Post-productivism involves understanding (i) productivism, (ii) post-productivism, and (iii) post-productivism as a critical legal approach.
Productivism is an ideology strongly associated and disseminated throughout the industrial periods of the nineteenth century – namely that of a search for a continuous increase in production capacities. According to the works of Ernest Solvay (1904), a leading industrial at the time, productivism assumes that the well-being of humans is ensured by the production of (im)material goods that they desire and will continue to desire. Continually increasing production is considered both possible and desirable. Therefore, social law should enable citizens to become economically self-reliant within this process of increasing production (e.g. van der Veen & Groot 2006).
Post-productivism focuses on the scenario wherein continual economic growth is no longer possible or desirable, in particular when such increase in production capacities produces its own societal or ecological problems (e.g. Fitzpatrick 2004; Buffalo 2016). It is thus firmly rooted in academic literature dealing with environmental effects (e.g. Wilson 2001 in agricultural studies). Post-productivism has many names and synonyms, or variations and related concepts in various academic fields. For example, literature in economics posit the model of degrowth / décroissance as an alternative model to the dominance of productivism (e.g. Hoffmann et al. 2023).
As a critical legal approach, post-productivism has recently been gaining attention in social law scholarship. It is often discussed within the context of sustainable employment, ecological labour law (Bueno et al. 2024; Dermine & Dumont 2022) or human rights in general (De Schutter & Van Ypersele 2026). Social law scholars use post-productivism as a lens to design legal research topics and critique existing legal interpretations and solutions. As such, legal scholarship may cover topics such as the interpretation of ‘decent’ work, collective bargaining in brown jobs with high risk of professional diseases, social protection of alternative types of work (e.g. domestic or care work), governmental subsidies in non-profit labour sectors, legal mechanisms on work-life balance, certain dimensions of the right to disconnect, or even specific exemptions to the duty to work in the activation policies for social benefit recipients.
Readings:
- Bueno N., Ter Haar B. & Zekic N. (eds.), Labour Law Utopias: Post-Growth & Post-Productive Work Approaches, Oxford University Press, 2024, https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198889755.001.0001.
- Buffalo K.R.F., Productivity and Prosperity: A Historical Sociology of Productivist Thought, University of Toronto Press, 2016.
- Dermine E. & Dumont D., ‘A Renewed Critical Perspective on Social Law: Disentangling Its Ambivalent Relationship with Productivism’, International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations 2022, vol. 38, no. 3, 237-268.
- De Schutter O. & Van Ypersele J., 'The future of work-related human rights in a post-growth economy' in The realisation of human righs in a post-growth world, Oxford, 2026.
- Fitzpatrick T., ‘A Post-Productivist Future for Social Democracy?’, Social Policy 2004, iss. 3, 214 ff.
- Hoffmann, M., Pantazidou, M., & Smith, T., ‘Critiques of work: The radical roots of degrowth’ in Eastwood L. & Heron K. (eds.), De Gruyter Handbook of Degrowth, De Gruyter, 2024.
- Solvay, E., Principes d'orientation sociale : résumé des études de M. Ernest Solvay sur le productivisme et le comptabilisme, Misch & Thron, 1904, 94 p.
- Van der Veen R. & Groot L., 'Post-Productivism and Welfare States: A Comparative Analysis', British Journal of Political Science 2006, vol. 36, iss. 4, 593-618.
- Wilson G.A., 'From Productivism to Post-Productivism... and Back again? Exploring the (Un)changed Natural and Mental Landscapes of European Agriculture', Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 2001, vol. 26, iss.1, 77-102.