 This is the first of a
series of articles discussing some of the remarkable ideas in a new
book called The Global Ideas Book.
The book, with a forward by Charles
Handy (pictured right) is the brainchild of the UK-based Institute for
Social Inventions,
and is a compendium of some of the 4000 ideas in the Global Ideas Bank, ideas and
germs of ideas submitted by the public for free use and development by
others. Described as "part suggestion box, part ideas network and part
democratic think-tank", what impresses me about this collection is the
sheer ingenuity of the ideas. Thanks to Nick Temple, one of the book's
editors, for bringing it to my attention. You can buy the book here.
One of several concepts that grabbed my attention immediately is
described
by its inventor, Bradley Hall, as "A currency created to limit
people's exploitation of the environment". I had been kicking around
the
idea of putting some constraint on the ability of the very rich to
spend profligately without restriction, and Bradley's proposition meets
that
difficult need and more. Basically how it works is this:
- Every individual would be given a flat, fixed,
non-transferable amount of a new Environment and Social Currency (ESC),
say, 10,000 units per month.
- A regulatory body would assign an ESC 'price' to each
product and
service sold, reflecting its negative environmental and social costs.
So gasoline, for example, would have a high ESC price, while a service
that has no negative environmental or social impact would have a zero
ESC price. Theoretically, goods and services that actually improve the
environment or social welfare could even be assigned a negative ESC price.
- Sellers would be required to charge users both its normal
market-demand price and its ESC price. So there would be a strict
limit, no matter how rich you are, on how much you could damage the
environment and social welfare through your purchases. If you've
reached your 10,000 ESC quota for the month, you're simply not allowed
to buy any more 'bads' that month -- you'll have to spend the rest of
your money on 'goods'.
As with any novel idea, its development will need a lot of thought and
planning, to minimize bureaucracy (much of it could be done
electronically) and minimize the risk of fraud (people buying in the
'black market' from vendors who don't charge ESC). But what appeals to
me about it is its extraordinary simplicity and egalitarianism. The
fact that it challenges the presumption that money gives you the
unlimited right to cause environmental or social damage is just the
icing on the cake.
What do you think? Are there some other obvious problems with the idea?
Any thoughts on how to implement it and avoid bureaucracy and fraud?
Would you welcome it or see it as another undesirable imposition of
government?
I'll be describing some other ideas from the book on these pages in the
coming weeks.
|
MADE IN CANADA
trust your
instincts 
