owa d g een o low labo p o-
duc i i y sec o s.
Fo he policies we ind a simila ela ionship o DG/PG ela ed
heo y ac oss all pape s: On he one hand, he s udies o en ocus on
s uc u al and echnological change/imp o emen s alongside he o en
s essed edis ibu ion and economic downscaling. Examples o such
policies a e inc eased ecycling a es, ene gy e iciency gains o nega i e
emission echnologies. Especially he la e , oge he wi h a s ong ocus
on public policies such as g een quan i a i e easing o s ong public
in es men s in he ene gy sec o , could be iewed wi h skep icism by
‘DG’ ac o s opposing nega i e emission echnologies and ad oca ing o
small communi y-owned, sel -su icien ene gy sys ems (c . Fi zpa ick
e al., 2022 and Fig. S.1 - S.3, Supplemen a y Ma e ial).
On he o he hand, policies p oposed by he quali a i e li e a u e and
equi ing majo b eaks wi h he exis ing socio-economic sys em, such as
common p ope y, no - o -p o i coope a i es, ime-based cu encies,
communi y-based en e p ises, legisla ion on he igh s o na u e,
mo a o ia on esou ce ex ac ion o he disman ling o la ge co po a-
ions, a e missing in he modeling exe cises. Explo ing such policies
would likely equi e majo changes in he e y s uc u es o he
cu en ly used models.
Las , we ind ha policies a e dis ibu ed a he unequally o e he
e iewed s udies: The 10 pape s (ID11, 27, 39, 60, 2, 21, 29, 35, 38, 50)
wi h he highes numbe o policies (be ween 6 and 22 policies modeled
pe pape ) accoun o mo e han hal o all modeled policies. The o he
hal is sp ead o e he emaining 39 pape s, o which 18 pape s only
model a single policy.
4. Discussion
Ha ing analyzed how selec ed aspec s o he heo e ical deba e
ega ding DG/PG a e e lec ed and ope a ionalized in modeling s udies,
in he ollowing we discuss achie emen s and limi a ions ac oss all
s udies, as well as he oppo uni ies o bo h u u e heo e ical and
modeling wo k a ising om ou li e a u e e iew.
A. Laue e al.
Ecological Economics 227 (2025) 108383
7
4.1. Achie emen s o DG/PG modeling
The modeling o DG and PG is a dynamically, apidly e ol ing a ea o
esea ch. Modeling wo k has been able o shed ligh on a ange o
di e en heo e ical ques ions abou deg owing and non-g owing
economies, including he en i onmen al (emissions, ene gy, ma e ial,
land) (ID36, 37, 39) and socioeconomic impac s (disposable income,
inequali y, e c.) (ID14, 24, 25, 32, 51) o DG and PG ansi ions, he a e
o economic g ow h/deg ow h compa ible wi h di e en socie al goals
(ID35 & 62), he in e ela ion be ween esou ce cons ain s and eco-
nomic g ow h (ID13, 22, 49), he ela ion be ween DG/PG and inancial
ma ke s (ID67, 43, 55) as well as he implica ions o a ange o di e en
policy packages (ID11, 29, 36).
O e he yea s, he scope o DG as well as PG modeling has been
ex ended o coun ies and egions p e iously no co e ed. Equally, he
numbe o models used o conduc esea ch on DG and PG con inues o
g ow, which inc eases he di e si y o me hodological ools used o
esea ch de- and pos -g ow h- ela ed p oblems.
Modeling exe cises in eg a e and emphasize di e en economic as-
pec s o DG/PG (GDP, socio-economic me abolism…) and e lec
di e en posi ions ega ding he in en ionali y o DG/PG and i s ela ion
o he cu en economic sys em. This no only illus a es he di e si y o
exis ing in e p e a ions o DG/PG bu can also p omp schola s o
acknowledge he lack o a uni o m use o hese umb ella e ms, and o
cla i y hei exac meaning. The hypo hesis hold by all models ha
u he g ow h in he socio-economic me abolism o global capi alism is
unsus ainable could he eby ac as a i s common g ound be ween
di e en DG/PG unde s andings.
Al hough modeling exe cises a e he e ogeneous and no s udy can
co e all aspec s o ‘DG’ o ‘PG’, aken oge he , hey p oduce a de ailed
and di e se pic u e o quan i ied knowledge, including policy- ele an
knowledge abou he e ec s and side e ec s o di e en en i on-
men al, social and economic policies ha migh be ele an in a ‘DG’ o
‘PG’ ansi ion.
A g ea s eng h o models, especially o models able o simula e
u u e de elopmen s, is ha hey allow hei use s o explo e a wide
Fig. 4. Policies explo ed in he e iewed modeling s udies.
A. Laue e al.
Ecological Economics 227 (2025) 108383
8
ange o ‘Wha -i ’ ques ions. ‘Wha -i ’ ques ions a e hough expe i-
men s and cons uc hypo he ical wo lds in o med by quan i a i e da a
ha allow o explo e he implica ions o di e en ajec o ies ( ypically
h ough an ex an e de ined po olio o policies), assessing and
compa ing hei e icacy. Likewise, hey help o de ec p io i ies, po-
en ial ba ie s and unin ended side e ec s, as well as syne gies and
ade-o s be ween di e en goals. The eby, models suppo he assess-
men o he easibili y o DG/PG na a i es o achie e en i onmen al
and social goals. In he e iewed s udies, bo h DG and PG ela ed
modeling exe cises in hei majo i y ind ha educed g ow h a es in-
c ease he easibili y o eaching en i onmen al goals, and do no ha e
o h ea en social goals. Modeling, hus, helps o unde s and causal
chains, which a e di icul o impossible o concep ualize gi en he
complex sys em na u e o human socie ies and he biosphe e.
Las , bo h ‘DG’ and ‘PG’ ela ed s udies ha e quan i a i ely illus-
a ed he link be ween (1) DG/PG, (2) Well-being objec i es (se ice
p o isioning, inequali y, e c.) (e.g. ID46, 35, 62) and (3) biophysical
limi a ions (clima e change, ene gy es ic ions, ma e ials a ailabili y,
e c.) (e.g. ID13, 31, 36, 39, 60). The eby modeling exe cises ha e
b oadened he imagina ion space o socie y and scien is s alike and
e ealed he allacies o inconsis encies o di e en ideas abou sus-
ainabili y ela ed socie al and economic changes.
4.2. DG/PG modeling weaknesses
The cu en ield o DG/PG modeling, howe e , also exhibi s some
sho comings ela ed o he models’ scope and s uc u e. Fo example,
he impo an ques ion o who would be he key agen s o change o he
DG/PG ansi ion (e.g. cen al go e nmen s e sus g ass oo mo e-
men s) is la gely le unadd essed. Models also ace se ious s uc u al
limi a ions o implemen he ex emely he e ogeneous and ine-g ained
exis ing DG policy p oposals, and o en ocus on a ew selec ed policies
a he han simula ing he e ec s o a la ge ange o policies ac ing a
di e en ime and geog aphic scales (c . sec ion 3.3).
Al hough modeling exe cises in p inciple ha e he po en ial o cla i y
deba es abou he scale o necessa y educ ions in he socio-economic
me abolism o socie ies ha would be compa ible wi h a DG pa adigm
(T aine , 2021), many o he analyzed modeling exe cises a oid he
‘p oblem o scale’ (Daly, 1992) ei he because hey do no p oduce
quan i a i e esul s o because hey do no indica e whe he he ou pu s
o hei simula ions in e ms o ene gy and GDP would be ‘sus ainable’ in
he long un (e.g. ID14, 25, 34, 58, 62). Excep ions wi h ega d o ene gy
a e Lallana e al. (2021) and Kuhnhenn e al. (2020), indica ing ha a
‘sus ainable’ global inal ene gy consump ion migh be ~200 EJ/yea .
Howe e , since hese s udies ocus on only one plane a y bounda y,
especially clima e change, and end o assume op imal condi ions o a
ansi ion (op imal planning, e iciency gains), hey p obably o e -
es ima e he ‘ eal sus ainable’ scale o human economic ac i i ies.
Fu he mo e, al hough he s udies wi h a global scope gene ally end
o di e en ia e be ween economic de elopmen in he Global No h and
Sou h, i seems ha he modeling li e a u e has no ye aken in o ac-
coun ecen ad ances in he quali a i e li e a u e ha heo ize on he
pe inence o ‘PG’ in he Global Sou h (e.g. Adi yanandana and Ge be ,
2019; Bish , 2022; Gab iel e al., 2019; Ge be and Raina, 2018). These
schola s poin ou ha cu en g ow h-based de elopmen in he Global
Sou h is unsus ainable and does no ocus on he ul ilmen o basic
needs o he Global Sou h’s popula ions. Modeling exe cises o en
neglec (in e )dependencies be ween co e and pe iphe al coun ies
(Ka z, 2022) as well as di e ences be ween Global No h and Sou h
ega ding his o y, cul u e and li ing condi ions (Rod íguez-Labajos
e al., 2019). Also, none o he pape s ha di e en ia e be ween Global
No h and Sou h akes in o accoun he g ea he e ogenei y o he
coun ies classi ied as Global Sou h o ‘de eloping’. Those pape s
gene ally assume ha he Global Sou h will g ow i s GDP while he
Global No h will educe i , in o de o achie e global con e gence
(ID13, 34, 58). O he app oaches assume global GDP deg ow h (e.g.
ID41 o 72) wi hou comple e con e gence. Howe e , in bo h cases i
emains unclea which kind o s uc u al economic de elopmen he
coun ies o he Global Sou h would ealize in such u u es.
These sho comings mus be in e p e ed in he con ex o mo e
undamen al limi a ions modeling s udies ace, such as (i) he need o
ecu o exogenous a iables whe eas in he eal wo ld all a iables a e
endogenously e ol ing; (ii) ba ie s o quan i y non-mechanis ic aspec s
such as social beha io s; (iii) unce ain ies and igno ance abou he
u u e o he social wo ld ( he e olu ion o ins i u ional amewo ks,
cul u al no ms, e c.) and biophysics (clima e ipping poin s, Ea h’s
clima e sensi i i y, ma e ial endowmen s, e c.); (i ) da a a ailabili y
and compu a ional limi a ions, and las ( ) he dependence on modele
decisions and subjec i i ies (Meadows, 1999; Meadows e al., 2004;
S e man, 1991; S e man, 2000). Thus, despi e hei impo ance in
in o ming policymake s, modeling esul s should no be con ounded
wi h p edic ions, no should poli ical decision-making be based
comple ely on pa icula model ou comes. Ra he , in he e a o unce -
ain y and pos -no mal science (Fun owicz and Ra e z, 1994) quan i-
a i e esul s should be complemen ed by quali a i e esea ch and
pa icipa o y p ocesses.
4.3. Sugges ions o u he wo k
Fu he wo k in he ield o PG/DG could ad ance in se e al di-
ec ions: (1) imp o ing modeling, (2) imp o ing heo e ical li e a u e
and (3) complemen ing/expanding he e iew o PG/DG wo ks con-
duc ed in his a icle.
Ou analysis has shown ha , despi e he di e si y o exis ing in-
e p e a ions and ope a ionaliza ions o DG and PG, he modeling
li e a u e mi o s he di e en s andpoin s aised on ‘DG’ and ‘PG’ dy-
namics in he heo e ical li e a u e wi h ega d o concep ual di e ences
be ween he concep s as well as hei in en ionali y, compa ibili y wi h
capi alism and policies o be implemen ed. Resea che s in e es ed in
con ibu ing o he e ol ing ‘DG’ and/o ‘PG’ modeling ield, could
ocus mo e on he Global Sou h, o example by di e en ia ing be ween
economic classes globally and wi hin coun ies, inc easing he models’
egional de ail, and explo ing pa icula policy p oposals ha we e
de eloped speci ically o he social, economic and cul u al eali ies in
coun ies o he Global Sou h (Bish , 2022; Ge be and Raina, 2018).
These p oposals align wi h he need o pay mo e a en ion o ba ie s
and key agen s o a DG/PG ansi ion, conside egional he e ogenei ies
and ealize s uc u al changes in exis ing quan i a i e economic models
in o de o ep esen di e en sus ainabili y pa adigms. Since agen -
based models (ABMs) acili a e he ep esen a ion o ac o he e ogene-
i y, linking ABMs wi h biophysical models could cons i u e a me hod o
add ess hese cu en blind spo s. Addi ionally, conside ing mo e han
one plane a y bounda y (S e en e al., 2015) could p oduce mo e
ealis ic sus ainable scales o he wo ld economy, and, hus, cla i y,
whe he a sus ainable economy equi es a s ong ‘deg ow h’ o cu en
GDP le els o whe he a ‘pos -g ow h’ condi ion o low o ze o g ow h
would be iable. Howe e , inc easing he numbe o dimensions and
plane a y bounda ies could come wi h conside able modeling and
compu a ional (i.e. excessi e simula ion imes) challenges, p incipally
due o da a a ailabili y issues and he need o gua an ee in e nal con-
sis ency in in e disciplina y models. Also, g ea unce ain ies wi h e-
ga d o he long- e m esilience o he Ea h sys em and limi s o sec o al
ene gy e iciency gains could obs uc he modeling o long- e m sus-
ainable scales o he socio-economic me abolism.
Resea che s in e es ed in ad ancing he quali a i e li e a u e on al-
e na i es o g ow h migh ake he indings o ou compa a i e e iew
as mo i a ion o u he cla i y he concep ual di e ences be ween ‘DG’
and ‘PG’ in o de o educe he con usion c ea ed by he simul aneous
use o mul iple ela ed e ms. A close collabo a ion be ween modele s
and heo e icians could lead o modeling s udies wi h a s ong
g ounding in di e en heo ies o social change explo ing pe inen
ques ions o bo h academia and socie y.
A. Laue e al.
Ecological Economics 227 (2025) 108383
9
