Outgoing Address

Josh Farley
2020-2021 President-ISEE

I always plan to write a New Year letter to all my friends and family, but rarely get around to it.  This year I was supposed to be visiting best friends and family in Brazil whom we have not seen since the start of the COVID pandemic. Plane travel is always a difficult decision forcing me to balance carbon emissions against my promise to my wife that we would remain in touch with her family, who are also some of my favorite people in the world.  COVID had other plans, however. Literally just as we were walking out the door on the way to the airport, the Department of Health called to say my daughter had tested positive.  We swapped the long summer days and subtropical beaches of Florianopolis for quarantine at home with the family as COVID tore through the household. Thanks to the vaccines, none of us got more than a mild case.  We’re all deeply grateful to lead such privileged lives that our worst-case scenario for the holidays was to spend them with family in our warm, comfortable home.   As a bonus, I finally have time to write those yearend letters, including this one to all of you. 

I begin with a reflection on the status of our field.  I first discovered EE while doing my PhD in a neoliberal agricultural economics program.  I knew within one semester that mainstream economics was based on bad science and worse ethics and was not for me. An opportunity to spend a year in Brazil on an interdisciplinary, pre-dissertation fellowship explicitly not studying economics convinced me to continue.  While there, I discovered Herman Daly’s work, then Georgescu-Roegen’s, followed by the pantheon of pioneers in our field.  I returned to my doctoral work eager to become an ecological economist, only to be told by my committee that if I insisted on pursuing that route, I would never get a job or even a publication.  I wrote to Herman Daly as an anonymous grad student, asking how I could become an ecological economist, and he kindly responded, telling me to finish my degree and call myself one.  I did as he said, convinced that EE was the future of economics. 

Unfortunately, mainstream, neoliberal economic has continued to dominate in academia, and most of the problems ecological economics was created to address have grown worse.  When the ISEE was founded in 1989, atmospheric CO2 was still below 350 ppm, widely considered the threshold for unacceptable climate change. It is now ~420 ppm, with growing evidence of already unacceptable costs, especially in countries lacking the resources required to adapt.   Populations of wild vertebrates have fallen by more than half over the last 50 years as the human population has doubled.  Humans and their livestock now outweigh terrestrial vertebrates by 25:1, humans alone by 10:1. Built human infrastructure outweighs all living things on Earth; plastic alone weighs twice as much as all animals, and doubles in mass every 15 years. Skyrocketing inequality has only been exacerbated by the COVID crisis. 

But we have now reached a crossroads in human history.  Business as usual threatens imminent catastrophic ecological impacts, which will force radical and inherently unpredictable changes to our economic systems. Avoiding ecological catastrophe will require radical changes to global economies and cultures. Radical change is unavoidable.  Planned, intentional change is likely to be far less disruptive and uncertain than unplanned destruction of the global ecosystems on which we depend for survival.

I would like to share my hopes that the tide is changing. Many of the key insights of ecological economics are finally gaining ground, while both pundits and the public increasingly recognize the failures of mainstream economics. There are now many fine graduate programs in EE, and student interest appears to be surging.  Student manifestos against the narrow, context free approach of mainstream economic programs proliferate. Formerly mainstream economists such as Piketty are decrying worsening inequality and questioning capitalism, while even US Federal Reserve economists can acknowledge that “Mainstream economics is replete with ideas that “everyone knows” to be true, but that are actually arrant nonsense”[1].  Many of us fear that this may be too little, too late, and we are too far into overshoot to recover, but it would not be the first time that predictions of imminent doom have proven wrong. Nature may prove more resilient and humans more innovative and adaptable than we believe.  Perhaps this next generation will learn that working together to overcome shared challenges provides a richer and more meaningful life than soul-crushing corporate jobs and overconsumption.  I am hopeful that Ecological Economics and the ISEE can help accelerate these incipient changes and contribute to the socially just sustainability transition we so desperately need. 

I ran for President of ISEE four years ago not because I wanted the position but because I believe the core tenets of EE are necessary to guide radical change in the desired direction, the ISEE can help advance the EE agenda, and I had a responsibility to help.  As I noted in my candidate statement, I was deeply concerned about my ability to do an adequate job.  Fortunately, my excellent fellow board members—all hard-working, dedicated, and effective— more than covered my slack.  We shifted from at most a couple meetings per year to at least one per month, and I believe we have much to show for it.  Drawing on documents drafted by other board members, I provide here a brief synopsis of what we have achieved over the last two years.

CONFERENCES

At our member meeting at the 15th ISEE conference in Puebla just over two years ago we had long discussions about the future of ISEE conferences, debating among other things the merits of virtual, hybrid and in-person conferences, and of partnering with like-minded societies. The board received excellent conference proposals, one from Manchester University for a joint conference with 7th annual Degrowth and another from the Russian Society.  We chose the former to experiment with joint conferences.  COVID-19 forced us to postpone the conference, but we decided to host a virtual symposium on the original dates:  Economy and livelihoods after Covid-19: A global on-line symposium of the International Degrowth Network and the International Society for Ecological Economics. 1st – 4th September 2020, University of Manchester.  We held the actual conference, Building Alternative Livelihoods in times of ecological and political crisis: International Online Joint Conference of the international degrowth research networks, the International Society for Ecological Economics and the European Society for Ecological Economics, 5th – 8th July 2021 – hosted by University of Manchester, UK.  Both events were successful proofs of concept: engaging virtual conferences are possible. We had about 1000 registrants for the first event and some 2400 for the second. We are deeply thankful for the Manchester team whose hard work made it possible. 

Postponing the conference disrupted our tradition of holding ISEE conferences in even years and regional society conferences in odd years, but also provides an opportunity for new approaches. Appendix 1 summarizes some of our board discussions of available options.  Note that both appendices were also inputs to the post-conference business meeting.

[1] https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2021062pap.pdf

REBUILDING TIES WITH THE JOURNAL

We also worked hard to rebuild our ties with both the editorial team and the publisher of our flagship journal, Ecological Economics.  We assume that many members of the society share the Board’s concerns over the for-profit nature of most academic publishing, in which companies profit by price-rationing access to the knowledge generate to serve the public good or by charging those who produce that knowledge for its publication, but also recognize the importance of maintaining a high-quality journal.  Appendix 2 summarizes our discussions with regional societies about the journal as well as our progress on building stronger relationships with Elsevier and the editorial team.

REVISION OF CONSTITUTION AND BYLAWS

We revised the constitution and bylaws to better conform to existing practice, but also to add two student members to the board and established staggered terms for board members to ensure continuity. 

COORDINATION WITH REGIONAL SOCIETIES

We worked to strengthen our ties with regional societies by consulting with their Presidents as we worked on various issues, some outlined in appendix 2.  We learned that regional societies were often unaware of the benefits they received from affiliation with ISEE, including access to complete membership lists, and that we need to provide better documentation to ensure smooth transitions when new boards are elected.  We plan to establish regular board meetings with regional societies in the future.

MISCELLANOUS ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Thanks to our engaged board members, we have:

• Substantially improved our website;
• Created a YouTube Channel open to member contributions;
• Agreed to an internship for PhD students at the Vatican Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development, with money raised by Stuart Scott, continuing an outreach effort initiated by Clovis Cavalcanti and Stuart Scott;
• Successfully nominated Joan Martinez-Alier to the Balzan prize of 2020
• Awarded the Boulding Prize to Rashid Hassan in September 2020
• Organized a semi-plenary session on “Ecological economics for earth system governance in turbulent times” at the Bratislava 2021 Earth System Governance Conference.

To conclude this already overly long letter, I sincerely thank departing board members for all their hard work, and warmly welcome the new President, President-Elect and Board of the ISEE.  We managed to field a slate of exceptional candidates in a closely contested election with high participation. We retained some of our most experienced board members while welcoming a variety of bright, capable and engaged ecological economists from around the globe.  I look forward to working with all of you to create a stronger, more productive, and more effective ISEE that can make meaningful contributions to a socially just sustainability transition. 

Appendix 1

Planning of future ISEE conferences – Status October 2020

Covid 19 led to the postponement of the planned 16th ISEE Conference that was to be held as a joint conference with the 7th International Degrowth Conference in Manchester in 2020. As the conference has been postponed to July 2021, the long tradition of having the ISEE conferences in even years and the conferences of regional societies in odd years will thus be broken.

Simultaneously, other conditions have changed:

• The climate crisis has led many to call for a reduction of flying or even for “staying grounded”.
• Digital technologies have improved the opportunities for online meetings and conferences and more academics have learned to use the technologies during the pandemic.
• The pandemic can be expected to discourage future travelling.

Considering these new conditions, the ISEE Board invited the regional societies to discuss how to proceed with future ISEE conferences. Based on a meeting and a number of written contributions, this summary is intended to inform the membership of the status of these discussions. There is not agreement about everything, but the following seems to be widely held positions at the moment.

Joint and hybrid conferences – and other events

We have to reduce flying, and some of the traditional conference activities can be replaced by online seminars. Still, networking is important and can be difficult to ensure by online activities only, particularly for young scholars and newcomers to the field. A balanced solution could be to reduce the number of large conferences by letting the separate ISEE conferences be replaced by joint conferences with regional societies. Then every second year, one of the regional societies could replace a regional conference by a joint conference with ISEE. Simultaneously, the conferences could be hybrid in the sense that they combine physical presence for some participants with online presence for others, who live nearby and can travel in a reasonable way.

To make ecological economics more widely known and to form relevant contacts, our conferences could be organized together with like-minded societies, as we have already done in several cases. Since the dominant research interests are influenced by regional priorities, potential cooperators would differ according to regions.

There is a need to experiment with new formats both to improve the quality of conferences and to promote alternative activities such as seminar series. It would be useful to have a shared platform to increase the visibility of all the offers provided by ISEE, the regional societies and universities working with ecological economics.

Priority to activities for young scholars

It is decisive for the survival of the society to recruit young scholars. Therefore, it should have high priority to organize activities that appeal to them. For young scholars it can be important to meet in person to establish a network, but the big conferences may not be the best way to achieve this. Smaller and more focused conferences, workshops, training activities etc. may be more effective. Several regional societies have much experience with such activities, both physical and online. It could be a task for ISEE to organize knowledge sharing about these practices among the regional societies.

Membership and funding

Conferences have been important to encourage academics to become members of both the international and the regional societies because of reduced conference fees. We have two challenges here: one is the recruitment of new members, and the other is the funding of the societies’ activities. They may call for separate solutions, particularly if membership becomes free in the longer run. Regarding membership, the activities for young scholars are important, and these activities may also contribute to funding either through fees or public funding. In addition, small fees for online participation in conferences and other events can be applied. People can be motivated to pay, if they understand that they support the funding of the society. But other ideas for fundraising are needed, for instance, for running websites.

Outreach

Conferences and other events are not only important for networking and academic activity, but could also serve as a basis for outreach to the wider society, including policy makers, NGOs, think tanks, corporations, etc. It is important to deal with topics of urgency and to try to get some impact.

Practical issues

It is difficult to find organizers for conferences, as it involves a lot of work. It may still be a valid item in a person’s tenure dossier, but it has become more difficult to find the time.

Running online and hybrid conferences requires technical support, which is not always available from universities.

Appendix 2

Summary of key points from the meeting with representatives from the regional societies 29 January 2021 regarding Ecological Economics

The participants acknowledge the importance of the journal as a key asset for the ecological economics community:

• The journal has a long history, a high quality and a good brand
• It is important for ecological economists to have a publication outlet with a high ranking
• ISEE depends on the royalties from Elsevier.

The participants voice concerns regarding Elsevier’s business model, where the high profit margin is based on much free work from researchers as well as public funding. It is problematic that ISEE is associated with this business model, but our leverage is limited. The struggle with the large publishers is first of all carried out by governments, funding bodies, universities, and libraries, and the situation changes all the time, making it difficult for us to navigate.

The business model is also a challenge to the quality of the journal. Ever changing IT platforms, outsourcing resulting in difficult communication, errors and bad copyediting, pressure for handling more submissions combined with low pay for handling editors, and the plan to replace the managing editor with the Elsevier journal manager in India threaten to undermine the quality. Some participants referred to bad experiences in relation to the editing of special issues – an experience that was shared by others, who had edited special issues for other large publishers.

The current trend towards providing open access can be seen as positive from a diffusion perspective. However, when it is combined with for-profit publishing, the transition towards open access creates another problem, because some researchers are precluded from publishing by high fees. It is key challenge to ensure that quality papers can be published independently of the ability to pay.

More unrelated to Elsevier’s business model, some participants voiced concerns about the editorial policy of the journal. Some would like the journal to concentrate on ecological economics in a more narrow sense, but it is acknowledged that the broad coverage is important to keep up the ranking and to provide a publication outlet for ecological economists that is not considered to be a narrow niche publication.

ISEE is bound by contract with Elsevier not to support competing journals, but the regional societies can back or run other journals. Examples are Environmental Policy and Governance (the European society), Ecology, Economy and Society (the Indian society) and Revista Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica (the Latin American societies). The participants find that Ecological Economics as the journal of ISEE coexists well with such regional initiatives that have their own editorial policies.

Conclusions

We should

• continue the cooperation with Elsevier on Ecological Economics
• try to defend the quality of the journal by helping the editorial team to get improved working conditions
• try to reinvigorate the relationship between the journal and our membership
• discuss with Elsevier how to avoid that a transition to full open access raises barriers for publication.

Later follow up on activities related to the journal Ecological Economics

The Journal Ecological Economics is a key asset for the ecological economics community, and therefore it should be strengthened. The Journal has an excellent performance, in terms of quality, scope diversity and a high influence in the academic community. However, it faces a number of challenges, including a rising number of submissions.

The allocation of legal rights between Elsevier and the ISEE was decided long ago (1988), when the partnership was established for the creation of the journal.

One of the main activities of the current board administration has been to assess and improve the relationship with Elsevier and the editors-in-chief of the Journal.

Due to different reasons, such relationship has not been optimal during a number of years in the past.

After several internal discussions, external advice, and meetings, the Board has however managed to:

1. Re-establish a fruitful communication with Elsevier and the editors-in-chief.
2. Set a joint meeting for September 2021, in order to assess the performance of the journal, its main challenges and foresee strategic decisions to address them.

In addition, during recent months, the Journal has expanded the number of handling editors, which was very needed, in order to cope with a rising publication demand.