Methodological Overview - Economics and Ecology: United for a Sustainable World - page 5

It is obvious to ecologists that changes in one component of a system set
in motion forces that affect every other component—much like a water-
bed in that you cannot touch any part of it without affecting the whole of
it—the overarching “Waterbed Principle.” Systems adjust and self-correct.
Economics, with its reliance on cause-and-effect methodology and the
growth ethic, has been slow to recognize this type of systemic recursiveness.
Again, the unintended effects are enormous.
Third, the search for efficiency in the optimization of a tiny number of
(perhaps even poorly chosen) variables has led to a lack of effectiveness in
the operation of the overall system. For example, the quest for maximum
profitability of business firms, or the search for maximum income and thus
purchasing power of certain people, has dramatically reduced the capabil-
ity of the overall economic system of ensuring the well-being of all people
worldwide or of the long-term health of natural systems. Everywhere we see
ecosystems (forests, grasslands, oceans) on the verge of collapse due to the
unintended effects of exploitation for human use.
Finally, full accountability within a system is necessarily mandatory.
Economists regularly give lip service to the need for a “full system account-
ing.” By this is meant that all impacts of a given resource allocation must
be acknowledged and measured to the extent possible. But here the fetish
for quantitative measurement again creates a dangerous pitfall. The envi-
ronment is difficult to price extrinsically, and often the only thing done is
to acknowledge this difficulty, and then proceed as if the price were zero,
which in effect discounts the birthright of all future generations. Thus, the
analyst hides behind the assumption of ceteris paribus (other things being
equal), and thus retreats into the misleading world of assumed, linear, cause-
and-effect relationships, partial analysis, and of ignoring the unintended,
but dangerously disruptive, effects that clearly exist.
Once again, we contend that these unintended effects, perpetrated by
the current myopically linear economic view, are largely the cause of the
global, social-environmental crises we currently observe. In summary,
the push for economic growth to accommodate the completely unsustain-
able number of humans on the planet represents a symptomatic approach,
which falls far short of addressing the cause of the problem. By analogy,
this symptomatic approach is like going to your doctor because you do
not feel well. In turn, your doctor tells you that you must get more exer-
cise and lose 20 pounds. To which you respond, “Can't you just prescribe a
pill? I don't want to change my lifestyle.” If, on the other hand, we modern
humans are to live with any measure of dignity and comfort, the symp-
tomatic rationale embedded in contemporary economics must give way
to a systemic approach that recognizes and accepts the reciprocal interac-
tions among all aspects of social-environmental sustainability worldwide.
Granted, this sounds like a daunting task, yet in our view it is paramount to
human survival. Our hope is to encourage the acceptance of this challenge,
and to make the case that a more life-enhancing path exists than the dismal