Sunday, February 22, 2009

Donella Meadows on vision

In her article detailing the need for pragmatic vision in our changemakers, The Sustainability Institute's Donella Meadows points out:
"Environmentalists have failed perhaps more than any other set of advocates to project vision. Most people associate environmentalism with restriction, prohibition, regulation, and sacrifice. Though it is rarely articulated directly, the most widely shared picture of a sustainable world is one of tight and probably centralized control, low material standard of living, and no fun. I don't know whether that impression is so common because Puritanism is the actual, unexpressed, maybe subconscious model in the minds of environmental advocates, or whether the public, deeply impacted by advertising, can't imagine a good life that is not based on wild and wasteful consumption. Whatever the reason, hardly anyone envisions a sustainable world as one that would be wonderful to live in."
Meadows goes on to discuss how solving problems (let's say world hunger) demands a thought process that dissects our preconceived notions about systems, feedback loops, and pessimistic thought:
"In my vision of the end of hunger, every child is born into the world wanted, treasured, and lovingly cared for. Because of that, many fewer children are born and not one of them is wasted. Every person can become all that she or he is capable of becoming, in a world that is beautiful, where cultures are diverse and tolerant, where information flows freely, untainted by cynicism. In my vision food is raised and prepared as consciously and lovingly as are children, with profound respect for nature's contribution as well as that of people. In a world without hunger I can take care of my own nearby community and be taken care of by it, knowing that other people in other communities are also doing their caring close at hand. There would be plenty of problems to solve -- I want problems to solve -- but I could travel anywhere in the world without encountering deprivation, terror, or ugliness. What I would find, everywhere, would be natural integrity, human productivity, working communities, and the full range of human emotions, but dominated not by fear and therefore greed, but by security, serenity, and joy. I could go on. I can see this vision clearly and in detail. I can see the farms; I can see the kitchens. But you get the point. Maybe you are already filling in your own details, or maybe you are uncomfortable in the presence of such visionary language. Whatever your reaction, notice where it comes from, notice what has been laid upon you by your culture, and notice that there is a place inside you, close to the surface or deeply buried, that desperately wants a world something like the one I’ve just sketched out. I have noticed, going around the world, that in different disciplines, languages, nations, and cultures, our information may differ, our models disagree, our preferred modes of implementation are widely diverse, but our visions, when we are willing to admit them, are astonishingly alike."
Is she in need of an injection of realism? Is she right on? Is she somewhere in between? Does she ignore the laws of physics or normal distribution statistics? How is she "wrong"? How is she "right"? What is your vision? What do you think?

1 comment:

TheCakeScraps said...

The thing that I liked most about the excerpt here is in the initial 2 sentences (2nd excerpt). "In my vision of the end of hunger, every child is born into the world wanted, treasured, and lovingly cared for. Because of that, many fewer children are born..."

To me, this shows that she is at least more in touch with reality than many. Trade-offs must happen. Solving world hunger without a birth rate reduction is only going to make things worse. Acknowledging these sorts of realities - while keeping a strong vision - is what these movements often lack.

She does go into unrealistic realm a bit: "...food is raised and prepared as consciously and lovingly as are children...". In my opinion, that is a bit off the deep end. Unless she has much larger plans for substantially reducing world population this cannot work. As a side note, this is the same criticism I have for 'organic' food. You just can't produce the same yield as you can with 'non-organic' thus you are actually decreasing the available food supply.

Anyway, interesting read. Passion can be a great thing.