
(The red lines above
show sustainable levels of population and consumption, with no
provision for survival of any other living species. They show we are
already living well beyond the Earth's sustainable capacity. The green
lines
show the sustainable levels of population and consumption if we want to
share a modest part of our planet with other species). More information
on this chart here.)
What gets rewarded gets done. That's an old business and HR management maxim, but it's also one of the pivotal messages of The Growth Illusion,
Richard Douthwaite's thoughtful review of economic history and the
paradoxical consequences of economic growth, published in 1992 and
updated in 1999. The "what gets rewarded gets done" principle states
that if you want to motivate people to change their behaviour, use a
reward. Since the Industrial Revolution, and to a lesser extent since
the Agricultural Revolution, those with disproportionate wealth and
power have learned that the best way to protect and increase that
wealth and power is to get the population addicted to growth -- growth
in numbers, growth in consumption, growth in debt to pay for even more
consumption, and tolerant of the enormous waste and inefficiency such
extravagant consumption necessitates. As Douthwaite shows by drawing on
the lessons of history and a mountain of data on the lack of
correlation between growth, production, consumption, health and
well-being, the consequences of all this growth are:
- an economic system so dependent on continued growth that
when it falters, it quickly slides into deep recession or even
crippling depression
- increasing unemployment -- an inevitable consequence of the unquenchable need to cut costs
- decreases in 11 of the 12 major indicators of human
well-being*, as the numerous negative impacts of growth (pollution,
stress, traffic congestion, etc.) take their toll
- enormous economic fragility as that growth relies on
innovation to compensate for the resource scarcities it is continually
creating
<>growing inequality of economic resources between rich and poor at every level of aggregation
- <>inability of local communities to be self-sufficient especially in times of economic or natural disaster
- higher levels of crime, social disintegration and physical and mental illness
- more and more economic power and wealth concentrated in
fewer and fewer massive, grossly inefficient and bureaucratic large
corporations
- the need for ever-greater government subsidies and
bureaucracies to compensate for the dislocation, damage and inequities
created by growth economics
- a severely damaged and depleted ecosystem, which requires
more and more resource subsidies to keep productive, and which as it
becomes more homogeneous, fragile and stressed, becomes vulnerable to
sudden, potentially catastrophic changes that it can no longer
compensate for
Ultimately such a system is unsustainable, even pathological. As Edward
Abbey said, "Growth for the sake of growth is the ideology of the
cancer cell." Yet today the rewards for participating enthusiastically
in the growth economy are manifold: higher salaries, more senior jobs,
more material wealth, economic and political support, political funding
and kickbacks, and with all these things, greater personal
'popularity'. These are powerful rewards and incentives for trying to
perpetuate this bankrupt system, and for denying its negative
consequences and its unsustainability. Furthermore, these days it's the
only game in town: Alternative economic systems either have been
discredited or are untested.
In the absence of better economic models, what are we to do? Douthwaite
starts by laying out several social principles that must be accepted as
the foundation for any truly sustainable economic system:
- the need to end or reverse human population increase
- acceptance of a responsibility to leave as healthy an
environment with as many resources for future generations, as we
inherited from past generations
- valuation of other people's interest equally with our own
- acceptance that some things are priceless' and hence
off-limits to economic development -- they must not be sold, bartered,
destroyed or used up regardless of the economic 'value' this might bring
The new economy, he suggests, must be built bottom-up. It starts with
"sustainable local economies that would produce the essentials of life
from the resources in their areas and thus be largely self-sufficient
and independent of each other. This is not to say that they would not
trade. They would, but never out of necessity". A local economy that needs
to trade is an indication that it is, or will become in time,
unsustainable...A greater diversity of diet, clothing, building
materials and lifestyles [would result] just as in the natural world
where species have their own ecological niches and avoid competing
directly. Regional economies would develop by finding good ways to use
the resources of their immediate areas to meet the needs of local
people rather than the demands of uniform markets far away. New
cuisines and vernacular architectures would develop and new cultures
would be born, and remain sustainable...provided its population did not
exceed its carrying capacity."
Douthwaite sidesteps as political the issue of self-defence: How a
self-sufficient and sustainable economy can defend itself from a
covetous unsustainable one, without itself becoming unsustainable in
the process. Each local economy would have its own currency and banking
system for its own protection, and would prohibit investment in, or
capital transfers with, unsustainable economies. All 'profits' would be
reinvested in the community that produced them.
This is of necessity a highly oversimplified summary of Douthwaite's
arguments and the solutions he espouses. In addition to reading the
book I would recommend the Sustainable Territories
online dialogue that accompanied his online seminar on the book. His
follow-up book on building strong local economies is called Short Circuit.
It seems to me Douthwaite's Sustainable Local Economies are entirely consistent with Peter Brown's Stewardship Society, Ivan Illich's anti-institutionalization model, Diana Leafe Christian's Model Intentional Communities framework, and my own Natural Enterprise
blueprint. All of these models are built bottom-up, designed to show a
better way to live, to make a living, in harmony with the rest of life
on Earth. None of them depends on global national leaders in politics,
business and public institutions suddenly becoming conscious of the
madness of their ways. Rather, they all follow Bucky Fuller's famous
advice: "to change something, build a new model that makes the existing
model obsolete".
* goods produced,
quality of environment, leisure time, equality of income distribution,
working conditions, ease of making a living, safety of the future,
health, quality and access to culture and education, housing quality,
spiritual comfort, strength of community and family
|