Christian Arnsperger, né en à Munich, est un économiste. Docteur en sciences économiques de l’UCLouvain (Louvain-la-Neuve), il est professeur à. Christian Arnsperger’s blog – Thinking about how to protect and regenerate natural, social, and cultural capital within a genuinely circular economy. Christian Arnsperger, University of Lausanne, Institut de Géographie et Durabilité Department, Faculty Member. Studies Transition to sustainable economies.
|Published (Last):||22 November 2017|
|PDF File Size:||1.30 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.95 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
How does our “being spatial” influence our arnspergsr to nature and our perception of what ecological sustainability calls for? It is true that we are fundamentally economic beings, but this does not exclude — and even implies — that we are embedded both in temporalities and in geographical spaces through which we travel and which constitute us as subjects.
Do the local and the global pull in opposite directions when it comes to our quest for a sustainable economy? Is our “geographicity” nowadays an obstacle to, or rather a stimulation for, the development of a more acute awareness as to the biosphere’s limits and the environmental constraints arnspergee our economic exchanges should heed? What economic anthropology of spatiality and territoriality do we need in order to ground, support, and lend more coherence to various concrete processes of economic relocalization such as ecotourism, ecovillages, bioregionalism or short circuits of food provision?
How does our quest for a meaning in life make our ways of spending, consuming, saving, and investing more or less sustainable? How does our anxiety about our finitude and our fragility, or even our mortality, as well as our quest for a meaning in life, influence our ways of spending, consuming, saving, and investing? Can such sustainabilty-oriented practices as voluntary simplicity, downshifting, collaborative economies or negative-interest currencies ever scale up and generalize if what continues to structure our economic exchanges is competition curistian the fear of losing and failing?
Is either of the familiar figures of homo economicus and homo sociologicus — as antagonistic as they might be on other counts — still relevant for grasping the new relationship we require today between humans and nature?
Shouldn’t economic anthropology, if it wants to remain relevant in the face of today’s environmental challenges, urgently come into contact with existential philosophy and psychology? Couldn’t economic and social policies that are more sensitive to the existential experiences of social actors improve the efficiency of technical measures such as ecological taxation, green stock-market investment or the capture and exploitation of atmospheric carbon — and couldn’t human beings who are better reconciled with their existential finitude move beyond green capitalism and build more strongly sustainable economic alternatives?
How can we better understand the complex articulation between money creation, bioregionalism, and ecological sustainability?
The role played by money and by monetary anthropology in sustainability issues is being increasingly recognized nowadays. What is money and how is it created in our modern economies? Does the way in which money is created today — essentially as interest-bearing bank debt — generate a macroeconomic “obligation to grow” that could explain in part the structural unsustainability of our societies?
Do alternative banks offer criteria for the distribution of loans and the selection of investments such that they might help eliminate, or at least diminish, the pressure towards growth in the economy? Could environmentally oriented complementary currencies — whether local or global — provide credible answers to today’s ecological challenges? Can notions such as the “optimal monetary zone” allow us to better understand the complex articulation between monetary territoriality, bioregionalism, and ecological sustainability?
Christian Arnsperger | University of Lausanne –
What cultural and existential transformations would citizens have to experience so that we might become able to build a genuine “monetary eco-geography” in our christia Making the planet sustainable will require us to understand the U. How did it emerge from the British culture of the 17th and 18th centuries?
The United States remain, today, the least sustainable nation on the planet, in particular as to what regards per-capita energy consumption, but in terms of the ecological footprint more generally. At the same time, the North-American culture of consumption, mobility, housing, and urbanization still appears as the role model to be emulated by the rest of the world, and especially by the better-to-do social segments in emerging and developing economies.
Making the planet sustainable will therefore require us to understand the deep roots of the U. How did these cultural traits emerge — whether through continuation or through breaking away — from the relationship to nature and chhristian material goods that characterized the British culture of the 17th and 18th centuries? In what way did the Industrial Revolution in 19th-century Great Britain precipitate the unsustainabilty of the American way of life?
Did an ingrained “frontier mentality” and a specifically North-American relationship to geographical space contribute to a model of unsustainability unique to christan United States? Do the alternative economic movements that are currently developing there, at the very heart of capitalism and its dysfunctionings, make it possible to glimpse the lineaments of a new American culture of sustainability — one that would, like its current predecessor, have the potential to spread across the globe?
Research fields Spatiality and territoriality as factors of ecological sustainability How does our “being spatial” influence our relationship to nature and our perception of what ecological sustainability calls for?