Human security - from the economic notion of scarcity viewpoint

Shahab Sabahi

Energy and Environment for Development – Policy Analysis Research Group

The economic notion of resource scarcity differs from what scientists consider for physical abundance of resources. For economists, the net value of resources over the course of time is a measure for making judgment for resource scarcity. From an economic point of view, if marginal costs increase as remaining reserves decline, but market price does not increase as fast as the costs, then the net value is declining and it indicates NON growing scarcity. The fact that remaining reserves are declining would indicate geologic scarcity, but unless market price increases fast enough than marginal cost, the resource is not becoming economically scarce.

Indeed from an economic perspective market forces; technology costs, future demands, substitute commodities prices and their availability will determine the level of scarcity for resources rather than geologic and physical availability of resources.

What about environmental quality; fresh water and clean air? What about species face the danger of extinction? Could we apply this commodity-based and private goods notion of economic scarcity to public and environmental goods? Can this notion guarantee the irreversible exploitation of the life-support resources?

Scarcity is an economic fact of life and can be manageable for commodities that flow through organized institutions such as markets. However where the case is about the scarcity of life support resources and human security may another institution should be in play. In the latter case, interchangeability, market price and demand fluctuation are not applicable.

Having the reality of limited capital and human resources and necessity of their optimal allocations, we need a framework to help us to effectively prioritize our environmental objectives. The more non-market the environmental service, the harder it will be to adapt this economic notion of scarcity. It is suited to private commodities that exchanged in markets.

The existing value system cannot appropriately calculate the real value of environmental goods. Furthermore the prevailing and dominated development model for societies cannot accommodate all aspects of human security.

These all may require the development of new economic value system within new global governance, with focus on effective regional cooperation and conservation efforts, to fulfill the human security needs.        

From Globalization to Chaos – (application of entropy measure)

Shahab Sabahi

Energy and Environment for Development – Policy Analysis Research Group

With applying the philosophical reasoning approach (see my previous post), I examine the link between globalization and expecting more confrontations. In science, there is an analytical measure, it is called entropy, that being employed to evaluate phenomena which directly dominate human’s life. It can be used to explain aging, society decay, stability life, information, language, codifications, norms and cultures. According to this measure, the trends for the all phenomena tend to converge toward a universal trend for equalization, like the concept of globalization. Globalization has its adherent dynamics which force the whole system to equalization and developing a universal norm. In scientific term it means that an increase in global entropy. It is going to create an equivalent thermal death. There is another philosophical explanation that brings some hope that an open system, as our life system is, may not follow the entropy increasing direction. Chaos theory (I. Prigogine) explains chaotic moves keep a system away from reaching that equalization condition.    

With this perspective, S. Huntington’s “clash of civilizations and new world order” is rather philosophically described a natural phenomenon than posits just a hypothesis.   

Reason

Shahab Sabahi

Energy and Environment for Development – Policy Analysis Research Group

Humans have long been curious to understand the principles which govern planets, ecosystem, society and individual interactions. Knowing the governing laws gives humans to foresee their future development. The enlightenment, intellectual movement marked the rise of the modern life in Europe of the 17th and 18th centuries, was the crucial era for evolving this human’s desire. It furnished appropriate ground on which ideas about individual capability, nature, and human rights were shaped in adherence to ideology of liberalism. Reason was used to explain phenomena and link between human and its environment. The enlightenment is credited for supporting revolutionary developments in art, religion, philosophy and politics. However, it would be safe to say that central to the enlightenment was the deification of reason.

Indeed, the enlightenment had its origin backed to the ancient Greeks. The ancient Greek philosophers embodied the idea of reason in their philosophies and promoted its application in their speculations. For them philosophy was the mother of sciences engulfing the essence of all human achievements. It is therefore natural to associate philosophy with elements of universal scientific developments.(G. Saridis) It is true that human, since then, with the use of philosophy and reasoning, has described phenomena, in form of speculations, divine laws or explaining empirical experiences.

Today, this trend still follows. We keep attempting to conceptualize better frameworks to explain phenomena and the governing laws with the help of both philosophy and scientific facts.

When I free myself…

Shahab Sabahi

Energy and Environment for Development – Policy Analysis Research Group

I cannot imagine my life as otherwise than it is. I have found resources of strength in myself which I believe would never have tapped if I would have been carrying on with my previous mindset.

 

There is a refreshing simplicity in grappling with realities rather than fighting in a fog, of being a perceptible fish in a small puddle rather than a rivet in a gigantic machine.

Societies may be rich with promises, sometimes forthcoming, sometimes with cost, always irreversible, and person can fall hard. I, by myself, promise nothing but accepting realities and keeping up hopes for achieving quality.

I may get little, but I always appreciate what I have. It will be mine. If I get nothing there is no place to fall so it helps creating power to catch up.

Inspired by “Ripples from Iceland” Amalia Lindaal’s book 1962 

China’s socioeconomic system: challenges ahead

Shahab Sabahi

Energy and Environment for Development – Policy Analysis Research Group

China has managed a complex transition from centralized planned economy to some sort of open and dynamic economy with outstanding competence. China has exhibited an effective managerial style in adopting a series of realistic macroeconomic policies and foreign policies over the course of two decades. China’s governmental system has shown a quality for making quickly complex decisions in the context of globalization and when crises hit socioeconomic structure.

However it may be a question that China’s model a version for capitalism would be reliable and sustainable forever? Can it transplant in other part of the world with hopes to get the same outcomes?

It may be only a suitable model in regions inside East Asia where the Chinese cultural values are dominated. The model is strongly based on the Chinese political philosophy whose principle is embedded in government building and limited the people participation in macro decision making process.

The model cannot be sustainable in the long term. Neither export –driven growth nor the top-down approach to decision making will keep yielding positive and desirable results forever. By blocking open discussion about upcoming public policies, stopping any independent exploration and investigation on the failed public policies, in public, the socioeconomic system would not receive any feedbacks to rearrange itself. It translates that the entire socioeconomic system will lose its consistency and converges to its decay.

For more than 2000 years, China’s political and socioeconomic system has evolved around China’s chronic issue, lineage and kinship preference in social interactions. The Chinese moral philosophy had shaped around the objectives which could build, based upon a just, fair and quality government to address this issue. It was believed that then this government could guarantee a steady state for China’s socioeconomic system.  Now China is rapidly growing. The absence of public debate may be swept under carpet, power abuses committed in the middle and low level of the government’s hierarchy system. It can ignite the public anger which will cost the government. It should be kept in mind that the Communist Party has committed to equality with distribution of wealth over the society.

Economic growth will create middle class. If we assume the Chinese middle class, its number increasing, will behave in the way middle class do in other part of the world, this phenomenon will be another source of internal pressure. Middle class may not compromise social status and political participation with money.       

These arguments suggest that China’s model for socioeconomic system is not sustainable. It works in the time of crises, but not forever. It could survive, IF the export-based growth share lowers and replaced with more domestic consumption growth, however it puts the national security of China at stake (middle class pressure). Also China needs more cultural influences beyond its boarders. Besides being determined in foreign affair, a strong state should appear decisive and tough in collecting tax. In long term people will say “No Tax without participation”.  

Social norms resistance to change

Shahab Sabahi

Energy and Environment for Development – Policy Analysis Research Group

Social norms are evolved inside societies. The norms are being defined by specific group of people who share values, world view, principles and perceptions of new ideas. The norms are formulated based on the group’s real time needs, experience from past and cultural beliefs. When real time needs cannot be satisfied and societies cannot effectively adapt to new external forces, trust fades away from the effectiveness of norms. Frustration among the members of societies grows and pushes the societies to their limits. Society so often comes to a standstill. The phenomenon is so-called ideological trap happens. This situation drafts society from realm of realities and disables it to adapt to new contexts. To solve the issues, some members of society are basing their arguments on society’s glories in the past and strongly support a backward move to re-establish the old system structures. Among this group, some project the data in the past into future with taking into account the real time boundary conditions, and prescribe some sort of short term solutions. There is a group who looks for solutions out of the norms and view the norms themselves as obstacles for solving problems. They, at least in part, do not deny the dynamism of norms. But they believe the norms should be changed in the means to address the real time needs. Those of them who are radical reject the importance of norms dynamics and moderates keep searching for better norms to replace. The moderates usually fail to explain how society’s norms changes occur. What is the driving force behind the changes? What is the cost of the changes?          

Creating norm changes is triggered by changing the mindset of society’s population. Social progress requires a radical shift in society’s dominant value system and review the validity of the existing objectives in accordance with the new defined values. Norm change does not necessarily require breaking with the past. Infant norms rest over the outgoing ones and being consistent with the past. Shifting mindsets requires more than rational arguments and should bring about clear visions of a better life (Purpose) and are inspired to pursue it (Passion).

Norm change is a hard task. It requires a whole society commitment. It takes a big deal of time and has losers and winners. However it is unavoidable. Smart societies recognize realities and take action to change their value systems prior to external forces compel them to admit the changes 

Progressive ideology (Sustainable progress)

Shahab Sabahi

Energy and Environment for Development – Policy Analysis Research Group

Sustainable progress may look a weird term. Indeed the concept of sustainability has been one of key driving forces behind humankind’s advancement and progress. Sustainability has been pivotal to humankind’s survival strategies. It helps humans improve the ways they carry out their daily affairs, develop different ideologies and mindsets, create and find out merits in peace, law and regulation. By creating ideologies, humans facilitate the creation of different socioeconomic structures which in part respond their social interaction requirements.

Sustainability balances people’s interactions among their societies and benefits all members. It also balances societies with engaging communities in political systems to see their contributions in collective decision-making process in a broader context, and energizing members to pursue the grand vision. It keeps leaders accountable in societies and does not allow they impose their own interests on their communities. Instead, leaders must engage and cultivate new values based upon the culture values that already exist.

Sustainability does not halt humankind’s progress, unless the “ideological trap” appears and sustainability from a dynamic concept turns to a static one.

In the my next post I will discuss in brief about “ideological trap”