Laserfiche WebLink
<br />closer to what might be called ZPPG, <br />that is, Zero Population and Produc- <br />tivity Growth, than anyone could <br />have conceived ten or twenty years <br />ago, <br />It is a fundamental principle of <br />futurology that all projections are <br />wrong, including mine, and certain <br />events, of course, could postpone <br />the coming of the spaceship earth <br />and could lead to a longer period of <br />productivity growth, though not per- <br />haps of population growth, I have <br />been able to think of only three <br />changes, all of whicb seem to have <br />rather low probability, that could <br />drastically change the picture, These <br />are artificial life, as a result of the <br />developments of molecular biology; <br />artificial intelligence, as a result of <br />(he development of computers--or <br />even a breakthrough on the under- <br />standing of natural intelligence and <br />human learning; and the gravity <br />shield (a subslance or process tbat <br />would block the force of gravity), <br />which would drastically change the <br />whole power picture, None of these, <br />however, seems at all probable in <br />the next 50 or 100 years, with the <br />possible exception of the first. <br /> <br />THE IMAGE of the future outlined <br />here is bound to have a profound <br />effect on the evaluation function of <br />all kinds of decision makers. an <br />effect that will increase as we move <br />further into the future, It implies a <br />high value on modesty rather than <br />grandeur. There is no room for <br />"great societies" in the spaceship. It <br />implies conservation ism to the point <br />of conservatism rather than expan- <br />sionism. ft implies a high value on <br />taking things easy, on conflict man- <br />agement. There is no place in the <br />spaceship for men on white horses <br />and very little room for horsing <br />around, We cannot afford to have <br />war, revolution, or dialectical pro- <br />cesses, Everything must be directed <br />toward the preservation of precar- <br />ious order rather than experimenta- <br />tion with new forms, We have to <br />stress equality rather than lncentives, <br />simply in order to minimize uncer- <br />tainty and conflict. It is important <br />to realize that the case for equality <br />may not rest at all on the concepts <br />of social justice, Equality, indeed, <br />denies at least one principle of social <br />justice-that distribution should be <br />in rough proportion to desert-for <br />under an equalitarian regime the <br />deserving get less than they deserve <br />and the undeserving get more, as- <br /> <br />suming at least something like a <br />normal distribution of deservingness, <br />Nevertheless, there may be a case <br />for equality that rests not at all on <br />social justice but on the sheer de- <br />mand of the system for stability, A <br />just society that provided incentives <br />for virtue might simply prove to be <br />too unstable, <br />If all this sounds rather depress- <br />ing, it is intended to be, Economists <br />have never been very cheerful about <br />the stationary state, and a perma- <br />nent, planetwide stationary state, <br />from which there seemed to be no <br />possible means of escape, might be <br />a very depressing prospect indeed, <br />What is even more depressing is <br />that a stationary state (ZPPG ) <br />might not even be stable. simply <br />because of the intensification of con- <br />flicts within it. <br />In the progressive state, conflicts <br />can be resolved fairly easily by prog- <br />ress itself. The poor can get richer <br />without the rich getting poorer. In <br />the stationary state, if the poor are <br />to get richer, then the rich must get <br />poorer, and what is even more <br />frightening, if the rich are to get <br />richer, they can only do so by in- <br />creasing their exploitation of the <br />poor, and since the rich may be the <br />most powerful, they may have <br />strong incentives to do this. Thus, <br />the banished specter of exploitation, <br />which progress made obsolete, is re- <br />introduced into the world, The <br />dialectical processes to which a sta- <br />tionary state would be exposed <br />would thereby become much more <br />acute and might easily destroy the <br />state's precarious equilibrium, in <br />war, revolution, social upheaval, the <br />decay of all legitimacies, and a <br />Hobbesian nightmare of retrogres- <br />sion in the war of all against all. As <br />Adam Smith said prophetically, the <br />declining state is melancholy, <br /> <br />The ultimate question of whether <br />a stationary state would be bearable, <br />or even stable, depends a great deal <br />on the human capacity for social <br />invention. One might even have an <br />optimistic image of the present <br />period of human expansion as a kind <br />of adolescence of the human race, <br />in which man has to devote a large <br />proportion of his energy and infor- <br />mation to sheer physical growth, <br />Hence, we could regard the station- <br />ary state as a kind of maturity in <br />which physical growth is no longer <br />necessary and in which, therefore, <br /> <br />t <br />2699 <br /> <br />human energies can be devoted to <br />qualitative growth - knowledge, <br />spirit, art, and love, One might even <br />romantically regard the twenty-first <br />century as symbolizing the achieve- <br />ment of this maturity, Fortunately <br />for us, we have to leave most of <br />these problems to our descendants, <br />All we can really do is to wish them <br />well, to leave them a little elbow <br />room, and to guide our current <br />evaluation functions somewhere to- <br />ward the minimax of being on the <br />safe side, <br /> <br />Kenneth E. Boulding, Professor of <br />Economics Qnd Program Director of <br />the Program of Research on General <br />Social and Economic Dynamics, Insti- <br />tute of Behavioral Science, University <br />of Colorado. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />ECOLOGY AND <br />TECHNOLOGY <br /> <br />The chief reason for the sharp in- <br />crease in environmental stress in tbe <br />United States is the sweeping trans- <br />formation in production technology <br />in the postwar period, Productive <br />activities with imense environmental <br />impacts /urve displaced activities <br />with less serious environmental im- <br />pacts; the growth pattern has been <br />counter-ecological. This conclusion <br />is easily misconstrued to mean that <br />tec~nology is therefore, per se, eco- <br />logically hanofuL That this interpre- <br />tation is unwarranted can be seen <br />from the following examples, <br />Consider the simple transforma- <br />tion of the present ecologically faulty <br />relationship among soil, agricultural <br />crops, the human population, and <br />sewage, Suppose that the sewage, <br />instead of being introduced into sur- <br />face waters as it is now, whether <br />directly or following treatment, is <br />Instead transported from urban col- <br />lection systems by pipeline to agri- <br />cultural are,as, where-after appro- <br />pnate stenllza.lIon,erocedures-it is <br />Incorporated Into the soiL Such a <br />pipeline would literally reincorpo- <br />rate the urban population into the <br />soil's ecological cycle, It would re- <br />store the integrity of that cycle and <br />incidentally remove the need for <br />inorganic nitrogen fertilizer-which <br />also strains the aquatic cycle. Hence, <br />the urban population would no <br />longer be external to the soil cycle <br /> <br />3 <br />