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.

主流经济学理论认为，竞争是调节全球经济中生产与交换机制的核心动力¹。据此，学界普遍认为国际贸易中的国家互动可使所有参与方获益²,³。然而，各国间及各国国内日益加剧的社会经济不平等，以及全球范围内的环境退化，正对这一传统认知构成挑战⁴–⁶。其中，生态不平等交换（Ecologically Unequal Exchange）等关键理论指出，国际贸易会引发全球经济体系中核心（Core）与外围（Periphery）区域之间收益与成本分配的不对称性⁷。本研究通过经济-生态耦合模型，证明国家间的关系实则遵循剥削与控制的动态逻辑，而非竞争或共生模式。外围与半外围区域的环境强度更高，但此类环境退化的负担可直接归咎于少数获取并支配绝大多数环境资源的区域。核心区域通过剥削与控制半外围及外围区域，在国家层面实现了经济与环境表现的提升。本研究结果表明，绿色增长与去物质化政策或无法在全球层面实现兼具社会公平性与环境可持续性的社会。我们呼吁摒弃增长导向型政策，以免在迈向可持续发展的转型中出现适得其反的效果。