Transcript Thinking “Resilient Cities”

Ecological Economics,
De-Growth and Denial:
The Role of Social Engineering
William E. Rees, PhD, FRSC
UBC School of Community and Regional Planning
CANSEE 2013
Sustaining the Commons:
Ideas and Actions for a Green Economy
York University, Toronto (31 October 2013)
Context: The Anomalous, Unsustainable
Oil-Based Expansion of Civilization2013 Population:
7.1 billion
The serious use of fossil fuel beginning in the 19th
Century allowed the explosive growth of the
human enterprise
Continuous growth—population and economic—is an anomaly. The growth spurt that recent
generations take to be normal is the single most abnormal period of human history.
The ‘Great Acceleration’, post 1750:
The exponential growth of consumption
 “The Great Acceleration is
clearly shown in every
component of the human
enterprise included in the
figure. Either the component
was not present before 1950
(e.g., foreign direct investment)
or its rate of change increased
sharply after 1950 (e.g.,
population)” (Steffen, Crutzen & McNeill
2007 [Ambio 36: 314-321])
 This explosion of energy and
material throughput
(consumption and pollution)
has occurred during a period of
unprecedented technological
and economic efficiency gains.
The Global Picture
global biocapacity:
12.0 billion hectares
ffads
OVERSHOOT:
Economic and
material growth
today is being
financed , in part,
by the liquidation
of essential, nonsubstitutable selfproducing natural
capital and at the
expense of global
life support
systems.
current human eco-footprint:
19.0 billion hectares
When growth is uneconomic
Adapted from Daly (2005)
The optimum level of consumption is reached when marginal gains equal marginal losses.
Any further increase in consumption (economic scale) is uneconomic growth (growth that
makes us worse off).
In theory, H. Sapiens has unique
potential to escape our predicament
Unparalleled capacity for evidence-based
reasoning and logical analysis;
 Unique ability to plan ahead;
 The capacity to exercise moral judgment;
 Unique diversity of mechanisms for
cooperative engagement;
 Compassion for other individuals and
other species.

An Obvious ‘Solution’: Planned DeGrowth (and it’s not a new idea)



John Stuart Mill saw no virtue in people becoming much richer
than they need be, but advocated instead for a just distribution of
property “…attained, by the joint effect of the prudence and
frugality of individuals, and of a system of legislation favouring
equality of fortunes, so far as is consistent with the just claim of
the individual to the fruits… of his or her own industry.”
He even suggested a version of economic ‘contraction and
convergence’, this in 1848, no less! “It is only in the backward
countries of the world that increased production is still an
important object: in those most advanced, what is economically
needed is a better distribution…”
In effect, Mill contemplated a society of universal ‘enoughness’
in which everyone would be able to enjoy “sufficient leisure,
both physical and mental, from mechanical details, to cultivate
freely the graces of life.” (quotes from J. S. Mill 1848, Book iv, Chap. iv).
Thoroughly modern, Mill even made
the ecological connection
Mill lamented that that Earth might lose “that great
portion of its pleasantness which it owes to things
that the unlimited increase of wealth and population
would extirpate from it, for the mere purpose of
enabling it to support a larger, but not a better or a
happier population.”
 He found no satisfaction “…in contemplating the
world with nothing left to the spontaneous activity of
nature.”
 He hoped for posterity’s sake that people would
come to “be content to be stationary, long before
necessity compels them to it” (quotes from J. S. Mill
1848, Book iv, Chap. iv).

Contemporary Variants: Catching up
with Mill



Steady-state economics: advanced by ecological economists
as the basis for living more equitably within the means of
nature. A major legacy of Herman Daly, though rooted in N.
Georgescu-Roegen’s interpretation of the 2nd Law of
Thermodynamic (the Entropy law).
The de-growth (décroissance) movement: advocates a
gradual downscaling of production/consumption toward a
more equitable and cooperative society that would ensure
both ecological stability and human wellbeing. Also rooted
in Georgescu-Roegen and further energized by evidence of
ecological overshoot.
Despite increasing urgency, either contemporary variant: a)
really takes us much beyond Mill; b) is gaining significant
traction in today’s geopolitical climate.
Which brings us to contemplating the
nature of ‘reality’ – we make it up as we go!





The ‘social construction of reality’ (or, rather, ‘perception’)
is a universal phenomenon within and across cultures.
Every religious doctrine, political ideology, scientific theory,
academic paradigm, mythic worldview, social norm and
cultural narrative is a ‘social construct’.
Each such construct is first birthed in language as an uneasy
blend of facts and beliefs, values and assumptions; the whole
is massaged and polished by social discourse and frequent
repetition (or experimental replication in the case of science).
A particular construct eventually becomes elevated to the
status of ‘received wisdom’ by tacit agreement among
members of the social group creating the construct.
Neo-liberal and ecological economics are competing social
constructs. But are they equally ‘valid’?
Not all constructs are created equal



“You may say, if you wish, that all reality is a
social construction, but you cannot deny that
some constructions are ‘truer’ than others.
They are not ‘truer’ because they are
privileged, they [become] privileged because
they are ‘truer’” (Postman 1999).
Some conceptual models provide better
‘maps’ of the reality they purport to represent
than do others.
Popper put it this way
 “What
the scientist’s and the lunatic’s
theories have in common is that both
belong to conjectural knowledge. But
some conjectures are much better than
others…”
(Karl Popper, The Problem of Induction)
But this has never stopped societies from
buying into to deeply flawed ‘conjectures.’
Shared Illusions: Our collective shield
against the harsh barbs of reality
 “The
masses have never thirsted after truth.
They turn aside from evidence that is not to
their taste, preferring to deify error…” (Gustave
le Bon 1896).
 “For
us to maintain our way of living, we
must… tell lies to each other, and
especially to ourselves… [the lies] are
necessary because without them many
deplorable acts would become
impossibilities” (Jensen 2000).
Even ‘hard science’ is afflicted

“… a new scientific truth does not
triumph by convincing its opponents
and making them see the light, but
rather because its opponents
eventually die, and a new generation
grows up that is familiar with it.”
(Max Planck, 1949)
The problem is universal and persistent (i.e.,
it’s part of fundamental human nature)


“Not truth, but error has always
been the chief factor in the
evolution of nations…” (Le Bon
1895).
“Wooden-headedness, the source of
self deception ...plays a remarkably
large role in government. It consists
in assessing a situation in terms of
preconceived fixed notions [i.e.,
ideology] while ignoring any
contrary signs. It is acting
according to wish while not
allowing oneself to be deflected by
the facts” (Tuchman 1984).
An Explanatory Cognitive Mechanism
 During individual development,
repeated sensory experiences and
cultural norms literally shape the
human brain’s synaptic circuitry
in patterns that reflect and embed
those experiences. Socially
constructed patterned thinking
acquires a physical presence in
the brain.
 Subsequently, people seek out
compatible experiences and,
“when faced with information
that does not agree with their
[preformed] internal structures,
they deny, discredit, reinterpret
or forget that information”
(Wexler, 2006).
Why is all this relevant?
The conservative right has beat the liberal left in the
social construction game, putting global society at risk:


See the Lewis Powell Memo (or Powell Manifesto) of 23 August, 1971
at: http://reclaimdemocracy.org/powell_memo_lewis/
Read at least:
a) Lewis Lapham’s analysis (Tentacles of Rage: The Republican
Propaganda Mill, a Brief History) Harpers, 1 Sept 2004)
http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2004/RepublicanPropaganda1sep04.htm
b) This excerpt from Winner Take-All-Politics: How Washington Made
the Rich Richer and Turned its Back on the Middle Class (J.S Hacker
and P. Pierson) at: http://billmoyers.com/content/the-powell-memo-acall-to-arms-for-corporations/
c) Bill Moyers’ analysis at: http://www.truthout.org/opinion/item/4580:bill-moyers-our-politicians-are-moneylaunderers-in-the-trafficking-of-power-and-policy-2
Powell helped galvanize the corporate
sector to socially (re)construct America
Powell felt compelled to assert that:
 the “American economic system is under broad attack.”
 “Business must learn the lesson . . . that political power is
necessary; that such power must be assiduously cultivated; and
that when necessary, it must be used aggressively and with
determination—without embarrassment and without the
reluctance which has been so characteristic of American
business.”
 “Strength lies in organization, in careful long-range planning
and implementation, in consistency of action over an indefinite
period of years, in the scale of financing available only through
joint effort, and in the political power available only through
united action and national organizations.”
 The latter was to include the financing of neoliberal economics
departments, establishing new think-tanks, and other kinds of
‘front groups’.
A dramatic, rapid mobilization of corporate
resources in the mid-1970s (which persists to this day)




The number of corporations with public affairs offices in
Washington grew from 100 in 1968 to over 500 in 1978. In
1971, only 175 firms had registered lobbyists in
Washington, but by 1982, nearly 2,500 did.
‘Agency capture’ and the ‘revolving door’ syndrome are
commonplace.
The number of corporate PACs increased from under 300 in
1976 to over 1,200 by the middle of 1980.
Powell’s legacy includes: the Business Roundtable, the
American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the
Heritage Foundation, the Cato Institute, the Manhattan
Institute, Citizens for a Sound Economy (precursor to
Americans for Prosperity) and other organizations united in
pushing back against political equality and shared
prosperity.
The Primacy of Neo-Con Reality




The corporate right created “brightly packaged policy objectives—tort
reform, school vouchers, less government, lower taxes, elimination of
the labor unions, bigger military budgets, higher interest rates,
reduced environmental regulation, privatization of social security,
down-sized Medicaid and Medicare, more prisons, better surveillance,
stricter law enforcement”
In 1964, 62 percent of people surveyed had “trust[ed] the government
to do the right thing; by 1994 the number had dwindled to 19 percent.
This is tribute to the success of the Republican/corporate propaganda
mill that for the last forty years had been grinding out the news that
“all government is bad, and that the word ‘public,’ in all its uses and
declensions (public service, citizenship, public health, community,
public park, commonwealth, public school, etc.), connotes
inefficiency and waste.”
By the end of Reagan's second term “the propaganda mills were
spending $100 million a year on the manufacture and sale of their
product, invigorated by the sense that once again it was morning in
America.”
(quotes from Lapham 2004) .
An Example of Corporate ‘Engagement’
The Center for American Progress Action fund
identified at least $85 million the Koch brothers
have given to 85 right-wing think tanks and
advocacy groups in the decade and a half up to
2011.
 GreenPeace claims that from 1997 to 2011, the
Koch Brothers alone funneled over $67 million to
climate-denial think tanks and other front
groups, I.e., organizations such as the Heartland
Institute who are working in lockstep with the
Kochs’ ideological agenda while presenting
themselves as scientifically credible experts.

A whole generation socially
engineered to ignore reality.
Neo-con values and ideology override
evidence, analysis and reason
Politicians often show willful ignorance; blindness
to scientific data and analysis (deep denial);
 Governments reject planning in the public interest;
rigged markets determine major policy decisions;
 Competitive belligerence dominates in both markets
and international affairs.
 Society has abandoned moral and ethical concerns
in favour of self-serving short-term opportunism;
 We seemingly condone crass individualism and
personal greed at the expense of the common good
(including our collective interest in survival);

This is a new
age of unreason,
the 21st Century
Endarkenment
SO, THE QUESTION OF THE DAY:
Granted that passion, instinct and cultural
programming often trump reason, we can
still ask what an intelligent, forwardthinking, compassionate species might do in
light of available data, the historical record
and on-going trends, to enhance survival
prospects for contemporary society?
The Obvious Answer
Learn the neo-con lesson – mere facts, data and
analysis are not enough.
 Formally acknowledge our present danger and
focus on humanity’s collective interest in survival.
 Develop a long-term plan to re-engineer society to
be more ecologically sensitive and socially
responsible.
 All we need is a few hundred million dollars and
several decades—social learning, particularly the
deliberate construction of an entire cultural
paradigm, can be enormously expensive and a
gluttonous time vampire.

What might this entail? A new cultural
narrative incorporating ecological economics
and steady-state thinking



Learn to override innate expansionist tendencies and
abandon our socially constructed perpetual growth
myth.
Construct a new global cultural narrative that shifts the
values of society from competitive individualism,
greed, and narrow self-interest, toward community,
cooperation and our collective interest in repairing the
earth for survival.
Create graphic scenarios contrasting the future chaos
associated with the status with the ecological resilience,
social stability and economic security possible in a
steady-state.
Bottom Line: Let’s get real!
In coming years, the human enterprise will
likely contract. As an intelligent, forwardlooking moral species we can (theoretically)
choose between:


Business as usual – risking a chaotic implosion imposed
by nature followed by geopolitical turmoil and resource
wars or:
A well-planned, orderly and cooperative descent toward
a socially just sustainability for all.
Can humanity learn to live more equitably within the
means of nature?
The easy stuff: Intervene to create more
efficient markets; let prices tell the truth







End perverse subsidies (e.g., to the fossil fuel sector).
Acknowledge that most goods are underpriced and therefore
over-consumed.
Recognize that government intervention to correct for gross
market failure (e.g., climate change) is necessary and legitimate.
For efficiency, internalize ecological and social externalities, i.e.,
insist on full-cost pricing.
Initiate ecological fiscal reform—tax the bads, not the goods.
Implement a combination of pollution charges/taxes (e.g., carbon
tax) and import tariffs. (Support WTO reform.)
Consider a negative income tax to assist low-income families
through the transition.
Restructure our socio-ecosystems
to conform to biophysical reality





Shift from quantitative growth to qualitative development
Create socio-eco-economic planning regions on a humanly
manageable spatial scale.
Manage regional socio-ecosystems to maintain/increase
species diversity, systems integrity and optimal habitat
patchiness for the species concerned (i.e., inhibit full
development of the ‘conservation phase’ of the adaptive
cycle.
Relocalize—strive to maintain economic diversity and
multiple employment opportunities within every planning
region.
Invest in multiply redundant energy systems with an
emphasis on sustainable renewable forms.
Re-socialize






Initiate a national public education campaign on the severity
of the crisis and the need for decisive action.
Emphasize that global change is a collective problem
requiring collective solutions (individual actions have
inadequate, even trivial effects). Governments must act in for
the common good.
Promote a cultural shift from private to public capital
accumulation and to human development.
Implement job-training and job-placement programs to equip
people for employment in sunrise industries.
Design and implement new forms of social safety nets to
enable peoples’ transition to a smaller, post-carbon, steadystate economy (there will be sunset as well as sunrise
industries).
Recognize the advantages of job-sharing and shorter workweeks in the context of improved work-life balance (selfactualization).
Motivation and Rationale?
It’s in everyone’s long-term best interest



Individual and national interests have
converged with humanity’s common
interests. That is;
Sustainability is a collective problem that
demands collective solutions (no country
can become sustainable on its own);
Failure to act for the common good will
ultimately lead to civil insurrection,
geopolitical chaos, resource wars and
ecological implosion.
Reminder: Systems Failure is Possible



Joseph Tainter on The Collapse
of Complex Societies
Human societies are problemsolving systems. Each problem
solved leads to greater societal
complexity (e.g., division of
labour, class structure,
technological sophistication).
Inevitably there comes a time
when “continued investment in
complexity as a problem solving
strategy yields a declining
marginal return” (e.g., incomes
stop rising). Tensions, intragroup conflicts and
dissatisfaction build up, elites
defend the status quo, popular
discontent evolves into civil
insurrection. Or:
The society destroys its
ecological foundation; collapse
follows.
Collapse is the norm when
societies rigidify, lose resilience!
“...what is perhaps
most intriguing in the
evolution of human
societies is the
regularity with which
the pattern of
increasing complexity
is interrupted by
collapse…” (Tainter 1995).
This might be
civilization’s last and
best chance to break
the historic pattern.
