As Drexhage and Murphy (2010) remind us, though progress on sustainable development may seem to be a failing enterprise by most measures, twenty years is a relatively short period in which to implement systemic changes that would revolutionize the way world does business. However, the recent financial crisis and growing distrust of neoliberal approaches to economic development provide an historical opening for further consideration and/or reconsideration of the sustainable development model. "A new model could chart a development path that truly is concerned with equity, poverty alleviation, reducing resource use, and integrating economic, environmental, and social issues in decision making" (Drexhage & Murphy, 2010, p. 19). This would require taking sustainable development out of the "environment box" and considering wider social, economic, and political agendas (Drexhage & Murphy, 2010, p. 20).

Is it possible that sustainable de-growth could be that new model? Certainly the literature reveals that criticisms of the growth-oriented model of sustainable development are growing. Supporters of de-growth may be attracted by the perceived failure of traditional economic and political and their associated ideologies, including possibly sustainable development. Still, after a review of the concept sustainable de-growth, Martinez-Alier, Pascual, Vivien, & Zaccal (2010) argue that for it to become a viable alternative to sustainable development, de-growth needs to be more clearly defined and its implications for income, employment, and social disruption. In that it confronts current powers in society as well as the dominant paradigm of development, sustainable de-growth faces a serious challenge to persuade government leaders or business executives to consider an economic no-growth policy. For example, if a sustainable de-growth policy means a reduction in GDP, this is likely to cause some disruption in employment unless ameliorating policies regarding work and remuneration are in place. Similar policies would also have to be in operation to avoid disruptions in the monetary and financial systems (Martinez-Alier et al.).

The difficulty of challenging sustainable development should not be surprising. As Latouche (2007) explains, growth is a profitable business but only on the condition that the burden and the cost to nature are passed on future generations, often with negative implications for the health of citizens and their working conditions. Latouche argues that de-growth offers an alternative that is potentially inventive and creative way to break the hold of traditional economic models built around growth. Although de-growth is not yet a concrete political program, according to Latouche the only way to disrupt the existing system is to create a political project that will construct convivial, autonomous and economical societies built on quality rather than quantity, and on cooperation rather than on competition. This is indeed a tall order.