Recap
Welcome to the last post of a three-part series focusing on Post-Growth Future Visions. Part 1 covered the dystopic visions of Doomerism, Post-Doomerism, and Catastrophism, Part 2 the somewhat more desirable visions of Resilient Adaptation Selective Progress and Ecological Modernism, and this Part 3 addresses the most desirable visions of Nature-Integrated Living, Localism, and Eco-Localism, plus visions of Post-Industrialism, Low-Technologies, and Eco-Communities (or villages).
As I often reiterate, subject matter thematically related to Our Human Story and Future Sustainability is recycled throughout postings. This post, the final in a series featuring potential future visions– in the three categories of pro-growth, de-growth, and post-growth – raises this obvious question: Which vision will it be?
It’s reasonable to assume that any conceived future vision will involve elements of simultaneous scenarios — regional collapses, technological advances in some sectors, and shifts toward sustainability in others. The key challenge will require navigating uncertainty while maintaining human and bio-ecological resilience.
The potential trajectory depends on multiple interlocking factors, notably: 1) technological breakthroughs, such as timely development of carbon capture, fusion energy, and AI governance; 2) political will and social organization – if governments and societies succeed in coordinating effective systemic change; 3) economic and resource realities, as related to concerns about whether capitalism will either adapt or break when facing mounting pressures; and 4) ecological tipping points, as determined by the amount of damage baked into the socioecological operating system.
As mentioned in previous posts, the future visions covered are not limited to post-growth, but are also being promoted today by dedicated groups of humans who share similar simple low-consumption lifestyles that place a greater emphasis on humans living more symbiotically within Earth’s Web of Life. For my part, I’ll toss support behind the future visions addressed in this post, and perhaps you will, too.
The Most-Favorable Future Vision – Nature-Integrated Living
In in his Do the Math article, “The Simple Story of Creation”, astrophysics professor Tom Murphy succinctly summarizes a perspective I support:
Since our civilization is not built on a foundation of sustainable principles, it is no surprise that we find it now to be utterly unsustainable. . . What we need to learn instead is how to live with the long-term constraints of the natural world as it is presented to us.
Moreover, Murphy suggests that learning to live within the Earth’s carrying capacity will require humanity to “Make biodiversity and ecological health the highest priority, and work within the resulting constraints.” I heartedly agree, but it seems the combined influences of nature and nurture have not adequately prepared us for managing what is developing into an escalating socioecological predicament.
Perhaps the most appropriate path to attaining and maintaining future sustainability may be Nature-Integrated Living, the practice of incorporating nature into everyday life, both indoors and outdoors, including designed spaces that connect people with nature, or create outdoor spaces for relaxation. The benefits are many, including:
1. Improved mental health, according to research showing that, when surrounded by nature, people experience lower stress and blood pressure levels.
2. Increased productivity, the result of biophilic design, which helps people feel more connected to nature.
3. Biophilic design, a concept of incorporating natural elements into built environments, as with using natural lighting, indoor plants, and water features.
4. Improved sustainability due to the incorporation of nature into our normal environment, which encourages greater mindfulness of nature and adoption of sustainable practices.
5. Designing outdoor spaces, such as gardens, courtyards, or rooftop terraces that help people connect more with nature.
6. Biodiversity initiatives, like incorporating native plants, providing wildlife habitats, or implementing sustainable landscaping practices.
7. City-led initiatives that encourage the integration of nature into urban life through public engagement.
The Population Controversy. I’ve inserted information relating to population factors throughout my postings because it is a central issue that remains the metaphorical elephant-in-the-room topic, an issue that addicted pro-growth devotees either dispute, or deny, or ignore. Information in an earlier post explains the analyses of population experts regarding possible sustainable population levels, and the average rests between 1 to 2-million people.
Due to rising seas, extreme storms, or unpredictable weather, coastal areas may largely be abandoned, forcing mass migrations to safe zones. Thus, future populations would be settled in fewer resiliently habitable regions, most likely temperate zones with stable climates, access to fresh water, and fertile soil. As such, many large cities are subject to abandonment, and small, self-sufficient communities (100-1,000 people each) would become the norm. Modest-sized regional cities available via public transportation could exist as cultural centers. As with most pre-modern settlement patterns, smaller sustainable villages, towns, and cities would follow natural geography, existing primarily along rivers, near forests, and in mild-climate agricultural zones.
Infrastructure and Energy. Sustainable energy sources would primarily depend on using small-scale solar, wind, and geothermal systems suitable to local conditions. Water systems would include rainwater harvesting, natural filtration, and gravity-fed water distribution. Waste management would focus on adopting a goal of zero waste, a process that involves composting, reusing materials, and turning everything back into productive cycles. This approach would also be adopted in building housing structures from natural, salvaged, or repurposed materials, such as earth-bags, cobs, strawbales, and reclaimed stone and wood.
Economy and Technology. Localism and Eco-Localism would prevail over Globalism. This means that, instead of relying on the wasteful pro-growth measures of mass production and long-distance trade, communities would rely as much as possible on local skills and services provided by craftspeople, artisans, and shared knowledge. In the absence of reduced industrialization, communities could create businesses focused on salvaging and repurposing reusable quantities of materials from abandoned buildings and factories, as well as from waste dumps. Finally, instead of depending on advanced AI and automation, people could create high-resilience by using simple, low-tech tools, passive solar design, and regenerative farming techniques.
Food and Agriculture. The organic methods of permaculture and agroecology would replace industrial agriculture with regenerative agriculture, closed-loop farming, and forest gardens. With the elimination of industrial fertilizers and pesticides, soil health would be restored with the use of compost, biochar, and rotational grazing. Industrial farming of animals would be replaced with animal husbandry using small-scale, ethical, and integrated livestock systems for various animals, including chickens, goats, and pigs. . Food sources would include aquaponics for cultivating plants and fish, and foraging in wild edible landscapes for plants and fungi to supplement diets and provide traditional medicines. Overall, there would be minimal food waste, as scraps are composted or used to feed domestic animals.
Society and Culture. Using communal decision-making, governance could be decentralized, by means of consensus, councils, and mutual aid rather than hierarchical approaches. In general, life would be slower and simpler, with fewer work responsibilities and stresses, people could focus more on building and maintaining relationships, creative projects, and connecting to the land and all living beings. Most materials needs could be met by producing and using handcrafted items, including clothing, tools, furniture, and even large structures, effectively reducing mass produced goods, with the exception of salvaged goods. As for educational needs, schooling would be decentralized and learning would be hands-on, perhaps through apprenticeships. Rather than standardized industrialized schooling, learning could include storytelling and oral folk traditions, along with creative science and art projects, outdoor learning (gardening, foraging, etc.) and participatory group activities (dance, choral, and instrumental groups). Preventive health would also be addressed, including physical activities that involve whole-body exercising, as well as holistic health (herbal, natural remedies, healthcare methods), a diet consisting of healthy food sources that align with a nature-based philosophy.
Nature and Ecosystem Regeneration. With the demise of industrial civilization, rewilding of vast areas of land and oceans would enable regrowth of forests, cleanup of rivers, and recovery of endangered wildlife species. Instead of dominating Nature, humankind could choose to live symbiotically balanced with natural cycles. Living harmoniously with Nature would drastically reduce the consumption of fossil-fuels and resultant dangerous emissions, resulting in a minimal carbon footprint. Industrial waste would also be minimal, because only what would be needed is taken. In sum, with human pressures greatly reduced and extinction rates in decline, Earth’s biophysical ecosystems could heal and even flourish.
Other Compatible Visions – Eco-Localism, Low-Tech, and Eco-Communities
Nature-Integrated Living embraces most of the goals promoted by the compatible sustainability strategies of Eco-localism, Low-Tech, and Eco-Communities.
Richard Heinberg explains that Eco-Localism is a perspective claiming that globalization is essentially an authoritarian phenomenon increasingly controlled by corporations. In comparison, eco-localist individuals and communities remain virtually powerless. Nevertheless, in opposing globalization, eco-localists present seven recommendations to communities and city, state, and national governments:
1. Incentivize cooperative, worker-owned businesses.
2. Promote the meeting of human needs through non-market means; that is, the sharing economy.
3. Focus on the well-being of people and nature instead of simply aiming to grow GDP.
4. Tax the rich and provide more economic security (including education and healthcare) for lower-income people.
5. Re-localize production by regulating big corporations so that smaller, local producers and sellers can remain competitive.
6. Strengthen the rights of communities (including the rights of nature) and the fabric of democracy.
7. Many eco-localists advocate deliberately shrinking the industrial economy to reduce its impact on nature.
Instead of relying on high technology, which is energy intensive, eco-localists prefer the simplicity of low technology. Another approach seeks a balance between using both types, which allows combining the efficiency and versatility of high-tech with low-tech's potential for autonomy and resilience. For example, primitive technologies focus on bushcraft survival skills, such as hunting, fishing, foraging, fire-crafting, wood-crafting, and knot-tying. Low-tech tools, like hammers, axes, hand drills, chisels, scissors, needles, etc., are used for working with natural materials, like stone, wood, wool, cotton, and so on. For larger-scale uses, pre-industrial machinery like low-tech windmills and sailboats can serve effectively as powering mechanisms.
Should the human population eventually shrink to a sustainable level, ample supplies of high-tech energy-saving devices should be available for salvaging and recycling in providing most energy needs, including solar panels, wind turbines, and geo-thermal heating/cooling devices. Moreover, repairing and maintaining most equipment could be possible using supplies of spare parts. A hybrid blend of low-tech and high-tech energy-saving devices could work as long as usage remains sustainable within a region’s carrying capacity.
The type of community that could function sustainability far into the future already exists worldwide, where like-minded groups live harmoniously. Known as ecovillages or intentional communities, the aim is to grow more socially, culturally, economically and/or environmentally sustainable. By relying on intentional physical design and behavioral choices, inhabitants remain committed to a lifestyle that has minimal negative impact on the natural environment. Communities are consciously designed to be locally-owned, and prefer participatory processes that help regenerate and restore both social and natural environments.
Networks of larger ecovillages often exist as smaller sub-communities formed by like-minded individuals, families, or other small groups. People who are not members, at least at the outset, may settle near ecovillages and participate informally. Currently, more than 10,000 ecovillages exist worldwide. Some sources are provided by Global Ecovillage Network (GEN), a model of collective action similar to Ten Thousand Villages, which supports the fair trade of global goods.
Wrap Up
So, what will the unknown future human story be? If our present human predicament is any indication, the coming decades will may well resemble a rough, roller-coaster ride. Buckle up and get ready for an exciting and thrilling adventure, as every aspect of our human sphere and the bio-ecosphere will be affected.
For readers who have followed this overview exploration of our human story, thanks for joining what I consider a fascinating adventure of discovery. Of course, the exploratory journey will continue, with attention given to specific topics. Having learned much, including the fact that I’ve yet much to learn, I’ve found the process very worthwhile. I hope I’m at least on the right path in gaining a deeper understanding of our humble human role within the scope of universal existence.
I sincerely hope you, your loved ones, society, and the bio-ecosphere are able to face all future challenges well prepared – in mind, body, and spirit – for whatever happens. Finally, may we, along with all other Earthly beings, continue evolving to higher-levels of consciousness and wholeness.
Gratefully . . .