Critics often reproach the discipline of economics for supporting developme
nts that result in environmental and social degradation. This article ident
ifies where such censure is valid, but proceeds to argue that the rationale
underlying economic techniques is at fault, rather than the techniques the
mselves. Within the rural context, we suggest that economics can make a val
uable contribution to the design and achievement of sustainable ways of liv
ing. Valid criticism of economics focuses on its assumptions about value, s
ince this has led to emphasis of favourable effects of markets, and laissez
-faire. Policies exposing rural areas to more rigorously competitive market
conditions encourage their transformation by increasing mechanisation, ind
ustrialisation and a less sustainable use of resources. New approaches and
policies are required if different outcomes are to be achieved. An initial
step is to identify desirable outcomes, a matter of social choice. However,
society makes multiple demands on rural resources, and such issues cannot
be adequately captured within a neo-classical welfare model. An alternative
, hierarchical framework in the tradition of systems thinking, capable of a
nalysing the complex relations associated with rural resource use, provides
appropriate emphasis to the economic links between goals at different leve
ls within the system, and appears to have some heuristic value. An empirica
l counterpart of the hierarchical framework, input-output analysis, generat
es information to support social choices and can also contribute to the und
erstanding of economic systems and their interaction with the wider social,
cultural, ethical and environmental universe. The article concludes with s
ome revised economic policy prescriptions to promote rural sustainability.
(C) 2000 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.