The unlimited economic growth that fuels capitalism's metabolism has profoundly transformed a large portion of Earth. The resulting environmental destruction has led to an unprecedented rate of biodiversity loss. Following large‐scale losses of habitats and species, it was recognized that biodiversity is crucial to maintaining functional ecosystems. We sought to continue the debate on the contradictions between economic growth and biodiversity in the conservation science literature and thus invite scholars to engage in reversing the biodiversity crisis through acknowledging the impacts of economic growth. In the 1970s, a global agenda was set to develop different milestones related to sustainable development, including green–blue economic growth, which despite not specifically addressing biodiversity reinforced the idea that economic development based on profit is compatible with the planet's ecology. Only after biodiversity loss captured the attention of environmental sciences researchers in the early 2000s was a global biodiversity agenda implemented. The agenda highlights biodiversity conservation as a major international challenge and recognizes that the main drivers of biodiversity loss derive from economic activities. The post‐2000 biodiversity agendas, including the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the post‐2020 Convention on Biological Diversity Global Strategy Framework, do not consider the negative impacts of growth‐oriented strategies on biodiversity. As a result, global biodiversity conservation priorities are governed by the economic value of biodiversity and its assumed contribution to people's welfare. A large body of empirical evidence shows that unlimited economic growth is the main driver of biodiversity loss in the Anthropocene; thus, we strongly argue for sustainable degrowth and a fundamental shift in societal values. An equitable downscaling of the physical economy can improve ecological conditions, thus reducing biodiversity loss and consequently enhancing human well‐being.

In a time imbued with civilisation crisis, José Manuel Naredo’s work is of particular relevance. Naredo, one of the most prestigious economists in Spain and a pioneer of ecological economics, first published his most popular book (La economía en evolución. Historia y perspectivas de las categorías básicas del pensamiento económico) in 1987. This article reviews its most recent and updated version released in 2015. Beyond a brilliant criticism of neoclassical economics, he discusses the underlying ideology and implications of the notion of economic system uncritically endorsed by most schools of economic thought. Transcending the usual dichotomy between ‘orthodox’ and ‘heterodox’ economics, Naredo calls for an economic transition built on the integration of different kinds of scientific knowledge as well as other intuitive, metaphysical and ethical fields in favour of a truly inclusive economics. This is, he warns us, a sine qua non for a socioecological transformation to flourish.

A finales de 2019, más de 11.000 científicos declararon que afrontamos una emergencia climática que obliga a actuar con urgencia, lo que muestra el fracaso de la agenda climática global (ACG). Desde sus inicios hace treinta años, no se ha revertido la tendencia creciente de las emisiones globales. Este artículo contribuye al debate existente en torno al análisis de la influencia de factores económicos y políticos sobre el diseño de ACG examinando su objetivo de crecimiento económico. Buscamos aclarar si las reglas del juego económico mundial, sustentadas en la ideología del crecimiento, impulsora del actual metabolismo socioeconómico extractivista que subyace a la crisis socioecológica planetaria, determinan dicha agenda. Así, revisamos los principales eventos internacionales en torno al cambio climático (CC) y documentamos un giro en los principios de la política climática a partir de los años ochenta del siglo pasado, según el cual el crecimiento dejó de verse como la causa del CC para verse como su solución. Argumentamos que el hecho de promover un desarrollo sostenible basado en el crecimiento explica el fracaso de la política climática. Y es que esto resulta en una política demasiado optimista hacia las soluciones tecnológicas y los instrumentos de mercado que lleva a creer que el crecimiento verde es posible y la solución al CC, lo que limita la acción a la “descarbonización” de la economía y la adaptación al CC ignorando otros aspectos sociopolíticos relevantes.

Introducción al semi-monográfico