Environmental decision-making within the EU: the dynamics between neoclassical economics and limits to growth

Abstract

Since knowledge about humans’ impact on the environment became available in the late 19th century, it took some time for this to become of political concern. Only at the end of the 1960s did this topic emerge on political agendas in various parts of the world. In the governmental bodies of the just-founded European Union (EU), environmental concerns started to become part of policy around this time as well. At this moment, decision-making by the EU institutions had developed to become almost solely underpinned by neoclassical economic theory. Consequently, the environmental strategy of the EU has grown to adopt a green growth approach, as opposed to the advice of environmental scientists who argue for an approach considering the limitations of the Earth.

In my thesis, I aim to get an indication of whether a change from a growth-pursuing ideology to a limits-to-growth ideology is possible by applying the theory of path dependence on the historical development of the EU’s environmental strategy. I hypothesise that, if any openings for change have occurred in the past, these openings occurred due to exogenous shocks such as economic and social pressures.

I conclude that it will be rather difficult for the EU to change their environmental strategy to a less growth-driven one. First, a limits-to-growth alternative appeared to be not present during the critical juncture at which the EU was founded. Second, none of the limits-to-growth principles has been present during the development of the EU’s environmental strategy. Third, the self-reinforcing mechanisms underlying the neoclassical economic ideology in the EU’s environmental strategy appear to be very strong. Not only are they suggesting that the institutional pattern of the EU needs to serve the overall economic system on which the EU was initially founded; they also indicate that the growth-enhancing beliefs of the EU are fuelled by the sustainable growth ideology from influential parties such as the United Nations and the Brundtland Commission.