I have been deep-diving on the brilliant Jean-Marc Jancovici and the reports of his NGO, The Shift Project. They produced a plan for the transformation of the French economy a couple of years ago that looks to be one of the few sensible plans around. Here it is: https://theshiftproject.org/article/ptef-livre-et-site-web/.

It's in French so I Google translated all 288 pages.

They asked themselves: what needs to be done if France is to reduce its emissions by 5% every year through to 2050, while giving everybody access to employment?

They did not consider money or GDP (explained in my review)

Here's my summary of the key policies/findings:

- A 50% reduction in energy use by 2050

- A major shift from imported food to local food production

- A 50% reduction in meat consumption, particularly beef

- A halt to new construction, with a focus on renovating and insulating existing buildings

- A decrease in travel, with shorter journeys and longer stays favoured

- Flying increasingly replaced by train travel

- Private car ownership will drop significantly, with greater emphasis on car-pooling and train journeys

- The average car size will decrease, with microcars and electric bikes incentivized by taxing based on energy use per kilometre

- 500,000 new jobs will be created in the agriculture and food sector as there is a shift toward more labour-intensive agriculture like agroecology, local food production, and on-farm food processing (e.g., yoghurts)

- In transportation, jobs will shift from airlines to the railway industry

- 100,000 jobs will be created in small-scale logistics, such as bike couriers

- The bicycle industry (including electric bikes) will expand by 12x, creating 230,000 jobs

- Overall, there will be a net gain of 300,000 jobs

- All employees across all companies required to undertake training in climate and energy

The final point above - mandatory training for ALL employees in ALL companies on energy and climate - seems like a no-brainer and very easy to implement.

54% of the electricity to come from nuclear and is based in a report from the nuclear agency in France of what they could produce if they went all out to maximise nuclear there.

I wrote a full review of the plan here:

https://thecarbonpulse.substack.com/p/what-a-realistic-plan-to-meet-the

I don't understand why in this topic (degrowth), there is only a bunch of "ads" and pictures... instead of people sharing their experience of degrowth, helping each others, sharing their needs, etc.
For instance, I live remotely and start producing my food; I'd like to meet like minded people, etc.

Why is it that people put the environment against the economy?

Why is it that people put the environment against the economy?

it seems like econ commenters always try to say that protecting the environment would hurt the nebulous idea of the "economy'. despite the fact that the costs of Environmental destruction would cost way more than Environmental regulation.

i hate the common parlance that a few people's jobs are worth more than the future of Earths biosphere. especially because it only seems that they care about people losing their jobs is if they work at a big corporation.

always the poor coal miners or video game developers at EA and not the Mongolian Herders, or family-owned fishing industries that environmental havoc would hurt. maybe jobs that are so precarious that the company would fire you if the company doesn't make exceptional more money every year are not worth creating/

I have a theory that other communities don't realize they are part of the Degrowth movement.

R/anticonsumption, r/minimalism, and other communities about climate change, appreciating nature, and living simpler.

Do you think this is a fair assessment? How can we help then realize this movement is their home too.

In thinking about ways to alternatively power the modern world, obviously the best answer is use less. That's why we're here.

What isn't clear to me are the areas that this can't or shouldn't be done.

Refrigeration is a pretty good solution. The medical field will need power.

Some transportation is necessary, but not nearly this much.

What are the things that require about as much energy as they're getting now and don't have degrowth alternatives because they are necessary?

Hya, I'm going to be short since it's the point of less usage of everything lol.

I'm french and in a "lost" city, not dead but missing a lot of stuff for a "big" city.

I'm a dev and without work and I can't figure out how to degrowth while working for big companies to make more money more efficiently.

None of that idea suits me and I wonder if you know people or companies that are degrowth and social performance driven rather than money 😬

Thank you very much!

I’ve chewed my friends ears off enough about degrowth that they’re interested to learn more. But I know if I send them a paper from Parrique or recommend a book from Tim Jackson it will be too technical and it would put them off.

Any more accessible sources, be they videos, interviews or blog posts that you can recommend?