Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of Vermont

Beyond Environmentalism

Envisioning a Sustainable and Desirable FutureRobert CostanzaGund Professor of Ecological Economics and Director, Gund Institute of Ecological EconomicsRubenstein School of Environment and Natural ResourcesUniversity of VermontBurlington, VT 05401

http://www.uvm.edu/giee

In their essay “The Death of Environmentalism,” Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus identified a critical missing element in the environmental movement. Despite the extreme threats to our future, they claimed that “not one of America’s environmental leaders is articulating a vision of the future commensurate with the magnitude of the crisis.” Environmentalism has instead relied on a negative vision, a complaint-based style of activism that fails to engage with the public. It has become too focused on technical policy fixes and single-issue politics and is “no longer capable of dealing with the world’s most serious ecological

crisis.”

The object of this seminar series is to move beyond the negative environmentalism of the past by creating a positive, detailed, shared vision of a sustainable and desirable future—a future in which living in harmony with nature is not a sacrifice, but an improvement in everyone’s quality of life; a future that can captivate and motivate the public; a future that we would be proud to leave to our grandchildren. Until we create and widely share this vision, we have no hope of achieving it.

January 19 Robert Costanza, University of Vermont“Envisioning a Sustainable and Desirable Future”

January 26 Josh Farley, University of Vermont"Beyond Sacrifice: the Relationship between Sustainability and Quality of Life."

February 2 Rik Leemans, Wageningen University“Scenarios of a sustainable and desirable future: lessons from the Millennium

Ecosystem Assessment”

February 9 Ernest Callenbach, Author of “Ecotopia” and “Ecotopia Emerging”“Ecotopia revisited: life in a sustainable and desirable future”

February 16 Daniel Fogel, University of Vermont“The university in a sustainable and desirable future”

February 23 Bryan Norton, Georgia Tech"The Re-Birth of Environmentalism as Pragmatic, Adaptive Management."

March 2 Richard Heinberg, New College of California“After the party: energy in a sustainable and desirable future”

March 9 David Batker, Earth Economics“The institutions of a sustainable and desirable future”

March 16 Mary Evelyn Tucker, Harvard University"The Emerging Alliance of Religion and Ecology"

March 23 Spring Break

March 30 Bill McKibben, Middlebury College“Thinking small: scale and desire”

April 6 Jon Isham, Middlebury College“Building the new movement for a sustainable low-carbon future”

April 13 Gar Alperovitz, University of Maryland“The political economy of a sustainable and desirable future”

April 20 (evening) Lin Ostrom, Indiana University“The challenge of building social capital in a sustainable and desirable future”

April 27 David Orr, Oberlin College“Politics and the environment in a sustainable and desirable future”

Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of Vermont

Practical Problem SolvingRequires the Integration of:

• Visiona. How the world worksb. How we would like the world to be

• Tools and Analysisappropriate to the vision

• Implementationappropriate to the vision

GrowingEconomicSubsystem

RecycledMatter

Energy

Resources

Energy

Resources

SolarEnergy

Waste Heat

"EmptyWorld"

SinkFunctions

SourceFunctions

FInite Global Ecosystem

AnthroposphereAnthroposphere

Marc Imhoff

Biospheric Sciences Branch

NASA

QuickTime™ and aCinepak decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Empty World Energy

Planning?

Labor

Land

EconomicProcess

GoodsandServices

CulturalNorms andPolicy

IndividualUtility/welfare

Consumption(based on fixedpreferences)

Improvement

Education, Training,Research

Building

Investment(decisions about, taxesgovernment spending,education,science andtechnologypolicy, etc., basedon existing propertyrights regimes)

Property rights

Private Public

GNP

Manufacturedcapital

”Empty World" Model of the Economy

Perf

ect

Su

bst

itu

tab

ility

Betw

een

Fact

ors

Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of VermontThe Challenge: Sustainable Management of an Ever-Changing Planet

World Primary Energy Supply by Source, 1850-1997

OIL AND GAS LIQUIDS 2004 ScenarioUpdated by Colin J. Campbell, 2004-05-15

March 2 Richard Heinberg New“After the party: energy in a sustainable

and desirable future”

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Atmosphere

NCAR can now run these kinds of models for more than 1000 years

Sea-viewing Wide Field-of-View Sensor (SeaWiFS) data on marine and terrestrial plant productivity

QuickTime™ and a decompressor

are needed to see this picture.

Biosphere

GrowingEconomic

Subsystem

RecycledMatter

Resources

SolarEnergy

Waste Heat

"FullWorld"

Energy Energy

Resources

FInite Global Ecosystem

SinkFunctions

SourceFunctions

Human Capital EconomicProductionProcess

GoodsandServices

EvolvingCulturalNorms andPolicy

Well Being(Individual andCommunity)

Consumption(based on changing,adaptingpreferences)

Education, training,

research.

Building

Investment(decisions about, taxescommunity spending,education, science andtechnology policy, etc., basedon complex propertyrights regimes)

Individual Public

GNP

Wastes

Common

Ecologicalservices/amenities

having, being

- having,- being

negative impacts on all forms of capital

being, doing, relating

Restoration,

ConservationNatural Capital

ManufacturedCapital

having

positive impacts on human capital capacity

doing, relatingComplex propertyrights regimes

SolarEnergy

SocialCapital

Lim

ited

Su

bst

ituta

bili

tyB

etw

ee

n C

ap

ital F

orm

s

“Full World” Model of the Ecological Economic System

Waste heat

Institutional

rules, norms, etc.

Materially closed earth system

From: Costanza, R., J. C. Cumberland, H. E. Daly, R. Goodland, and R. Norgaard. 1997. An Introduction to Ecological Economics. St. Lucie Press, Boca Raton, 275 pp.

SustainableHuman

Well-Being

BuiltCapital(built infrastructure,factories,houses,roads, etc.)

SocialCapital

(social networks,family and friends,

norms and rules,institutions, etc.)

NaturalCapital

(non-built infrastructure,ecosystems,

biodiversity, etc.)

HumanCapital(population,

health, education,

information, etc.)

TechnologicalOptimism

Resources are unlimitedTechnical Progress candeal with any challenge

Compitition promotesprogress; markets are the

guiding principle

Optimists Are Right(Resources are unlimited)

Skeptics Are Right(Resources are limited)

Real State of the World

Star TrekFusion energy becomespractical, solving manyeconomic and environmentalproblems.Humans journey to the innersolar system, where populationcontinues to expand(mean rank 2.3)

from: Costanza, R. 2000. Visions of alternative (unpredictable) futures and their use in policy analysis. Conservation Ecology 4(1):5. [online]

URL: http://www.consecol.org/vol4/iss1/art5

TechnologicalSkepticsm

Resources are limitedProgress depends less ontechnology and more on

social and communitydevelopment

Cooperation promotesprogress; markets are the

servants of larger goals

Big GovernmentGovernments sanctioncompanies that fail to pursuethe public interest.Fusion energy is slow todevelop due to strict safteystandards.Family-planning programsstabilize population growth.Incomes become more equal.(mean rank 0.8)

Mad MaxOil production declines and noaffordable alternative emerges.Financial markets collapse andgovernments weaken, too broketo maintain order and controlover desperate, impoverishedpopulations.The world is run bytransnational corporations.(mean rank -7.7)

EcoTopiaTax reforms favor ecologicallybeneficent industries and punishpolluters and resource depleters.Habitation patterns reduce needfor transportation and energy.A shift away from consumerismincreases quality of life andreduces waste.(mean rank 5.1)

Four Visions of the Future

EmptyWorldVision

FullWorldVision

Changes in human well-being under Millennium Assessment scenarios

– In three of the four MA scenarios, between three and five of the components of well-being (material needs, health, security, social relations, freedom) improve between 2000 and 2050

– In one scenario (Order from Strength) conditions are projected to decline, particularly in developing countries

(BigGovernment,

B1)

(MadMax,A2)

(Ecotopia,B2)

(StarTrek,A1)

February 2nd Rik Leemans, Wageningen University“Scenarios of a sustainable and desirable future: lessons from the

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment”

.

StarTrek

-10

0

+10 MadMax BigGov Ecotopia

-10

0

+10

Mean

Mean

MeanMean

Number of respondents

Ranking

Donella (Dana) Meadows1941-2001

Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of Vermont

1. In order to effectively envision, it is necessary to focus on what one really wants, not what one will settle for, i.e.

Really Want Settle ForSelf esteem Fancy carSerenity DrugsHealth MedicineHuman Happiness GNPPermanent Prosperity Unsustainable Growth

2. A vision should be judged by the clarity of its goals, not the clarity of its implementation path. Holding to the vision and being flexible about the path is often the only way to find the path. 3. Responsible vision must acknowledge, but not get crushed by, the physical and political constraints of the real world

4. It is critical for visions to be shared because only shared visions can be responsible.

5. Vision has to be flexible and evolving. Thus the process of envisioning is at least as important as the particular visions themselves.

Principles of Effective Envisioning*

*from Meadows, D. 1996. Envisioning a Sustainable World. pp. 117-126 In: Getting Down to Earth: Practical Applications of Ecological Economics, edited by R. Costanza, O. Segura, and J. Martinez-Alier. Washington D.C.: Island Press.

Autonomous Individuals

Institutions(ie. markets, legal systems, etc.)

Goals

A. Current conception: Individuals as autonomous agents acting through institutions toachieve their goals. All individuals are not equally empowered in this process, however,goals are not shared, and there is no process for adjusting goals or institutions.

Current Situation: Lack of Shared Vision

Shared Envisioning

Shared Vision

Community Institutions, Cultural Norms, etc

Individuals in Community

B. Proposed conception: Individuals participate directly in developing a shared vision for thesociety. This vision is translated into institutions aimed at achieving the vision.

A. Before the process: many individuals have not really thought about their visionsof a sustainable and desirable society. Their visions are narrow or vague and disjointed.

B. Intermediate stage: Individual visions are developed and expanded, and,through the dialog process, areas of consensus are identified and expanded.

Shared Vision

C. Shared envisioning Shared vision is identified and articulated. The sharedvision leaves apmle room for individual expression and uniqueness, while providinga core of shared values and desires. Individual visions are actually strengthenedand empowered in this process.

Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of Vermont

Envisioning a Sustainable and Desirable America

World View Humans as a part of nature Steady state, ecological economy Goal quality of life rather than consumption

Built Capital Runs on renewable energy and natural capital Emphasis on quality rather than quantity Small communities rule (both within and outside cities)

The vision so far (see http://www.uvm.edu/giee/ESDA)

Natural Capital Protected as essential life support Depletion heavily taxed

Human Capital Balance of synthesis, analysis, and communication Meaningful, creative work and leisure Stable populations

Social Capital A primary source of productivity and well-being “Strong” democracy

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.

Gund Institute for Ecological Economics, University of Vermont

The Challenge:

Create a shared vision of a sustainable and desirable future

January 19 Robert Costanza, University of Vermont“Envisioning a Sustainable and Desirable Future”

January 26 Josh Farley, University of Vermont"Beyond Sacrifice: the Relationship between Sustainability and Quality of Life."

February 2 Rik Leemans, Wageningen University“Scenarios of a sustainable and desirable future: lessons from the Millennium

Ecosystem Assessment”

February 9 Ernest Callenbach, Author of “Ecotopia” and “Ecotopia Emerging”“Ecotopia revisited: life in a sustainable and desirable future”

February 16 Daniel Fogel, University of Vermont“The university in a sustainable and desirable future”

February 23 Bryan Norton, Georgia Tech"The Re-Birth of Environmentalism as Pragmatic, Adaptive Management."

March 2 Richard Heinberg, New College of California“After the party: energy in a sustainable and desirable future”

March 9 David Batker, Earth Economics“The institutions of a sustainable and desirable future”

March 16 Mary Evelyn Tucker, Harvard University"The Emerging Alliance of Religion and Ecology"

March 23 Spring Break

March 30 Bill McKibben, Middlebury College“Thinking small: scale and desire”

April 6 Jon Isham, Middlebury College“Building the new movement for a sustainable low-carbon future”

April 13 Gar Alperovitz, University of Maryland“The political economy of a sustainable and desirable future”

April 20 (evening) Lin Ostrom, Indiana University“The challenge of building social capital in a sustainable and desirable future”

April 27 David Orr, Oberlin College“Politics and the environment in a sustainable and desirable future”