Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Andrei Domingues Cechin
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Master's Dissertation |
| Press: | São Paulo. |
| Institution: | Universidade de São Paulo (USP). Instituto de Eletrotécnica e Energia (IEE/BT) |
| Defense date: | 2008-07-28 |
| Examining board members: |
Jose Eli Savoia da Veiga;
Sonia Maria Barros de Oliveira;
Ademar Ribeiro Romero
|
| Advisor: | Jose Eli Savoia da Veiga |
| Abstract | |
Introduction - It is crucial to know Georgescu\'s view about what is now called \"Sustainable Development\". An economist that made many contributions to mainstream economics during most part of his life, and proposed in the 1970\'s a new view of the economic process, based in Thermodynamics. He is seen as one of the main precursors of Ecological Economics, if not the most important one. Ecological Economics studies the economic system regarding the biophysical conditions of it\'s interactions with the environment. If he really anticipated important questions about the environmental sustainability of the development process, why weren\'t his scientific ideas taken seriously? Scope - This research has the purpose to rescue Georgescu\'s ideas, a revolutionary thinker whose contribution is highly valuable to the understanding of society-nature relationships. Bibliography - This work was based in Georgescu\'s books and papers, in the works of authors who were criticized by him. It was also based in the reading of ecological economists\' papers, and in publications of international agencies, especially those related to energy and global warming. Aspects - The research approached Georgescu\'s revolution with respect to conventional economic reasoning, the growth versus scarcity debate, and the elements that make him a precursor of ecological economics. It was also assessed how his thoughts may illuminate the sustainable development debate, with special emphasis on the energy transition discussion. Conclusion - It seems that his vision about the economic process represents the first scientific revolution in Economics, because he rejected the paradigm that limits the frontiers of the economic process where commodity circulation can be observed. His most inconvenient ideas, like that of development being compatible with \'degrowth\' of the product in the long term future also contributed to his excision. In the beginning of the 21st century, however, they find a more propitious environment, be it because of the importance attributed to global environmental issues, be it because of the perception that complex phenomena cannot be understood with a reductionist, mechanic and static scientific framework. The rehabilitation process of his scientific work has happened especially in Ecological Economics and in the \'out-of-equilibrium\' economics. (AU) | |