Degrowth Aotearoa New Zealand

Fertility Trends and Environmental Toxicity

Tue, 29 Jul 2025 20:23:10 -0700

Fertility trends globally are experiencing a significant decline, with the world fertility rate plummeting to its lowest levels in modern history, according to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). There are challenges that arise as a direct result, including increasing pronatalism, compromised rights of future generations, and reproductive justice.

Determinants of decreasing fertility rates include access to education for girls and women, improved contraceptive use, economic constraints, shifts in societal values and expectations, and environmental factors. Exposure to environmental toxins, such as endocrine disrupting chemicals and pesticides can interfere with hormonal balance, disrupt ovulation, and impair sperm quality.

Prof. Shanna Swan, a renowned environmental and reproductive epidemiologist, has dedicated her career to studying the impact of environmental chemicals on reproductive health. Her work reveals alarming and increasing trends in declining sperm counts, diminished fertility, and birth defects.

Environmental toxicity can impact reproductive health in various ways, including:

1....Read More

A World Action Plan for the Global Polycrisis?

Mon, 26 Aug 2024 19:09:18 -0700

A World Action Plan for the Global Polycrisis?

Piers Locke, PhD

What if we recognised that addressing climate change as a singular problem obstructs understanding of the global polycrisis we face, and therefore also the possibility of developing a coherent response?

Over the last several decades the problem of anthropogenic climate change has come to saturate our consciousness. It penetrates our awareness through scientific proclamations, policy promises, protest actions, and, of course, lived experience. It’s in our politics, it’s impacting our economies, and it mobilises civic action. A vast apparatus of institutional initiatives and policy mechanisms has emerged to address it. You may be reassured that the problem has acquired social momentum, even if you are frustrated by how inadequate action has been. But what if the singular focus on climate change itself is a problem?

It’s not hard to realise that climate change is but one aspect of abroader global ecological crisis even if prevailing institutional action does not tend to reflect that. For instance, in the Planetary Boundaries framework,...Read More

Dark Times Academy interview with Dr Piers Locke discussing the new course on overshoot, risk and transition

Wed, 31 Jul 2024 20:06:29 -0700

DTA: Your class is titled Future thriving: Biophysical limits, systemic risk, and meeting the challenge of post-growth transition. What do you think is the most important thing for people to know about Future Thriving?

Piers: There’s quite a lot going on in that title! But it all points to some fundamental things about the predicament of being human in a world struggling to cope with the pressures we put on it and each other. You could say it points to a slow-motion emergency we’re struggling to speak about and take action on. Amidst that struggle though there is wisdom, knowledge, and voices worth listening to- the voices of those who are trying to imagine and plan our way out of this predicament. And I think those voices need to find each other, learn from each other, and take strength from each other.

More specifically, the course is about the planetary limits organised human life is breaching, the direct and indirect risks and consequences they are producing, and attempts to mitigate them by rethinking how we organise our lives. I find all this simultaneously scary, fascinating, and inspiring. So, I think the most important thing for students to know about this course is that it’s not just an opportunity to better understand the problems we face, or to appreciate attempts to develop solutions, but also to apply this understanding to themselves, their communities, and their purposes.

I remember when Mandy Henk introduced me to Chris Shaw’s Liberalism and The Challenge of Climate Change. I admit, I was unfamiliar with his book, even though I am familiar with the global warming misinformation watchdog DeSmog, of which he is a director. I was giving a class on geoengineering for her climate disinformation course, and I was impressed by what he says about the inadequacy of our political order for addressing climate change.

Chris begins his book by reminding us of the difference between what you can read in the scientific reports of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and what gets translated into international climate policy. He tells us that in 2022 the IPCC concluded that;

“targeting a climate resilient, sustainable world involves fundamental changes to how society functions, including changes to underlying values, world-views, ideologies, social structures, political and economic systems, and power relationships.”

Given what makes it into their summaries for policy makers, and the international resolutions made at the Conferences of the Parties (COPs), some people may be surprised to learn that at least some scientists writing for the IPCC consider such profound societal transformation as necessary. Afterall, the technocratic language of decarbonization, emissions reductions, and Net Zero targets is much more common; all framed to suggest that we need not abandon the system that produced the crisis, but can instead just make some corrective tweaks.

For Chris Shaw...Read More

Intergenerational Justice and the Imperative for Degrowth

Fri, 12 Jul 2024 03:04:31 -0700

Intergenerational justice demands that we prioritise the wellbeing and prosperity of future generations, ensuring a safe and thriving planet for those yet to come. However, our current economic system, predicated on growth and consumption, undermines this principle. The imperative for degrowth emerges as a necessary corrective to address the injustices perpetuated by our growth-oriented economy.

The pursuit of growth has led to rampant resource depletion, environmental degradation, and climate change, compromising the very foundations of life on Earth. This trajectory disproportionately burdens future generations, who will inherit a degraded planet and face unprecedented challenges. By prioritising growth over sustainability, we violate the principles of intergenerational justice, sacrificing the future for short-term gains.

Degrowth, in contrast, offers a path towards a more equitable and sustainable future. By
reducing consumption and production, we can:

1. Mitigate climate change and environmental degradation

2. Preserve natural resources for future generations

3. Redistribute wealth and resources more equitably

4. Foster a culture of sufficiency and well-being over materialism

Intergenerational Justice and the Failure of Ethics

Thu, 11 Jul 2024 19:12:57 -0700

Intergenerational justice, the principle of ensuring a safe and thriving planet for future generations, has been consistently neglected, revealing a profound failure of ethics. Despite recognising the moral obligation to protect the vulnerable, we have failed to extend this duty
to those who come next.

The ethical frameworks that guide human behavior, such as consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics, have proven insufficient in addressing intergenerational justice. These frameworks prioritise the interests of the present generation, neglecting the long-term consequences of our
actions.

The failure of ethics is evident in:

1. Climate change: despite knowing the devastating impact of our carbon footprint and destruction of nature, as a society we continue to prioritise short-term gains over care for the future.

2. Resource depletion: we exhaust natural resources, imperiling the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

3. Environmental degradation: we pollute and destroy ecosystems, compromising the health and wellbeing of those to come.

This ethical failure stems from a narrow focus on individual rights and interests, neglecting the collective and long-term implications of our actions. It also reflects a flawed understanding of human flourishing, prioritising material prosperity over the wellbeing of life and the planet.

Food Security 101: Part 8 Visions for Local Food Systems

Mon, 17 Jun 2024 16:04:42 -0700

As mentioned in part 7, this section of the work is going to explore an aspect of Sonya Cameron’s review (‘Realising Food Secure Communities’), which explored the features of “What a better food system might look like.” The review in its entirety is a ‘must read’ if you want to be serious about building a local food system in your community. Cameron called the following six, basic features, “Visions”, that were common to most of the 39 documents she reviewed, and implies their consideration and adoption could lead to the creation of “better food systems”. They are listed and discussed below.

Local: Local is what you make ‘local’, but the core of it is, ‘By Locals, for Locals’, and
that the actions of building a local food system should also be intentionally building community resilience. This fits entirely with what we have been discussing in the 7 earlier parts of this work and stated in part 4, that, “Food Sovereignty is the pathway to Food Security”. You don’t have sovereignty without autonomy, local decision making and other forms of control,
and this can only happen locally – locality by locality - until further decisions are made for collective action with other neighbourhoods/communities. So, a big “Yes” to Cameron’s conclusion of ‘locality’. When people meet, communicate and work together for their common benefit, they build understanding and trust – the glue of strong communities.

In most hamlets, townships and larger towns (potential communities) of Aotearoa/NZ, this
approach needs to be taken a step further. I am referring to the taking back of control of local commerce. The economies of small and large towns (communities) haven’t just been raped and pillaged by Neoliberal Economic policies and the actions of ‘Free Markets’, they have been thoroughly buggered as well. The financial...Read More

Aviation Emissions, Net Zero Modelling, and Post-Growth Transition

Wed, 05 Jun 2024 19:25:14 -0700

Those committed to the transformative change of a post-growth transition have cause to cast a critical eye on Green Growth roadmaps for Net Zero. These are plans for maintaining the business of modern life in the face of climate crisis through technological and regulatory change, without reduction in material and energetic throughput, and without willingness to entertain social transformation. Ecological economist Jefim Vogel and anthropologist Jason Hickel recently conducted a study to see if high income countries have achieved Green Growth decoupling sufficient to meet Paris Agreement-level emissions reductions. They find that they have not, and are extremely unlikely to in future [1].

I recently gave a deputation to Christchurch City Council about aviation emissions in which I informed elected members of the problematic modelling of roadmaps for Net Zero aviation and their greenwishing propaganda function. I also have an academic article being published about Christchurch airport’s decarbonisation and energy transition planning.

Now I have made a submission to the Climate Change Commission regarding the proposal to include international aviation and shipping emissions within New Zealand’s 2050 targets, which I fully support. The Commission produced a well-informed consultation report for this. However, there are serious problems with the Net Zero roadmaps discussed, which do not receive sufficiently critical attention.

So what are the problems?

The Covid 19 lockdown period might have heightened our awareness, and then, the Ukrainian and Gazan crises may have pushed it to the background, but it hasn’t gone away. That’s right, I’m talking ‘food security’ –or more specifically, ‘food insecurity’. Of course, it’s a strange topic for us in Godzone, because we’re awash with food, and the notion of food insecurity in Aotearoa/NZ could even be laughable if it weren’t for the numerous and persistent food banks and the hungry kids turning up at school each day. So maybe, we have something to talk about.

However, it could be that the problem lies with how we are reading it. The United Nations defines food security as follows: “Food security exists, when all people, at all times, have physical and economic access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food to meet their dietary needs and food preferences for an active and healthy life.”

Perhaps, that’s the problem in a nutshell – in the crazy definition of ‘food security’ itself. Isn’t it a totally unrealistic expectation (and an unrealisable situation in the ‘real world’), to claim that ALL people, at ALL times, should have an adequate supply of safe and good quality food that
also satisfies their (cultural?) food preferences? It is, isn’t it? Isn’t it? And so, as per usual, it turns out that it all depends on where you make your stand.

The fact you are reading this article, and have now started the fourth paragraph, tells me
something about where you stand, so, this could pose the risk of being a...Read More

Submission to the Science System Advisory Group (MBIE)

Mon, 20 May 2024 18:55:19 -0700

Jack Santa Barbara, Ph.D Submission questions: Phase 1

Question set 1 – The Science, Innovation and Technology System.

1. What future should be envisaged for a publicly supported science, innovation and technology systems?

These systems should first and foremost be put in the service of meeting universal basic human needs, rather than economic growth. Basic needs are both material and non
material; they are satiable and independent of time and place, hence their universality. Given the current unmet basic needs of many New Zealanders (think food security, water quality,
adequate shelter, etc), this should be a priority. It is a gross misunderstanding to conflate economic growth with meeting basic human needs, hence the urgency of refocusing
priorities. At best, economic growth makes an indirect contribution to some people’s basic needs. Basic needs deserve a more direct, and inclusive focus from science and technology.

So much technical innovation has a detrimental effect on natural systems that we need a significant rethink about our science and tech policies and priorities. Tech priorities over
the past half century have contributed significantly to advanced ecological overshoot, imperilling our safety and security. Too many people are making too many demands on
natural sources and sinks – that is what advanced ecological overshoot is; the evidence is clear. Climate change, biodiversity loss and ubiquitous pollution are all symptoms of advanced ecological overshoot. Redirection of focus is critical.

2. What are the opportunities, challenges and barriers that need to be addressed to build a more thriving research, science, innovation, and technology system that delivers positive sustainable growth and prosperity for New Zealand?