Scholarlink

<p>The current backlash against sustainability policies, known as greenlash, has among its causes an inflation of the sustainability debate that has been fuelled by important shifts in mode, scope, and state of greenwashing. Responding to calls for novel approaches to this crisis, this Perspective first conceptualises <i>sustainability debate inflation</i> as the difference between the growth of the sustainability ‘talk’ (statements, pledges, and commitments) and the increase in the sustainability ‘walk’ (substantive, long-lasting, sustainability-related actions). Then, drawing an analogy with macroeconomic models of inflation, it proposes transposing the monetary and fiscal contractionary policies devised to curb inflation to address sustainability debate inflation. Specifically, a form of <i>sustainability debate austerity</i> that temporarily ‘freezes’ the debate, thus curbing inflationary pressures, is suggested. As in classic macroeconomics responses, this change is expected to trigger an increase in the supply and, after a series of readjustments, the lost output would be regained, and a new equilibrium—where the talk matches the walk—would be met: a harsh but necessary measure to save sustainability from the consequences of its own success.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The new greenlash: from greenwashing and sustainability inflation to the sustainability backlash—and how to tackle it

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年4月17日

查看全文
  • Ludovico Giacomo Conti,
  • Peter Seele

摘要

The current backlash against sustainability policies, known as greenlash, has among its causes an inflation of the sustainability debate that has been fuelled by important shifts in mode, scope, and state of greenwashing. Responding to calls for novel approaches to this crisis, this Perspective first conceptualises sustainability debate inflation as the difference between the growth of the sustainability ‘talk’ (statements, pledges, and commitments) and the increase in the sustainability ‘walk’ (substantive, long-lasting, sustainability-related actions). Then, drawing an analogy with macroeconomic models of inflation, it proposes transposing the monetary and fiscal contractionary policies devised to curb inflation to address sustainability debate inflation. Specifically, a form of sustainability debate austerity that temporarily ‘freezes’ the debate, thus curbing inflationary pressures, is suggested. As in classic macroeconomics responses, this change is expected to trigger an increase in the supply and, after a series of readjustments, the lost output would be regained, and a new equilibrium—where the talk matches the walk—would be met: a harsh but necessary measure to save sustainability from the consequences of its own success.