Degrowth has evolved within a decade from an activist movement into a multi-disciplinary academic paradigm. However, an overview taking stock of the peer-refereed degrowth literature is yet missing. Here, we review 91 articles that were published between 2006 and 2015. We find that the academic degrowth discourse occupies a small but expanding niche at the intersection of social and applied environmental sciences. The discourse is shaped by authors from high-income, mainly Mediterranean, countries. Until 2012, articles largely constitute conceptual essays endorsed by normative claims. More recently, degrowth has branched out into modelling, empirical assessments, and the study of concrete implementations. Authors tend to agree in that economic growth cannot be sustained ad infinitum on a resource constraint planet and that degrowth requires far reaching societal change. Whether degrowth should be considered as a collectively consented choice or an environmentally-imposed inevitability constitutes a major debate among degrowth thinkers. We argue that the academic discourse could benefit from rigid hypotheses testing through input-output modelling, material flow analysis, life-cycle assessments, or social surveys. By analyzing the potentials for non-market value creation and identifying concrete well-being benefits, the degrowth discourse could receive wider public support and contribute to a paradigmatic change in the social sciences.

中文翻译：

---

Degrowth – 盘点和审查新兴的学术范式

Degrowth 在十年内从激进主义运动演变为多学科学术范式。然而，还缺乏对同行评议的退化文献的概述。在这里，我们回顾了 2006 年至 2015 年间发表的 91 篇文章。我们发现，学术退化话语在社会科学和应用环境科学的交叉领域占据了一个小而不断扩大的领域。话语由来自高收入国家（主要是地中海国家）的作者塑造。直到 2012 年，文章在很大程度上构成了规范性主张认可的概念性文章。最近，去增长已经扩展到建模、经验评估和具体实施的研究。作者倾向于同意，在资源受限的星球上，经济增长不能无限地持续下去，而去增长需要深远的社会变革。应该将去生长视为集体同意的选择还是环境强加的必然性，这构成了去生长思想家之间的主要辩论。我们认为，学术话语可以从通过输入输出建模、物质流分析、生命周期评估或社会调查进行的严格假设检验中受益。通过分析非市场价值创造的潜力并确定具体的福祉利益，去增长话语可以获得更广泛的公众支持，并有助于社会科学的范式变革。应该将去生长视为集体同意的选择还是环境强加的必然性，这构成了去生长思想家之间的主要辩论。我们认为，学术话语可以从通过输入输出建模、物质流分析、生命周期评估或社会调查进行的严格假设检验中受益。通过分析非市场价值创造的潜力并确定具体的福祉利益，去增长话语可以获得更广泛的公众支持，并有助于社会科学的范式变革。应该将去生长视为集体同意的选择还是环境强加的必然性，这构成了去生长思想家之间的主要辩论。我们认为，学术话语可以从通过输入输出建模、物质流分析、生命周期评估或社会调查进行的严格假设检验中受益。通过分析非市场价值创造的潜力并确定具体的福祉利益，去增长话语可以获得更广泛的公众支持，并有助于社会科学的范式变革。