Results from Barcelona 2010 on the topic

Technology and Production

The following are the results of the GAP at the Degrowth Conference 2010 in Barcelona that are particularly relevant for this working group.

The document first presents a summary, including links to other working groups (in bold & italic), and then the complete results of those Barcelona working groups with some relations to the current one.

Summary

A selective moratorium on technologies is proposed, based on their potential risks, benefits and impacts. We need at least some limits to market and profit-driven technology and innovation (e.g. internet, antibiotics, nanotechnology, genetic engineering, space travel). (infrastructure, certain type of infrastructure should be banned)

Taking into account the values of all stakeholders (democracy), the criteria for identifying the limits would be based on (indicators):

a. the degree of locality concerning resources, innovation and decision making (trade)

b. the scale in use of the technology and its the supporting infrastructure. (infrastructure, social economy)

c. the required inputs and outputs of the technology:

(environmental, monetary, energetic, etc.)

The results should be disseminated for independent and wide review. (democracy) while promoting people engagement to ratify or abrogate moratoriums (political strategies) and promoting public awareness (education, political strategies).

We need alternatives in the form of local and small scale with low start up capital and other barriers to entry (e.g. permaculture, agroecology and various social technologies).

Research is needed on the driver of innovation, or on whether socially and environmentally beneficial technologies can be developed and spread in a non-profit seeking context and way.

Working Groups from 2010 GAP in Barcelona with some connections

New technologies

A selective moratorium based on potential risks, benefits and impacts.

Research questions:

• Identify criteria (encompassing values of stakeholders) for systematically assessment, e.g. :

a. Degree of locality concerning resources, innovation and decision making

b. Scale in use of the technology and the scale of the supporting infrastructure.

c. Required inputs and outputs of the technology (environmental, monetary, energetic, etc).

• Disseminate the results of the inquiry for independent and wide review.

•  Promote public awareness of core issues.

• To promote people’s engagement to ratify or abrogate such moratorium.

Politics of New Technologies:

• New and current institutions to achieve buy-in from the broader community (including scientists and technologists). Ideological separation:

  • Technology and innovation not driven by the market could lead technological progress. For example local and small scale with low start up capital and other barriers to entry (e.g. ppermaculture, agroecology and various social technologies).

  • Technology and innovation, irrevocably entwined with markets and commercial prospects. The very need to service markets drives technology and innovation (e.g. internet, antibiotics, Genomic engineering, Space travel)

Open question:

• The question remained about how the de-growth movement can manage sustainable coexistence of commercial interests without compromising the social and environmental interests in fostering innovation and technology. How should rights on knowledge be managed in this case?

Moratoria on new infrastructures

Proposals:

• Eliminate/nationalise mega-construction companies (due to their levels of debt) that drive the building of infrastructure projects as ends in themselves.

• Some infrastructure projects must clearly be abandoned: Nuclear, ammonia production, incinerators, high speed train and large scale dams.

• Some infrastructure must be limited: highways, long distance transportation and airports.

• At the same time, transformation of some existing infrastructure must be promoted: smaller more compact cities, converting car based infrastructure to walking and cycling and open common space.

Research questions:

• Research the full life-cycle impacts and components of infrastructure materials.

Activities:

• Support social campaigns that change the imaginary of people regarding the need to travel, long distance travel, levels of consumption and production and dependence on infrastructure.

• Support communities that fight large infrastructure projects.

Zero waste

Core points:

• Responsibility to be shared in the individual, social, productive and political arena

• Proximity: production, treatment and final disposal of different wastes as local as possible

• Incentives, especially taxes as economic tools in the des-incentive of waste generation. However, reduction of waste can not be managed just with economic instruments

• Education of all social actors in order to make close not just impacts of products and kinds of treatments, but also the positive implications that zero waste initiatives have in relation to quality of life.

• Ecodesign and Cradle to Cradle, important role in the change of perspective of the waste in reuse sense.

Political proposals:

• Promotion of legal instruments to reduce waste such us taxation (on materials, in the production process) and Deposit and Refund systems enlarged to as much as possible

• Use of advertising expertise for education in reuse and reduction

• Facilitation of sharing good experiences to link good practices and good quality of life

• Encouragement of cooperative sharing to promote community based recycling and reuse methods

• Incorporation of proximity in waste regulations as a core principle

Research questions:

• Creation of an international network of agencies for life cycle analysis and waste prevention

Disagreement:

• Role to be played by corporations and private sector and how much the solutions are to be looked for in the technological and/or in the social arena

Degrowth in water consumption

• “Reapropiation of commons”: returning to public ownership and management of superficial, groundwater and desalted water at municipal level (if possible) avoiding to consider it as a commodity

• Domestic tariff systems with basic threshold for free lifeline and quota up to a ceiling threshold, established in physical blocks terms and per day per person. Heavy industrial tariff to physical parameters and thresholds

• Labelling Virtual water content (full life cycle) on all products: water points credit card

• Degrowth in water consumption is tightly related to land use planning: non-industrial agroecological approach to agrarian land and food soverignity; stop new irrigation plans and water transfer and big supply infrastructures; stop urban sprawl

• Downscaling to local sources management which enable people's empowerment: public fountains of free drink water as a symbol against fetishism of bottled water; democratic control on economy; living the river and its ecosystems; building a new water culture starting from water as life

• In conclusion, accelerate degrowth and downshift your lifestyle