Note from the Field Caps yes,but how? A response to Alcott Giorgos Kallis a , * , Joan Martinez-Alier b a ICREA and ICTA, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 08193, Spain b ICTA,Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona 08193, Spain a r t i c l e i n f o Article history: Received 15 June 2010 Accepted 17 June 2010 Available online 25 June 2010 Keywords: Caps Degrowth Sustainability Eco-authoritarianism a b s t r a c t This articles argues that extraction and emission caps are a promising strategy for a sustainable degrowth transition, but that their design and implementation is far from simple.We draw attention to the institutional structures and processes through which caps are to be set, designed and enforced, and discuss the danger of eco-authoritarian politics in the name of enforcing caps or other environmental limitations. Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. As co-authors of the introductory article of the Special Issue on degrowth (Volume 18, Issue 16),responsible for the comment on Blake Alcott’s article, let us express our apologies. Critizing Alcott’s article for eco-authoritarianism or for a blunt promotion ofthe market was not our intention. Our wording that “there is a looming danger of eco-authoritarian, expert-based regimes in the name of setting and monitoring such limits” was carefully chosen not to associate this danger with Alcott’s article. Since this may not be clear to all readers,our sincere apologies to the author for the unfortunate wording. In the last few weeks we have had a direct correspondence with the author concerning the substantive elements of our comment, and in particular whether there is a danger of eco-authoritarianism in the name of caps.While we mostly agree with Alcott, we still perceive different degrees of danger, Alcott’s thesis being that there is no more risk of authoritarianism with caps, than with any other environmentalor social policy. Given that impact caps are an important strategy in the contextof sustainable degrowth and environmental sustainability, we believe that our debate may be of interest to the readers ofthis journal.But before,let us present three caveats to avoid further misunderstandings. First,we should distinguish ideas from persons. All of us advo- cating degrowth or environmental sustainability might be good and well-intended persons. This does not mean that our ideas are also good by definition or that they cannot be used for, or even legitimize,the wrong causes.Our warning that impact caps run a risk of authoritarian implementation doesnot question the motivations of Alcott, which are in fact irrelevant to the discussion. Second,we are adamantly in favour of caps. Martinez-Alier has been a vocal advocate of the Yasuni-ITT initiative, a form of compensated cap on the extraction of oil in Ecuador. However, this does not stop us from reflecting on the complications, problems and dangers of a cap strategy. This is not to reject it, but to elaborate it, make it relevant to the real world and shape the way it is politically implemented. Third, the purpose of an editorial is not to evaluate how well a paper did within its word constraints, but to raise new and interesting questions. Our analysis in the editorial as well as in this lengthy response should be read as a complement and extension of the theoretical reasoning of Alcott, and not as an antagonistic criticism.We complement Alcott with an emphasis on the real- world design and implementation of caps, without which it is,in our view impossible to evaluate whether caps can be an effective strategy or not, or perceive a dangerof authoritarianism.Our editorial did not suggest that Alcott was unaware ofreal-world complications; it only argued, that to make cap a relevant strategy and to avoid political dangers, further research should look at the real-world implementation and performance of caps. The main thrust of our argument is the following: caps are a great idea, but the important question concerns the institutional processes through which they are to be decided and implemented. Unless these are specified, there is a danger of caps being used to legitimize authoritarian approachesto environmental regulation.Authori- tarian policies refer to policies that do not enjoy broad support and are implemented by a small elite with the use of unwarranted force and often violence, physical or symbolic. This is a bigger parable for * Corresponding author. Tel.: þ34 93 581 3749. E-mail address: giorgoskallis@gmail.com (G. Kallis). URL: http://eco2bcn.es Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Cleaner Production j o u r n a l homepage: w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / j c l e p r o 0959-6526/$ e see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.06.010 Journal of Cleaner Production 18 (2010) 1570e1573