Donut Economics — long term strategy for happiness
Power Generation
Did the people of Joshimath choose to have a Hydel Power project in their backyard? The answer is at best a tentative No and most likely, Maybe . Over the years of my travel to the region, I have observed a shift from traditional Kath-Kuni wooden structures to cement and metal structures, which are too heavy for the soil and unsuitable for seismic zone 5. The shift from local and thereby bespoke, to global and largely irrelevant, is the foundation for ecological disasters world over. Building of large commercial complexes, drastic extensions of homes have been taking place in this area for years, despite the MC Mishra Committee report of 1976, clearly stating what the locals knew anyway — this land is not meant for such construction. ‘NTPC go back’ cries of the locals, have come too late.
It is interesting to note that the same region was the birthplace of one of the most powerful environmental movements — the Chipko movement of 1970s which recognised the need to respect this volatile land and prevent erosion by saving trees. What did Gaura Devi, Sunderlal Bahuguna and the villagers of the Alakananda Valley know, that we do not anymore? When we say that the region is now developed, what does it mean in terms of happiness and health?
The focus on power generation, at the cost of soil, water and human health, is not new.
Right after Independence, the Damodar Valley Project (DVC) started its operations in the fertile lands of the Santhal tribe in Bengal. “We have tamed the Damodar River, put it in chains. Man has the wisdom and power to discipline the powers of nature”, said the spokesperson for DVC, in the inauguration speech. Within a decade, the fertile lands were barren, the tribe living in harmony with nature, displaced. In the words of a local, who was a child in a fisherfolk family when the project got underway, “We were sold ‘Vikas’ in exchange of happiness. The forests we considered sacred became barren. Fish stopped coming to the banks of the river, robbing us of the vocation of our forefathers”. Most people got menial jobs in the DVC, letting go of their traditional livelihood practices which came from the forest and river. Sara Joseph’s book ‘Budhini’ gives an account of how a project meant to benefit the people, robbed them of their health and dignity instead.
Is not power generation, that too using ‘clean’ sources, important? It is. Electrification is possibly one of the most critical climate change mitigation methods. At what cost should it come? Is there a more efficient and responsible way? (20% of electricity is lost due to inefficiencies and poor technology. I am not even getting into the wasteful use of electricity producing things no one needs…)
Green Revolution
The Green Revolution of the 60s aimed at feeding millions of starving Indians, famine being one of the outcomes of the British rule in India. Those enhanced ‘scientific’ methods gave us fields of poison and great amount of wealth to the farmers, who spend a lot of it on cancer treatment and medical treatment for birth defects arising out of pesticide exposure.
But is not food sufficiency important? Was there a more far-sighted way of ensuring it? 33% of food produced is wasted. The irony is that we are now observing 2023 as the ‘International year of Millet’, after systematically moving away from traditional, local millets that were less water dependent and more capable of maintaining soil nutrients naturally. On one hand, the number of people going hungry reduced due to the Green Revolution, on the other, the number of diseases arising out of nutritional deficiencies and carcinogens in food, increased.
Does ‘development’ always have to come at the cost of planet and thereby human, health?
Economist Kate Raworth (https://doughnuteconomics.org/) proposed a Donut, to answer this.
Donut Economics
Any development policy, needs to look at bringing people into the ‘Donut’, ie provide them health, education and all the basics of life while ensuring the outer Environmental limits, ie climate, biodiversity etc are not breached. The world has breached 4 out of 9 of the planetary boundaries dangerously (Stockholm Resilience Centre), largely under the pretext of providing economic stability/development to people. And the corporate sector is not the only one to blame.
During my workshops, I see planetary boundaries being exceeded in these 2 situations:
1. When for-profit organisations claim that their only objective is to ‘maximise profits’, in true Milton Friedman style. The link to the resulting ecological disaster and their and their children’s health is not understood. I find it easier to accept this group because they’ve been brought up on Shareholder Capitalism theories which encourage businesses to look at short-term monetary gains. An exercise on connecting the dots between long-term profits and planet, usually gets such organisations on to the right track. The byproduct of a healthier planet for their children, is a bonus.
2. When not-for-profit social organisations claim that their only objective is to ‘maximise social welfare’, but planetary welfare, is not part of it! These organisations try to push vulnerable sections of society into the Donut, by giving them education and financial independence but completely ignore the ‘health’ parameter. This group is difficult to understand, as they constantly work towards bettering the plight of the underprivileged, while making their living space, food, water, air, poisonous- breaching the outer limits of the Donut.
I have many examples from organisations working with microentrepreneurs, where they provide knowledge and funding to marginalised sections of society to become economically active. This economic activity might involve creation of waste, pollution and warming, which gets entirely ignored. I have worked with organisations pushing economically inactive women to open beauty salons, where money and knowledge is provided to set up a parlour with a single-minded focus on profits. Many times, those profits come from use of cosmetics containing lethal levels of toxins. There is no training provided on their safe disposal. And most importantly, the beneficiaries get exposed to high levels of chemicals included carcinogenic phthalates. This is not even recognised, let alone addressed. I have often been directed to the funding organisations’ ‘Environment/Climate Change’ department, if there is one, when I ask about the long-term health impact on the women and their families.
These organisations need to understand that planetary crises adversely impact the beneficiary community the most. The Donut shows us that the ‘development-planet’ dissociation, just does not work.
I find using Donut’s visual depiction of how mindless economic activity can put the planet and people in danger, helpful. I also wonder why such a common-sensical concept needed to be explained in the first place. Where did we stray away from the path of happiness and health, to the path of only economic growth at the cost of everything else? Could it have started at the very beginning — in our childhood?
Nature-Happiness-Health
In my chapter on Environmental Leadership (https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-981-19-4723-0_16), I studied leaders who were able to achieve financial independence and in most cases, provide for others, while helping the planet regenerate. As expected, early exposure to nature made them more responsible towards the planet. In 100% cases, the leaders expressed a deep sense of satisfaction and wellbeing.
Increasing amount of research shows a connect between mental/physical health and nature exposure. A 75 year long study on Happiness called ‘The Harvard study of Adult Development’ studied 764 men since 1938 and arrived at the single-most important factor for happiness — Relationships.
Harvard Health, among other medical journals, have time and again emphasised on happiness as key ingredient for good health.
To bring more people into the Donut, is to provide ‘health’ and ‘well-being’ to all living beings. And a healthy, vibrant planet enables both. Therefore, any strategy, corporate, governmental, social, that does not take care of the planet, fails to ensure the only thing any strategy should result in — well-being and happiness of people for all time to come.
