Weird method. Say I want to write a review on the state of economics. I choose all articles with the word 'economics' in the title, and then - surprise surprise - I find most of them are reviews. What an indictment of the state of economics: 'they are only writing reviews'!
https://twitter.com/ProfJeroenBergh/status/1830600588964364696
Ok, maybe 'degrowth studies' (sic) are not the equivalent of economics, but of 'the economy'. So I do a lit review of articles with the word 'economy' in the title, and - surprise surprise - I find that most of them are crappy pieces on the circular or the sustainable 'economy'.
Say you had to write a literature review on the state of 'climate models'. Would you only review articles with the word 'climate model' in the title, or would you go after finding actual articles with climate models?
This supposed review of degrowth studies (sic) is not really a review, it is a bad-faith hit piece based on a badly constructed selection meant to show that the studies reviewed are bad. It only shows that the process of selection was bad.
Few, if any, of the most important recent (and older) contributions to degrowth that I know of, are included. For a serious review of the field, stay tuned: we have a co-authored article with the top names in the field in the process of being published in a top journal.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
