By our avidity, weaknesses, desires, fears, and ignorance, due to economical models based on over-consumerism, we are creating our misery and the misery of many living beings.
We are so confident, Arrogant and Ignorant that we believe that we can safely regulate the climate of our planet. But since we are Human beings before we recognize our mistake it maybe too late for the many to live and a few would just be happy about living with robot bees, AI, and genetically modified living beings.
For the benefit of the many, what path would you like to choose? Business as usual or proceed an economical, social, and ecological paradigm shift?
As a starting point, in May 2011 the OEDC started measuring successful societies utilizing the-so called 'Better Life Index':
http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/
However, it excludes many other successful societies or some quite large countries.Further, its methodology and epistemology can be questionnable and some parameters maybe hidden or don't contribute actively to answer the current question.
Thank you in advance for sharing your experience and expertise.
All your comments are welcome.
Kind regards
As a person that had some experience living in European countries and Mexico where ecology and economy are not that successful, I have seen that some common points are: Environmental education, starting from the first years of school and being a child with educated parents in order to create environmental concern. Social success is also very related to education against corruption and a fair distribution of the income, which is the main gap unsuccessful countries.
Thank you for your input Ofelia.
To clarify my question, Iwould like to amphasise on the climate change and on the economics for the benefit of all.
The consciousness of technological impact and anthropogenic activities on the climate started in the 19th century.
At least sInce the Kyoto summit in 1997, the path chosen has been geo-engineering. The results are not up to the task and the agreements of the 21st Conference of the Parties December 2015 are not properly implemented by all parties.
Can we find a better path without throwing all kind of chemicals in the atmosphere ?
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Would_you_consider_the_release_of_chemicals_into_the_atmosphere_ethical_in_the_attempt_to_control_global_warming_due_to_anthropogenic_activities
Kind regards
I would say secularism. See e.g., Steven Pinker new book : Enlightenment now.
Low population density: look at Scandinavia, for example. This allows economic development without environmental damage.
The people in that societies are good in civism that is the common point
For one answer among others, see Bridget & Edward Dommen, Mauritius: an island of success, Wellington, Pacific Press & Oxford, James Currey, 1999. The study was commissioned by UNICEF, which was curious to understand why Mauritius had succeeded economically, politically and demographically (nuance!, but it was 20 years ago) where so many others had failed.
When I thought we had found the answer and it was surprisingly short, I tested it on Veerasamy Ringadoo who had been Minister of Education then President of Mauritius. “Fabian Socialism“, I said; “Young man, he answered, you are very slow.”
Thank you for your this reference.
Indeed the example of the economy and ecology of an Island can be a great example for a sustainable ecology.
On the economical side of the question, could you share rough estimates of the ratios of the Mauritius government budget per capita with regards to the GDP?
Further, how the success of the Mauritius' society was measured economically, socially, and ecologically?
Kind regards
Guy
It’s all in the book except for ecological indicators (they weren’t collected at the time under study, nor were there international norms for them.
Societies may tend to achieve a balance between economy, social justice and ecological soundness however, a 100% sustainability remains unattainable due to the constraints posed by the laws of physics (thermodynamics). Here attached is copy of a paper I co-authored years ago that will expand on my brief answer here. I hope this publication will help answering your question.
The common denominator for all of this is the education of girls (and/or of adult women). A myriad of studies link high rates of education for females with lower fertility rates and strangely enough, better protection for the environment. Educated females have lower fertility rates and more influence in or contribution to their societies, and this will render these societies the most successful economically, socially, and ecologically.
Education is a keystone factor however, it NOT solely a gender issue. Education for sustainability should be an equitable service available across gender, economic status, ethnicity and more. Education is the overarching concept to strive for sustainability, the most inclusive attribute for a sustainable development.
Our study of Mauritius confirms the décisive importance of girls’ education, especially combined with a number of arrangements to encourage the employment of women, some of them quite unexpected like the geography of where to build factories.
Electricity had been spread to the entire island primarily to support universal education by making light available at night so that children could do their homework. Because electricity was available everywhere, factories could be built anywhere, including at the bottom of the lane in the village. Traditionalist fathers and big brothers were willing to let their daughters and sisters walk to work at the bottom of the lane while they would have resisted letting them take the bus into the wilds of the sinful city.
Since women were bringing money home, the men became less anxious to marry them off at an early age, which contributed to solving the population problem and generally improved the status of women and their participation in national life.
Understanding the relationship between those variables: economy, society and culture, and ecology. Have the big picture of the reality and the relationship of country history (memory) with the current state of the country and the impacts of our desitions in the future. Understand that the reality of a country is not an isolated reality with strong connections with the neigborhoods and the world.
Dear Guy, please let me make you a question. Are you going to make a research on applied economics with the inquiry you started?
If the answer is yes I will interested to follow your project.
Cheers Gabriel
Gabriel,
I think there is no need for more studies.
All the elements are there, they only need to be gathered, and shared for everyone’s benefit.
In other discussion on global warming or climate changes, I have made some suggestions to prove the feasibility of such ecological economy and asked the same question. However, I was asked to go musing elsewhere which I did: ” You wonder about a solution to climate change. How much worrisome change has taken place? You need to start your musings at some point on your path.“
And I am open minded and would like the point of view or all people experienced at all scales home, village, city, country.
For me the book “All men are brothers” about Gandi’s point of views about governance although not perfect was inspirational.
La vie (l’avis) de tout le monde compte.
Kind regards
Guy
The phrasing of your question seems to indicate some doubt that humans should try to control what happens. For good or ill there is no way to avoid human activity having a major--within limits controlling--impact, so whether we have the wisdom to do a good job or not, we better do the best job we are capable of. Otherwise we will affect the result thoughtlessly and it does not seem likely that such a course will be the best we can do.
Dear Prof. Garston,
Thank you for your understanding.
One cannot even control oneself. How could one dream about controlling anything else?
The best one could do is learning to be wiser. Mindfulness maybe a better tool than all the super computers of the world to better job in everything we do.
A few things can be taught or 'controlled' forcefully everything can be learned willingly. Let’s learn from what’s working best naturally. Lower entropy is the natural path.
Kind regards
Guy
high human development index, education, knowledge intensive exports, high GDP/capita, Innovation, low carbon intensive industries and cleaner environment.
Dear Guy:
I'm not sure one can confidently state that any society has been or will ever be "successful economically, socially, and ecologically". Please define what you mean by 'successful'. Please name a society which fits the bill, both spatially and temporally.
Dear Brandon,
Indeed societies have been evolving. If it is quite difficult to answer the question since all parameters are difficult to meet optimally at least a good path of evolution toward that goal could be defined from examples such as the one given by Prof. Dommen with the Mauritius.
Alternatively, one could learn from non-working models or extinct civilizations such as Easter Island even though the science is not settled on what might have happened there.
I have not had the opportunity to read the book of Jarred Diamond, Collapse, but there are some possible counter examples and leads in it.
Being stuck with an over-consumeristic model that could be considered as a path to decadence followed by disaster as History as proved it more than one time of the world.
Kind regards
To help clarify the complexity I found this week-end a the enclosed graphic shared by Dr. Towe in the discussion:
https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_it_time_we_shift_emphasis_from_technological_solutions_to_climate_change_focus_on_the_Human_Dimension/9
Dear Guy
That means your idea of successful society is that can have a sustainable development and be resilient enough to continue with its envolvement despite catastrophes of any kind?
In the other hand society collapse is really a worring issue, recently I have read some articles from the BBC News.
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20170418-how-western-civilisation-could-collapse
Dear Gabriel,
Thanks for sharing this great article: “In Rome do as the romans do”… time after time in History this popular saying led to decadence then disaster.
A Possible cause for unsustainability is the addiction and the endless race for GDP growth, Energy, Chemicals, Power, Technology, Knowledge, Speed.
More Power or Speed or Money never has been the solution for sustainability!
I am recalling a youtube video by Prof. Hans Rosling watched yesterday shared by Isabella Fontana earlier in thes discussion https://www.researchgate.net/post/Is_it_time_we_shift_emphasis_from_technological_solutions_to_climate_change_focus_on_the_Human_Dimension/16
Prof. Hans Rosling demonstrates that with the occidental capitalistic model there is enough food and goods for everyone:
http://youtu.be/r6m81dIF75Q
However, I didn’t like much the hype and the ladder sketch that reminded me Al Gore’s show. Further, I think that looking up with desire and possible risk of envy toward those who are showing a wrong path is no better than looking down on own those who live with little means. I don’t believe that the over-consumerism will lead to a solution. Better Human Beings, better economic model would be better for all all including the “elite” who at the end of the day and of their lives do recognize that all their gold and power is useless to them.
It has only made people obese and greedier and more wicked and led people and civilizations faster to a certain death.
How could it be the solution?
Kind regards
Past no longer exists and future doesn’t exist yet, solely the present moment is our business.
After figuring out a goal and possible paths, what could be the detox and rehab program?
Jawad,
Not all models are equally successful. The path to high GDP/capita is misleading, full of ambushes, and risks…
Environmentally and socially unsuccessful societies invest high amount of their GDP budget in their military or forceful enforcement of their policies. A military budget less than 1% of GDP is more likely to be successful.
Kind regards
Indeed. Mauritius is one of the rare countries in the world which has no army, and it is no coincidence that is prosperous & democratic.
There is no proper answer to your question.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Ecology