degrowthuk.org
Decoupling …… again
_Post updated 12 Feb to draw attention to an error in the Guardian article and another in the ICIU report._
An article appeared in The Guardian on Thursday, December 11th, entitled “Economic growth no longer linked to carbon emissions in most of the world, study finds” 1.
The Guardian appears to have a policy of not linking the reports it cites. It is from a London-based NGO, Energy and Climate Analysis Unit (ECAU). The report2 lacks a section on study limitations and cites few references. Nor does it present more than a summary of the data.
The claim is bold but there are a number of problems with it.
## Emissions of greenhouse gases are still rising
“Total energy-related CO2 emissions increased by 0.8% in 2024, hitting an all-time high of 37.8 Gt CO2. This rise contributed to record atmospheric CO2 concentrations of 422.5 ppm in 2024, around 3 ppm higher than 2023 and 50% higher than pre-industrial levels.” That’s the generally cautious International Energy Agency3.
_IEA (2025), Global CO2 emissions from energy combustion and industrial processes and their annual change, 1900-2023, IEA, Parishttps://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/global-co2-emissions-from-energy-combustion-and-industrial-processes-and-their-annual-change-1900-2023 , Licence: CC BY 4.0_
## The degree of decoupling is far from enough
As Kallis and Hickel pointed out4, the degree of decoupling achieved by those countries is far from sufficient to yield climate safety.
Let’s look at the data. The following table shows the scale of reduction in emissions for those countries claimed to be absolutely decoupling over the period 2006-2023.5
| | **Reduction 2015-23** | **Reduction 2006-23** | | **Annual reduction 2015-2023** | **Annual reduction 2006-2023**
---|---|---|---|---|---|---
Austria | | -12.26% | -26.76% | | -1.62% | -1.81%
Belgium | | -2.50% | -10.51% | | -0.32% | -0.65%
Canada | | -9.29% | -12.36% | | -1.21% | -0.77%
Czechia | | -6.96% | -13.70% | | -0.90% | -0.86%
Denmark | | -6.96% | -33.31% | | -0.90% | -2.35%
Estonia | | -26.54% | -44.12% | | -3.78% | -3.37%
Finland | | -15.93% | -47.45% | | -2.15% | -3.71%
Germany | | -14.57% | -26.64% | | -1.95% | -1.81%
Hungary | | -4.41% | -37.60% | | -0.56% | -2.74%
Ireland | | -6.77% | -42.20% | | -0.87% | -3.17%
Japan | | -13.52% | -23.06% | | -1.80% | -1.53%
Netherlands | | -6.54% | -29.41% | | -0.84% | -2.03%
Norway | | -28.84% | -31.19% | | -4.16% | -2.18%
Poland | | -8.43% | -12.18% | | -1.10% | -0.76%
Romania | | -0.65% | -25.20% | | -0.08% | -1.69%
Slovakia | | -8.47% | -18.91% | | -1.10% | -1.23%
Spain | | -7.38% | -38.46% | | -0.95% | -2.82%
Sweden | | -10.74% | -29.92% | | -1.41% | -2.07%
United Kingdom | | -18.41% | -36.48% | | -2.51% | -2.63%
USA | | -4.60% | -17.94% | | -0.59% | -1.16%
| | | | | |
Decoupling countries | | -8.10% | -21.66% | | -1.05% | -1.43%
| | | | | |
World | | 7.60% | 24.51% | | 0.92% | 1.30%
_Own calculations from the Global Carbon Budget’s spreadsheet of national carbon emissions 6. This one is just those consumption emissions attributed to the burning and extraction of fossil fuels: emissions from the changes in land use are additional to these, and available separately. The ECAU uses the same dataset, as that used here._
So, for the United Kingdom, for example, the reduction in consumption emissions for the period 2015-2023 was -18.41%, one of the highest attained. This equated to an average -2.51% per year. Yet to reach net zero emissions by 2050, an annual reduction of 10% would be needed7. Even that would not be enough since this would allocate a disproportionately small share of the global carbon budget to the UK8. For the decoupling countries as a whole, reduction 2015-2023 was -8.1%, an average -1.05% per year, again far from enough.
Those countries, together with 21 that only decoupled since 2015, together account for 36% of emissions, 2015-2023. As the table shows, the emissions for the world as a whole have increased, at 1.3% per year since 2006 (a little slower since 2015, but that included the pandemic in 2000). So those decoupling countries are not compensating for the growth in emissions elsewhere.
_Global carbon emissions versus those of the consistently decoupling countries, 2006-23. Note, the metric is of carbon (C). To convert to CO2, as used in the IEA graph, multiply by 3.644._
It is also worth noting that the actual growth rates in these consistently decoupling countries over this period have been low. So that for the world as a whole, the decoupling challenge is clearly greater.
_World Bank data (as used in the ECAU study) showing lower GDP growth rates in the consistently decoupling group compared to their other high income peers and to the world overall._
## How good is the data?
There are questions about the reliability of such data. Drill into the methodology and a lot of it, particularly for consumption emissions is estimated from other data, with multiple uncertainties9.
## GDP estimates can be inflated
Most of the absolute decoupling countries are richer ones. The problem here is that despite using PPP (purchasing power parity), GDP in richer countries is calculated on prices there, but the products are produced in poorer countries with lower prices. (Expropriation of value). So GDP, as measured is inflated in the rich countries10. It means that decoupling is potentially overestimated, particularly where imports increase over time.
## A preliminary conclusion
The above is a quick response to the article, and the report on which it is based. The reduction in emissions is too small to make a real difference – after all, those decoupling countries are still emitting, and as Parrique11, Victor12 and others have pointed out, GDP growth makes it harder to make emissions reductions. Counterfactually, how much bigger would reductions have been without GDP growth?
Finally (for now at least), a lot of this reduction is dependent on substitution of fossil fuel generation with industrial scale ‘renewable’ power. That substitution gets harder to implement as the easier applications are substituted first, and the harder ones (heavy transport, heavy industry) are likely to slow down future decarbonisation. Moreover, those renewable energy capture systems themselves have a major material footprint, with other dire ecological consequences, not to mention all the social impacts of mining.13 Beware a ‘carbon tunnel vision’. Carbon is important, but not the only thing. GDP growth is toxic to life.
Mark H Burton
_minor edit: 9/1/26_
**_update 12 Feb_ : Incorrect information in both the Guardian article and the ECIU report.**
The Guardian states: “ _Countries representing 92% of the global economy have now decoupled consumption-based carbon emissions and GDP expansion, according to the report by the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU).”_**This is incorrect.** The ECIU report actually says _“Today, countries responsible for 46.3% of global GDP and 36.1% of global emissions have_
_absolutely decoupled. Overall, 92% of global GDP and 89% of global emissions are in economies that have decoupled, either relatively or absolutely…”_ The Guardian implies that meaningful decoupling has occurred in countries responsible for 82% of emissions. But relative decoupling is not meaningful decoupling: it just means that therate of growth of emissions is slower than that of GDP. Big Deal. The ECIU report is clear that absolute decoupling has only taken place in countries responsible for 36.1% of emissions. **Even this is incorrect.** In 2023, **the 21 absolutely decoupling countries accounted for** **25.89%** of global emissions (my calculation using the same dataset used by ECIU). Even if we scale that up (since their data accounts for “113 countries representing
over 97% of global GDP and 93% of global emissions”, by that factor of 1/0.93, the figure only reaches 27.84%.
**Yet again, the bold claims for decoupling are misleading.**
Citations
1 https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/11/economic-growth-no-longer-linked-to-carbon-emissions-in-most-of-the-world-study-finds For a cookie-less version, use https://web.archive.org/web/20251213024642/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/dec/11/economic-growth-no-longer-linked-to-carbon-emissions-in-most-of-the-world-study-finds
2 https://ca1-eci.edcdn.com/10YPP_Decoupling_Globally_2025.pdf?v=1765386016
3 https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/global-co2-emissions-from-energy-combustion-and-industrial-processes-and-their-annual-change-1900-2023
4 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(23)00174-2/fulltext
5 Absolute decoupling is where GDP increases and emissions fall. See the cited report for definitions of decoupling.
6 https://globalcarbonbudget.org/download/2345/?tmstv=1762815968
7 https://degrowthuk.org/2025/08/01/renewables-carbon-and-the-energy-crisis/
8 As pointed out in my article, just cited, and by Tyndall centre scientists, see https://theconversation.com/the-uks-year-of-climate-u-turns-exposes-a-deeper-failure-254499
9 https://steadystatemanchester.net/2016/04/15/new-evidence-on-decoupling-carbon-emissions-from-gdp-growth-what-does-it-mean/
10 See Smith, J. (2012). The GDP Illusion: Value Added versus Value Capture. Monthly Review, 64(3), 86–102. https://monthlyreview.org/articles/the-gdp-illusion/
11 e.g. https://idh21.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Can-Europe-green-its-growth_CunyParrique_IDH21_2024-V2.pdf see the conclusion.
12 Victor, P. A. (2019). _Managing without growth: Slower by design, not disaster_ (Second edition). Edward Elgar Publishing.
13 https://degrowthuk.org/2025/08/01/renewables-carbon-and-the-energy-crisis/
### Share this:
* Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
* Share on X (Opens in new window) X
* Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
* Email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
* Print (Opens in new window) Print
* Share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window) LinkedIn
*
### Like this:
Like Loading…
### _Related_
