From THE ECONOMICS OF THE COMING SPACESHIP EARTH
By Kenneth E. Boulding, 1966
.........The gross national product is a rough measure of this total throughput. It should be possible, however, to distinguish that part of the GNP which is derived from exhaustible and that which is derived from reproducible resources, as well as that part of consumption which represents effluvia and that which represents input into the productive system again. Nobody, as far as I know, has ever attempted to break down the GNP in this way, although it Would be an interesting and extremely important exercise, which is unfortunately beyond the scope of this paper.
By contrast, in the spaceman economy, throughput is by no means a desideratum, and is indeed to be regarded as something to be minimized rather than maximized. The essential measure of the success of the economy is not production and consumption at all, but the nature, extent, quality, and complexity of the total capital stock, including in this the state of the human bodies and minds included in the system. In the spaceman economy, what we are primarily concerned with is stock maintenance, and any technological change which results in the maintenance of a given total stock with a lessened throughput (that is, less production and consumption) is clearly a gain. This idea that both production and consumption are bad things rather than good things is very strange to economists, who have been obsessed with tile income-flow concepts to the exclusion, almost, of capital-stock concepts......
Beyond GDP 2008
There are numerous new "indicators" but... 42 years...
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Monday, November 24, 2008
System breaks and positive feedback as sources of catastrophe
Kenneth £. Boulding - 1986
IV. VULNERABILITY IN SOCIAL SYSTEMS
Social systems can exhibit nearly all these different kinds of system breaks
and catastrophes. Positive feedback may be
more common in social systems than it is in other systems. A quarrel is a good example:
A does something that is offensive to B, so B does something that is offensive to A, so A does something more offensive to B, and B something still more offensive to A, and so on, until the situation explodes in a fight, a law suit, or even a murder. The arms race is another very good example: A feels insecure and increases its arms, which makes B feel less secure and therefore it increases its arms, which makes A feel still less secure, so it increases its arms, which makes B feel still less secure, so it increases its arms, and so on. Sometimes these positive feedback processes can reach an equilibrium. Very often, however, they go on until there is a system break. A great many wars indeed are a result of the breakdown of systems of
deterrence that have led into arms races.
In economic systems, we see many examples of positive feedback. Inflation
is often a good example, particularly where it is the result of an inadequate
tax system leading to budget deficits, which are financed in part at least by the
creation of money, which increases the price level, which increases the government
expenditures. Often receipts do not catch up, so that the deficit increases, which
leads to more inflation, which leads to still further deficits, more inflation, and
so on. This process sometimes ends up in hyperinflation, as in Germany in 1923
or Hungary in 1946, in which the price level can double every week or even every
day. This, however, eventually becomes intolerable and the old currency is called
in, a new currency is-estabhshed, with an improved tax system that creates much
greater stability.
The Great Depression of 1929 to 1933 was another very good example of positive feedback. It started with a speculative collapse in the Stock Market, which diminished and also redistributed net worth on a very large scale, driving many people into bankruptcy, which led to widespread pessimism, which diminished investment. This in turn diminished profits, which confirmed the pessimism and led to more pessimism, less investment, lower profits, still less investment, still lower profits, and so on, until by 1932 and 1933 profits were negative, net investment was virtually zero, interest had about doubled as a proportion of the national income, unemployment was 25 percent of the labor force. Then, for some reason that is still not wholly clear, although related in time to the election of President Roosevelt, whose charismatic personality seemed to
cheer many people up, investment recovered, profits recovered, investment recovered
still further, profits still further, until 1937. The process was interrupted by a
small depression in 1938, possibly related to the government cash surplus prod-
uced by the introduction of Social Security. Then, of course, comes rearmament
and the Second World War, which reduced unemployment virtually to zero, but
also severely diminished gross private domestic investment and state and local
government. These processes are very complex and it is often hard to distinguish
between positive and negative feedback. One of the saddest examples of positive
feedback is the development of cultures of violence, such as we see in Northern
Ireland, Lebanon, Sri Lanka, the Sikhs in India, and so on. Here again, violence
produces more violence, which produces more violence, and so on. Sometimes
this stabilizes out at a certain level; sometimes it degenerates into general civil
war.
V. DEVELOPMENT AS POSITIVE FEEDBACK:INTERRUPTIONS AS SYSTEM CHANGE
Economic development is another positive feedback process, much more be-
nign than most social processes. It is a process essentially in human learning and
know-how. There is a level of poverty which can be very stable simply because
no resources can be spared either for human learning or for the accumulation
of physical goods which supplement and express the human learning. Beyond a
certain point, however, resources can be devoted to human learning and to the
accumulation of goods, and the more we know, often the easier it is to learn. The
more goods we have, the easier it is to add to them. This process may eventually
reach some sort of equilibrium in a stationary state, either because with the exi-
sting techniques for adding to knowledge learning becomes increasingly difficult
and the increase in knowledge slows down, or because other factors develop,
such as war, which destroy the capital accumulations, or even because of the
development of widespread unemployment and the failure to utilize resources.
It is often hard to distinguish what turns out to be an interruption in the
system from what turns out to be a fundamental system change. Economic
development is a good example. It is frequently interrupted by wars or by
depressions, yet these have a relatively short lifespan relative to the total process,
and once they are over and peace and prosperity are restored, development begins
again, and very often indeed at an accelerated pace. The ultimate result is then
not very different from what it would have been if the interruption had not
taken place. We see this, for instance, in a country like Japan, which started
on a process of economic development about 1870, interrupted a little by the
Korean Empire, and severely interrupted by the Second World War, which was
utterly devastating. After the war recovery took place at even an accelerated
pace, until by about the 1970s Japan was economically about where it would
have been if it had not been to war and had continued to grow at its pre-war
pace.
The Great Depression likewise can be seen as an interruption in the develop-
ment of most of the countries of the Western world. In the communist countries
likewise we see a similar phenomenon. Stalin and the "First Collectivization"
was a very serious interruption in the development of the Soviet Union, one in-
deed from which they are still not fully recovered. The "Great Leap Forward" in
China turned out to be a leap backward. The "Cultural Revolution" similarly
was an interruption in Chinese development. The growth of human knowledge,
however, on which development depends, is a process of positive feedback that
seems remarkably hard to stop, although there are examples of economic stag-
nation, for instance, in the Islamic world after about 1300, which can only be
explained by political repression of the human learning process.
The "strain-strength" model is of great importance in social systems, which
often suffer very sudden transitions when the strain on the system is greater than
its internal strength. The outbreak of war is almost always such an occasion,
which is one reason why it is so hard to predict and why the concept of the
"causes" of war is a very unsatisfactory one. A revolution is another example.
Just exactly what it is that gives a social system strength to resist a sudden strain
is by no means always clear. Certainly in the case of war the "strength" of the
system is often quite inverse to the amount spent on armaments, which easily
leads to a weakening of the overall system and a diminution in overall security.
Just what it is that makes some marriages survive until the death of one of the
partners, whereas others end in divorce, is, again, often very puzzling. The causes
of marital breakdown are almost as complex as the causes of the breakdown of
international peace. Sometimes it is an almost imperceptible boundary between
the negative feedback processes which lead to stability and the positive feedback
processes which lead into catastrophe. Here again, the structure of systems
is often a very poor guide to their dynamics. All complex systems can get into
patterns that lead to their destabilization and move them into extreme positions,
like Hitler's Germany or Cambodia's Khmer Rouge. It is all the more important,
particularly at the present, that we develop negative feedback processes in the
system of unilateral national defense which can reduce the strain on the system
and diminish the likelihood of catastrophe.
http://www.esee2009.si/
A Matter of Opinion - How Ecological and Neoclassical Environmental Economists
think about Sustainability and Economics
IV. VULNERABILITY IN SOCIAL SYSTEMS
Social systems can exhibit nearly all these different kinds of system breaks
and catastrophes. Positive feedback may be
more common in social systems than it is in other systems. A quarrel is a good example:
A does something that is offensive to B, so B does something that is offensive to A, so A does something more offensive to B, and B something still more offensive to A, and so on, until the situation explodes in a fight, a law suit, or even a murder. The arms race is another very good example: A feels insecure and increases its arms, which makes B feel less secure and therefore it increases its arms, which makes A feel still less secure, so it increases its arms, which makes B feel still less secure, so it increases its arms, and so on. Sometimes these positive feedback processes can reach an equilibrium. Very often, however, they go on until there is a system break. A great many wars indeed are a result of the breakdown of systems of
deterrence that have led into arms races.
In economic systems, we see many examples of positive feedback. Inflation
is often a good example, particularly where it is the result of an inadequate
tax system leading to budget deficits, which are financed in part at least by the
creation of money, which increases the price level, which increases the government
expenditures. Often receipts do not catch up, so that the deficit increases, which
leads to more inflation, which leads to still further deficits, more inflation, and
so on. This process sometimes ends up in hyperinflation, as in Germany in 1923
or Hungary in 1946, in which the price level can double every week or even every
day. This, however, eventually becomes intolerable and the old currency is called
in, a new currency is-estabhshed, with an improved tax system that creates much
greater stability.
The Great Depression of 1929 to 1933 was another very good example of positive feedback. It started with a speculative collapse in the Stock Market, which diminished and also redistributed net worth on a very large scale, driving many people into bankruptcy, which led to widespread pessimism, which diminished investment. This in turn diminished profits, which confirmed the pessimism and led to more pessimism, less investment, lower profits, still less investment, still lower profits, and so on, until by 1932 and 1933 profits were negative, net investment was virtually zero, interest had about doubled as a proportion of the national income, unemployment was 25 percent of the labor force. Then, for some reason that is still not wholly clear, although related in time to the election of President Roosevelt, whose charismatic personality seemed to
cheer many people up, investment recovered, profits recovered, investment recovered
still further, profits still further, until 1937. The process was interrupted by a
small depression in 1938, possibly related to the government cash surplus prod-
uced by the introduction of Social Security. Then, of course, comes rearmament
and the Second World War, which reduced unemployment virtually to zero, but
also severely diminished gross private domestic investment and state and local
government. These processes are very complex and it is often hard to distinguish
between positive and negative feedback. One of the saddest examples of positive
feedback is the development of cultures of violence, such as we see in Northern
Ireland, Lebanon, Sri Lanka, the Sikhs in India, and so on. Here again, violence
produces more violence, which produces more violence, and so on. Sometimes
this stabilizes out at a certain level; sometimes it degenerates into general civil
war.
V. DEVELOPMENT AS POSITIVE FEEDBACK:INTERRUPTIONS AS SYSTEM CHANGE
Economic development is another positive feedback process, much more be-
nign than most social processes. It is a process essentially in human learning and
know-how. There is a level of poverty which can be very stable simply because
no resources can be spared either for human learning or for the accumulation
of physical goods which supplement and express the human learning. Beyond a
certain point, however, resources can be devoted to human learning and to the
accumulation of goods, and the more we know, often the easier it is to learn. The
more goods we have, the easier it is to add to them. This process may eventually
reach some sort of equilibrium in a stationary state, either because with the exi-
sting techniques for adding to knowledge learning becomes increasingly difficult
and the increase in knowledge slows down, or because other factors develop,
such as war, which destroy the capital accumulations, or even because of the
development of widespread unemployment and the failure to utilize resources.
It is often hard to distinguish what turns out to be an interruption in the
system from what turns out to be a fundamental system change. Economic
development is a good example. It is frequently interrupted by wars or by
depressions, yet these have a relatively short lifespan relative to the total process,
and once they are over and peace and prosperity are restored, development begins
again, and very often indeed at an accelerated pace. The ultimate result is then
not very different from what it would have been if the interruption had not
taken place. We see this, for instance, in a country like Japan, which started
on a process of economic development about 1870, interrupted a little by the
Korean Empire, and severely interrupted by the Second World War, which was
utterly devastating. After the war recovery took place at even an accelerated
pace, until by about the 1970s Japan was economically about where it would
have been if it had not been to war and had continued to grow at its pre-war
pace.
The Great Depression likewise can be seen as an interruption in the develop-
ment of most of the countries of the Western world. In the communist countries
likewise we see a similar phenomenon. Stalin and the "First Collectivization"
was a very serious interruption in the development of the Soviet Union, one in-
deed from which they are still not fully recovered. The "Great Leap Forward" in
China turned out to be a leap backward. The "Cultural Revolution" similarly
was an interruption in Chinese development. The growth of human knowledge,
however, on which development depends, is a process of positive feedback that
seems remarkably hard to stop, although there are examples of economic stag-
nation, for instance, in the Islamic world after about 1300, which can only be
explained by political repression of the human learning process.
The "strain-strength" model is of great importance in social systems, which
often suffer very sudden transitions when the strain on the system is greater than
its internal strength. The outbreak of war is almost always such an occasion,
which is one reason why it is so hard to predict and why the concept of the
"causes" of war is a very unsatisfactory one. A revolution is another example.
Just exactly what it is that gives a social system strength to resist a sudden strain
is by no means always clear. Certainly in the case of war the "strength" of the
system is often quite inverse to the amount spent on armaments, which easily
leads to a weakening of the overall system and a diminution in overall security.
Just what it is that makes some marriages survive until the death of one of the
partners, whereas others end in divorce, is, again, often very puzzling. The causes
of marital breakdown are almost as complex as the causes of the breakdown of
international peace. Sometimes it is an almost imperceptible boundary between
the negative feedback processes which lead to stability and the positive feedback
processes which lead into catastrophe. Here again, the structure of systems
is often a very poor guide to their dynamics. All complex systems can get into
patterns that lead to their destabilization and move them into extreme positions,
like Hitler's Germany or Cambodia's Khmer Rouge. It is all the more important,
particularly at the present, that we develop negative feedback processes in the
system of unilateral national defense which can reduce the strain on the system
and diminish the likelihood of catastrophe.
http://www.esee2009.si/
A Matter of Opinion - How Ecological and Neoclassical Environmental Economists
think about Sustainability and Economics
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Environmental documentary at DokMa and guests..
My guests - from left Ray McCormack from Ireland (A Crude Awakening / The Oil Crash) and on the right Fulvio Montano from Italy (La Fiuma - Incontri sul Po e Dintorni). Missing Gaetano Capizzi (CinemAmbiente) who had to leave earlier.
Below Lars Oxfeldt Mortensen (The Cloud Mystery) from Denmark in front of The Oldest Vine in the world.
Thinking about the problems? On my right, Tomo Križnar (Darfur -war for water)
Is media really interested in environmental topics? Perhaps - 2 minutes from 19th minute on. Kratek članek v Večeru in nekaj iz posveta o vodi ter linki do ostalih okoljskih filmskih festivalov (environmental film festivals).
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Resilience video school
Zanimiva predavanja o naravnih in socialnih kompleksnih sistemih in njihovih povezavah. V Sloveniji lahko kot takšen sistem prepoznamo poseljena gozdnata območja - več o adaptivnem gospodarjenju - dr. Bončina
Resilience is the capacity to deal with change and continue to develop.
ecological resilience can be defined in two ways. The first is a measure of the magnitude of disturbance that can be absorbed before the (eco)system changes its structure by changing the variables and processes that control behaviour. The second, a more traditional meaning, is as a measure of resistance to disturbance and the speed of return to the equilibrium state of an ecosystem
Več o tej temi Buzz Holling, ki ga imajo za očeta teorije povratnosti (resilience), vendar pa je spoznanje o tem pri upravljanju gozdnih ekosistemov v SLoveniji že dolgo - glej prispevek Bončine.
About the system analysis - nice article by Donella Meadows
Lepe definicije določenih pojmov:
Social-ecological systems are linked systems of people and nature. The term emphasizes that humans must be seen as a part of, not apart from, nature — that the delineation between social and ecological systems is artificial and arbitrary. Scholars have also used concepts like ‘coupled human-environment systems´, ‘ecosocial systems´ and ‘socioecological systems´ to illustrate the interplay between social and ecological systems. The term social-ecological system was coined by Fikret Berkes and Carl Folke in 1998 because they did not want to treat the social or ecological dimension as a prefix, but rather give the two same weight during their analysis.
Ecosystem resilience is a measure of how much disturbance (like storms, fire or pollutants) an ecosystem can handle without shifting into a qualitatively different state. It is the capacity of a system to both withstand shocks and surprises and to rebuild itself if damaged.
Social resilience is the ability of human communities to withstand and recover from stresses, such as environmental change or social, economic or political upheaval. Resilience in societies and their life-supporting ecosystems is crucial in maintaining options for future human development.
Ecosystem Services are the benefits people obtain from ecosystem processes. These include water and air purification, flood control, erosion control, generation of fertile soils, detoxification of wastes, resistance to climate and other environmental changes, pollination, and aesthetic and cultural benefits that derive from nature.
Vulnerability refers to the propensity of social and ecological system to suffer harm from exposure to external stresses and shocks. Research on vulnerability can, for example, assess how large the risk is that people and ecosystems will be affected by climate changes and how sensitive they will be to such changes. Vulnerability is often denoted the antonym of resilience.
Institutions are the norms and rules that shape human interactions. They can be formal (such as rules and laws) or informal (such as norms, conventions and self-imposed codes of conduct). Institutions, such as property rights, can be used to link society to nature with the aim to control people´s use of the environment for both ecological and human long-term objectives.
Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) include companies, the weather, our immune systems, the economy, ecosystems, single cells and brains. In these CAS simple rules of cause and effect do not apply, they are complex, unpredictable and constantly adapting to their environments. Hence, they are far from being machines that you can take apart and investigate the parts to understand the whole.
Response diversity refers to the multitude of responses to environmental change and disturbances, among species contributing to the same ecosystem function. This kind of diversity plays a crucial role in sustaining the resilience of ecosystems to cope with disturbance and change. If all species within a functional group (e.g. pollinators, seed dispersers or decomposers) are equally sensitive to a particular disturbance the system will have low response diversity and be vulnerable to that particular disturbance.
Anthropocene is a term coined in 2000 by the Nobel Prize winning scientist Paul Crutzen. It describes the most recent period in the Earth's history, starting in the 18th century, when the activities of humans first began to have a significant global impact on the Earth's climate and ecosystems.
Natural Capital is an extension of the traditional economic notion of capital. The term was coined to represent the natural assets that economists, governments, and corporations tend to leave off the balance sheets. Natural capital can be non-renewable resources, like fossil fuels and mineral deposits; renewable resources, such as fish or timber; or ecosystem services (for instance the generation of fertile soils, pollination, or purification of air and water).
Social Capital is a concept used in various fields, from economics and political science to sociology and natural resources management. Broadly, it refers to social relations and among individuals and the norms and social trust which they generate and which facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit.
.
Adaptive co-management is an approach based on collaboration among multiple actors, for instance agencies, researchers and local resource users. Management of everything from local fisheries to global climate change is regarded as controlled experiments, with the consequent need for monitoring, evaluation and constant improvement. According to a growing number of scholars such management that is flexible and open to learning stimulates a sustainable development by enhancing resilience in coupled human and natural systems.
Blue and green water: ‘Blue water´ is the liquid water in rivers, lakes and ground water. ‘‘Green water´ is the water that feeds the system as rain and forms soil moisture that is absorbed by plants (and then exhaled as vapour flow). When discussing the water needed to produce food for an expanding human population we tend to neglect the green water flows even though most food production comes from rain-fed farming, not least in hunger and poverty stricken areas with rapid population growth.
Urban sprawl is a phenomenon that plagues cities in both developing and industrial countries. It is an uncontrolled or unplanned extension of urban areas into the countryside that tends to result in an inefficient and wasteful use of land and its associated natural resources.
Resilience is the capacity to deal with change and continue to develop.
ecological resilience can be defined in two ways. The first is a measure of the magnitude of disturbance that can be absorbed before the (eco)system changes its structure by changing the variables and processes that control behaviour. The second, a more traditional meaning, is as a measure of resistance to disturbance and the speed of return to the equilibrium state of an ecosystem
Več o tej temi Buzz Holling, ki ga imajo za očeta teorije povratnosti (resilience), vendar pa je spoznanje o tem pri upravljanju gozdnih ekosistemov v SLoveniji že dolgo - glej prispevek Bončine.
About the system analysis - nice article by Donella Meadows
Lepe definicije določenih pojmov:
Social-ecological systems are linked systems of people and nature. The term emphasizes that humans must be seen as a part of, not apart from, nature — that the delineation between social and ecological systems is artificial and arbitrary. Scholars have also used concepts like ‘coupled human-environment systems´, ‘ecosocial systems´ and ‘socioecological systems´ to illustrate the interplay between social and ecological systems. The term social-ecological system was coined by Fikret Berkes and Carl Folke in 1998 because they did not want to treat the social or ecological dimension as a prefix, but rather give the two same weight during their analysis.
Ecosystem resilience is a measure of how much disturbance (like storms, fire or pollutants) an ecosystem can handle without shifting into a qualitatively different state. It is the capacity of a system to both withstand shocks and surprises and to rebuild itself if damaged.
Social resilience is the ability of human communities to withstand and recover from stresses, such as environmental change or social, economic or political upheaval. Resilience in societies and their life-supporting ecosystems is crucial in maintaining options for future human development.
Ecosystem Services are the benefits people obtain from ecosystem processes. These include water and air purification, flood control, erosion control, generation of fertile soils, detoxification of wastes, resistance to climate and other environmental changes, pollination, and aesthetic and cultural benefits that derive from nature.
Vulnerability refers to the propensity of social and ecological system to suffer harm from exposure to external stresses and shocks. Research on vulnerability can, for example, assess how large the risk is that people and ecosystems will be affected by climate changes and how sensitive they will be to such changes. Vulnerability is often denoted the antonym of resilience.
Institutions are the norms and rules that shape human interactions. They can be formal (such as rules and laws) or informal (such as norms, conventions and self-imposed codes of conduct). Institutions, such as property rights, can be used to link society to nature with the aim to control people´s use of the environment for both ecological and human long-term objectives.
Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) include companies, the weather, our immune systems, the economy, ecosystems, single cells and brains. In these CAS simple rules of cause and effect do not apply, they are complex, unpredictable and constantly adapting to their environments. Hence, they are far from being machines that you can take apart and investigate the parts to understand the whole.
Response diversity refers to the multitude of responses to environmental change and disturbances, among species contributing to the same ecosystem function. This kind of diversity plays a crucial role in sustaining the resilience of ecosystems to cope with disturbance and change. If all species within a functional group (e.g. pollinators, seed dispersers or decomposers) are equally sensitive to a particular disturbance the system will have low response diversity and be vulnerable to that particular disturbance.
Anthropocene is a term coined in 2000 by the Nobel Prize winning scientist Paul Crutzen. It describes the most recent period in the Earth's history, starting in the 18th century, when the activities of humans first began to have a significant global impact on the Earth's climate and ecosystems.
Natural Capital is an extension of the traditional economic notion of capital. The term was coined to represent the natural assets that economists, governments, and corporations tend to leave off the balance sheets. Natural capital can be non-renewable resources, like fossil fuels and mineral deposits; renewable resources, such as fish or timber; or ecosystem services (for instance the generation of fertile soils, pollination, or purification of air and water).
Social Capital is a concept used in various fields, from economics and political science to sociology and natural resources management. Broadly, it refers to social relations and among individuals and the norms and social trust which they generate and which facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit.
.
Adaptive co-management is an approach based on collaboration among multiple actors, for instance agencies, researchers and local resource users. Management of everything from local fisheries to global climate change is regarded as controlled experiments, with the consequent need for monitoring, evaluation and constant improvement. According to a growing number of scholars such management that is flexible and open to learning stimulates a sustainable development by enhancing resilience in coupled human and natural systems.
Blue and green water: ‘Blue water´ is the liquid water in rivers, lakes and ground water. ‘‘Green water´ is the water that feeds the system as rain and forms soil moisture that is absorbed by plants (and then exhaled as vapour flow). When discussing the water needed to produce food for an expanding human population we tend to neglect the green water flows even though most food production comes from rain-fed farming, not least in hunger and poverty stricken areas with rapid population growth.
Urban sprawl is a phenomenon that plagues cities in both developing and industrial countries. It is an uncontrolled or unplanned extension of urban areas into the countryside that tends to result in an inefficient and wasteful use of land and its associated natural resources.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
