Considering an economy of wisdom

Anita Ramgutty, PhD.

- Publicité -

 

I have yet to come across a report on sustainable/unsustainable lifestyles in Mauritius. The world goes round in circles – literally – conference after symposium, trying to figure out the solution to satisfy all parties on the matter of nations’ shared responsibility for ensuring quality of life for all, for today and tomorrow.  Thinking of tomorrow implies paying attention to the sustainable nature of what we do today as we seek to live better and better lives through our production and consumption habits and patterns. Will we still be able, later, to enjoy the things we have and do, now? Will those who come after us have to pay the price for our decisions today as we seek to meet our needs and wants, in the process of our development?

 

To sustain development at a global level, Agenda 21, the main sustainable development policy document of the 1992 Earth Summit, addresses the unsustainable nature of modern industrialised societies, and recommends “fundamental changes” in the ways that societies produce and consume.  This is an attack on the neo-classical economic growth paradigm which promotes the ever-increasing production and consumption of goods and services as the engine of wealth and employment creation. Thus we have placed, at the altar of GDP, bountiful offerings of products, waste and pollution, expecting “wealth” for the country and jobs for all.  We regularly – every year, in fact – are reassured that the growth of the economy is being taken care of by various measures and programmes at national and sectoral levels, and this makes the common man feel good. We are also warned, and rightly so, of externally-sounding problems like climate change, food insecurity and wars in far-off places which may cause a deceleration of our fast train to growth and wealth. I believe that the common man may not be in a position to connect the dots between climate change, economic growth figures, and his own life and the quality thereof. Who or what is GDP for, what is national wealth and where does it go? How come the common man’s real income doesn’t seem to improve, while prices at the supermarket soar? What is food insecurity when shelves are full and vegetables abound at the market? Why ought he to bother about sustainable development when government says it is taking care of everything? What is this business of inequality in society and why can’t someone do something about it? And I wonder whether the common man would relate to the knowledge that Mauritius ranks first in Africa on the happiness scale? Myself, I do not have the kind of economics brain to judge the value of such advanced matters as financial instruments or the derivatives market in rendering health and vitality to our economy, but I have concerns, and I do think that non-experts need to try and understand the system, so at least we are not dancing to some illusory tune, believing but not really, that our lives are improving and that we should be counting our blessings.

What is minimally explained to the common man is that the model is based on the perspective that we have to fight, to struggle, to compete, onward and forward, always, striving to look good to lure in foreign investors as a matter of survival in a merciless global economy. That such a paradigm entails (and it does) conflict and competition with  nature, with other people, species, generations, and entire societies is defended in utilitarian arguments – you can’t make an omelette without breaking eggs, right? This is an existential issue, a winner-takes-all script of over-production, over-consumption and over-wastage we have been conditioned to accept, which even conventional economists recognise is a limited approach and cannot fulfil the promise of bringing good, fulfilling and balanced lives, health, education, leisure, culture and recreation for generations to come.

Take our situation in Mauritius: many projects and programmes, although laudable, are extremely slow in implementation and do not engage individuals sufficiently, either in reflection or action at their level. For example, do we have a clear picture of our trends and patterns in use and consumption of natural resources, raw materials and energy? How many of us know that we will become a water-stressed country by 2025? Do we know the impact of our food consumption patterns on the environment, the economy, society, and indeed, on ourselves as individuals?

We must remind ourselves that the underlying purpose of the creation of national wealth is happiness for the people. I am not saying that we are living in ignorant bliss or that we face an impending crisis we know little about, but I feel that the situation is more grim in Mauritius than it seems on the surface. My concern is that we are so tightly bound in an intricate web of dependence on other economies and so little aware that our habits and patterns of consumption are simply unsustainable, that we have lost touch with what really matters and where efforts ought really to be placed to ensure the sustainability of our livelihoods, our health and our happiness.

I feel that in spite of the tremendous improvements in our material lives over last fifty years, we do not ask ourselves if, as a society we are truly getting happier and happier. Robert Lane in his The Loss of Happiness in Market Democracies book argues that in affluent societies there is growing unhappiness, growing depression, accompanied by mistrust and increasing political negativity, further undermining happiness.

Another excellent book, “Mis-measuring our lives : why GDP doesn’t add up” by authors Amartya Sen, Joseph Stiglitz, and Jean-Paul Fitoussi, describes the pressing relevance for assessing how and whether our economy is serving the real needs of our society, and challenges the claims of GDP as a relevant or accurate measurement of the well-being of societies. Alternatives to the GDP index have been developed and are being used elsewhere, such as Green GDP, Better Life Index (BLI), Thriving Places Index (TPI), Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI), Gross National Happiness (GNH), imperfect thought they may be. However, I can venture a guess that finance professionals will not be in a hurry to advise a radical departure from the conventional economic model.

Arguably, this is an era in which we must learn to be more resilient, more adaptable, and more responsible to face the future. In expressing my concerns I am wishing that policy makers move towards greater wisdom in determining measures of our wellbeing and happiness. However, this is not only a matter of government policy or sector development and resilience. It is also about individual action, but where do we as individuals stand, in our habits, mindset and behaviours? Are we wise? What if we pursued self-realisation as holistic human beings instead of competitive self-interest, by emphasising the totality of our human nature? With this in view, what could a developmental agenda prioritise in order to ensure more sustainable ways of living in the future? The EU’s Sustainable lifestyles 2050 report exhorts the world to move away from “old forms of consumerism” yet my concern is that such exhortations have not reached our lovely shores in a significant, impactful manner. Speaking of wishes, I  am hopeful of soon hearing something like a rallying cry from the entire Mauritian people, like so: “Let’s make economic decisions that support life, not damage it. We can steer our economy to create a fair society in which our communities and all living things can thrive. Our governments can make decisions and laws so that what we produce, how we produce it and how we spend money does not damage our lives and the life around us”. (from : Better than Growth: Australian Conservation Foundation)

One of my entrepreneurial activities is engaging in natural farming, using no additives whatsoever. I heard government’s encouragements and I hopped on the bandwagon of ecological agriculture and farm-to-table “plantasion” on a modest scale. This, and converting my front yard into an edible landscape, are my first-hand experiences in taking on my own role to make a lifestyle change. We can all do better and wiser in our lifestyles, while national policies gain momentum and show results. In fact, many organisations and individuals are also doing increasingly impactful things, and adopting new habits, like making efforts to collect rainwater, generating less waste and recycling plastic, shifting to environment-friendly transportation, homesteading, and choosing simplicity in their consumption behaviours.  Had we proper cycling tracks, I am sure more people would choose to cycle to work, but at least the new work-from-anywhere norm is helping to ease our huge traffic problem.

So yes, I don’t mind being “Madame patate-manioc”. And arouille too, if you please.  But you know what, the greatest benefit is that I have heard and acted on that inner voice, that compelling whisper of wisdom, the one that makes me feel awake and alive, as I reflect constantly on the things that matter, grounded in the rhythms of the earth, caring for all living things.

 

 

- Publicité -
EN CONTINU

l'édition du jour