In Part I the ecological crisis has been highlighted, mainly the climate instability that will last for next decades; in Part II are given the reasons why to modify, and in which manner, the current development model. In the last forty years the crisis of environment has never become a variable to be considered in programming economic policies. Sin of the dominant neo-liberalism, from the “unilateralism” of the US administration up to the “fiscal compact” by EU? Sure, but also the other economic schools meet the same error. The present crisis of capitalism is an overproduction crisis, whose peculiar quantitative character, due to the technological innovation in the globalized market, makes insuperable the contradiction between the increment of the offer and the capability of the market of absorbing the demand: which gigantic redistribution of income should be done in order that the “spendability” can match the offer? Neither is possible, like in the two previous great crises, the “recourse” to a world war as a solution of the problem; the nuclear deterrence denies it. What to do? The essential deafness of Economy to the environmental issue pushes the authors, on one hand, to propose some theoretical elements for an economic cycle that conjugate ecological variables to economic ones in a “stationary state” model; on the other hand, to look at the ecological crisis as an extraordinary chance for changing, from now, the model of development towards a sustainable economy, by means of the “energy revolution”, the green economy and the “third market”.
Vista nella Parte I la gravità della crisi ambientale, soprattutto l’instabilità climatica che caratterizzerà le prossime decadi, nella parte II si esplicitano le ragioni profonde della necessità di cambiare, e come, il modello di sviluppo. Negli ultimi quarant’anni la crisi ecologica non è mai diventata una variabile importante nelle politiche economiche. Colpa del neo-liberismo imperante, dall’ “unilateralismo” dell’amministrazione USA al “fiscal compact” della UE? Sì, ma anche le altre scuole economiche commettono lo stesso errore. L’attuale crisi del capitalismo è una crisi di sovrapproduzione, il cui carattere quantitativo, dovuto all’innovazione tecnologica nel mercato globalizzato, rende insuperabile la contraddizione tra l’aumento dell’offerta e la capacità del mercato di assorbire la domanda: quale colossale redistribuzione del reddito sarebbe necessaria per adeguare la “spendibilità” all’offerta? Né la deterrenza nucleare consente, come nelle due analoghe grandi crisi precedenti, il “ricorso” alla guerra mondiale. Che fare? La sostanziale sordità dell’Economia alla questione ambientale stimola gli autori, da un lato a proporre gli elementi teorici per un “ciclo” economico che coniughi variabili economiche ed ecologiche in un modello di “stato stazionario”; dall’altro a vedere la stessa crisi ecologica come una straordinaria opportunità per cambiare da subito il modello verso un’economia sostenibile, attraverso la rivoluzione energetica, la green economy e il terzo mercato.
ANGELINI, A., FARIOLI, F., MATTIOLI, G., SCALIA, M. (2016). Le due crisi: crisi del capitalismo e crisi ambientale. Una soluzione sostenibile? (parte II). CULTURE DELLA SOSTENIBILITÀ, 83-110.
Le due crisi: crisi del capitalismo e crisi ambientale. Una soluzione sostenibile? (parte II)
ANGELINI, Aurelio;
2016-01-01
Abstract
In Part I the ecological crisis has been highlighted, mainly the climate instability that will last for next decades; in Part II are given the reasons why to modify, and in which manner, the current development model. In the last forty years the crisis of environment has never become a variable to be considered in programming economic policies. Sin of the dominant neo-liberalism, from the “unilateralism” of the US administration up to the “fiscal compact” by EU? Sure, but also the other economic schools meet the same error. The present crisis of capitalism is an overproduction crisis, whose peculiar quantitative character, due to the technological innovation in the globalized market, makes insuperable the contradiction between the increment of the offer and the capability of the market of absorbing the demand: which gigantic redistribution of income should be done in order that the “spendability” can match the offer? Neither is possible, like in the two previous great crises, the “recourse” to a world war as a solution of the problem; the nuclear deterrence denies it. What to do? The essential deafness of Economy to the environmental issue pushes the authors, on one hand, to propose some theoretical elements for an economic cycle that conjugate ecological variables to economic ones in a “stationary state” model; on the other hand, to look at the ecological crisis as an extraordinary chance for changing, from now, the model of development towards a sustainable economy, by means of the “energy revolution”, the green economy and the “third market”.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
articolo cultura sostenibilità n. 1 2016.pdf
accesso aperto
Dimensione
3.73 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
3.73 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.