Varieties of ecological economics: Do we need a more open and radical version of ecological economics?

Should we aim at one single economics paradigm for all purposes or is it wise to accept the existence of more than one theoretical perspective? Is one ecological economics perspective enough or should we encourage competing paradigms as part of a pluralist perspective? Moritz Remig expresses his preference for 'mainstreaming' ecological economics in the January 2015 issue of Ecological Economics suggesting that alternative perspectives and alternative terminologies, such as “sustainability economics”, lead to confusion. In this reply I am arguing that there is no value-free or value-neutral ecological economics and that therefore limiting economics or ecological economics to one paradigm is not compatible with democracy. We have to live with some complexity when dealing with sustainability issues and should not avoid issues of paradigm, ideology and political-economic system.