I gave a presentation today about companies increasingly being recognised for their sustainability initiatives. One of the (MBA) students in the audience - which included execs from companies - asked how we get around the fundamental problem that companies need to you to consume and consumption underlies all our problems.
Growth capitalism in my view, is indeed a problematic paradigm. But let's go with a thought experiment - what does it mean not to have growth? In the property or equity markets, it means your house or your superannuation is worth the same today as it is next year or the year after - or (and we're not talking about collapses here) maybe less, cos the paint starts peeling and the kitchen is a year older and more battered. As investments, these things would need to rely on the income they generate (rent or dividends) making them far less subject to speculation.
It also means that savings (eg super savings) wouldn't grow over time, except through the compounding
of interest and other income. You'd retire with much less, and wouldn't have as much to spend through your walking on a beach or red sports car driving twillight years. But then, you might not need as much, because I don't think inflation would eat up part of what you had each year.
We couldn't expect - as a whole - expect to have a bettter standard of living in the future than we do today, although individuals or families or groups may do better or worse relative to others over time.
Inflation is the only reason I can think of that economic gfrowth serves any useful purpose in an already - affluent society and inflation is caused by demand exceeding supply. Demand only exceeds supply because a) we insist on overpopulation in order to prop up growth (witness the "need" for immigration and fertility rhetoric of the current Federal government and b) because it is the target of the whole marketing, advertising and sales industries.
In fact (and I'm not an economist) I'm not really sure why the goal for an affluent country is economic growth at all.
Leaving growth aside, let's return to the question of companies and what they need. They don't need us to buy goods, they just need us to give them our money. My first answer to this is that a large proportion of companies in our economy are service companies. They don't sell us widgets, but banking services, telephone services or insurance.
My second point was that even among the companies where you hand over some money and walk away with a physical good, it is rarely (for the company) the good that is the point. They derive their value from being able to meet a need - and if they were smart about it, they could use fewer resources to meet the same need. To use an old chestnut, I've never desired to own a fridge or a hot water tank - I just want cold milk and hot showers. I don't want a car - I just want something on call that gets me, the kids and the shopping from A to B (carshare anyone?). And I don't want cardboard boxes (let alone plastic packaging) - I just want robust items that won't break easily.
I'm far from the first person to note this, but a radical rethinking of what a company delivers can really shape a successful future. Old ways of thinking, inherited from when resources were plentiful, cash was hard to come by and transaction costs were high (info was scarce, comparisons difficult, etc) are no longer appropriate. I don't want a new damn mobile phone. I want someone else to take my clients' calls after hours. I don't want to own lightbulbs, stereos, whitegoods, computers or anything else really. I'm certainly not paying for the resource consumed when I have to buy any of this stuff - I'm paying for a sound reputation for reliability, a decent warranty and maybe some service guarantees (like a helpline). If a company can figure out how to meet my need while using less of the resources to do it - I'm all for it.
I don't have many readers here, in fact I think I pretty much know you all by (user) name but I know you guys are pretty smart with this stuff. What don't you want that you currently have no option but to buy
Wednesday, 29 August 2007
reader invitation required
Hmmm. More than a month since my last post. What's been going on?
I've been working hard at work and harder at home with all the usual attempts to replace energy (fossil fuelled) with labour (mine). Whinge moan.
I've bought a bike - actually four bikes though none of them second hand. I really need to lose a car now to make up for that.
I've got a whole lot of seeds, and some big pots and soil, and will spend Friday afternoon planting with the kids. We're having roaring success with the rocket and the sprouts but possum-trouble with the silverbeet (at least I think it's a possum. Any tips out there on possums? would a scarecrow work?).
We're through the winter and have not heated the house (hooray for summer!) I've knitted a scarf and am learning to crochet (surprisingly therapeutic). I've met and befriended further neighbours and got my in-laws to worm farm. I've preserved some lemons and made bread and yoghurt. It's certainly a capacity building exercise at the moment. We had someone come and replace all our bulbs with compact fluoros.
Perhaps the success I feel proudest of is increasingly integrating my values into my social world. I feel more an integrated whole. For a long time, there was an emperors new clothes sort of feeling about my work and my values - where there was no common ground. Then I got a job in the field and there was an emperors new clothes feeling about my work and values on one hand; and my social world on the other. I'm managing to bring the two together.
But I have not been blogging the experience (though that was never the point) and while I continue to enjoy my favourite bloggers, I'm not sure I'm really cut out for it.
I think it shows a distinct lack of capability or commitment or something for instance to go more than a month without a post.
So here's the thing. I think maybe there's enough of a groundswell that I could join in a shared blog community. Will anyone have me as a guest? or join me in a new collaborative effort?
I've been working hard at work and harder at home with all the usual attempts to replace energy (fossil fuelled) with labour (mine). Whinge moan.
I've bought a bike - actually four bikes though none of them second hand. I really need to lose a car now to make up for that.
I've got a whole lot of seeds, and some big pots and soil, and will spend Friday afternoon planting with the kids. We're having roaring success with the rocket and the sprouts but possum-trouble with the silverbeet (at least I think it's a possum. Any tips out there on possums? would a scarecrow work?).
We're through the winter and have not heated the house (hooray for summer!) I've knitted a scarf and am learning to crochet (surprisingly therapeutic). I've met and befriended further neighbours and got my in-laws to worm farm. I've preserved some lemons and made bread and yoghurt. It's certainly a capacity building exercise at the moment. We had someone come and replace all our bulbs with compact fluoros.
Perhaps the success I feel proudest of is increasingly integrating my values into my social world. I feel more an integrated whole. For a long time, there was an emperors new clothes sort of feeling about my work and my values - where there was no common ground. Then I got a job in the field and there was an emperors new clothes feeling about my work and values on one hand; and my social world on the other. I'm managing to bring the two together.
But I have not been blogging the experience (though that was never the point) and while I continue to enjoy my favourite bloggers, I'm not sure I'm really cut out for it.
I think it shows a distinct lack of capability or commitment or something for instance to go more than a month without a post.
So here's the thing. I think maybe there's enough of a groundswell that I could join in a shared blog community. Will anyone have me as a guest? or join me in a new collaborative effort?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)