Everywhere wants to grow their economy. We’ve got growth plans, growth strategies, planning for growth and even growth vouchers. But while the language of growth and competitiveness fills the pages of our local plans, enterprise partnerships and corporate strategies, there is much less clarity about what we actually mean by growth and how we hope to use it to improve our localities.
Instead, economic growth is increasingly the unquestioned goal for place that will enable us all to live happily ever after.
We see growth almost ‘like a flow of water, each drop of which is equally valuable, homogenous and beneficial’, as Peter Self said in Rolling Back the Market. Across the political divide we assume that growth will bring everything we want, jobs, growth, personal wealth, welfare and even happiness.
However, our enthusiasm for growth rests on a body of economic theory and assumptions about which, despite appearances, there is ongoing argument and debate. Behind the scenes, economists argue endlessly about the assumptions and ideas behind growth and economy. Do human beings simply act in their own self-interest to maximise their own consumption of life or are they influenced by their interaction with others? How does big brand marketing influence our behaviour, and help to construct the idea that we live in a world of infinite desires but limited means?
A common argument within local economic growth strategies is that it will create jobs which help to achieve higher levels of income which will in turn have spin-off benefits for local expenditure and investment. If people are better off, they might also be happier, and of course, the more people earn, the less they rely on the state and so on. But even this version of events is filled with some big assumptions. Is income such a great measure of how we feel about life or is it a confusion of wellbeing with being well-off? How do we know that the people who need the jobs most in an area will get them and will the money they spend remain in the area or leak away into the coffers of multinationals?
Whilst its nice to dream of economic growth, is that the limit of our aspiration? Surely what we actually want to achieve is the opportunity to create a good society, where people have a chance to live a life that they have reason to value? By itself, it’s doubtful that economic growth can deliver that fairy tale ending:
You are spot on Sarah. All I would add is that we have perhaps already reached ‘peak growth’. There will be no return to the growth that followed on from the Second World War. Indeed growth is going to be very weak and what there will be is just being largely fuelled by the property bubble which the UK government is happily stoking for electoral gain next year. Fundamentally it’s about how do we move from a fixation with exchange value and move to an economy that is about use value.
Agreed, Sarah’s thread re: ‘growth’ needs to become more fully debated, especially amongst policymakers, whereby the language & values of human capital development becomes more compelling than simple economic growth & all the assumptions championed by private interests.
Also, too much stock is placed upon the views of economists, whose training is in ‘thinking about firms & consumer behavior, business cycles, government regulatory antitrust & business cycle policy options, statistical concepts & techniques, & the historical context of economic aspects of life’, instead, let’s learn to rely more upon our own expertise as community economic development practitioners or as policy analysts. Economists are not in our business; I don’t ever see them quoting community-based practitioners, or asking for their opinions when it comes to building healthy communities.