Does GDP really tell us how we're doing?

So, a while back I came across an article that I'd like to share with you. I've been thinking of how we measure progress and so have a great many other minds before me.

GDP - Gross Domestic Product, is used often to refer to a country's standard of living. It is really just the market value of all the goods and services produced within a country in a given period. What you need to consider is that this is strictly an economic tool and economics doesn't count externalities - things like what the goods and services being produced actually are and their cost to clean up.

Even Simon Kuznets, the inventor of the GDP did not intend it to measure “the welfare of a nation.” This is because spending on tobacco, war, cleaning up man-made disasters, building prisons all cause the GDP to rise. Meanwhile, caring for an ailing relative, unpaid housework, volunteer work — all obvious goods — don't show up.

In October, Jim Coyle wrote about the New Canadian Index of Wellbeing, a tool which measures "not just the economy, but how people and communities, the environment and our democracy are faring." The results show that Canadians are working longer and enjoying life less.

'In fact, the report says that while the GDP increased by 31 per cent from 1994 to 2008, the Canadian Index of Wellbeing rose just 11 per cent. Moreover, the wealthiest 20 per cent of people received the lion's share of that growth, while the gap to the bottom 20 per cent grew even larger.

...

By comparison, the CIW takes into account the complexity and interconnectedness of human society. It offers a deeper understanding of what constitutes social and individual good. It speaks about relationships, social isolation enjoyment of life. '

Linear vs Non-Linear Narratives

Are we any closer to understanding the world than the Sumerians were?

Western thought has come to accept the pursuit of individual interest at the cost of collective wellbeing as an inexorable reality. Eastern cosmology, by contrast, has for the most part been dominated by a holistic ethic from which communal norms have evolved.

Current cultural and scientific models are rooted in the underlying assumption that organic relationships are dominated by competition. Theories on survival of the fittest and zero-sum game have emerged from this polarized world view.

Such a worldview could be traced to Newtonian Physics, which assumes a direct connection between cause and effect. This direct correlation is based on the assumption that systems are closed, change is slow, interdependencies are low and certainty is high. The complex global systems of the 21st century stand in firm contradiction to this assumption.

Globalization, migration, and communications technology, amongst many other factors, have rendered boundaries permeable, exposing their existing biological, cultural, and economic interdependence. Robert Wright, author of Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny, argues that as complexity in human society increases, so does potential for collective gain. Similarly, biologists and scientific theorists alike are challenging Darwin's competitive evolutionary model as incomplete. They argue that symbiosis, the mutual dependence and interaction of life has resulted in cases of cooperative evolution.

Climate sceptics point to uncertainty as the linch pin upon which the scientific consensus on climate change is built. They cry heresy, no different than the medieval masses stubbornly refusing to believe that what they take for granted might be false. Granted, change is uncomfortable, but shooting the messenger is an ineffective approach. Today's scientific community has tried in vain to explain the concept of uncertainty due to the multitude of interacting anthropological and biotic factors. And yet, complexity is proving difficult to explain in a soundbite.

The world's ecosystems and human communities do not operate in water tight containers but rather relationships characterized by both negative and positive feedback loops. In other words these interactions are cyclical. For instance, the hydrological cycle does not act independently of the atmospheric cycle, this means that an increase in average global temperatures, would affect the movement of air masses, displace normal rainfall, and increase precipitation in one area while inducing a drought in another. So a change to one system echoes throughout, which is precisely why the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) forecasts a temperature rise in a range between 2.5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit over the next century. Because of the complexity of these systems perfect knowledge is impossible, as is certainty. Arguments for either are merely stalling tactics of reactionaries.

Climate change is one of many critical issues which we as a whole will have to confront but traditional organizational models are not structured to adapt to the social, economic and environmental fluxes we will experience. The first step is acknowledging that external and internal environments of organizations, governments and the Earth itself are neither closed, stable, isolated nor predictable. Solutions to the world's emerging complex problems will require working across many disciplines.

It is time for the global community to start focussing on our similarities rather than our differences. By finding common ground we can take an integrated cooperative approach to the coming challenges facing our planet. For too long the neo-liberal push for specialization has been breeding intolerant ideological views. Students focussed solely on entering professional trades or academia lack exposure to other fields. By pursuing a single track education, students miss out on opportunities that arise from understanding how to cross-pollinate and graduate without the ability to relate their career. Luckily over the past few years the realization is beginning to sink in that business is not inherently antithetical to the environment. The clean-tech sector is an example of this.

The environment is not a threat to the economy or vice versa. Value judgments must be set aside in order for an exchange of expertise and knowledge to take place. It is through open and fluid dialogue that humanity can innovate to adapt to an increasingly interdependent and consequently changing world.

We are coming to understand that simple answers do not exist.

Published in The Strand: Thursday, April 1, 2010

Original title: "The shifting global paradigm: understanding interdependence"

A Lesson in Deceit: Admit, Thank, Boast, Repent, Move On

In a country of notorious political correctness and the ever present fear of engagement, it is no surprise that we have also been an incubator for the strangest form of deceit.

Rather than a mere lie, the art of bullshit has evolved to new heights. Princeton philosopher Harry Frankfurt's essay On Bullshit is a good introduction to the bullshitter who, unlike a liar, is "interested solely in advancing their own agendas, have no use for the truth."

A recent article by Susan Delacourt helps explain how to "Get Through a Controversy in Five Easy Steps". It could serve as an apology for the continual ambivalence we Canadians have paid to the controversies gushing out of the House of Commons in the past few years - simply put we lost the ability to actively complain because each transgression was acknowledged and laughed off by the defendant themselves.

In essence, "Admit, Thank, Boast, Repent, Move On." So before we Canadians even have a chance to get outraged, the controversy has been buried and labelled old news. And those that protest, well, they risk being social pariah bringing up yesterday's joke.

Gerry Nicholls, is a Conservative spin-doctor, whose use of this tactic has led to some calling him a "brilliant strategist". In other words, this communications consultant and former senior officer in the National Citizens Coalition, is an expert in bullshit. Recently Mr. Nicholls wrote on the threat to democracy in Canada, he basically laughs off "pundits who keep warning us about how the politicians in Ottawa are slowly eroding away our traditional parliamentary democratic institutions" and concludes that "Canadians have the power to regularly vote in federal elections." Now that is mighty rich coming from someone whose website advertises his ability to "Design media campaigns on a limited budget that will help sway public opinion."

Bullshit aside, I recently read an old op-ed by George Soros talking about the need for a strong commitment to the pursuit of truth as a means of having a functioning democratic society. Resisting the urge to cry to the originality Gods for yet another idea I had previously deemed my eureka moment being put in print, I present for your reading pleasure, "From Karl Popper to Karl Rove and Back".

And, Mr. Nicholls is right about one thing, we can vote. So what's the excuse?

UPDATE: Check out LeadNow. This group promotes democracy through strengthened communities.

Why Canada's Withdrawal from Kyoto is a Blessing in Disguise

After returning from the UN climate conference in Durban, South Africa, Environment Minister Peter Kent announced that Canada is withdrawing from Kyoto.

While this is very symbolic it is important to remember that an international climate change accord is only as strong as it's weakest link. Moreover the "all for one and one for all" mentality of several nations overshadowed any clear initiative. Have you ever noticed how much more effective you are when making decisions on your own in comparison to seeking a consensus from family and friends for something as trivial as what movie to rent or food to order? While noble, and useful for preventing rash or reactionary decisions, the consensus process is slow.

Collective change is difficult and obscure but change is accessible when we realize that a collective is a sum of parts. Global negotiations are conversations. Conversations are plans to act but they aren't actions. Waiting on a group of diverse interests to make a decision might not even be worth it in the end as a standard agreement ignores the diversity of cultures, traditions, economies and environments around the world. On the local scale, climate change is going to effect us differently depending on our infrastructure and geography. Not only does it make sense to plan for mitigation and adaptation on the provincial, regional, watershed, municipal or local scale but efforts will be more tangible, visible, communicable, and maybe even faster.

Though Canada as a government will not be meeting it's Kyoto obligations, this does not mean that Canadians will not. While it is optimistic to think that behaviour change can happen without being legislated, there are economic opportunities in adapting early. That is exactly what these recent events are, an opportunity.

It's difficult to be one's hero, especially when our image of heroes are people who were handed their destiny. It's almost as though we expect a decisive moment to grant us the authority to take leadership and initiative. In reality, every moment is an opportunity waiting to be seized.