IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/cesptp/hal-02332485.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Natural Resources in the Theory of Production: The Georgescu-Roegen/Daly versus Solow/Stiglitz Controversy

Author

Listed:
  • Quentin Couix

    (CES - Centre d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, UP1 UFR02 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne - École d'économie de la Sorbonne - UP1 - Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne)

Abstract

This paper provides a theoretical and methodological account of an important controversy between neoclassical resources economics and ecological economics, from the early 1970s to the end of the 1990s. It shows that the assumption of unbounded resources productivity in the work of Solow and Stiglitz, and the related concepts of substitution and technical progress, rest on a model-based methodology. On the other hand, Georgescu-Roegen's assumption of thermodynamic limits to production, later revived by Daly, comes from a methodology of interdisciplinary consistency. I conclude that neither side provided a definitive proof of its own claim because both face important conceptual issues.

Suggested Citation

  • Quentin Couix, 2019. "Natural Resources in the Theory of Production: The Georgescu-Roegen/Daly versus Solow/Stiglitz Controversy," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-02332485, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:hal-02332485
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-02332485
    as

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baumgärtner, Stefan & Becker, Christian & Frank, Karin & Müller, Birgit & Quaas, Martin, 2008. "Relating the philosophy and practice of ecological economics: The role of concepts, models, and case studies in inter- and transdisciplinary sustainability research," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 384-393, October.
    2. Joseph E. Stiglitz, 1974. "Growth with Exhaustible Natural Resources: The Competitive Economy," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 41(5), pages 139-152.
    3. Levallois, Clément, 2010. "Can de-growth be considered a policy option? A historical note on Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen and the Club of Rome," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 2271-2278, September.
    4. Pearce, David, 1997. "Substitution and sustainability: some reflections on Georgescu-Roegen," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 295-297, September.
    5. Solow, Robert M., 1997. "Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow-Stiglitz," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 267-268, September.
    6. R. M. Solow, 1974. "Intergenerational Equity and Exhaustible Resources," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 41(5), pages 29-45.
    7. Giuseppe Vittucci Marzetti, 2013. "The Fund-Flow Approach: A Critical Survey," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(2), pages 209-233, April.
    8. Clément Levallois, 2010. "Can de-growth be considered a policy option? : A historical note on Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen and the Club of Rome," Post-Print hal-02313162, HAL.
    9. Robert M. Solow, 1973. "Is the end of the world at hand?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Andrew Weintraub & Eli Schwartz & J. Richard Aronson (ed.), The Economic Growth Controversy, chapter 2, pages 39-61, Palgrave Macmillan.
    10. Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, 1986. "The Entropy Law and the Economic Process in Retrospect," Eastern Economic Journal, Eastern Economic Association, vol. 12(1), pages 3-25, Jan-Mar.
    11. Antoine Missemer, 2013. "Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen, pour une révolution bioéconomique," Post-Print halshs-00823249, HAL.
    12. Guido Erreygers, 2009. "Hotelling, Rawls, Solow: How Exhaustible Resources Came to Be Integrated into the Neoclassical Growth Model," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 41(5), pages 263-281, Supplemen.
    13. Opschoor, J. B., 1997. "The hope, faith and love of neoclassical environmental economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 281-283, September.
    14. Victor, Peter A., 1991. "Indicators of sustainable development: some lessons from capital theory," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 191-213, December.
    15. Benchekroun, Hassan & Withagen, Cees, 2011. "The optimal depletion of exhaustible resources: A complete characterization," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 612-636, September.
    16. Daly, Herman E., 1990. "Toward some operational principles of sustainable development," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 1-6, April.
    17. Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1976. "Monopoly and the Rate of Extraction of Exhaustible Resources," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(4), pages 655-661, September.
    18. William D. Nordhaus & James Tobin, 1973. "Is Growth Obsolete?," NBER Chapters, in: The Measurement of Economic and Social Performance, pages 509-564, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Benchekroun, Hassan & Withagen, Cees, 2011. "The optimal depletion of exhaustible resources: A complete characterization," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 612-636, September.
    20. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    21. Stefan baumgärtner, 2004. "The Inada Conditions for Material Resource Inputs Reconsidered," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 29(3), pages 307-322, November.
    22. Verena Halsmayer, 2014. "From Exploratory Modeling to Technical Expertise: Solow’s Growth Model as a Multipurpose Design," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 46(5), pages 229-251, Supplemen.
    23. Robert M. Solow & Frederic Y. Wan, 1976. "Extraction Costs in the Theory of Exhaustible Resources," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 7(2), pages 359-370, Autumn.
    24. Joseph Stiglitz, 1974. "Growth with Exhaustible Natural Resources: Efficient and Optimal Growth Paths," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 41(5), pages 123-137.
    25. Christensen, Paul P., 1989. "Historical roots for ecological economics -- Biophysical versus allocative approaches," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 17-36, February.
    26. Antoine Missemer, 2017. "Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen and degrowth," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 493-506, May.
    27. Eric Neumayer, 2013. "Weak versus Strong Sustainability," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14993.
    28. Peet, John, 1997. "'Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow/Stiglitz'...but what is the real question?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 293-294, September.
    29. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    30. Ayres, Robert U., 2007. "On the practical limits to substitution," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 115-128, February.
    31. Roxana Bobulescu, 2012. "The making of a Schumpeterian economist: Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 625-651, August.
    32. Antoine Missemer, 2017. "Les Économistes et la fin des énergies fossiles (1865-1931)," Post-Print halshs-01546579, HAL.
    33. Cleveland, Cutler J. & Ruth, Matthias, 1997. "When, where, and by how much do biophysical limits constrain the economic process?: A survey of Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen's contribution to ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 203-223, September.
    34. Anderson, Curt L., 1987. "The production process: Inputs and wastes," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, March.
    35. Robert M. Solow, 2009. "Does Growth Have a Future? Does Growth Theory Have a Future? Are These Questions Related?," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 41(5), pages 27-34, Supplemen.
    36. Krysiak, Frank C., 2006. "Entropy, limits to growth, and the prospects for weak sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 182-191, June.
    37. Spash, Clive L., 2012. "New foundations for ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 36-47.
    38. William D. Nordhaus & James Tobin, 1972. "Economic Research: Retrospect and Prospect, Volume 5, Economic Growth," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number nord72-1.
    39. Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas, 1988. "Closing Remarks: About Economic Growth--A Variation on a Theme by David Hilbert," Economic Development and Cultural Change, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(3), pages 291-307, Supplemen.
    40. Ayres, Robert U., 1999. "The second law, the fourth law, recycling and limits to growth," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 473-483, June.
    41. Solow, Robert, 1993. "An almost practical step toward sustainability," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 162-172, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. François Allisson & Antoine Missemer, 2020. "Some Historiographical Tools for the Study of Intellectual Legacies," Post-Print halshs-02931492, HAL.
    2. Couix, Quentin, 2020. "Georgescu-Roegen's Flow-Fund Theory of Production in Retrospect," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    3. Galychyn, Oleksandr, 2022. "Towards sustainable cities: A multi-criteria assessment framework for studying urban metabolism," MPRA Paper 121584, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 11 May 2022.
    4. C. Cassen & Antoine Missemer, 2020. "Structuring Environmental and Development Economics in France: The CIRED Case (1968-1986) [La structuration de l'économie de l'environnement et du développement en France : le cas du CIRED (1968-1986)," Post-Print halshs-02548876, HAL.
    5. Abdulla, Kanat, 2021. "Regional convergence and structural transformation in a resource-dependent country," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 548-557.
    6. Mohammad Al-Saidi, 2020. "From Economic to Extrinsic Values of Sustainable Energy: Prestige, Neo-Rentierism, and Geopolitics of the Energy Transition in the Arabian Peninsula," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-16, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Quentin Couix, 2018. "The role of natural resources in production: Georgescu-Roegen/ Daly versus Solow/ Stiglitz," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-01702401, HAL.
    2. François Allisson & Antoine Missemer, 2020. "Some Historiographical Tools for the Study of Intellectual Legacies," Post-Print halshs-02931492, HAL.
    3. Germain, Marc, 2019. "Georgescu-Roegen versus Solow/Stiglitz: Back to a controversy," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 168-182.
    4. Toman, Michael & Pezzey, John C., 2002. "The Economics of Sustainability: A Review of Journal Articles," RFF Working Paper Series dp-02-03, Resources for the Future.
    5. Maciej Malaczewski, 2018. "Natural Resources As An Energy Source In A Simple Economic Growth Model," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(4), pages 362-380, October.
    6. Gómez-Baggethun, Erik & de Groot, Rudolf & Lomas, Pedro L. & Montes, Carlos, 2010. "The history of ecosystem services in economic theory and practice: From early notions to markets and payment schemes," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(6), pages 1209-1218, April.
    7. Couix, Quentin, 2020. "Georgescu-Roegen's Flow-Fund Theory of Production in Retrospect," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    8. Fagnart, Jean-François & Germain, Marc, 2011. "Quantitative versus qualitative growth with recyclable resource," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(5), pages 929-941, March.
    9. Luke McGrath & Stephen Hynes & John McHale, 2020. "Linking Sustainable Development Assessment in Ireland and the European Union with Economic Theory," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 51(2), pages 327-355.
    10. Quentin Couix, 2018. "From Methodology to Practice (and Back): Georgescu-Roegen's Philosophy of Economics and the Flow-Fund Model," Post-Print halshs-01854031, HAL.
    11. Cameron Hepburn & Alex Bowen, 2013. "Prosperity with growth: economic growth, climate change and environmental limits," Chapters, in: Roger Fouquet (ed.), Handbook on Energy and Climate Change, chapter 29, pages 617-638, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Comolli, Paul, 2006. "Sustainability and growth when manufactured capital and natural capital are not substitutable," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 157-167, November.
    13. Adrian Boos, 2015. "Genuine Savings as an Indicator for “Weak” Sustainability: Critical Survey and Possible Ways forward in Practical Measuring," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-37, April.
    14. Antony, Jürgen & Klarl, Torben, 2019. "Resource depletion in a Ramsey economy with subsistence consumption, exogenous technical change and capital depreciation: A full characterization," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203640, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    15. Robert D. Cairns, 2011. "Accounting for Sustainability: A Dissenting Opinion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(9), pages 1-16, August.
    16. Ngo Long & Vincent Martinet, 2018. "Combining rights and welfarism: a new approach to intertemporal evaluation of social alternatives," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(1), pages 35-64, January.
    17. Nick Hanley & Louis Dupuy & Eoin McLaughlin, 2015. "Genuine Savings And Sustainability," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 779-806, September.
    18. Daniele Schilirò, 2019. "Sustainability, Innovation, and Efficiency: A Key Relationship," Palgrave Studies in Impact Finance, in: Magdalena Ziolo & Bruno S. Sergi (ed.), Financing Sustainable Development, chapter 0, pages 83-102, Palgrave Macmillan.
    19. John C. V. Pezzey, 2004. "Sustainability Policy and Environmental Policy," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 106(2), pages 339-359, June.
    20. Ahi, Payman & Searcy, Cory & Jaber, Mohamad Y., 2018. "A Quantitative Approach for Assessing Sustainability Performance of Corporations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 336-346.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen; Robert Solow; Joseph Stiglitz; natural resources; theory of production;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:cesptp:hal-02332485. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.