| Chapter 1: | Ecological Economics as a Transdisciplinary Approach to Sustainability |
|
|
that arises is that most production modes of economics do not take cognizance of biophysical laws and principles (Cleveland et al., 1984; Daly, 1973; Georgescu-Roegen, 1971; Hall, 2000). Economists do not seem to have developed holistic concepts of sustainability based on the functioning of the interdependent parts of systems, even though input-output analysis and general equilibrium analysis have become part of their standard tools (Tisdell, 1999). As Schumacher (1974) argued in his book Small Is Beautiful, economists tend to suffer from ‘a kind of metaphysical blindness’ which leads them to imagine ‘there is a science of absolute and invariable truth’ (p. 44) that is value free and deals with laws as immutable as the law of gravity. Social decisions based on traditional economic criteria will continue to compromise the system through so-called externalities or side effects that create more entropy (e.g., increased disorder or reduced energetic potential) in the system as a whole. This calls for alternative approaches to counter the reductionist tendencies in economic science.
In recent years, the growing economy is beginning to be placed within a larger, nonexpanding environment. The emerging ecological economics perspective has recognised the profound importance of understanding the dynamics of the biophysical systems on which economic activity depends (Turner et al., 1997). The essential meaning of ecological scarcity is that humankind's political, economic, and social life must once again become thoroughly rooted in the physical realities of the biosphere. It is important to recognise the impossibility of infinite growth within Earth's finite biosphere. Ecological economists (e.g., Daly, 1996) have defined economic growth in terms of the physical dimensions of throughput and have acknowledged that in the long run, social and economic sustainability is not possible without ecological or environmental sustainability. It is therefore essential to maintain natural capital because the relationship between natural and human-made capital is increasingly viewed as complementary rather than substitutionary (Woodwell, 1998). This requires a shift from the arrogant focus on the human control of nature to a realisation that humankind is inherently a part of nature. Accordingly, the basis of existing anthropocentric value