Open Access

Johannes Hirata

• The Corona pandemic confronted societies with several unexpected constraints that had the effect of making certain goods much scarcer than before. Withdrawal from Russian oil and gas supplies has a similar effect. Carbon abatement can also be seen as a deliberate choice to make certain goods scarc-er than they actually are. These parallels suggests that it may be worthwhile to take a close look at societies’ responses to all three challenges. This paper makes an attempt to synthetize empirical and theoretical insights regarding these scarcity shocks from a well-being perspective, i.e. replacing the prevalent welfare economic focus on production and consumption with a focus on sustainable well-being. Taking the case of Germany, it will be argued that the observed responses to all three challenges reflect a focus on maintaining incomes and production and that therefore these responses risk being detrimental to sustainable wellbeing and even to economic stability. This is particularly relevant if carbon abatement requires not only transient material sacrifices but lasting and significant reduc-tions of consumption. It will be argued that the impact of these new scarcities will be much less problematic in a society that acknowledges the priority of sustainable wellbeing over production and consumption measures. Such a society would still need to incur material sacrifices, but these need not translate into a loss of wellbeing if economic conditions and social norms adapt. This will also be more sustainable not only in terms of ecological impact, but also in terms of debt, inflation and inequality.