The degrowth side of post-development (and vice versa) Tzekou Eirini-Erifyli, PhD Candidate Gritzas Giorgos, Assistant Professor

Postdevelopment (PD) Degrowth (DG) More than 20 years since the first edition of "The Development Dictionary" Degrowth (DG) About 15 years since the emergence of degrowth as an activist slogan What points of convergence and divergence can be found among these two discourses?

Points of convergence (1) Academic orientation A critical view of the development paradigm (emphasising on cultural matters and on environmental and social sustainability)

Points of convergence (2) A critique on the representations constructed by the theory of homo oeconomicus, aiming at their dismantling Their view on the political subject of transformation -The emphasis is put on its emergence procedures rather than it's characteristics The emphasis on social and environmental justice

Points of convergence but... Their relationship with social movements -The movements they relate to are partially different (also) because of their different geographical focus The emphasis on the relocalisation of socioeconomic relationships and on local autonomy -There is a differentiation between PD and some currents in the DG discourse regarding the "ideal" political system and whether it should be a universalist project or not The emphasis on ecology -Despite it's partially different ontological and epistemological roots

Points of divergence (1) Their ontological assumptions -While from the part of PD they are fully antiessential and non dualistic, DG incorporates both essential and antiessential ontological assumptions Their epistemological assumptions -Similarly, DG integrates elements of modern epistemology but also methods that are critical of it, while PD views epistemic decolonisation as a very critical matter

Points of divergence (2) The range of transformative policies that they address -PD mostly addresses strategies and policies"from below" for constructing alternative worlds while DG also addresses reformist policies that transform the already existing institutions Their dissemination practices -DG is based heavily on academic practices (research and education) for the dissemination of its content, while PD mostly uses non academic practices or practices that bring together academic and non academic/local knowledge

Conclusions (1) How can the 2 discourses meet each other? DG: connection with the social movements and the discourses of the "Global South" + incorporation of elements of postcolonial theory---->foster the critique on the cultural homogenisation of development and enrich the discussion on democracy and autonomy PD: extention of its studies to the "Global North" and connection with the corresponding social movements + examination of DG concepts (like "conviviality") and practices (like the ones concerning the development and expansion of its educational and research network)

Conclusions (2) Further research Possible effects of the "loose" epistemological and ontological framework of DG on its appeal to academic and non academic circles Some of the subjects on which the dialogue between the 2 discourses could open -Self-sufficiency -Autonomy -Social and Solidarity Economy, the commons and diverse/community economies as alternative models of economic organisation

Thank you for your attention!!