Acceso usuarios
Este artículo analiza la evolución del discurso en torno al derecho al desarrollo en el contexto del Antropoceno, con el objetivo de identificar cómo, desde los márgenes y de manera incipiente, se empieza a cuestionar la centralidad del crecimiento económico ilimitado en el sistema internacional de protección de los derechos humanos de Naciones Unidas. Para ello, se parte de una perspectiva inspirada en enfoques críticos, que permite problematizar los supuestos sobre los que se ha construido la asociación entre desarrollo y crecimiento económico ilimitado, según la cual el crecimiento económico era la condición sine qua non para el desarrollo económico y social, sin tener en cuenta los impactos ambientales asociados ni la idea de unos límites materiales al mismo. Por tanto, desde una perspectiva metodológica, el artículo se apoya en un análisis histórico-discursivo que combina una genealogía del concepto de desarrollo y su vínculo con el crecimiento económico, con la revisión de los marcos normativos relativos al derecho al desarrollo y la lucha contra la pobreza, incluyendo informes recientes elaborados por relatores especiales de la ONU.
Para abordar ese objetivo, el artículo se organiza en dos partes principales. Por un lado, se examina la genealogía del crecimiento económico como imperativo central en la política internacional y su progresivo cuestionamiento desde enfoques críticos, especialmente en el contexto del Antropoceno. Por otro lado, se analiza el derecho al desarrollo como instrumento normativo vinculado históricamente al crecimiento económico ilimitado, explorando sus tensiones y resignificaciones en un contexto de superación de varios límites planetarios. Asimismo, se estudian dos informes recientes de relatores especiales de la ONU que evidencian fisuras en la asociación entre desarrollo y crecimiento, abriendo espacio a discursos postcrecentistas centrados en la redistribución, el bienestar y la sostenibilidad planetaria. Estas fisuras, aunque muy incipientes, abren espacio a la posibilidad de transitar hacia concepciones postcrecentistas, que puedan dar respuesta a algunos de los desafíos de justicia global e intergeneracional que plantea el Antropoceno.
In recent decades, the global ecological crisis has transcended the confines of environmental scienc-es to become a central concern across multiple disciplines, including International Relations (IR). The notion of the Anthropocene —albeit contested— has highlighted the extent to which human activity, particularly under the dynamics of globalized capitalism, is destabilizing planetary life-support systems. This article examines how the Anthropocene challenges foundational categories of international order, focusing especially on the long-standing imperative of economic growth, and explores the emergence of post-growth imaginaries within global governance and its slow penetration in the United Nations (UN) discourse. While growth continues to dominate both policy agendas and academic debates, its hegemo-ny is increasingly contested, with significant cracks emerging in areas such as the right to development and poverty eradication debates within the UN. By analyzing these discursive shifts, the article situates the growth paradigm within a broader historical and epistemological framework shaped by Western modernity, while also tracing the emergence of counter-narratives that emphasize ecological limits and justice imperatives.Methodologically, the article employs a historical-discursive approach that combines a genealogical re-construction of the concept of development with a critical analysis of UN instruments, including reports by Special Rapporteurs on the human rights to development and extreme poverty. It draws primarily on post-development and post-growth literatures, as well as critiques coming from the Global South such as Samir Amin’s proposal of delinking and the Latin American Pacto Ecosocial del Sur. These perspec-tives share the premise that international norms are not neutral or universal but historically contingent constructions reflecting epistemologies rooted in modernity and coloniality, which have long prioritized accumulation and instrumental rationality while marginalizing ecological considerations and non-Western knowledges.The analysis begins by examining the historical consolidation of economic growth as a central political objective in the post-World War II order. Institutions such as the UN and the OECD were crucial in em-bedding growth into the normative structures of global governance, naturalizing its identification with progress and modernity. This linkage did not emerge spontaneously but was the result of deliberate efforts to reconstruct the international order around productivity, modernization, and integration of re-cently decolonized states into capitalist circuits. From a critical perspective, this historical development reflects an ontological orientation that reduced development to material accumulation and systemati-cally externalized its ecological and social costs. This explains the resilience of the growth imperative in both IR theory, international law and global governance, even as the contradictions associated with this paradigm have become increasingly evident in the Anthropocene.The article then turns to the right to development, formally articulated in the 1986 UN Declaration as a response to Global South demands in the postcolonial context. Initially conceived as an instrument of equity and empowerment, this right was rapidly associated with economic growth as its necessary foundation, a framing that reinforced the hegemony of the growth paradigm while masking its contra-dictions. Nevertheless, discursive openings have emerged over time. The inclusion of multidimensional conceptions of development—emphasizing equity, participation, and sustainability—suggests a gradual redefinition, albeit one that remains constrained by the institutional inertia of growth-centered models. These debates are also reflected in the ambivalence of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which simultaneously incorporates ecological sustainability and social justice but ultimately reaffirms growth as the main driver of progress. In this sense, the right to development constitutes both a site of continuity and contestation: while deeply tied to the growth paradigm, it has also provided an institu-tional space for critical reinterpretations that resonate with post-growth perspectives.The final part of the analysis examines recent reports produced by UN Special Rapporteurs on the right to development and on extreme poverty, which reflect a growing recognition of the ecological limits to growth. These documents explicitly challenge the orthodoxy of “growth first, redistribution later” by articulating alternatives centered on human rights, equity, and sustainability. They also incorporate elements from post-growth thought, such as the emphasis on degrowth, steady-state economics, and well-being economies, while stressing the need to reconcile social rights with ecological limits. Although these contributions remain marginal in the institutional landscape of the UN, their significance lies in the way they create discursive fissures that question the inevitability of growth as the foundation of inter-national order and global development. The emergence of these cracks, however limited, demonstrates that the hegemonic paradigm is not impermeable and that alternative imaginaries are gaining visibility within highly institutionalized frameworks.From this analysis, four main findings emerge. First, the growth paradigm, while resilient, is increasing-ly vulnerable to criticism, particularly within human rights mechanisms of the UN. Second, the right to development, historically linked to economic expansion, is being reinterpreted in more multidimensional terms that prioritize sustainability and equity alongside growth. Third, post-growth discourses, though marginal, have begun to filter into institutional debates, creating a space for normative transformation. And fourth, Southern perspectives play a crucial role in articulating alternatives to the extractive logic of global capitalism. These perspectives include Amin’s proposal of delinking, which calls for a sovereign and autonomous reorientation of development trajectories, and the Pacto Ecosocial del Sur, which ar-ticulates an ecosocial vision rooted in justice, sustainability, and sovereignty. Both frameworks highlight that the persistence of global inequality is structurally linked to the dependence of the Global South on Northern accumulation processes, and that addressing the ecological crisis requires challenging these asymmetries.The broader contribution of the article lies in demonstrating that the growth imperative —frequently treated as natural and inevitable— is in fact historically constructed and increasingly subject to contesta-tion. Moreover, it shows that even within institutionalized settings such as the UN, which have historically reinforced the growth-development nexus, new possibilities for reimagining the right to development are emerging. These possibilities remain fragile, and their realization is uncertain, but they demonstrate that growth is no longer the uncontested foundation of international norms. This has important implications for IR as a discipline, as the Anthropocene reveals the inadequacy of conventional analytical frameworks and compels the field to engage with perspectives long excluded from mainstream debates, including degrowth, Southern ecosocial proposals, and environmental justice frameworks.In conclusion, the Anthropocene destabilizes not only the ecological bases of development but also the intellectual and institutional foundations of global governance. It demonstrates that the hegemony of growth, while enduring, is no longer unassailable. Reports by UN special rapporteurs and debates around the Sustainable Development Goals indicate that post-growth perspectives, while marginal, are begin-ning to exert some influence on normative discourses. This evolution raises pressing questions for IR: whether the discipline and international institutions can decouple justice from growth and imagine forms of development that are ecologically grounded, relational, and oriented toward the sustainability of life. Although the emergence of such paradigms remains uncertain, the cracks in the growth consensus rep-resent a critical juncture in the evolution of global development discourse. The capacity of international governance to integrate ecological constraints, recognize the structural inequalities of global capitalism, and engage seriously with Southern epistemologies will determine whether these discursive openings remain peripheral or catalyze a deeper reconfiguration of international thought.
