Debunking competition - Global Ecologically Unequal Exchange explained by exploitation and control relations

Mainstream economic theory argues that competition is the fundamental force regulating the mechanism of production and exchange in the global economy1. Accordingly, countries’ interaction in international trade is presumed to benefit all parties2,3. However, the increasing socioeconomic inequalities across and within countries and global environmental degradation challenge this conventional wisdom4–6. Ecologically Unequal Exchange, among other critical theories, argues that international trade triggers asymmetries in the distribution of benefits and costs between Core and Periphery regions of the global economic system7. Using a combined economic-ecological model, here we show that relations between countries follow dynamics of exploitation and control rather than competition or mutualism. Periphery and semi-periphery present higher environmental intensities, but the burden of such environmental degradation can be directly attributed to handful regions, which acquire and drive most environmental resources. Core regions enhance their economic and environmental performance at the national level by exploiting and controlling Semi-periphery and Periphery regions. Our results demonstrate that green growth and dematerialization policies may be unable to achieve socially fair and environmentally sustainable societies at the global level. We call for abandoning growth-oriented policies to avoid counterproductive efforts in the transition towards sustainability.