{"title":"Rethinking planning and nature conservation through degrowth/ post-growth debates","authors":"Adile Arslan Avar , Yağmur Özcan Cive","doi":"10.1016/j.futures.2024.103416","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Based on the critical debates in urban theory, political ecology and urban political ecology literature, this article interrogates the potentialities and limitations of degrowth/post-growth planning, regarding relational, non-dualistic and multi-scalar spatialization of nature conservation. It firstly reveals that pragmatic, technoscientific and “sustainable/ecological urbanism” and market-based nature conservation it incorporates exacerbate socio-ecological crises and socio-spatial inequalities in and beyond cities under the conditions of planetary urbanisation. Second, it interrogates how new market-based nature conservation turned into 'green-grabbing' and primitive accumulation. Having explored the degrowth or post-growth approach in relation to other radical nature conservation approaches (e.g., convivial conservation and global safety network), it interrogates the ways in which post-growth planning deals with socio-spatial aspects of nature conservation. It takes the “degrowth/ post-growth planning” both as an instrument to spatialize radical nature conservation and as an approach addressing socio-ecological injustices and inequalities intersecting at multiple scales. It concludes that the degrowth/ post-growth planning can overcome its limitations and advance its potentialities, drawing from already existing radical conservation and critical approaches in neighbouring disciplines as well as the discipline itself.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48239,"journal":{"name":"Futures","volume":"161 ","pages":"Article 103416"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Futures","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0016328724000995","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Based on the critical debates in urban theory, political ecology and urban political ecology literature, this article interrogates the potentialities and limitations of degrowth/post-growth planning, regarding relational, non-dualistic and multi-scalar spatialization of nature conservation. It firstly reveals that pragmatic, technoscientific and “sustainable/ecological urbanism” and market-based nature conservation it incorporates exacerbate socio-ecological crises and socio-spatial inequalities in and beyond cities under the conditions of planetary urbanisation. Second, it interrogates how new market-based nature conservation turned into 'green-grabbing' and primitive accumulation. Having explored the degrowth or post-growth approach in relation to other radical nature conservation approaches (e.g., convivial conservation and global safety network), it interrogates the ways in which post-growth planning deals with socio-spatial aspects of nature conservation. It takes the “degrowth/ post-growth planning” both as an instrument to spatialize radical nature conservation and as an approach addressing socio-ecological injustices and inequalities intersecting at multiple scales. It concludes that the degrowth/ post-growth planning can overcome its limitations and advance its potentialities, drawing from already existing radical conservation and critical approaches in neighbouring disciplines as well as the discipline itself.
期刊介绍:
Futures is an international, refereed, multidisciplinary journal concerned with medium and long-term futures of cultures and societies, science and technology, economics and politics, environment and the planet and individuals and humanity. Covering methods and practices of futures studies, the journal seeks to examine possible and alternative futures of all human endeavours. Futures seeks to promote divergent and pluralistic visions, ideas and opinions about the future. The editors do not necessarily agree with the views expressed in the pages of Futures