Thou shalt not take the name of bioeconomy in vain
In this paper, we show that the characteristics of complex adaptive systems support the original interpretation of the bioeconomy of Georgescu-Roegen: the current use of natural resources by industrialized societies is incompatible with the regeneration processes of ecological systems. Elaborating t...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Recursos: | Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona |
| Repositorio: | Dipòsit Digital de Documents de la UAB |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ddd.uab.cat:312206 |
| Acesso em linha: | https://ddd.uab.cat/record/312206 https://dx.doi.org/urn:doi:10.1007/s11625-025-01633-7 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | Complex adaptive system Noble lie Social identity Sociotechnical imaginary Toxic truth Uncomfortable knowledge SDG 8 - Decent Work and Economic Growth |
| Resumo: | In this paper, we show that the characteristics of complex adaptive systems support the original interpretation of the bioeconomy of Georgescu-Roegen: the current use of natural resources by industrialized societies is incompatible with the regeneration processes of ecological systems. Elaborating the concept of societal identity, using a biosemiotics reading of the social theory of Luhmann, we show that the current social identity is sustained by implausible sociotechnical imaginaries, including the European Union's interpretation of the bioeconomy as a panacea for green growth. We argue that the current widespread perception of polycrisis is a sign that, on the tangible side of biosemiotic process, social practices urgently need change. On the notional side, however, society is (still) incapable of relinquishing the set of sociotechnical imaginaries grounded in the American and Cartesian dreams (the promethean ideology) firmly locked in its collective memory. This incongruity has produced information disorder in the sustainability discourse. We conclude that the EU endorsement of the concept of the circular (bio)economy as a strategy for perpetual economic growth decoupled from resource use represents a desperate attempt to maintain the status quo through the endorsement of an integrated set of noble lies. |
|---|