Hi everyone,
As it turns out, I am writing a textbook on sustainability and I am to the part where I talk about LTG. I am curious how this audience sees the LTG "facts" - that is, is there anything that is conclusively disproven from the LTG work? For my part, I find Graham Turner's 2008 piece in Global Env. Change, "A comparison of The Limits to Growth with 30 years of reality" of particular interest. While I had previously been quite doubtful of the accuracy/importance of LTG, I admittedly had not actually read the whole thing, including all the updated editions; and, it seems that many of the perceived shortcomings of LTG come from either incorrect readings of the models or from those who have not actually thoroughly read it. For example, there is the common accusation that they don't take technology or markets seriously, but in fact, this constitutes chapter 6 in the 30 year update and is included specifically in their models in that chapter. That said, I would be interested in any specific (important) claims that we might think are demonstrably incorrect as I consider this work for the textbook. Certainly we could criticize it for the way it aggregates all dynamics into a global monolithic model, and the nature of politics are obscured terribly, but really I am concerned more about demonstrable "errors". Thanks in advance! Peter Peter J. Jacques, Ph.D. Associate Professor Department of Political Science University of Central Florida P.O. Box 161356 4000 Central Florida Blvd. Orlando, FL 32816-1356 Phone: (407) 823-2608<tel:%28407%29%20823-2608> Fax: (407) 823-0051<tel:%28407%29%20823-0051> Peter J. Jacques, Ph.D. View my CV, articles, teaching documents, etc... here: http://ucf.academia.edu/PeterJacques
