Tyler Cowen proposes this in Stubborn Attachments. A simplified version of his argument might be that (1) future people are as deserving of moral consideration as anyone alive today, (2) wealth is the major driver of all flourishing and (3) the power of compounding means that lower growth rates now will have a major impact on the wealth (and thus flourishing) of future people. To not grow is to doom future possible people to either worse lives or to not exist at all.
One issue with putting this into practice is that it's very difficult to know what will end up being sustainable: this might depend upon either the creation of future technologies or on unforeseen side effects. If we are too optimistic about our growth being sustainable, we could cause a collapse. If we are too pessimistic, we could miss out on large gains brought on by compounding effects.
One of the biggest things that makes me suspicious of this is that people are already highly motivated to grow their own parts of the economy for selfish reasons, so are more likely to believe this to be true for their case. It might or might not actually be true in particular cases, but I'd worry that this idea ends up just getting used to make people feel morally justified to do what they already want to do.
One of the biggest things that makes me suspicious of this is that people are already highly motivated to grow their own parts of the economy for selfish reasons, so are more likely to believe this to be true for their case. It might or might not actually be true in particular cases, but I'd worry that this idea ends up just getting used to make people feel morally justified to do what they already want to do.