IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/penwps/312411.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Post-growth and the lack of diversity in the scenario framework

Author

Listed:
  • El Skaf, Rawad

Abstract

Scenarios and pathways, as defined and used in the "SSP-RCP scenario framework", are key in last decade's climate change research and in the latest report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In this framework, Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) consist of a limited set of alternative socioeconomic futures, that are both represented in short qualitative narratives and with quantitative projections of key drivers. One important use of the computationally derived SSPscenarios is to do mitigation analysis and present a "manageable" set of options to decision-makers. However, all SSPs and derivatively SSP-scenarios in this framework assume a globally growing economy into 2100. This, in practice, amounts to a value-laden restriction of the space of solutions to be presented to decision-makers, falling short of IPCC's general mandate of being "policyrelevant and yet policy-neutral, never policy-prescriptive". Yet, the Global Economic Growth Assumption (GEGA) could be challenged and in practice is challenged by post-growth scholars. However, for post-growth mitigation scenarios to be constructed, explored, and assessed more systematically, they need to be fully integrated into the scenario framework. This is not done yet. I argue, from a philosophy of value-laden science perspective, that this should be done and propose two ways. This integration follows from and satisfies a diversity criterion, which derivatively enhances the framework's "objectivity" and the IPCC's policy-neutrality.

Suggested Citation

  • El Skaf, Rawad, 2025. "Post-growth and the lack of diversity in the scenario framework," Working Paper Series 03/2025, Post-Growth Economics Network (PEN).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:penwps:312411
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/312411/1/1918714754.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:penwps:312411. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.postgrowtheconomics.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.