cannot continue to grow outside of it, nor should it grow to a point where it is harmful to the ecosystem. The economy being dependent upon the ecosystem must adhere itself to achieving a state of compatibility with environment. Logic follows then, what is the optimal level of economic output? How do we decide what level should be maintained. We certainly cannot use the standard of the average american. In order to get that, we would have to increase the world economy by a multiple of seven! As it stands now human being use up a little more than a fourth of the worlds net primary product of photosynthesis. We cannot go beyond or even close to 100% of NPP, since historically the tendency of growth is to reduce global NPP of photosynthesis. More and more there are stress-induced feedback's from the ecosystem to the economy. The greenhouse effect, ozone depletion, acid rain, etc., that say even our present rate is unsustainable. So sustainable growth is contradictory in a finite, nongrowing ecosystem. As many economists can tell you, growth in real GNP should stop when decreasing marginal benefits equal increasing marginal costs, theoretically! However there is no statistical data that makes the effort to measure the cost of GNP. Data that would take into account all the environmental and sociological costs now and in the future for the ‘growth’ we realize today. Those that admit to such an optimal point of growth say it is far off.. These policy maker and advisors to world leaders contradict themselves. Even their visions of sustainable growth has limits. Yet there has never a mention of limits on economic growth. For example, harvesting rates should not exceed regeneration rates, and water emissions should not be greater than the capacity of the environment to assimilate the waste. Yet if the world economy would cease to grow, the ecosystem could not even sustain this rate of metabolic throughput flow we enjoy today. More i...
