The Unquestioned Pursuit How Growth Conquered Our Imagination

You live in a world where "growth" isn't just a concept; it's practically an ideology. Think about it. When you hear news about the economy, what's the headline? Is the GDP growing? Are companies expanding? Is employment increasing? These aren't just metrics; they're presented as indicators of success, health, and progress. Daniel Susskind wants you to pause and truly consider just how deeply ingrained this pursuit of economic growth is, and how rarely we stop to ask why it has become the default, unquestioned objective of societies worldwide.

For decades, growth has been the universal prescription for almost every societal ill. Slow down? Boost growth. Unemployment? Stimulate growth to create jobs. Poverty? Generate growth so wealth trickles down. Need better healthcare or education? You need a bigger economic pie, which means growth. This belief is so pervasive that questioning the fundamental need for growth can feel almost heretical, like being against prosperity or progress itself. You're often labeled a pessimist or, worse, someone who doesn't understand how the world works.

Where did this intense focus come from? You can trace its modern dominance back through the 20th century. The post-World War II era, in particular, saw rapid technological advancements and a rebuilding effort that naturally led to expansion. Growth lifted vast numbers of people out of poverty, improved living standards dramatically in many parts of the world, and seemed to offer a clear, measurable path to a better future. It became synonymous with progress. The narrative was simple and compelling: bigger is better, more is better, growth solves problems. This experience cemented growth as the primary goal, not just in economics departments, but in political manifestos, corporate strategies, and even your own personal expectations for rising living standards.

Governments structured their policies around stimulating growth. Central banks adjusted interest rates with an eye on economic expansion. International institutions measured national success primarily by GDP figures. Businesses were (and are) judged on their ability to grow revenues and profits. You, as an individual, are often encouraged to focus on growing your income, your assets, your career. Growth isn't just an economic policy; it's woven into the very fabric of modern life and ambition.

The appeal of growth is understandable, even seductive. It offers a seemingly infinite frontier of possibility. It suggests that we don't have to make difficult choices about dividing a fixed pie; we can just make the pie bigger. This idea has enormous political appeal, as it avoids confrontational questions of distribution and equity, at least in theory. If everyone's income is growing, perhaps they won't complain as much about inequality. If the tax base is expanding, governments can fund public services without raising tax rates on the wealthy. It provides a rationale for investment, innovation, and risk-taking, promising rewards for individuals and society alike.

The Growth Orthodoxy

This widespread acceptance has led to what you might call the "growth orthodoxy." It's the prevailing belief that economic growth is not just desirable, but necessary and always good. This orthodoxy shapes research agendas, media narratives, and public discourse. It creates a kind of tunnel vision where alternative goals or metrics for societal well-being struggle to gain traction.

Consider the language used. We talk about "healthy" growth, "sustainable" growth (often without defining what that means), "inclusive" growth, and "pro-poor" growth. The adjective changes, but the noun – growth – remains the unwavering constant. The assumption is that we must always pursue growth, and the only debate is how to achieve it or make it slightly less harmful. We rarely question whether indefinite growth is even possible or, perhaps more importantly, whether it's still the most appropriate goal for the challenges we face today.

Susskind's starting point is to challenge this orthodoxy directly. He argues that while growth has delivered immense benefits historically, the context in which we pursue it has changed dramatically. The planet's environmental limits are becoming painfully clear. The nature of work is being transformed by technology. The social fabric is strained by inequality and political polarization. In this new context, the unquestioning pursuit of growth might not be the panacea it once seemed. It might, in fact, be exacerbating some of our most pressing problems.

This initial chapter asks you to confront your own assumptions. How much do you take the necessity of growth for granted? How often do you hear dissenting voices or serious proposals that don't center around increasing GDP? By highlighting the depth of the growth imperative in modern society, Susskind prepares you to explore the powerful promises growth has offered, but also the significant costs and limitations that are increasingly coming into view. You are invited to step back from the relentless pursuit and begin to question whether the goal we've chased for so long is still the right one for the journey ahead.

The Great Bargain The Promises and Power of Economic Expansion

Before you can truly appreciate the challenges of infinite growth, you need to understand the profound benefits it has delivered. Economic growth, particularly over the last two centuries, has been instrumental in transforming human civilization. It wasn't just a number on a spreadsheet; it was a force that reshaped lives, offering opportunities and comforts previously unimaginable to the vast majority of people. Susskind doesn't deny this history; in fact, he emphasizes the power of this "great bargain" – the implicit societal agreement that pursuing economic expansion is a worthy goal because of the tangible improvements it brings to human well-being.

Think about your own life or the lives of your grandparents compared to their ancestors a few generations back. The differences are staggering. A person born in the 18th century, or even the early 19th century, likely lived a life marked by scarcity, back-breaking labor, limited healthcare, and a high risk of premature death. Famine was a recurring threat. Basic comforts like heating, sanitation, and clean water were luxuries or entirely absent. The average life expectancy was dramatically lower than yours today.

Economic growth changed this picture fundamentally. Driven by the Industrial Revolution and subsequent technological waves, it led to unprecedented increases in productivity. Suddenly, societies could produce vastly more goods and services with less human effort. This rising tide lifted billions of people out of absolute poverty. It meant more food, better housing, access to education, and significant advances in medicine and public health. Diseases that once ravaged populations became treatable or preventable. Infant mortality rates plummeted. Life expectancies soared.

This material progress was the most visible and powerful promise of growth. It offered a path to a better life, not just for a privileged few, but for a growing proportion of the population. As economies expanded, so too did the resources available for public goods and services. Tax revenues, generated from increased economic activity, allowed governments to invest in infrastructure like roads, bridges, and communication networks. They could build schools, expanding literacy and educational attainment. They could establish healthcare systems, providing medical care that was previously inaccessible.

Consider the funding of public services. It's a crucial part of the "great bargain." A growing economy generates more income and profits, which means more tax revenue. This allows governments to spend more on education, healthcare, social welfare programs, and research without necessarily having to increase tax rates. This makes funding these vital services politically easier and more palatable. When the economic pie is growing, debates about how to slice it are often less contentious than when the pie is stagnant or shrinking. Growth offers a way to fund aspirations for a better society – cleaner cities, better care for the elderly, support for the unemployed – by simply having more resources available.

The Engines of Expansion

What drove this growth? Susskind points to several key factors that were part of the package:

• Technological Innovation: New machines, processes, and ideas constantly increased efficiency and created entirely new industries. From the steam engine to the internet, technology has been a relentless engine of expansion.
• Capital Accumulation: Investment in factories, machinery, infrastructure, and human skills provided the tools and capacity for greater production.
• Increased Labor: Growing populations and higher labor force participation added to the sheer number of people producing goods and services.
• Trade and Specialization: Expanding markets allowed for greater specialization, increasing efficiency and enabling economies of scale.
• Institutional Frameworks: The development of stable property rights, legal systems, and financial markets provided the necessary foundation for complex economic activity and investment.

These factors, working in concert, created a virtuous cycle. Innovation led to productivity gains, which increased incomes, leading to more savings and investment, funding further innovation and capital accumulation. This cycle seemed to offer a perpetual engine of improvement.

Moreover, growth offered a powerful mechanism for social mobility and individual opportunity. In a growing economy, there are more jobs, more diverse roles, and more chances for individuals to apply their skills and talents, potentially rising above the circumstances of their birth. This promise of upward mobility has been a core part of the appeal of capitalist, growth-oriented societies.

The pursuit of growth also shaped international relations and domestic politics. Countries competed on the global stage for economic dominance, measured largely by their GDP. Political leaders promised growth to their electorates, knowing that rising living standards were a key driver of public satisfaction and stability. Economic performance became a primary benchmark for governmental success or failure.

"For much of history, growth has been the best – perhaps the only – strategy for tackling poverty, improving living standards, and funding public services."

This quote encapsulates the core of the "great bargain." Growth was, for a long time, the most effective tool humanity had developed for improving the material conditions of life for large numbers of people. It wasn't perfect, and its benefits weren't always evenly distributed, but its overall impact on reducing destitution and expanding possibilities was undeniable.

However, Susskind is laying the groundwork for a crucial question: if this bargain has been so beneficial, why is it now being challenged? The reason, he will argue in subsequent chapters, is that the costs of this seemingly endless pursuit of growth are becoming increasingly apparent and potentially outweighing the benefits in certain critical areas. The context has changed, and the old solutions may be creating new, more dangerous problems. But you must first fully grasp the immense power and historical success of the growth paradigm to understand why abandoning or even moderating it is such a difficult and controversial proposition.

Hitting the Wall The Environmental Reality Check on Infinite Growth

You've seen how the pursuit of economic growth offered a powerful path to prosperity, lifting billions out of poverty and funding essential public services. This was the "great bargain" – a seemingly win-win scenario where more economic activity meant better lives. But this chapter confronts the inconvenient truth: the material progress enabled by growth came at a significant, increasingly unsustainable cost to the planet. You are now facing the reality that the Earth is a finite system, and the relentless pursuit of infinite expansion is running headfirst into ecological limits.

The engine of traditional economic growth has historically relied on extracting resources from the Earth and using energy, primarily from fossil fuels, to transform those resources into goods and services. Think about everything you use daily – your clothes, your phone, your food, your transportation, your home's heating or cooling. All of it required the input of materials and energy. As the economy grows, producing more and more, it demands ever-increasing quantities of these inputs and generates ever-increasing amounts of waste and pollution.

For a long time, the planet's capacity to absorb waste and replenish resources seemed limitless. Rivers and oceans could dilute pollution, forests could absorb carbon dioxide, and mineral deposits seemed vast. But you are now living through a period where the scale of human economic activity has grown so large that it is overwhelming the Earth's natural systems. The environmental consequences are no longer localized issues; they are global threats that jeopardize the very foundations of human civilization.

The Symptoms of Strain

Susskind details how the relentless pursuit of growth manifests in critical environmental breakdowns:

• Climate Change: Perhaps the most prominent symptom. Burning fossil fuels to power our economies releases greenhouse gases, trapping heat and warming the planet. You are already witnessing the impacts: more extreme weather events, rising sea levels, melting glaciers, and disruptions to ecosystems. This isn't a future problem; it's a present reality driven directly by the energy demands of a growing global economy.
• Resource Depletion: Many essential resources – fossil fuels, certain minerals, fresh water, fertile topsoil, fish stocks – are being consumed at rates that exceed the Earth's capacity to replenish them. This raises questions about future scarcity and the ability to maintain current levels of production and consumption, let alone increase them indefinitely.
• Biodiversity Loss: As economies expand, they convert natural habitats for agriculture, infrastructure, and urban development. Pollution, climate change, and resource extraction further degrade ecosystems. This leads to a rapid decline in the variety of life on Earth, undermining the stability and resilience of the natural systems that support us.
• Pollution: Beyond carbon emissions, industrial and agricultural activities release a wide range of pollutants into the air, water, and soil. Plastics accumulate in oceans, chemicals contaminate water supplies, and air pollution harms human health. These are direct byproducts of increased production and consumption.

These are not independent problems; they are interconnected consequences of treating the Earth as an infinite source of inputs and an infinite sink for outputs. The traditional economic models that prioritize GDP growth often fail to adequately account for these environmental costs, treating them as "externalities" – side effects outside the core economic calculation. But as you experience more heatwaves, floods, droughts, and see reports of collapsing ecosystems, you understand these "externalities" are becoming the central story.

The concept of "planetary boundaries" highlights this collision. Scientists have identified key Earth system processes – climate change, biodiversity loss, nutrient cycles, freshwater use, land-system change, etc. – for which there are thresholds or tipping points. Crossing these boundaries increases the risk of abrupt and irreversible environmental changes. Economic growth, in its current form, is pushing many of these boundaries closer to or even beyond safe operating spaces.

Can Growth Be "Sustainable"?

In response to these environmental concerns, the concept of "sustainable growth" emerged. The idea is that we can continue to grow the economy while simultaneously reducing our environmental impact through technological innovation, efficiency gains, and shifting to renewable resources. You might hear about decoupling – the hope that we can decouple economic growth from resource use and environmental degradation.

Susskind examines this possibility but also highlights the skepticism surrounding it. While there have been some successes in improving efficiency and adopting renewables, the overall global trend is still one of increasing resource use and environmental pressure as the economy continues to grow. The scale of the challenge is immense, and the pace of environmental breakdown often seems to be outpacing the pace of sustainable solutions.

Critics of "sustainable growth" argue that it's an oxymoron. They contend that a system based on perpetual expansion of material production and consumption is fundamentally incompatible with the finite nature of the planet. Even if we become much more efficient, the sheer increase in the volume of activity demanded by exponential growth can quickly overwhelm those efficiency gains – a phenomenon sometimes called the "rebound effect." For example, cars become more fuel-efficient, but people respond by driving more miles or buying larger vehicles, offsetting some of the potential environmental benefit.

The environmental crisis forces you to ask: Is the "great bargain" still a bargain when the price is the stability of the planet's life-support systems? Susskind argues that ignoring or downplaying these environmental costs is no longer viable. They are no longer distant, abstract problems; they are immediate threats that undermine the very prosperity that growth was meant to deliver. You cannot have a healthy economy, or healthy societies, on a dying planet.

This realization fundamentally challenges the unquestioned pursuit of growth. It suggests that continuing on the same path, simply aiming for "more," is leading us towards a precipice. It forces a difficult conversation about whether we can achieve genuine human well-being and progress without the constant pressure for economic expansion, and whether prioritizing environmental stability requires a fundamental rethinking of our economic goals. Having explored the benefits of growth and now its environmental limits, you are prepared to examine its social consequences.

The Uneasy Fruits Growth's Social Divides and Political Stresses

You've seen how economic growth delivered immense benefits, lifting billions from poverty, and then how its environmental costs became increasingly apparent. Now, you must look inward at societies themselves and confront another difficult truth: the fruits of growth have been profoundly unequal. While the overall pie has grown, the slices received by different groups within societies have varied dramatically, leading to widening social divides and heightening political tensions. Growth, it turns out, doesn't automatically solve problems of fairness or social cohesion; in many cases, the relentless pursuit of it has made them worse.

For decades, the promise was that a rising tide would lift all boats. The idea was that even if inequality existed, everyone's living standards would improve in absolute terms. While this was true for many in the past, the reality today is more complex. In many developed economies, despite continued aggregate growth, large segments of the population have seen their real wages stagnate or decline, their job security diminish, and their prospects for upward mobility dwindle. Meanwhile, wealth and income have become increasingly concentrated at the very top.

Think about the disconnect you might observe: headlines boasting about record stock markets or national GDP figures, while simultaneously you see rising levels of precarity, food bank usage, or unaffordable housing in your own community. This isn't just a perception; it's backed by data showing a significant divergence between the economic fortunes of the highly skilled and wealthy versus those in lower-skilled jobs or struggling to make ends meet.

Mechanisms of Unequal Distribution

How does growth lead to such unequal outcomes? Susskind points to several interconnected factors:

• Technological Change: While technology is a key driver of growth, it is also inherently disruptive. It automates routine tasks, often displacing workers in manufacturing and services. It also creates new, high-paying jobs, but these often require advanced skills or education, benefiting those who already have access to resources or human capital. This creates a "skill premium," leaving behind those whose skills are devalued.
• Globalization: The interconnected global economy, fueled by trade and capital flows, allows companies to seek the lowest labor costs and move production across borders. While this can lead to overall efficiency and growth, it puts downward pressure on wages for many workers in higher-cost economies and can exacerbate inequality between countries as well as within them.
• Financialization: A growing share of economic activity in many advanced economies is centered on finance. This can lead to increased volatility and crises, which often disproportionately impact those with fewer assets to weather economic shocks. It also tends to reward capital holders and financial professionals more generously than traditional wage earners.
• Policy Choices: Governments often make policy decisions in pursuit of growth – such as tax cuts for corporations and high earners, deregulation, or cuts to social safety nets – believing this will stimulate investment and create jobs. However, these same policies can sometimes exacerbate inequality and weaken the social support systems that might cushion the blow for those left behind by economic shifts.
• Weakening Labor Power: The decline of unions and collective bargaining in many countries has reduced the ability of workers to negotiate for a larger share of the economic gains they help create.

When these forces combine, you end up with societies where a small percentage capture a disproportionate share of the new wealth generated by growth, while others struggle. This isn't necessarily because they aren't working hard; it's because the structure of the growth-oriented economy is channeling rewards unequally.

"Even when the economic pie is growing, disputes about how it is sliced can become more, not less, intense, particularly if the slices for different groups are diverging."

This is a critical insight. The existence of growth doesn't eliminate social conflict; it can sometimes intensify it. When people feel they are contributing to economic expansion but are not sharing in the benefits, or when they see others prospering while their own situation stagnates or worsens, it breeds resentment, frustration, and a sense of injustice. This feeling is often not directed at the abstract concept of "the economy" but at political elites, corporations, or other social groups perceived as benefiting unfairly.

Social and Political Consequences

These economic inequalities have profound social and political ramifications:

• Erosion of Trust: When large segments of the population feel the system is rigged against them, trust in institutions – government, corporations, media – declines. This makes collective action and finding common ground on important issues more difficult.
• Political Polarization: Inequality fuels social division. It can exacerbate cultural and ideological divides, as economic grievances become intertwined with issues of identity and values. This often manifests as increased political polarization and gridlock.
• Rise of Populism: Populist movements often gain traction by appealing to those who feel left behind by economic changes. They offer simple, often nativist or anti-establishment solutions to complex problems, tapping into the anger and frustration caused by perceived inequality and neglect.
• Social Unrest: In more extreme cases, persistent and visible inequality can lead to social unrest, protests, and instability, as simmering resentments boil over.
• Health and Well-being Impacts: Inequality isn't just about money; it affects health outcomes, educational opportunities, and overall well-being. Living in a highly unequal society, even if you are not at the very bottom, can be stressful and damaging.

The focus on maximizing aggregate growth can sometimes lead policymakers to overlook or deprioritize these social costs. The assumption is that growth is the primary goal, and its benefits will eventually "trickle down" or can be addressed later through redistribution. However, the experience of recent decades suggests that the "trickle-down" effect is often weak, and redistribution efforts face significant political hurdles in highly unequal societies.

Furthermore, the political imperative to maintain growth can create a reluctance to implement policies that might constrain certain economic activities, even if those activities contribute to inequality or environmental damage. There's a fear that anything that slows down the growth engine will lead to job losses and reduced prosperity, making politicians hesitant to rock the boat.

So, while growth has undeniably created immense wealth and opportunities, you see clearly that it has not been a tide that lifted all boats equally. Its pursuit, particularly in its recent forms, has contributed to deep social fractures and political instability. This means that even if infinite growth were environmentally possible, you would still face the fundamental challenge of how to ensure that prosperity is shared fairly and that the pursuit of economic progress doesn't tear apart the social fabric. This social dimension adds another layer of complexity to the question of whether growth, as we currently understand and pursue it, remains a desirable or sustainable goal.

h2>Beyond the Numbers Game Deconstructing the Definition of 'Growth'

By now, you've wrestled with the powerful historical benefits of economic growth and the increasingly severe environmental and social costs it entails. But this begs a crucial question: what exactly are we talking about when we talk about "growth"? For decades, and particularly in policy circles, the term has been largely synonymous with one specific metric: Gross Domestic Product, or GDP. This chapter invites you to move beyond this narrow definition and understand why fixating on GDP is an incomplete and potentially misleading way to measure societal progress.

GDP is, in essence, the total monetary value of all the finished goods and services produced within a country's borders in a specific period. It's a measure of economic activity, of output. When politicians promise growth, they are almost always promising an increase in this number. GDP growth has become the primary yardstick by which we judge the health and success of an economy and, by extension, often a nation. But Susskind urges you to look closely at what this number captures – and, more importantly, what it leaves out.

The Blind Spots of GDP

While GDP is useful for tracking the volume of market transactions, it has significant limitations when used as a proxy for overall well-being or progress. Think about some of the things it counts or fails to count:

• It Doesn't Distinguish Quality of Output: GDP counts all market transactions equally, regardless of whether they are beneficial or harmful. Building a factory contributes to GDP. Cleaning up the pollution from that factory also contributes to GDP. Spending on healthcare because people are sick from pollution adds to GDP. Spending on security because of rising crime rates adds to GDP. It's a measure of activity, not necessarily value or desirability from a broader societal perspective.
• It Ignores Environmental Degradation: One of the most critical blind spots is that GDP treats natural resources as free inputs and pollution as a free output. Cutting down a forest adds to GDP (through timber sales), but the depletion of the natural capital and the loss of ecosystem services are not subtracted. GDP doesn't account for the costs of climate change, biodiversity loss, or resource depletion – the very environmental limits discussed in the previous chapter.
• It Doesn't Value Unpaid Work: A vast amount of economically valuable activity takes place outside the formal market economy, such as caring for children or elderly relatives, volunteering, or maintaining one's own home. None of this is typically counted in GDP, even though it is essential for societal functioning and well-being. If you hire someone to clean your house, it adds to GDP. If you clean it yourself, it doesn't.
• It Fails to Capture Distribution: GDP is an aggregate measure. A country can have high GDP growth, but if all the gains flow to a small percentage of the population while the majority see their incomes stagnate, GDP doesn't reflect this growing inequality. As you saw in the last chapter, this uneven distribution is a major source of social and political stress, which GDP growth figures simply don't capture.
• It Struggles with the Digital Economy: The rise of the digital economy presents new challenges for GDP measurement. Many valuable services, from online search engines to social media platforms and open-source software, are provided for free to the user. They create immense value and improve lives but contribute little or nothing to measured GDP. Furthermore, improvements in the quality of goods and services (a faster computer for the same price, a phone that does more) are often hard to capture accurately.
• It Doesn't Measure Well-being or Happiness: Perhaps most fundamentally, GDP was never designed to measure human happiness, health, education, social cohesion, or overall quality of life. It is a measure of economic means, not human ends. You can have a country with high GDP but low levels of reported happiness, poor health outcomes, or declining social trust.

Focusing solely on increasing this single number means that policymakers and societies might inadvertently prioritize activities that boost GDP (like building more roads, even if traffic is already bad, or encouraging consumption) over activities that genuinely improve lives but don't show up strongly in the accounts (like preserving green spaces, investing in mental health, or fostering community bonds).

"Growth, as measured by GDP, is a powerful but partial lens through which to view the world."

Susskind argues that continuing to use this partial lens as our primary guide is problematic in an era defined by environmental crises and social strains. If our measure of success is flawed, then our strategies for achieving it will likely be flawed too. Chasing GDP growth might feel like progress on paper, while simultaneously eroding the environmental and social foundations upon which genuine long-term prosperity and well-being depend.

The Need for Broader Metrics

The recognition of GDP's limitations has led to calls for alternative or complementary measures of progress. Initiatives around the world are exploring ways to include factors like environmental sustainability, social equity, health, education, and life satisfaction in national accounts or dashboards of well-being. The idea is to shift the focus from simply the volume of economic activity to the quality and purpose of that activity, and its impact on human and ecological flourishing.

This move "beyond the numbers game" of GDP is not just an academic exercise; it has practical implications for policy. If a government's primary goal is to maximize GDP, it will pursue policies that achieve that end. If, however, the goal is defined more broadly to include environmental health, reduced inequality, and improved well-being, it would logically lead to different policy choices, perhaps favoring investments in renewable energy and social programs over projects that boost GDP but harm the environment or exacerbate inequality.

Susskind uses this critique of GDP to build his case for rethinking our economic priorities. He shows that the target we've been aiming for is imperfectly defined and doesn't necessarily align with what most people would consider a truly thriving society. The environmental constraints mean that endless growth in material output is physically impossible. The social strains mean that even if it were possible, it might not lead to a better society if the benefits are not shared. By deconstructing the definition of growth, he opens the door to exploring what alternative goals we might pursue and how we might measure progress towards them in a more meaningful way. The question shifts from "How do we grow GDP?" to "What truly constitutes progress, and how do we achieve that?".

Charting New Territory Exploring Futures Beyond the Growth Paradigm

Having grappled with the limitations of GDP, the mounting environmental costs, and the persistent social inequalities associated with the relentless pursuit of growth, you are now at a critical juncture. If the traditional model of prioritizing quantitative economic expansion is reaching its limits or causing unacceptable harm, what comes next? This chapter moves from critique to exploration, inviting you to consider alternative economic futures and conceptual frameworks that prioritize different objectives. Daniel Susskind opens the door to thinking about what a society and economy might look like if perpetual growth were no longer the central, unquestioned goal.

For decades, the question was always "How do we achieve more growth?" Now, increasingly, the question is shifting to "Can we thrive without growth, or at least without prioritizing it above all else?" This is not an easy question, as the growth paradigm is deeply embedded in our institutions, expectations, and political systems, as you saw in the earlier chapters. But the environmental and social pressures are forcing a serious consideration of whether there are different paths to prosperity and well-being.

Thinking beyond growth involves challenging some fundamental assumptions about economic progress. It requires decoupling the idea of a successful society from a constantly expanding GDP. It means considering other metrics of success – things like human health, educational attainment, social connection, environmental quality, and happiness – as primary objectives, rather than assuming they will automatically follow from economic growth.

Emerging Concepts and Proposals

Various thinkers and movements have proposed alternative economic models or transitions away from the growth imperative. Susskind surveys some of these ideas, helping you understand the different visions for a non-growth or post-growth future:

• Steady-State Economy: Developed notably by Herman Daly, this concept envisions an economy that maintains a constant level of physical throughput (resource use and waste generation) while allowing for qualitative development and improvement. The focus is on living within ecological limits, prioritizing efficient resource use, durable goods, and equitable distribution within a stable ecological footprint. Economic activity exists, but it doesn't perpetually expand its material scale.
• Degrowth: This is a more radical concept, particularly prevalent in Europe, which advocates for a planned, equitable reduction in the scale of production and consumption in wealthy nations. The goal is not recession, but a deliberate transition to simpler, less resource-intensive ways of living, aimed at reducing environmental impact and increasing social equity and well-being. It emphasizes local economies, shared resources, reduced working hours, and a focus on non-material sources of happiness.
• Well-being Economy: This approach, sometimes adopted by governments (like Scotland and New Zealand), explicitly moves beyond GDP as the primary measure of success. It focuses on creating economic systems that prioritize human well-being, social justice, and environmental sustainability alongside traditional economic indicators. Policies are assessed based on their impact across these broader dimensions.
• Doughnut Economics: Developed by Kate Raworth, this visual framework proposes an economy that fits within ecological ceilings (the planetary boundaries) while ensuring that everyone has access to a social foundation of essential resources and services. The "doughnut" represents the safe and just space for humanity, operating between ecological limits and social minima. It's a model focused on meeting human needs within environmental means, rather than simply pursuing endless growth.

These concepts are not without their critics and challenges. You might immediately wonder: How do you maintain employment in an economy that isn't constantly expanding? How do you fund public services if the tax base isn't growing? How do you address poverty in developing nations if the global growth engine slows down? These are legitimate and difficult questions that proponents of post-growth ideas are actively trying to address. They often point to mechanisms like redistributive policies, job guarantees focused on social and environmental needs, and alternative forms of economic organization (like cooperatives or local currencies).

Susskind is careful not to present any one of these alternatives as a ready-made, perfect solution. Instead, he highlights them as evidence that serious thinking is already underway about how to structure economic life differently. They represent attempts to define "progress" in terms that are more aligned with ecological reality and social aspirations for equity and well-being, rather than solely focusing on the volume of economic output.

Transitioning to any of these models would involve enormous societal shifts. It would challenge ingrained consumerist cultures, require significant policy changes, and likely face fierce resistance from those whose wealth and power are tied to the current growth-dependent system. It would mean difficult conversations about limits, sharing, and redefining what constitutes a good life.

"Exploring futures beyond the growth paradigm requires not just new economic models, but a fundamental shift in our collective imagination."

This shift in imagination is key. For so long, the narrative has been that more is always better, and growth is the only path to a better future. To move beyond this, you need to be able to envision a future where prosperity is measured differently, where human flourishing is the goal, and where economic activity serves those goals within ecological constraints. It means imagining a world where cooperation might be prioritized over competition, where durability is valued over disposability, and where the health of ecosystems is seen not as an externality but as foundational to human well-being.

This chapter serves as an opening to these possibilities. It shows you that questioning growth is not synonymous with advocating for austerity or a return to poverty. Instead, it's about exploring how we can organize ourselves to live good lives sustainably and equitably on a finite planet. By introducing these alternative frameworks, Susskind sets the stage for a broader conversation about the tools and transformations needed to navigate away from the current path and towards futures that prioritize resilience, equity, and ecological health alongside meaningful human progress. It makes you consider that the future might not be about having more, but about living better within limits.

Technology Growth's Savior or Silent Saboteur?

You've traced the powerful historical link between economic growth and improving living standards, confronted the planet's hard environmental limits, wrestled with growth's unequal social outcomes, and questioned the very definition of growth itself. Now, you turn to a force often presented as both the primary driver of past growth and the potential key to future progress: technology. Daniel Susskind examines the complex and often contradictory role of technology in the story of growth, asking whether it is destined to rescue the traditional growth model or is subtly undermining its very foundations.

Historically, technological innovation has been the engine room of economic expansion. The invention of the steam engine, the development of electricity, the internal combustion engine, and the rise of computing power all dramatically increased productivity, opened up new industries, and allowed economies to produce far more with the same or fewer inputs of labor and land. This relentless march of innovation has been fundamental to the "great bargain," creating the abundance that lifted billions out of poverty and funded public services.

In the face of environmental limits, technology is often presented as the savior of the growth story. The argument is that innovation will allow us to achieve "sustainable growth" by decoupling economic activity from its environmental impact. You hear about technologies like renewable energy, carbon capture, precision agriculture, advanced recycling, and materials science creating lighter, more durable products. The hope is that we can continue to increase GDP while simultaneously using fewer resources and generating less pollution. The idea is that technology enables "more from less," allowing the economy to grow qualitatively (in terms of value and services) even if its material footprint shrinks or stabilizes.

proponents of this view point to examples of dematerialization, where the physical weight of the things we produce has decreased even as their functionality and economic value have increased (think of shifting from physical books and CDs to digital media). They argue that future technological breakthroughs will accelerate this trend, allowing us to continue the pursuit of growth without hitting hard environmental ceilings.

The Disruptive Side of Innovation

However, Susskind pivots to explore a less optimistic, or at least more complicated, aspect of technology's impact. While technology can boost productivity and offer environmental solutions, its current trajectory, particularly in the realm of automation and artificial intelligence, poses significant challenges to the traditional relationship between economic growth, work, and shared prosperity. This is where technology can look less like a savior and more like a "silent saboteur" of the traditional growth model's social contract.

Recall the discussion about inequality. Susskind highlights how new technologies, while increasing overall economic output (GDP), are increasingly concentrated in their benefits. Modern automation and AI are capable of performing tasks that previously required human cognitive skills, not just manual labor. This has led to concerns about the future of work, specifically:

• Job Displacement: As machines and algorithms become more capable, they can replace human workers in a wider range of occupations, from manufacturing floors to customer service call centers to even some professional roles. While technology has always destroyed specific jobs, in the past it has also created new jobs, often in new industries built around the technology. The concern now is whether the pace of displacement might exceed the pace of new job creation, or whether the new jobs created require skills possessed by a much smaller fraction of the population.
• Wage Stagnation and Polarization: Even for jobs that aren't fully automated, technology can put downward pressure on wages for routine tasks. At the same time, it can create "superstar" effects, where a small number of highly skilled individuals or firms capable of leveraging technology capture outsized returns. This contributes directly to the wage and wealth inequality discussed earlier, polarizing the labor market into high-skill, high-pay jobs and low-skill, low-pay jobs, hollowing out the middle.
• Increased Returns to Capital: As technology becomes a more critical input to production than labor, the returns to those who own the technology (capital) tend to increase relative to the returns to those who supply labor. This shifts the balance of economic power and contributes to the concentration of wealth.

These impacts challenge a core assumption of the traditional growth bargain: that growth translates into widespread employment and rising wages for the majority of the population. If technology allows the economy to grow, potentially even sustainably, but requires less human labor to do so, or channels the benefits disproportionately to capital owners and a skilled elite, then the link between aggregate growth and individual prosperity for most people is broken or severely weakened. In this scenario, GDP might continue to increase, but it wouldn't necessarily mean more jobs or better living standards for you and your neighbors.

"Technology, the engine of so much past growth, is simultaneously creating the possibility of decoupling economic activity from resource use and threatening to decouple it from traditional forms of human work."

This duality is central to Susskind's argument. Technology presents a path to potentially resolve the environmental tension of growth (by enabling efficiency and dematerialization), but it exacerbates the social tension (by disrupting labor markets and increasing inequality). It forces you to consider whether continued GDP growth in a highly automated, technologically advanced future will still serve the purpose of broad societal improvement that it did in the 20th century.

Technology Enabling Alternative Futures?

Yet, technology is not deterministic. Susskind also considers whether technology could be harnessed to support alternative economic models that move beyond the growth imperative. Could digital platforms facilitate more localized production and consumption? Could technology enable better resource management and sharing? Could automation free up human time for non-market activities like caregiving, community building, or creative pursuits, shifting the focus away from traditional employment and GDP? Could better data and measurement tools (enabled by technology) help us track and prioritize well-being metrics over GDP?

These are possibilities, but they require deliberate choices about how technology is developed, deployed, and governed. The current trajectory, heavily influenced by market forces that prioritize efficiency and profit maximization (often through labor reduction), seems to be pushing towards the "saboteur" scenario of concentrated benefits and displaced workers. Shifting technology's role towards enabling a more equitable and sustainable future would require different incentives, regulations, and perhaps even a fundamental rethinking of intellectual property and ownership.

Ultimately, Susskind suggests that technology's impact on the future of growth is neither fixed nor guaranteed to be positive. It holds the potential to help address environmental limits, but it also carries the risk of fragmenting societies and undermining the traditional link between economic activity and shared prosperity. The question isn't just about the technology itself, but about the economic and social systems in which it is embedded. As you contemplate the future of growth, you must critically assess how technology is shaping the very nature of work, value creation, and the distribution of wealth, recognizing that its disruptive power might necessitate a fundamental recalibration of our economic goals beyond simply chasing a growing number.

Redefining Progress What Matters When Growth Isn't Everything?

You've journeyed through the powerful narrative of economic growth – its historical triumphs, its collision with environmental reality, its uncomfortable relationship with social equity, and the complexities introduced by technology. You've also seen that the traditional measure of growth, GDP, is a limited and often misleading indicator of genuine societal progress. Now, you face the central challenge posed by Susskind: if the unquestioning pursuit of growth, as currently defined and measured, is no longer a viable or desirable goal, what should replace it? This chapter is about the necessary task of redefining what "progress" truly means in the 21st century, shifting focus from simply increasing economic activity to enhancing human well-being and ecological health.

For decades, "progress" in national discourse was largely equated with "GDP growth." Politicians campaigned on promises to increase it, economists analyzed its fluctuations obsessively, and the public was encouraged to see it as the primary sign of a healthy, advancing society. This was understandable during periods when growth was rapidly lifting large numbers out of poverty and delivering tangible material improvements. But as you've seen, that equation is breaking down. A rising GDP can now coincide with environmental degradation, increasing inequality, and stagnant well-being for many.

This forces a fundamental question: what are we actually trying to achieve as a society? Are we aiming to maximize the production of goods and services, regardless of the cost? Or are we aiming to create conditions where people can live healthy, fulfilling lives within the means of a healthy planet? Susskind argues that it's time to explicitly choose the latter and to build our economic and social systems around those broader objectives.

Moving Beyond the Monetary Metric

Redefining progress means deliberately looking beyond monetary transactions. It means recognizing that a thriving society is built on more than just economic output. What are some of the elements that constitute a truly flourishing society, and how might we measure them?

• Human Health and Longevity: Are people living longer and healthier lives? This involves access to quality healthcare, clean air and water, nutritious food, and safe living environments.
• Education and Knowledge: Is the population educated and able to access knowledge and opportunities for learning throughout life? This is about more than just years in school; it's about skills, critical thinking, and the ability to adapt.
• Social Connections and Community: Do people feel connected to each other and their communities? Are social trust and cohesion strong? Loneliness and social isolation are increasingly recognized as significant threats to well-being, regardless of income.
• Environmental Quality and Resilience: Are we living in harmony with nature? Is the air clean, the water pure, and biodiversity protected? A healthy environment is not an optional extra; it's the foundation for human health and future prosperity.
• Equity and Fairness: Are the benefits and burdens of economic activity distributed fairly? Do all members of society have genuine opportunities to participate and thrive, regardless of their background?
• Meaningful Work and Purpose: Do people have opportunities to engage in work that is fulfilling and contributes positively to society? As automation increases, the focus might shift from simply having a job to having meaningful engagement.
• Participation and Voice: Do people have a say in the decisions that affect their lives? Is democracy robust and are civil liberties protected?
• Subjective Well-being: How do people themselves report on their happiness and life satisfaction? While subjective, these measures can provide valuable insights into the lived experience of progress.

These are just some of the dimensions that contribute to a rich and fulfilling life. Susskind emphasizes that focusing on these broader goals requires a conscious shift in priority. It means accepting that policies that maximize GDP might sometimes conflict with policies that enhance health, reduce inequality, or protect the environment. And when they conflict, we need a framework for deciding which priorities come first.

The Policy Implications of Redefinition

If progress is defined more broadly than GDP growth, it fundamentally changes the policy landscape. A government committed to maximizing well-being, for example, might:

• Invest heavily in public health and preventative care, even if it doesn't immediately boost measured GDP.
• Implement stricter environmental regulations, even if they impose costs on businesses and slow certain types of economic activity, because the value of a healthy ecosystem is prioritized.
• Pursue policies aimed at reducing inequality, such as progressive taxation, strong social safety nets, and investments in early childhood education, even if these are argued to be less "efficient" for pure growth maximization.
• Support initiatives that foster community, civic engagement, and access to arts and culture, recognizing their contribution to quality of life.
• Explore alternative work arrangements, such as shorter working weeks or different models of employment, to prioritize well-being and balance over endless labor force expansion.

This reorientation requires developing and using different metrics. Instead of fixating solely on GDP, governments and organizations might track dashboards of indicators covering health, education, environmental quality, equality, and social capital. The goal becomes improving these indicators in a holistic way, rather than assuming they will automatically improve with GDP growth.

"The real challenge is not just to measure different things, but to build economic systems and political institutions that are designed to deliver well-being and sustainability directly, rather than hoping they emerge as side-effects of growth."

This quote captures the depth of the required shift. It's not just about adding a few environmental or social indicators to the national accounts alongside GDP. It's about fundamentally changing the goal of economic policy from maximizing a narrow measure of output to maximizing a broad measure of societal flourishing within ecological limits.

You might wonder if this is feasible. Is it possible to maintain economic stability and provide for a large population without the constant pressure of growth? This is the core challenge that proponents of alternative models are grappling with, as discussed in the previous chapter. It requires rethinking everything from monetary policy and public finance to corporate governance and individual consumption patterns. It necessitates innovation, but perhaps a different kind of innovation – one focused on efficiency, durability, sharing, and regeneration rather than simply increasing volume and throughput.

Susskind doesn't provide a single, simple answer to what comes after growth, but he makes a compelling case that the conversation is urgent and essential. The limitations of GDP as a measure of progress are too significant to ignore in the face of pressing environmental and social challenges. Redefining progress is not about stopping economic activity; it's about giving it a new direction and purpose. It's about ensuring that the economy serves humanity and the planet, rather than humanity and the planet serving the economy's need to grow.

This chapter forces you to reflect on your own values and priorities. What truly constitutes a good life and a good society in your eyes? If you were to design an economy from scratch today, given what you know about ecological limits and social inequality, would its primary objective be maximizing output, or something else entirely? By posing these questions and exploring the need to redefine progress, Susskind sets the stage for a final synthesis that ties together the entire argument, bringing you to a reckoning with the future of growth itself.

The Growth Reckoning Synthesizing the Case for a New Economic Conversation

You have now journeyed through Daniel Susskind's comprehensive examination of economic growth. You've explored its undeniable historical power in transforming societies and improving countless lives, understanding why it became the seemingly unquestionable goal. You've also confronted the stark realities that challenge its continued pursuit: the Earth's finite environmental limits, the widening social and political divides its unequal distribution creates, the limitations of GDP as a true measure of progress, and the complex, often disruptive, role of technology. This final chapter brings these threads together, synthesizing the core arguments to present Susskind's central message: it is time for a "growth reckoning," a fundamental and urgent conversation about the future of our economies and societies when the old model of relentless expansion is no longer fit for purpose.

The case against the unquestioning pursuit of growth is built on a foundation of accumulating evidence and interconnected crises. It is not a rejection of the prosperity that growth has delivered, but a recognition that the context has changed so profoundly that clinging to the old ways is increasingly dangerous and counterproductive. The "great bargain" – the idea that maximizing output is the best way to achieve widespread well-being – is showing critical signs of strain.

Why the Reckoning is Necessary

Susskind's synthesis highlights the inescapable collision points:

• The Physical Impossibility: The planet's ecological limits are not theoretical. Climate change, resource depletion, and biodiversity loss are tangible, escalating crises. A system based on exponential increases in material throughput on a finite planet is, by definition, unsustainable in the long run. Continuing to pursue growth as if these limits don't exist is a path towards ecological collapse, which would ultimately undermine any form of prosperity.
• The Social Unsustainability: Even if environmental limits were somehow bypassed, the current pattern of growth, exacerbated by technological change and globalization, is proving socially corrosive. Widening inequality breeds resentment, erodes trust, and fuels political instability. A growth model that leaves significant portions of the population behind, or actively contributes to their precarity, cannot be considered successful or desirable in human terms. It creates societies that are wealthy in aggregate but fractured and stressed internally.
• The Conceptual Flaw: Relying on GDP as the primary measure of success is misleading. As you've seen, GDP counts harmful activities alongside beneficial ones, ignores essential non-market contributions, and fails to capture the distribution of income or the health of the environment and social fabric. Chasing a flawed metric leads to perverse outcomes, where policies aimed at boosting GDP might simultaneously undermine the very things that contribute to genuine well-being and a sustainable future.
• The Technological Paradox: Technology, the historical engine of growth, presents a paradox. It offers potential solutions to environmental challenges through efficiency and dematerialization, but it also threatens the traditional link between growth and employment, potentially leading to a future of high output but concentrated wealth and widespread job displacement. This challenge demands that we think carefully about how to share the benefits of automation and find new ways for people to contribute and thrive outside traditional full-time employment.

These are not independent problems to be solved in isolation. They are interconnected facets of a single, overarching challenge: our economic system, largely built around the imperative of continuous growth, is generating significant negative externalities – environmental damage and social inequality – on a scale that threatens to outweigh the benefits. The old promise that growth solves all problems no longer holds true; in many ways, the pursuit of growth is now creating them.

The "growth reckoning" is therefore not a call for immediate austerity or a sudden collapse. Instead, it is a call for intentionality. It is about acknowledging these realities and consciously choosing a different direction. It's about moving from an unquestioning pursuit to a deliberate choice about what kind of future we want to build. It's about shifting our focus from simply increasing the size of the economy to improving its quality, its equity, and its sustainability.

"The time has come for a reckoning with growth – a serious, wide-ranging conversation about its limits, its costs, and whether it can still serve as the primary organizing principle of our economic lives."

This conversation is challenging precisely because the growth imperative is so deeply embedded. Financial systems are built on the expectation of returns from growth. Political systems are structured around delivering growth to maintain stability and fund public services. Individual aspirations are often tied to increasing income and consumption. Unwinding these dependencies and rethinking these structures requires courage, vision, and collective action.

Elements of the New Conversation

What would this "new economic conversation" entail? Based on Susskind's analysis, it would need to address:

• Redefining Prosperity: Shifting the focus from GDP to broader measures of well-being that encompass environmental health, social equity, health, education, and quality of life. This requires developing better metrics and integrating them into policy-making.
• Living Within Limits: Designing economic activity to respect planetary boundaries. This involves investing heavily in sustainable technologies, circular economy models, and resource conservation, alongside potential changes to consumption patterns, particularly in wealthy nations.
• Sharing More Equitably: Developing policies and institutions that ensure the benefits of technological progress and economic activity are shared more broadly. This could involve rethinking tax systems, social safety nets, labor market regulations, and the distribution of wealth and income.
• Rethinking Work and Value: Exploring how societies can provide purpose, income, and dignity in a future where traditional employment may be less central for everyone due to automation. This involves valuing non-market contributions (like care work) and potentially exploring new models of income support or work sharing.
• Adapting Institutions: Reforming financial systems, political structures, and international agreements that currently reinforce the growth imperative, making them more conducive to pursuing well-being and sustainability.

Susskind doesn't claim to have all the answers for this new conversation. The path forward is complex and uncertain. Different societies will likely find different ways to navigate these challenges based on their unique circumstances and values. But the critical first step is acknowledging the problem and initiating the dialogue. Ignoring the reckoning won't make the limits disappear or the social tensions fade; it will only make the eventual adjustments more abrupt and painful.

In conclusion, Daniel Susskind's "Growth" makes a powerful case that the era of unquestioned economic growth is drawing to a close, not because growth is inherently bad, but because its continued pursuit in the face of ecological limits and rising inequality is creating unsustainable pressures. He compellingly argues that the time has come for a fundamental rethinking of our economic goals, moving beyond the narrow pursuit of GDP to a broader, more deliberate focus on human well-being and ecological health within planetary boundaries. This "growth reckoning" is not an option, but a necessity, requiring a new economic conversation that reshapes our institutions, our policies, and our collective understanding of what it truly means to progress in the 21st century. You are invited to be part of this crucial conversation, grappling with the challenges and exploring the possibilities of economies designed not just for more output, but for better lives on a healthier planet.