Degrowth is a loaded term. Capitalists reflexively reject it, Marxists say it’s not enough, progressives aren’t sure what to do with it, and environmentalists are convinced it’s the only way. Perhaps a more balanced, nuanced approach would be addressing the lifecycles of organizations, industries, and economies, rather than advocating for contraction in general. There are certainly companies that are in the latest stages of their lifecycles still playing (or trying to play) the Growth Rampage game (SAP, Microsoft, Exxon come to mind). The same can be said for the online search, smartphone, and Internet service provider markets & industries. And it is hard to argue that the United States’ economy is anywhere but one of the latest stages of the economic growth lifecycle.
If economies are like trees, there is a certain size that their genetic composition will support before their annual growth declines. Trees don’t think of this as a problem to be solved (though they do send seeds around). When trees die and fall, they become homes for new organizations to live and die within. Organizations might learn to live their lifecycles more accurately, rather than using wood beams to prop up dying trees.
Roman Ryan 