Either appropriate the term effectively WITHIN the hard logic set by the current status quo. Aka relate "growth" to "their" GDP but set in hard True Cost accounting. Don't be shocked if you find that we have not had any real "growth" since 1870.... * >> https://gl-10190.medium.com/debunking-degrowth-5c11ae794d1d

Otherwise don't use the term. Noam Chomsky is right: "Degrowth is a little misleading because growth itself is a funny concept."

So for funny people. Hickel's definition is indeed quite a funny concept because his poor (insufficiently robust::) definition includes trees to stop growing, for us to breath less air, not replace our inefficient fuel consuming machines, etc.. The Katherine Trebeck's and Jason Hickel's of this world are very very funny, but perhaps not too wise to plan our future on.

And don't get me wrong: communities should reclaim the commons from the intransigent elite class... Starting in the UK...Why? Because only 5% of English land is owned by it's households. 18% by corporations and the whooping rest, 77% of England, not joking, is in the hand of the church and the elites. With the Queen at the top of this incredible kleptocracy. (The one thing the French did well to get rid of.) Listen to Guy Shrubsole in The Guardian podcast. >i

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/audio/2019/jul/05/who-owns-england-podcast