This conceptual paper argues that economics is not a discipline well placed for dealing with the idea of transformation because it developed within one mode of society at a time of global population growth and hence also continuous demand growth. Today, in contrast, there is currently an acceleration in the fall of births, with birth rates having fallen steadily since the late 1960s but now falling faster than before. At the same time global awareness of environmental limits has risen greatly, although there is also a growth in more scepticism and ethno-nationalistic reactions to globalization and inequality. When surveyed, the populations of many countries are now more fearful than they were a few years ago. Trust in our current economic systems is falling. Concerns over poverty, inequality, the cost of living and the fear of unemployment have all risen. A search is on for better ways in which we might live in future but it is highly disjointed. A parallel is drawn in the paper between fears in the 1930s over the future of some societies (including concerning birth rates), and similar but more widespread fears today. When demand falls because there are fewer young people, and we also realise we who are rich need to consume less, to what paradigm do we turn? An economics of enough is about that concern but also touches on the increasing number of environmentalists, social scientists and younger activists, who have had enough of conventional economics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Danny Dorling (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: