Extraterrestrial Contact: The Dangers of a Growth Based Society

I live in Nashville, Tennessee. Cranes dot the horizon and construction is everywhere. We take pride in that growth. And yet we know what comes with it- increased traffic, higher rents, and congestion. Part of the joy in seeing a city grow is knowing that the growth is linked to the economy of the region and thus employment opportunities are abundant. We also like having a wide range of medical care; a choice of schools; skilled professionals in many fields; more restaurants and amusements. Inevitably we compare ourselves to other cities and decide that we are winning. But is that rational in the long-term?

The economic health of any region is currently judged by growth: growth of the workforce, growth of wages, growth of domestic product, and growth of trade. Countries need to keep growing to survive in the global economy. And it’s not just nations. Individuals want consumption growth to support a better lifestyle.  We live in a growth-based society. Sadly, there are indications that uncontrolled growth is killing the planet that supports us. Climate Change is a dire emergency as we deal with extreme weather and sea level rise. We are facing an ecological disaster as we lose species at an alarming rate. Growth and consumption are causing many severe problems. Exploiting fossil fuels without control may produce short-term monetary and employment growth for an economy, but what about the long-term impact of fossil fuel use to climate change? And that is just one example of growth causing damage.

A few economists are debating the value of uncontrolled growth. Michael Spence, the Nobel Prize winning economist at Stanford University, questions if measurements of growth can capture the thing humans most care about: well-being.

So, what do we do next? Over the years, environmentalists have suggested that we need moderation in consumption and increased control over waste. Not using straws at a restaurant and recycling are two small examples. The idea is that if we increase efficiencies and reduce waste we can have less of a negative impact on the environment. That makes sense, but does the traditional environmentalism go far enough? The world population continues to grow. That means more consumption and waste.

Given that we are a growth-based society, how can we achieve population control and not suffer economic collapse? We need more people working and consuming to fuel our economy. And besides, there is a matter of equity. People in Third World nations just want to participate in the lifestyle that many people in First World countries enjoy. They want better food, cars, electronics, and larger homes. They want to consume more. And who are we to deny them the benefits of growth?

The answer may be in balance. Humans need to find a way to live healthy and rewarding lives while preserving the environment to whatever degree is still possible. We need to make radical technological changes to respond to climate disruption and ecological issues. We must learn to live within our means.  We need a balanced society.

The term Steady State Economy is often used in connection with this idea of balance. It is a society where population and consumption are stabilized to be sustainable. Balance may sound like a passive response, but at the scale we are discussing, it would require a great deal of effort and ingenuity to achieve. Balance is currently discussed in many different ways, including sustainability and low-impact living, but it should include all facets of life including economic, social, and familial considerations. The balance comes from determining what we need, not what we want, and how to achieve that in a way that does not harm the Earth.

Economist Kate Raworth with Oxford University proposes Doughnut Economics. It is graphic representation that shows the reconfiguring of the world economy within the framework of our environment. Simply put: proper consideration of economic development means taking into account the consequences of those actions, both in terms of the environment and the impact to humans. The Raworth balance comes in the form of a circle or doughnut with an ecological ceiling that we should not go beyond and a social foundation that we don’t allow people to fall beneath. She shows the spikes that certain human activities entail, taking us beyond the ceiling of sustainability. One example she uses is the production of beef. There is a staggering amount of resources required to support cattle (land, feed, chemicals) and pollution (nitrogen primarily) that production creates. Cutting back on beef consumption could help to re-balance the situation. If you don’t think that’s a radical idea, just ask the cattle industry.

Laurie Kaye Nijaki at the University of Michigan also calls for a green economy.

“The green economy aims to widen the view of economic growth or progress through an integration of environmental considerations in the development process. It reframes growth as “green growth” and thus limits development by taking into account quality of life considerations that are hinged on environmental quality today and into the future. In this way, the metrics for evaluating development choices and their successes is changed to one that seeks to reference the long-run environmental effects of economic action and inaction.”

Big ideas always face hard realities. There is currently a world-wide recycling crisis. China stopped taking recycling and they were the primary market for the entire planet. More and more municipalities are dropping recycling because they can’t find anyone who will take it. Traditional economics won’t work. Recycling likely needs intrusive government action to make it profitable. And that would increase costs for consumers and irritate the large waste companies. Not an easy challenge. And that is one of many issues a green or Steady State economy would face.

What does all of this have to do with extraterrestrial First Contact? Our Earth-bound problems make us a much less attractive candidate for an extraterrestrial relationship. Why should aliens waste their time contacting a species that is driving itself to extinction? If we can’t manage our own planet, why would they want us out in the universe exploring and perhaps wrecking other planets? Solving these problems may be an essential milestone for civilizations to overcome and other beings may be waiting to see how we do. Or it could take extraterrestrials intervening to help us consider a new way of living here on planet Earth. The history of an extraterrestrial civilization could provide insight for moving forward here on Earth.

Photo by Shea Rouda on Unsplash