Posts

people walking on walkway during daytime

We can structure our economies differently: the potential of not-for-profit models

, , , ,

By Jennifer Hinton

My journey of working in the area of sustainable economy began when I wrote my MSc thesis on the circular economy plan in China back in 2007- 2008. The circular economy seemed like an ideal response to the sustainability conundrum. Economic activity could carry on, but with less resource use and pollution. However, I bumped into the inevitable contradictions between efforts to increase material circularity in order to reduce environmental impacts, on the one hand, and an ongoing commitment to endless economic growth, on the other. Shortly thereafter, I read an early version of Tim Jackson’s Prosperity Without Growth. His main message, that humans can prosper without constantly growing their economic activity, resonated with me. I had experienced the erosion of social cohesion in the United States related to increasing materialism (the work-shop-drop treadmill) and I had also experienced the same trend in rural China. In both cases, economic growth seemed to be doing more harm than good, as far as the environment and community cohesion went. The health of people and planet were being sacrificed for money.

I began looking for ideas and practices that could help societies transition away from the growth-driven economic system. Since then, I have been working on the development of a new way of understanding the economy through the lens of “relationship-to-profit”. Relationship-to-profit theory explains that the global sustainability crises which on the surface might seem disparate and disconnected, such as inequality and climate change, are actually very much interconnected, because they are driven by the same thing: the pursuit of private financial gain. Capitalist societies relate to financial gain (such as Gross Domestic Product and profit) as a measurement of success and progress and, thus, as an end in itself. This is embodied in economic institutions like for-profit forms of business, which allow for a financial gain purpose and the private distribution of profit to enrich owners. The dynamics of the for-profit economic system are strong and, contrary to narratives of “market failures”, it is accomplishing what it is designed to: private financial gain. But it is doing so at an enormous social and ecological cost.

Today, most people live in a for-profit type of economy. However, history shows us this is not the only way that economies and societies can be structured. 

If we are to move in a more sustainable direction, societies need to change their relationship to profit and money. A promising building block for this is the phenomenon of not-for-profit forms of business, which are already operating around the world and in all sectors of the economy. An economy primarily composed of not-for-profit types of business would differ from the for-profit economy in many important ways. In the absence of private financial gain from business ownership, and with all businesses geared towards a social benefit purpose instead, there would be a lot more financial equality in a not-for-profit market economy. It would also be less prone to speculation, consumerism, environmental degradation, and political capture (a situation in which private interests have undue influence on policy-making). The not-for-profit way of organizing the economy is not a silver bullet – it won’t solve all of our problems – but it provides a sturdy foundation for solving them. Whereas trying to solve the issues of inequality, climate change, and biodiversity loss in the context of a for-profit economy is like swimming against a tsunami.

Relationship-to-profit theory does three important things for efforts to transform the economy. First, it explains why and how the current system is dysfunctional in clear and straightforward terms. Second, it lays out a concrete vision and pathway for a sustainable future that is more just and safe for all life on Earth. Lastly, the not-for-profit market economy model broadens the horizon of possibilities beyond the false dichotomy of capitalism versus the state-planned economy; a dichotomy that has contributed to high levels of political polarization over how societies should address the crises of the 21st century. This is why I felt the need to bring this work to the 36×36 project, through a peer learning exchange with my fellow participants. I am hopeful that the discussion of these ideas will contribute to real transformation on the ground.

Want to find out more about relationship-to-profit theory and not-for-profit models? Here are a few resources to check out:

Envisioning a Not-for-Profit World for a Sustainable Future (a short non-academic article)

A Not-for-Profit World beyond Capitalism and Economic Growth? (a semi-academic article describing how a not-for-profit market economy could take us beyond capitalism and economic growth)

A Circular Economy for Sustainability, not for Profit (a short non-academic article framing the circular economy from a post-growth perspective)

Fit for Purpose? Clarifying the critical role of profit for sustainability (an academic article outlining the system-wide sustainability dynamics of the for-profit and not-for-profit economies)

Relationship-to-Profit: A Theory of Business, Markets, and Profit for Social Ecological Economics (doctoral thesis putting forth relationship-to-profit theory)

How on Earth: Flourishing in a Not-for-Profit World by 2050 (a non-academic book putting forth a vision of a not-for-profit market economy)

Five Dimensions of Post-Growth Business (an academic article outlining the different dimensions of business that are important for a post-growth economy)

 

If you prefer videos, here’s a recorded presentation I gave on the Not-for-Profit World model for a general audience:

/0 Comments/by

Ever Given consumerism a second thought?

, , ,

By Anna Haw and Isabel Nuesse

This image which sparked memes all over the internet in the last month may compel more people to rethink our consumer-driven habits and current state of our economy….or so we hope.

As consumers, we rarely give much thought to how the multitude of things we buy make their way across the planet and into our homes. That is, until the Ever Given (400m long packed with up to 18,000 containers) stopped $9.6 billion dollars’ worth of products each day that it was stalled in the Suez Canal. That’s $6.7 million a minute.  This debacle reveals the true scale of our global supply chains, and broader global economic system.

How is it that one ship can have such an impact? That so many goods depend on a single waterway, and that 6 days of disruption can amount to over $50 billion in losses? 

With so much money being lost, resources were swiftly mobilised to solve the frantic halt of the Suez Canal. It’s remarkable really, that our dependence on this consumer culture and our need to keep trading goods catalysed a global upheaval. 

The focus on incessant GDP growth has necessitated a relentless drive to create and trade goods, no matter the cost to the environment or human wellbeing. 

This shipping fiasco serves as a clear metaphor of our current economic system. We have an economy that lacks resilience, makes little practical sense and is so heavy that changing direction is almost impossible, despite obvious imminent danger. 

The comparatively tiny tug boats and bulldozers working together to dislodge the massive ship are akin to the many initiatives that are working to dislodge the current economic system. What’s needed to uproot the current economic system is a rising tide to provide much-needed support and create an enabling environment to the many profoundly positive new economic initiatives that are desperately trying to change the course of our damaging economy. 

We can create this rising tide.

It will take incredible mobilisation, bold action, risk and ultimately embracing long-term goals. 

There was support and media attention at all angles covering the crisis of Ever Given. Yet our current economic framework is a part and parcel of causing these crises. Rather than applying a band-aid at vast expense, or incessantly reporting on how many billions of dollars are being lost, let’s focus on the root of the problem. Are we throwing resources at a framework that is too centralised, single-minded and outdated?

What if a potentially catastrophic  global trade event can be viewed instead as an opportunity to give our  system a re-think? Do we need to keep purchasing goods at the current rate that we are? Can consumers buy less, share more and redistribute our wealth to support initiatives working towards achieving social justice on a healthy planet?  

As the Ever Given moves forward towards its destination with hundreds of other laden ships in its wake, let us not miss the opportunity to think about what our society’s priorities are, and where we’re mobilising our resources.

We do have the capacity to catalyse, dramatically shift and re-route our economic system, so what’s stopping us?

Image: Suez Canal Authority via AP

 

/1 Comment/by

The Mint Magazine: Invisible and Not Heard: A women’s perspective is out of sight.

,

Issue Theme Articles:

The love of money

Plumbers and pedagogues

The K in recovery

She dared to meddle

Long covid

People count

Gap analysis

 

Full Magazine 

 

/0 Comments/by

Petra Künkel | Un cambio de perspectiva | Congreso Futuro 2021

,

 

• Grado académico – Profesión: Máster en psicología industrial y ciencias políticas de la Universidad de Hamburg. Doctora en Transformaciones a la Sostenibilidad de la Universidad de Twente.

• Lugar actual de trabajo: Fundadora y Directora Ejecutiva del Instituto de Liderazgo Colectivo. Miembro del Comité Ejecutivo del Club de Roma.

• Líneas de investigación: Transformación hacia la sostenibilidad. Desarrollo de metodologías y articulación de espacios para su plena ejecución.

• https://congresofuturo.cl/petra-kuenkel/

/0 Comments/by

Wellbeing Economics isn’t a question of left and right

, ,

Blog by Kristin Vala Ragnarsdottir, WEAll Ambassador and Professor of Sustainability Science at the University of Iceland

Previously published on the WEAll website here

June 2, 2020

A few years ago a  guy called me up in Iceland and asked: “Why do the leftists own the environment?“  My answer was: “They do not but they have taken environmental issues to the forefront of their politics.  All parties should do that.“ He went on to found the Right Green Party which never took foothold in Icelandic politics.  But it was a step in the right direction.   Healthy environment and sustainability is tantamount for everyone’s wellbeing.

I was party to a similar discussion in an international WhatsApp group recently:  “Why is it that left-wing governments are promoting the wellbeing agenda?  In doing so it will be rejected by those to the right in politics.“

My response was: “In Iceland there is a broad political base behind the new wellbeing policy which has a focus on prosperity and quality of life and is aligned with the UN Sustainable Development goals.“

Our Prime Minister is from the Left Green Movement, but her coalition government encompasses the whole political spectrum – with the Independence Party (conservative right wing) led by Bjarni Benediktsson who is Minister of Finance and and Economic Affairs, and  the Progressive Party led by Sigurður Ingi Jóhannesson and is Minister of Transport and Local Government.

This broad based coalition government agreed the Wellbeing policy agenda in April 2020.  It has 39 wellbeing indicators that are to be collected and followed by Statistics Iceland.  This is very important when considering what may happen in the next election – when the Left Greens may no longer lead the government.  Then the wellbeing agenda is already engrained in policy with civil servants and public institutional support.

What about the other countries in the Wellbeing Economy Governments partnership?

In Scotland, the wellbeing economy agenda is being supported and followed by the National Performance Framework (NPF) which was presented to the Scottish Parliament by the First Minister Nicola Sturgeon. Sturgeon is from the Scottish National Party (SNP) – which is considered to be a centre-left party and wants Scotland to become independent and and have closer ties with Europe and the EU.

Importantly, the NPF was passed unanimously with support from all five political parties in the Scottish Parliament.  Again, with this broad base of support in parliament the wellbeing economy agenda has a chance to survive if the next elections do not return the SNP as the leading party.

In New Zealand, the Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern set the first wellbeing budget world-wide in May 2019 with a central question – how well are our people? The focus is on five priority areas where evidence indicates greatest opportunities to improve the lives of New Zealanders.  The PM´s political party is Labour (left).  Labour is in a coalition government with the New Zealand First Party (right wing) and the Green Party (left wing).  This again, is a broad-based political coalition, giving strength to the wellbeing agenda.

Scotland, Iceland and New Zealand are all members of WEGo – the Wellbeing Economy Governments partnership – which is an offspring of WEAll.  A new member has just joined WEGo – Wales.  The First Minister of Wales is Mark Drakeford and he leads the Labour (left wing) government in Wales.  Wales has had the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act since 2015 that has seven wellbeing goals.  Therefore the wellbeing agenda is firmly in Welsh policy – and has been set in law for five years.

The Wellbeing Economy agenda is therefore neither left wing nor right wing.  It is for us all, so that all people and our planet can prosper.  Now that governments across the globe are finding their feet to lead their nations out of the COVOD-19 health and economic crisis – let us remember that pandemics hit us all, wherever we stand in politics. We also know that we cannot go back to business as usual.

In the worlds of professor Frank Snowden, a historian:  “By creating the myth that we could grow our economy exponentially and infinitely, by almost 8 billion people living on earth, excessive travel, environmental pollution, by pushing back nature more and more, we created almost ideal conditions for the coronavirus to emerge, spread and hit us especially hard.“

Let us join hands across political spectrums and make the Wellbeing Economy the new economy for the 21st century.  Would you like to learn more? Then see the WEAll ten principles of Building Back Better.

/0 Comments/by