>The problem is economic power has become political power [[George Monbiot]] > I think economics is a quantifiable ethics or power politics Kim Stanley Robinson The idea that **economics is a social construct** is often associated with heterodox economic thinkers, critical theorists, and scholars who challenge the mainstream neoclassical economic framework. They argue that economics is not a "natural science" but rather a system of ideas, values, and practices shaped by historical, cultural, and political contexts. Below are some key thinkers and movements that argue for this perspective and propose viable alternatives: --- ### **1. Karl Polanyi** - **Argument**: In his seminal work *The Great Transformation* (1944), Polanyi argues that markets are not natural phenomena but are embedded in social and cultural systems. He critiques the idea of a self-regulating market and emphasizes the importance of social protections and regulations. - **Alternative**: Polanyi advocates for an economy that prioritizes social welfare, community, and environmental sustainability over profit maximization. --- ### **2. Feminist Economics** - **Key Thinkers**: Marilyn Waring, Julie A. Nelson, Nancy Folbre. - **Argument**: Feminist economists argue that traditional economics ignores unpaid labor (e.g., care work, household labor) and perpetuates gender inequalities. They highlight how economic systems are socially constructed to prioritize certain types of work and value. - **Alternative**: Propose an economy that values care work, incorporates ecological sustainability, and addresses gender disparities. --- ### **3. Degrowth Movement** - **Key Thinkers**: Serge Latouche, Giorgos Kallis, Jason Hickel. - **Argument**: Degrowth advocates argue that mainstream economics is built on the unsustainable premise of infinite growth. They critique GDP as a measure of progress and highlight the ecological and social costs of growth-oriented economies. - **Alternative**: Advocate for a post-growth economy that prioritizes well-being, equity, and ecological balance. This includes localizing economies, reducing consumption, and redefining prosperity. --- ### **4. Ecological Economics** - **Key Thinkers**: Herman Daly, Joan Martinez-Alier. - **Argument**: Ecological economists argue that mainstream economics fails to account for the finite nature of natural resources and the ecological costs of economic activity. - **Alternative**: Propose an economy that operates within planetary boundaries, emphasizing sustainability, resource conservation, and the valuation of ecosystem services. --- ### **5. Post-Development Theory** - **Key Thinkers**: Arturo Escobar, Gustavo Esteva. - **Argument**: Post-development theorists argue that mainstream economics and development paradigms are Western constructs that perpetuate inequality and environmental degradation. - **Alternative**: Advocate for localized, community-driven economies that prioritize cultural diversity, self-sufficiency, and ecological harmony. --- ### **6. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT)** - **Key Thinkers**: Stephanie Kelton, L. Randall Wray. - **Argument**: MMT challenges the conventional understanding of money, debt, and government spending, arguing that these are social constructs shaped by policy rather than natural laws. - **Alternative**: Proposes using monetary policy to achieve full employment, reduce inequality, and fund public goods like healthcare and education. --- ### **7. Solidarity Economy** - **Key Thinkers**: Ethan Miller, Emily Kawano. - **Argument**: The solidarity economy movement critiques mainstream economics for prioritizing profit over people and the planet. It emphasizes cooperative, community-based economic practices. - **Alternative**: Promotes cooperatives, mutual aid networks, and community-supported agriculture as alternatives to capitalist markets. --- ### **8. Doughnut Economics** - **Key Thinker**: Kate Raworth. - **Argument**: In *Doughnut Economics* (2017), Raworth critiques the obsession with GDP growth and argues for an economic model that balances human needs with planetary boundaries. - **Alternative**: Proposes a "doughnut-shaped" model where economies operate within the "safe and just space for humanity," meeting basic needs without exceeding ecological limits. --- ### **9. Indigenous Economics** - **Key Thinkers**: Winona LaDuke, Vandana Shiva. - **Argument**: Indigenous scholars argue that mainstream economics is rooted in colonial and extractive practices that disregard Indigenous knowledge and ecological wisdom. - **Alternative**: Advocate for economies based on reciprocity, respect for nature, and community well-being, often rooted in traditional Indigenous practices. --- ### **10. Marxist and Post-Capitalist Thought** - **Key Thinkers**: David Harvey, Silvia Federici, Michael Hardt, Antonio Negri. - **Argument**: Marxist and post-capitalist thinkers argue that economics is a social construct shaped by class relations and power dynamics. They critique capitalism for perpetuating inequality and exploitation. - **Alternative**: Propose alternatives such as worker cooperatives, common ownership, and participatory economics (parecon). --- ### **Common Themes in Alternatives:** - **Decentralization**: Shifting power from global markets to local communities. - **Sustainability**: Prioritizing ecological health and resource conservation. - **Equity**: Addressing inequalities and ensuring fair distribution of resources. - **Well-being**: Redefining prosperity beyond material wealth to include health, happiness, and community. --- By exploring these thinkers and movements, you can gain a deeper understanding of how economics is shaped by social constructs and discover viable alternatives that prioritize sustainability, equity, and well-being. ## The Economy & Chaos What if the economy was out of [[Control]], as in out of **our** control, or at least unwieldy.. Hard to manage, very hard.. so hard that no-one has a full grasp on all aspects. Neoliberal principles, which often prioritise market deregulation and growth at all costs, exacerbate these crises. Dark ecology critiques this blind trust in progress, highlighting the entropic and destructive aspects of global systems. ### **Doughnut Economics as a Framework for “Managing” Complexity** Kate Raworth’s [[Books/Doughnut Economics|Doughnut Economics]] offers a framework to balance economic activity within planetary boundaries while ensuring social equity: 1. **The Doughnut Model**: The inner ring represents basic human needs (food, water, healthcare), while the outer ring defines ecological limits (carbon emissions, biodiversity). The space between is the “safe and just space for humanity.” 2. **Why It’s Promising**: • It acknowledges the economy’s complexity by integrating ecological and social systems rather than isolating them. • Unlike traditional growth models, it reframes success as achieving balance, not perpetual expansion. • [[Systems Theory]] aligns with Raworth’s approach by recognising the non-linear interactions between economic, social, and ecological systems. ^e1badc Doughnut Economics thus contrasts with the deterministic models of neoclassical and neoliberal economics, which often oversimplify reality. ### **Systems Theory and Economic Complexity** Systems theory explains phenomena such as the economy and weather as **complex adaptive systems**: • These systems have countless interdependencies and feedback loops, making their behaviour non-linear and emergent. • Attempts to control or predict them (e.g., centralised economic policies, monetary interventions) can have unintended consequences, akin to attempting to control weather patterns. ### Jean Baudrillard’s _Simulacra and Simulation_ critiques how economic systems have become “simulations” detached from reality: • Financial markets often trade on perceptions rather than material realities (e.g., speculative bubbles). • This detachment creates crises when the simulated value (e.g., inflated assets) clashes with real-world constraints (e.g., housing collapses, environmental limits). ## proposed transformative approaches to economic systems Focusing on human well-being, equity, and sustainability. Below is an outline of economic changes inspired by Riane Eisler and _Doughnut Economics_ by Kate Raworth ideas: ### **1. Redefining Economic Success** • Move away from GDP as the sole measure of progress to embrace holistic well-being indicators like the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) or the Social Progress Index (SPI). • Emphasise the quality of life, environmental health, and equity over mere growth. ### **2. Shift to Partnership Economies (Inspired by Riane Eisler)** • Transition from domination systems (top-down, exploitative) to partnership systems that prioritise cooperation, equality, and shared responsibility. • Support economic policies that value traditionally undercompensated caregiving and community work, particularly by recognising unpaid labour such as childcare and eldercare. ### **3. Adopt the Doughnut Framework (Kate Raworth)** • Implement policies within the “Doughnut” model, balancing the ecological ceiling (planetary boundaries) with the social foundation (basic human rights). • **Inner Circle**: Ensure universal access to essentials like education, healthcare, housing, and meaningful work. • **Outer Circle**: Address overuse of resources to prevent climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution. ### **4. Invest in Social Infrastructure** • Develop robust public services, particularly in education, health, and social care, as critical pillars of the economy. • Encourage gender equity by supporting policies that make care work (paid and unpaid) more visible, valued, and equitably distributed. ### **5. Embrace Circular and Regenerative Economies** • Transition from linear (“take-make-waste”) models to circular economies that recycle, reuse, and regenerate resources. • Promote regenerative agriculture and renewable energy systems to restore ecosystems and reduce environmental harm. ### **6. Democratisation of Economic Power** • Strengthen cooperative ownership models and localised economies to empower communities. • Foster transparency and participation in economic decision-making, reducing the concentration of wealth and power in a few hands. ### **7. Ethical Business Models** • Encourage businesses to adopt triple bottom line accounting, prioritising people, planet, and profit. • Enforce accountability for corporations causing environmental harm or perpetuating inequity. ### **8. Global Equity and Justice** • Shift trade policies to prioritise fair trade and equitable resource distribution rather than exploitative practices. • Cancel or restructure debts of the Global South to enable sustainable development. ### **9. Policy Innovations** • Implement progressive taxation, including wealth taxes, to reduce inequality and fund social programs. • Introduce Universal Basic Income or similar social safety nets to guarantee financial security. ### **10. Education and Cultural Transformation** • Reform education to focus on interdependence, sustainability, and partnership values. • Challenge cultural norms that equate success with wealth accumulation and consumerism, fostering a mindset of stewardship and care. Both Eisler and Raworth encourage a paradigm shift, envisioning economies that serve people and the planet rather than treating them as means to maximise profit. This approach requires interdisciplinary collaboration and grassroots as well as policy-level advocacy. ### Transition Away from 21st Century Economics To envision a societal transition away from the dominance of economics as the central lens through which human life is understood, we can integrate frameworks such as **Kate Raworth’s Doughnut Economics**, **anarcho-syndicalist practices**, and philosophical insights from thinkers like Timothy Morton, Nietzsche, and Alasdair MacIntyre. This synthesis could sideline economics naturally by promoting a decentralised, ecological, and value-driven society focused on _eudaimonia_ (flourishing) rather than material accumulation. ### **Reframing the Role of Economics** ##### 1. **Economics as a Tool, Not a Goal**: • Kate Raworth argues in _Doughnut Economics_ that economic systems should serve humanity and the planet, not the reverse. By redefining economic success through the “doughnut,” she shifts focus to meeting basic human needs within planetary boundaries rather than endless growth. • Morton’s ecological perspective reinforces this by emphasizing the interconnectedness of systems and rejecting extractive, linear thinking. ##### 2. **Deconstructing the Worship of Markets**: • Nietzsche’s critique of religion and metaphysical absolutes applies here: the market has become a modern “God,” dominating our values and decisions. A Nietzschean framework would encourage society to transcend this fixation and embrace more creative, life-affirming goals. ### **Practices to Sideline Economics** ##### 1. **Anarcho-Syndicalism**: • [[Anarcho-syndicalism]] promotes decentralised, worker-controlled production units that prioritise human needs and cooperation over profit. By rooting economic decisions in local, democratic assemblies, it can decentralise power and diminish the market’s dominance in human life. • These syndicates could operate within Doughnut Economics’ planetary boundaries, using ecological metrics to guide production and consumption. ##### 2. **Revaluing the Commons**: • Drawing on Elinor Ostrom’s work on the commons, communities could reclaim shared resources, sidelining private markets in favour of cooperative stewardship. This echoes Aristotle’s vision of community-oriented life and Morton’s insistence on ecological entanglement. ##### 3. **Ecological Embodiment Practices**: • Dark ecology suggests fostering a sense of connectedness with the non-human world. Practices like [[Teams|community]] gardening, rewilding, and [[Permaculture]] could embed ecological awareness into daily life, reducing reliance on market-driven solutions. ### **Cultural Transition** ##### 1. **Rebuilding Meaning Beyond Consumption**: • Nietzsche’s call for the creation of new values aligns with MacIntyre’s idea of reviving traditions and practices. Art, philosophy, and communal rituals could offer alternative sources of meaning to the consumer-driven identity. ##### 2. **Education for Flourishing**: • Education systems could prioritise virtues like cooperation, creativity, and ecological literacy, sidestepping the market-oriented metrics of [[Productivity]]. ##### 3. **Networks of Care**: • Mutual aid networks, grounded in anarcho-syndicalist principles, can reduce dependency on commodified forms of care, making the economy less central to fulfilling human needs. ### **Overcoming Barriers** ##### 1. **Resistance to Neoliberal Ideology**: • Neoliberalism frames markets as natural and inevitable. A transition would require sustained critique of this [[Ideology]], highlighting its failures, such as ecological degradation and inequality. ##### 2. **Scaling Anarcho-Syndicalism**: • To counter the centralising tendencies of capitalism, anarcho-syndicalist models would need robust networks and federations to coordinate at larger scales while maintaining local autonomy. ### **A Vision for the Future** A society that sidelines economics would: • **Measure success** by wellbeing and ecological health (Raworth’s doughnut). • **Reclaim agency** through decentralised governance (anarcho-syndicalism). • **Reimagine value** through art, philosophy, and ecological attunement (Morton and Nietzsche). • **Embed solidarity** via mutual aid and shared stewardship. This transition would gradually shift society’s focus from worshipping the economy to nurturing human and ecological flourishing, allowing economics to take its rightful place as a servant of broader, life-affirming goals. ## Failings of Fiduciary Duty Fiduciary duty refers to a company’s legal obligation to prioritise the interests of its shareholders, typically by maximising profits and minimising costs. This duty requires corporate leaders to focus on financial returns above all else. As a result, it can conflict with the principles of equity and [[Ecology]]. By focusing solely on profit, companies may underpay workers or creators, undermining equity, and may ignore environmental responsibilities, prioritising short-term gain over ecological sustainability. As one critic puts it, “the fiduciary duty often leads [[Corporations]] to sacrifice broader social responsibilities in pursuit of shareholder profit.” This narrow focus on financial outcomes can lead to the exploitation of resources or people, directly contrasting with ecological goals that seek to protect the environment and equitable frameworks that aim to distribute wealth and opportunity more fairly. The legal obligations companies have to their investors, particularly the fiduciary duty to maximise profits, can sometimes undermine other priorities like environmental protection or fair compensation for creators. Here’s how these duties might lead to such challenges: ### 1. Focus on Profit Over External Costs The obligation to maximise profits often leads companies to prioritise actions that boost short-term financial gains, sometimes at the expense of long-term sustainability or ethical considerations. For instance: • Environmental Protection: Companies might view environmental regulations or [[Sustainable]] practices as costly and detrimental to their bottom line, especially if these practices increase operational expenses. This can lead to cutting corners on environmental protections or lobbying against stronger regulations, as these measures are seen as reducing profit margins. • Fair Compensation for Creators: In the case of streaming services like Spotify or YouTube Music, maximising profit often involves minimising costs, including royalty payments to musicians and other creators. The companies are incentivized to pay as little as possible to keep subscription prices low and maximize revenue, which can lead to inadequate compensation for the artists whose work generates the platform’s revenue. ### 2. Short-Termism Fiduciary duty often results in a focus on short-term gains, especially for publicly traded companies where shareholder pressure for quarterly profits is strong. This short-termism can conflict with long-term sustainability goals: • Environmental Sustainability: Investing in environmentally friendly technologies, sustainable supply chains, or cleaner production methods may have long-term benefits for [[Society]] and the planet, but such investments often have high upfront costs and take time to yield returns. Companies focused on immediate profits might forgo these investments in favour of cheaper, less sustainable practices that yield quicker financial results. • Musicians’ Compensation: A focus on short-term profit also encourages streaming services to negotiate aggressively with record labels and artists, leading to royalty structures that often favour the platforms over the creators. Platforms may argue that higher payouts would reduce their profitability, thus conflicting with their fiduciary duty to shareholders. ### 3. Minimisation of External Stakeholders’ Interests Fiduciary duty is traditionally interpreted as a responsibility to shareholders—those who own shares in the company—rather than to other stakeholders like employees, communities, or the environment. This narrow interpretation can lead to: • Environmental Neglect: A company may not prioritise the well-being of ecosystems or communities impacted by its operations if doing so doesn’t directly benefit shareholders. For example, a corporation might resist adopting expensive pollution controls or waste management systems if shareholders demand higher dividends or stock prices. • Undervaluing Artists and Musicians: Streaming services may prioritise revenue growth, platform expansion, and increasing shareholder value over paying artists more fairly. Because artists and creators are external stakeholders rather than owners, their financial well-being is often secondary to the company’s duty to its shareholders. ### 4. Lobbying and Regulatory Capture In some cases, companies with fiduciary duties to maximise shareholder value may engage in lobbying or other forms of regulatory influence to weaken environmental protections or prevent stronger labor laws. For example: • Environmental Regulations: Companies might lobby to reduce or eliminate regulations that impose costs on their business (e.g., carbon emissions taxes, renewable energy requirements). This behaviour is often rationalised as part of their obligation to reduce costs and maximise profits. • Artist Compensation: Streaming platforms might resist legislative efforts to increase royalties for musicians, arguing that higher costs would hurt their ability to offer affordable services to consumers or reduce their competitiveness. Their fiduciary duty to minimise costs could drive this opposition. ## Evolving Corporate Governance Models However, some models of corporate governance are evolving to take into account stakeholder [[Capitalism]] or environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors, which encourage companies to balance profit-making with social responsibility. This shift suggests that it is possible for companies to fulfil fiduciary duties while also prioritising environmental sustainability or fair compensation, but it requires broader interpretations of fiduciary duty that recognise the long-term value of these practices. In summary, the traditional focus of fiduciary duty on maximising profits for shareholders can sometimes undermine efforts to protect the environment or ensure fair compensation for creators, as these goals are often seen as secondary to the financial interests of investors. However, as corporate governance models evolve, there’s growing recognition that long-term profitability may, in fact, be tied to responsible environmental and social practices. ### Trophic cascade and trickle down economics ##### A common misunderstanding about how analogies work across different domains. 1. What is a Trophic Cascade? In ecology, a trophic cascade is a phenomenon where predators at the top of a food chain indirectly affect populations or behaviors at lower levels, often leading to changes in plant communities or even non-living parts of the ecosystem. Classic example: · Top-down control: Wolves are reintroduced → they eat elk → elk avoid grazing in certain areas → willow/aspen trees recover → beaver and songbird populations increase. · Here, the effect cascades down through different trophic levels (predator → herbivore → plants → other species). 2. What is Trickle-Down Economics? Trickle-down economics (often associated with supply-side economics) is a political-economic theory that proposes: · Benefits (tax cuts, deregulation) given to high-income earners or corporations will eventually “trickle down” to everyone else in the form of job creation, higher wages, and economic growth. · It assumes that enriching those at the top stimulates investment and productivity, benefiting lower-income groups over time. --- Why the Analogy Fails A. Direction of causality and nature of benefit · Trophic cascade: Works via direct consumption pressure and behavioral changes—predators reduce or redistribute herbivores, which benefits plants. The “benefit” to lower levels comes from suppressing the level just above them, not from enriching the top. · Trickle-down economics: Assumes enriching the top will indirectly help those below via investment and jobs, without necessarily reducing the top’s wealth or power. B. Empirical evidence · Trophic cascades: Well-documented in ecology (Yellowstone wolves, sea otters/urchins/kelp forests). · Trickle-down economics: Lacks strong empirical support in economics. Studies suggest tax cuts for the wealthy often increase income inequality without consistent, significant benefits to wages or employment for lower-income groups. Wealth does not reliably “trickle down” in the way proponents claim. C. System differences · Ecological systems involve energy flow and biomass transfer governed by predation, competition, and survival. · Economic systems involve monetary flows, power structures, policy choices, and human behavior—including savings, investment preferences, and rent-seeking, which can prevent wealth from flowing downward. D. “Top-down” vs. “Trickle-down” · Trophic cascades are “top-down” regulation — the top level controls the next level down. · Trickle-down economics is “top-down” enrichment hoped to diffuse downward — a fundamentally different mechanism. --- A More Accurate Economic Analogy for Trophic Cascades If we wanted an economic analogy for a trophic cascade, it might be: · Strict financial regulation (the “predator”) reduces speculative banking (“herbivore”), which in turn protects household savings (“plants”) from crises. · Here, regulating the top financial actors suppresses harmful behaviors at an intermediate level, benefiting the base. --- Conclusion Trophic cascades actually contradict, rather than support, trickle-down economic logic. In ecology, top predators restrain the level below them, leading to healthier foundations. In trickle-down theory, enriching the top is supposed to help the bottom without such restraint—a mechanism not observed in trophic cascades. The analogy is a misunderstanding of both concepts. `Concepts:` [[Sociology]] `Knowledge Base:`