IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ipewps/1522021.html

Ecological contradictions of Labour's Green New Deal

Author

Listed:
  • Neal, Luke

Abstract

This paper offers an analysis and critique of the Green Industrial Revolution proposed by the Labour Party in 2019. It identifies this policy as a variant of the Keynesian Green New Deal, which has been interpreted favourably by many socialists as a programme for climate stabilisation and an ecologically restorative, egalitarian organisation of the economy. The Green Industrial Revolution pointed towards a hybrid mixed economy whose main features would have been state policy orientation towards and large investments in renewables, efficiencies and retrofitting; as well as a renewed public sector and reforms to corporate ownership. This was predicated on a contradictory policy of green growth. On the contrary, this paper develops a concept of the critical energy constraints to growth, which highlights how, in terms of its focus on "the national economy" and aversion to major infrastructural changes to reduce energy use, Labour's programme was insufficient. Nonetheless, its openings and advantages are considered alongside and in light of these contradictions. They suggest the need for economic and ecological policies that recognise both the critical energy constraints to growth and the antagonistic relation between capital and labour internationally.

Suggested Citation

  • Neal, Luke, 2021. "Ecological contradictions of Labour's Green New Deal," IPE Working Papers 152/2021, Berlin School of Economics and Law, Institute for International Political Economy (IPE).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ipewps:1522021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/228592/1/174437838X.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Staffell, Iain, 2017. "Measuring the progress and impacts of decarbonising British electricity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 463-475.
    2. Heun, Matthew Kuperus & Brockway, Paul E., 2019. "Meeting 2030 primary energy and economic growth goals: Mission impossible?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 251(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Hammond, Geoffrey P. & Howard, Hayley R. & Jones, Craig I., 2013. "The energy and environmental implications of UK more electric transition pathways: A whole systems perspective," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 103-116.
    4. Jason Hickel & Giorgos Kallis, 2020. "Is Green Growth Possible?," New Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(4), pages 469-486, June.
    5. Lina I. Brand-Correa & Paul E. Brockway & Claire L. Copeland & Timothy J. Foxon & Anne Owen & Peter G. Taylor, 2017. "Developing an Input-Output Based Method to Estimate a National-Level Energy Return on Investment (EROI)," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-21, April.
    6. N/A, 2015. "Books for review," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 29(4), pages 699-699, August.
    7. N/A, 2015. "Books for review," Work, Employment & Society, British Sociological Association, vol. 29(5), pages 890-890, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Jorge Calero & Rosario Ivano Scandurra, 2016. "Modelling adult skills in OECD countries," Working Papers 2016/17, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    2. Nico Ravanilla & Allen Hicken, 2021. "Poverty, social networks, and clientelism," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2021-144, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    3. Kabeer, Naila, 2020. "Misbehaving’ RCTs: the confounding problem of human agency," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102940, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. W.F. Lawless, 2019. "Interdependence, Morality and Human-Machine Teams: The Revenge of the Dualists," Scientia Moralitas Journal, Scientia Moralitas, Research Institute, vol. 4(1), pages 31-50, July.
    5. Patrick Moriarty & Damon Honnery, 2020. "New Approaches for Ecological and Social Sustainability in a Post-Pandemic World," World, MDPI, vol. 1(3), pages 1-14, October.
    6. Vincenzo Sforza & Riccardo Cimini & Alessandro Mechelli & Taryn Vian, 2021. "A Review of the Literature on Corruption in Healthcare Organizations," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 15(4), pages 1-98, July.
    7. Lanfranchi, Gabriel & Herrero, Ana Carolina & Palenzuela, Salvador Rueda & Camilloni, Inés & Bauer, Steffen, 2018. "The new urban paradigm," Economics Discussion Papers 2018-70, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    8. Zhai, Ying & Wang, Wenzhi & Zhou, Liying, 2024. "Green efficiency loss caused by economic growth goals: Evidence from an emerging economy," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 983-995.
    9. Maria Petmesidou & Ana M. Guillén, 2022. "Europe’s green, digital and demographic transition: a social policy research perspective," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 28(3), pages 317-332, August.
    10. Zhao, Jun & Dong, Kangyin & Dong, Xiucheng & Shahbaz, Muhammad & Kyriakou, Ioannis, 2022. "Is green growth affected by financial risks? New global evidence from asymmetric and heterogeneous analysis," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    11. Nadezhda Kvasha & Olga Bolotnikova & Ekaterina Malevskaia-Malevich, 2023. "Biotechnological Basis of the Pulp and Paper Industry Circular Economic System," Economies, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-13, December.
    12. Osorio, Sebastian & Pietzcker, Robert C. & Pahle, Michael & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2020. "How to deal with the risks of phasing out coal in Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    13. Yeray Hernandez & Gustavo Naumann & Serafin Corral & Paulo Barbosa, 2020. "Water Footprint Expands with Gross Domestic Product," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-6, October.
    14. Sinan Erdogan & Guray Akalin, 2025. "Empirical Evidence on the Impact of Technological Innovation and Human Capital on Improving and Enhancing Environmental Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-17, August.
    15. Namahoro, J.P. & Wu, Q. & Su, H., 2023. "Wind energy, industrial-economic development and CO2 emissions nexus: Do droughts matter?," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 278(PA).
    16. Guo, Bowei & Castagneto Gissey, Giorgio, 2021. "Cost pass-through in the British wholesale electricity market," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    17. Savelli, Iacopo & Hardy, Jeffrey & Hepburn, Cameron & Morstyn, Thomas, 2022. "Putting wind and solar in their place: Internalising congestion and other system-wide costs with enhanced contracts for difference in Great Britain," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    18. Nicholas Langridge & Leah Hamilton & Alex Dobill, 2025. "Basic Income and Human Needs Satisfaction: Evidence from the HudsonUP Experiment," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 180(2), pages 1019-1039, November.
    19. Duro, Juan Antonio & Ramirez, Noemí & Wieland, Hanspeter & Wiedenhofer, Dominik & Haberl, Helmut, 2025. "Global inequalities in countries' demand for raw materials: Twenty years of expansion and insufficient convergence," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    20. Donatella Gatti, 2021. "Protecting Natural and Social Resources: A political economy approach," Working Papers hal-03374129, HAL.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q58 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Government Policy
    • Q43 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Energy and the Macroeconomy
    • F52 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - National Security; Economic Nationalism
    • B51 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Current Heterodox Approaches - - - Socialist; Marxian; Sraffian

    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:zbw:ipewps:1522021. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iphwrde.html .

    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.