Call for contributions - Organizing Sufficiency in the Global South: Justice Effectiveness and Instrumentation

International Roundtable Conference 

Sciences Po Paris, France | October 2 & 3 2025 

Deadline: March 1 2025

Organizers

Manisha Anantharaman (Sciences Po), Yamina Saheb (World Sufficiency Lab Sciences Po), Mallory Zhan (Sciences Po)

Background 

The concept of sufficiency has gained traction in both public and scholarly debates in recent years as an organizing principle to direct the ecological transition. Sufficiency, as defined in Saheb (2021) and later included in the 2022 IPCC report on climate mitigation, refers to "a set of policy measures and daily practices that avoid the demand for energy, materials, land, water, and other natural resources while providing wellbeing for all within the planetary boundaries”. This definition implies a lower limit of resource consumption to ensure human well-being and an upper limit defined by planetary boundaries, with the objective to deliver equity within and across countries and generations. Implicated in this is a broader reassessment of human needs and the ways in which they can be met by avoiding the overdemand for resources (Princen 2005; Saheb 2021). This poses significant policy challenges, both in terms of expanding the ambit of public policy intervention, and raising questions at the appropriate scales of governance in which policies for sufficiency can be designed and implemented.

Sufficiency is a cross-cutting issue that involves different policy fields and actors, relevant at multiple levels and scales; it encompasses a wide range of instruments and covers different economic areas (Schneidewind and Zahrnt 2014; Linnanen et al. 2020). In the OECD countries, a number of sufficiency policies have been proposed and implemented, notable examples include the reduction of working hours (e.g., Belgium, Iceland), fare-free public transport (e.g., Luxembourg, Malta), emission-differentiated road traffic tax (e.g., Sweden, Finland, Germany), and the introduction of sufficiency in the French 2015 energy transition law, to name but a few. An European energy sufficiency policy database has recently been developed (Zell-Ziegler et al. 2024). Due to the energy crisis, a great number of sufficiency policies focus on energy, but less is known about other sectors. Furthermore, there are few evaluations of sufficiency policies to date, andeven less is known about sufficiency elsewhere in the world.

However, Thailand was the first country to introduce sufficiency in its policies by implementing in the nineties its philosophy of a sufficiency economy (Mongsawad 2010), which is a paradigm shift in development policies. Sufficiency is also a fast evolving field for policy innovation in many emerging economies, who are tasked to address the significant environmental footprints of its growing consumer classes. It is estimated that a third of the top 10% consuming households worldwide live in emerging economies (Chancel and Piketty 2015). Several sufficiency measures discussed above have been implemented in emerging economies—though not always explicitly labeled as such—for example, fare-free bus programs for senior citizens in Brazilian and Chinese cities, and for women in the Indian states of Tamil Nadu and Delhi. To understand how current and future sufficiency policies can be better designed and implemented across contexts, it is crucial to learn from diverse global experiences.

The Roundtable Conference 

The roundtable conference will bring together around 30 researchers and practitioners at Sciences Po in Paris to examine policies for sufficiency in emerging economies. This workshop aims at generating learnings based on an open, cross-cultural, inter and trans-disciplinary dialogue, to shed light on promising pathways for effective sufficiency policies across countries. To apply to the conference, please submit an abstract (500 words max) evaluating policies or policy proposals for sufficiency in an emerging economy. Your contribution should address one or more of the following questions that will guide the discussions at the two-day conference.

• Are the policies identified labeled as sufficiency measures? How is sufficiency as an area of policy making understood within the specific cultural and socio-political context of the country? 

While sufficiency may still be a nascent area of policy intervention, policies supporting socio-ecological transitions grounded in the principles of sufficiency have existed for some time. For instance, in the field of sustainable consumption and production (SCP), many policies now address unsustainable levels of consumption by promoting governance for 'strong sustainable consumption' (Lorek and Fuchs, 2013) and ensuring a fair consumption space for all (Akenji et al., 2021). SCP policies may overlap with sufficiency measures, and how they are labelled and communicated by policymakers remains underexplored. Emerging, adjacent policies developed under frameworks such as post-growth, de-growth, and the well-being economy further blur the boundaries of sufficiency measures. Moreover, the interpretation and application of the term 'sufficiency' are shaped by each country’s unique cultural, historical, and socio-political context.

• How is the problem of unsustainable resource extraction and consumption perceived by the government and the public at large in the specific context of the policies? 

Problem perceptions and framing are fundamental to the handling of a policy problem. They shape decisions over whether a policy is developed at all, what instruments are employed, when action is taken, at what level that action is focused, and what resources will be devoted to it (Haug et al. 2010). Unsustainable resource extraction and consumption could be framed as an issue of individual behaviors and choices, or state and/or market failure. This also implies a questioning of the official policy goals and the underlying ideological foundations – which has been sidelined in many evaluation studies of climate policies (Huitema et al. 2011).

• What are the choices of instruments and modes of governance in the specific context of the policies? And were the choices effective in delivering the desired policy outcomes?

 Coherent combinations of policy modes, instruments and policy packages where different elements interact and reinforce each other are critical for success. Governments can have a preference for specific instruments, ranging from legislative/regulatory, economic/fiscal, agreement based/co-operative, and information/communication based instruments, etc. Achieving sufficiency requires innovative instrumental mixes. Another central question relates to the balance between hierarchical authority and market autonomy. Voluntary actions have proven to be inadequate to bring about far-reaching changes in behavior by individuals, firms and industries (Haug et al. 2010; Saujot et al. 2024). Conversely, more rigid and robust regulatory measures often face political challenges, making it difficult to garner widespread support for their adoption. It is imperative to understand how different modes and instruments have been mobilized in different contexts.

• How did sufficiency policies emerge and come to be implemented, and to what extent do their development and implementation embody a just transition? 

Although policy interventions may seek to generate net social benefits, they can generate winners and losers, both locally and globally. Further, policies that are developed without meaningful public participation risk lacking legitimacy, as they may not reflect the diverse perspectives and needs of society. Transparency in the decision-making process is essential to ensure that the public understands the rationale behind the policies and has the opportunity to participate in their design. Innovative participatory processes, such as deliberative forums, mini publics, and pilot experiments with motivated communities might be particularly useful before nation-wide implementation – but are rarely implemented. Exploring different dimensions of justice is thus a central theme in the evaluation of sufficiency policies.

• What are the implications for collective well-being as a result of the policies? And what are the approaches to evaluating effectiveness in terms of needs satisfaction?

 The effectiveness of climate and environmental policies have traditionally focused on emission reductions. Since the enhancement of collective well being – understood as the fulfillment of fundamental human needs (Doyal and Gough 1991; Max-Neef 1991; Di Giulio and Defila 2019) – is the normative goal of sufficiency policies, effectiveness should also be reinterpreted in relation to needs satisfaction. The evaluation of needs satisfaction faces significant methodological challenges, raising questions such as how can well-being be measured both objectively (provisioning systems and factors) and subjectively (assessment of life satisfaction) (see for example, Laurent 2021), and how can changes in well-being be attributed to sufficiency policies.

Note for the contributors 

To apply to the conference, please submit your abstract along with a short biography using this link by March 1 2025. Upon acceptance, you will be asked to provide a longer contribution (2,000-3,000 words) which will be published as part of "Débats” series organized by the Laboratory for Interdisciplinary Evaluation of Public Policies (LIEPP) at Sciences Po, a laboratory that aims to develop the evaluation of public policies through an interdisciplinary scientific approach. At the conference, we will explore the possibility of a journal article or special issue. The conference is financed by LIEPP. The costs of venue and food will be covered by the event organizers, with the expectation that the participants arrange their own travel and accommodation. Some funds have been reserved to support participants from non OECD countries and early career researchers. Please indicate in your application form if you need financial and/or visa support. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the organizer (mallory.zhan@sciencespo.fr).

Key dates 

• March 1 2024 - Abstract and Short Biography 
• March 20 2024 - Communication of Acceptance
• June 30 2025 - Final Programme of the Conference 
• October 2&3 2025 - Conference & Social Activities

References 

Akenji, L., Bengtsson, M., Lettenmeier, M., Fawcett, T., Saheb, Y., Coote, A., Capstick, S., Gore, T., Wackernagel, M., and Kenner, D. (2021) 1.5-Degree Lifestyles: Towards a Fair Consumption Space for All. Berlin: Hot or Cool Institute.

Chancel, L. and Piketty, T. (2015) Carbon and inequality: From Kyoto to Paris. Paris School of Economics. 

Di Giulio, A. and Defila, R. (2019) 'The "Good Life" and Protected Needs', in Kalfagianni, A., Fuchs, D., and Hayden, A. (eds.) Routledge Handbook of Global Sustainability Governance, 100–114. London: Routledge.

Doyal, L. and Gough, I. (1991) A Theory of Human Need. London: Macmillan. 

Gough, I. (2017a) Heat, Greed and Human Need Climate Change, Capitalism and Sustainable Wellbeing. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. 

Gough, I. (2017b) 'Recomposing Consumption: Defining Necessities for Sustainable and Equitable Well-Being', Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 375(2095): 20160379. 

Haug, C., Rayner, T., Jordan, A., et al. (2010) 'Navigating the dilemmas of climate policy in Europe: evidence from policy evaluation studies', Climatic Change, 101(3): 427–445. 

Huitema, D., Jordan, A., Massey, E., et al. (2011) 'The evaluation of climate policy: theory and emerging practice in Europe', Policy Sciences, 44(2): 179–198. 

IPCC (2022) Summary for Policymakers. In: Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D.C., Poloczanska, E.S., Mintenbeck, K., Tignor, M., Alegría, A., Craig, M., Langsdorf, S., Löschke, S., Möller, V., Okem, A. (eds.) Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA, pp. 3-33. doi:10.1017/9781009325844.001.

Linnanen, L., Nyfors, T., Heinonen, T., et al. (2020) 'The Sufficiency Perspective in Climate Policy: How to Recompose Consumption', Suomen ilmastopaneelin raportteja. 

Laurent, É. (2021) The Well-Being Transition: Analysis and Policy. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 

Lorek, S. and Fuchs, D. (2011). Strong sustainable consumption governance – precondition for a degrowth path? Journal of Cleaner Production, pp.36–43. 

Max-Neef, M. (1991) Human Scale Development: Conception, Application and Further Reflections. New York: Apex Press. 

Mongsawad, P. (2012). The philosophy of the sufficiency economy: a contribution to the theory of development. Asia-Pacific Development Journal, 17(1):123–143. 

Princen, T. (2005) The Logic of Sufficiency. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 

Saheb, Y. (2021) 'COP26: Sufficiency Should be First'. Buildings and Cities. Available at: https://www.buildingsandcities.org/insights/commentaries/cop26-sufficiency.htm 

Saujot, M. et al. (2024). “Where there’s a way, there’s a will”. Social conditions for achieving the ecological transition: a lifestyle approach IDDRI, Issue Brief N°08/24. 

Schneidewind, U., Zahrnt, A., and Schneidewind, U. (2014) The Politics of Sufficiency: Making It Easier to Li the Good Life. München: Oekom. 

Zell-Ziegler, C., Best, B., Thema, J., Wiese, F., Vogel, B., Cordroch, L., Lage, J., Schöpf, D. (2024). European Sufficiency Policy Database [Data set]. Energy Sufficiency Research Group https://energysufficiency.de/policy-database/