“Understanding our shifting perspectives on growth” by John Adams, Cottonwood Hts
RE: Understanding our shifting perspectives on growth
From views that make us feel good to ideas that make us think hard.
A letter by John Adams, Cottonwood Heights resident, to the CH City Council, April 4, 2022
As we move forward with dialogue, surveys and meetings in preparation for updating our city general plan, I want to challenge our city employees, elected officials, and citizens to consider some ideas on how we talk and think about growth, so we can both address our citizens' emerging concerns and create a plan suitable for our evolving world.
The fundamental decisions we’re facing on how we manage growth, and what we want the outcome to be, are certainly imperative and deserve our focus. These decisions contemplate HOW we grow and will be directed by our underlying beliefs about growth. However, while our traditional approach to planning historically accepts endless growth as the norm, hence the main focus is on how to manage the growth, we omit any discussion around WHY we grow.
In Cottonwood Heights, we’re fully feeling the stresses of commuter and recreational traffic congestion, lack of affordable housing, air pollution, water, storm drains, etc. Issues all stemming from our city’s rapid growth. How are we responding to try to stop these negative outcomes? Look no further than the plethora of local grassroots organizations all around us, fighting against these unintended side effects of growth:
Save Our Canyons – Save Not Pave – Friends of LCC – Friends of Alta – Save Parleys – Protect Our Winters – Save our Foothills –
Save this….Friends of that…Protect this…
WHY? Our citizens and society are coming to terms with this. And, with little guidance or experience to understanding these evolving concerns around our old mindset, this is causing much angst and division through our community as city leaders and local organizations survey for our preferences on HOW we should grow.
By purposefully enabling discussion around the WHY, it puts our values first, before the outcome. This is how we discover our commonalities and a shared sensibility, which provides us with a starting point in which we can unite to better equip us to solve for the HOW. This is not about adopting the correct beliefs, or getting a tally of votes on who wants what. This is about adopting the skill to update our current beliefs when necessary and providing inspiration for thinkers to look at our world in a different way. The concerns and confusion surfacing around growth is the evidence we need to summon the courage to understand our legacy beliefs. Addressing this will strengthen our community through unity and improve our capacity to plan for the future.
Recent polling from both the Cottonwood Heights Tomorrow survey (Cottonwood Heights General Plan Update, 2022), and a broader state-wide Envision Utah survey (Values and growth attitude summary, 2022) confirm that old beliefs around growth have come into question and are the cause of much concern. For example, the Envision Utah survey results showed Utahns today are more concerned about growth now than at any point in the last 25 years. In a dramatic shift from surveys of the past, more Utahns now feel that growth in the state jeopardizes our quality of life, rather than improves it.
Additionally, it found that half of the Utahns surveyed said they feel trying to stop growth will undermine the economy and drive-up housing costs. At the same time, a quarter of respondents said we need to try to stop or slow growth. There is no wonder there is confusion as we simply have not been here before.
You might be thinking, why are Utahns now suddenly questioning growth? Growth is good, right? It provides jobs, prosperity, and lower taxes. How can something that is supposed to be a good thing, and seems to have served us well in the past, now be perceived to threaten our health, environment, and overall way of life?
It’s all in the why versus the how.
Utahns have begun to question the elephant in the room: is more growth more harmful than helpful? And herein lies the source of our anxiety, and for good reason. Challenging this paradigm goes against what we have known to be true, and questioning our old beliefs makes the future feel unpredictable.
When looking at the top issues concerning Utahns, it’s clear the root cause of most is growth– be it economic growth, population growth, or even recreational growth. We’ve witnessed the many negative consequences of our rapid growth and are working full-force to manage them. Still, it’s unclear what we should do to stop the negative consequences from happening in the first place. No matter how rich a nation, or a city like Cottonwood Heights, no matter how destabilized the climate, no matter how degraded the land, no matter how much inequalities prevail, the answer always given is more growth.
Along with our local challenges, recent broader economic events have further caused us to question our old beliefs about growth and reassess what is actually important in our lives. From 9/11 to the recession of 2007-2008 to the COVID-19 pandemic to now the war in Ukraine, we’ve gained new perspectives on what really makes us thrive as individuals and as a society. We have been forced to learn so much about the things we can live without. And at the same time, we also learned what cannot exist without our never-ending spending on those things: our economy. Whether we need more (and more) in order to thrive or not, the scary truth we learned is that our economy is dependent upon never-ending growth regardless of the negative consequences. And sadly, the cost of these consequences does not get measured, but are simply externalities.
Quite simply put, even when we are already thriving as a community, decisions still get made from the lens of growth as the goal. By why is that? I will address that in a bit.
So, as we begin to develop our new city plan and update surveys for citizen feedback, what do we do with all of these questions and confusion? How do we help our citizens make sense of what is happening so we can get more informed and accurate feedback from them and then make better collective decisions on how to move forward? While our intentions to grow are often good, could our intuition on the approach be wrong? Is there a new 21st-century mindset that will better equip us to thrive in our future rather than continuing to create more and more of the issues that are deteriorating our quality of life and polarizing our citizens on how to deal them?
Before we can answer these questions, we must first understand where our exponential growth paradigm, that is now in question, originates. This requires us to explore some basic concepts of our economic system, the anchoring goal of this system, and how we measure its success. This is the key to understanding the drivers of all downstream decisions, as the decisions we make are ultimately designed to satisfy the goals of the system.
The excerpts below is from Kate Raworth’s book “Doughnut Economics, How to think like a 21st century economist” (Raworth, 2017)
What is the purpose of the economy anyway and how do we measure it?
Up until now, we have used a single lens to understand our economic reality; production and growth. These economic ideas see our needs as infinite. And the market is responsible for fulfilling them. By this logic, economic growth is both permanent and perpetual. One of the most common indicators for measuring the well-being in our societies is Gross Domestic Product, or GDP, which reflects the amount of goods and services generated by a given country. Its main consequence that is argued in its support? Job creation. Growth not only became the goal of our economic model, but the model requires the growth to be never-ending.
So why is this model failing us now?
The problem is that nothing can grow forever. Any kind of infinite growth produces imbalances. Consider how a tree grows until it is time to stop growing and then focus on thriving. Or consider when something in our body won't ‘stop’ growing. We call that cancer. Having growth as the goal of our economic model might initially lead us towards development but…what really lies behind that endless growth? What happens when a country is fully developed and continues to operate with an economic model that ‘requires’ endless growth? What happens if the system goal is not accurately adjusted once we have grown, to how we thrive? Are we really equitably meeting the basic needs of everybody in a global society, and at what cost to earth’s sustaining systems? That fixation on GDP as the primary measure of national progress has been used to justify extreme inequalities of income and wealth coupled with unprecedented destruction of the living world. It focuses on the short term, says nothing of wellbeing, and pays no attention, or cost to long-term consequences. And with growth as the very starting point of our system, the negative social and environmental effects we now encounter are simply cast away as ‘externalities’ by the language of economics. We see businesses become more efficient as they privatize profit and pass the costs upon society's balance sheet; while wars, post-disaster reconstruction, and even drug trafficking among many others are all included in our definition of ‘progress’ via GDP and employment. For politicians and others, the single year-on-year indicator for measuring economic progress had become too strong. It went from a policy option to a goal supporting a political necessity. Relying on this lens of economic growth has destabilized our societies and the very ecosystems that sustain our existence.
So then why did we decide to measure the wellbeing of the country by GDP?
In 1934 the U.S. Congress commissioned economist Simon Kuznets to devise a measure of America’s income. He invented the calculation of GDP, and for the first time it became possible to put a dollar value on America’s annual output, and hence its income, and compare it to the year before, and to compare one country from another. But Simon Kuznets himself warned that a nation's well being cannot be measured by its national income because it does not say anything about the quality of life, never mind the negative effects we would later see to the environment that sustains us. Soon however, growth was seen as a panacea for many social and political ailments, and ever-growing output became the widely used metaphor for progress and forward momentum and a happier society.
Why is it so hard to see behind the illusion of endless growth as the panacea?
This lens has led us to see growth as the goal itself because it generates jobs in a balanced market that achieves efficient prices via supply and demand for the goods it produces. It promises that growth will decrease inequality because it will distribute wealth through employment. But this is not reality. It promises that growth will generate adequate financial resources to tackle the environmental problems created by the growth. But exponential growth exasperates the problem as the by-products of more growth exponentially multiply the environmental issues. It does not allow for balance. While the blind acceptance of measuring the health of a country by GDP prevails, few are stopping to seriously ask whether GDP growth was always needed, always desirable or, indeed, always possible. To inquire about these became irrelevant, or political suicide.
We are now stuck feeding growth addictions that are pushing us past the boundaries to be able to reverse the harm they cause. We now have economies that are driven by mass consumerism that have come to demand, expect, and depend upon unending growth, because we are financially, socially, and politically addicted to it.
● Financially - Because today's financial system is designed to pursue the highest rate of money to be returned, putting publicly traded companies under constant pressure to deliver unending growing sales, market share and profit, regardless of any harm caused. And because banks create money as debt, bearing interest that must be repaid with more.
● Politically - Because politicians want to raise tax revenues without raising taxes and a growing GDP is a sure way to do that. And no politician wants to be replaced in the G20, so their economies must all grow to remain.
● Socially - Because we have had a century of consumer propaganda, where early psychotherapy was turned into lucrative retail therapy if we could be convinced to believe we transform ourselves every time we buy something more. Twentieth century economics assured us that if growth creates inequality don’t try to redistribute, because more growth will even things up again. And if growth creates pollution, don’t try to regulate because more growth will clean things up again. Except….it doesn’t and it won't.
Is there an alternative?
Economies that are regenerative and redistributive by design can tackle these problems. There are approaches that reveal a reality in which decisions are not purely self-interested as they can be made for the common good. And where balance isn't achieved through the prices and quantities of the things we make, but rather through respect for the natural limits of our planet while meeting the basic needs and rights of all. This kind of approach recognizes that wealth will never be distributed of its own accord, and that we need to design systems that will do it for us. The aim should no longer be for an economy that needs to grow whether or not we thrive, but for an economy that enables us to thrive whether or not it grows, by putting the balance of our ecosystem at the heart of what we do.
To change the current GDP mindset, we need to think in terms of how capitalism and the consumerism of today is both driving inequality while pushing us over our planetary boundaries. How can we reimagine capitalism: If you reject the idea that GDP should be the measure of growth, which is just how much stuff we burn and move around society, and recognize that growth has to be really the way in which we improve the material standards of living of people, then you can quite clearly see that it is really solutions to human problems that are really the things that represent growth. And when you see it in that way, it allows you to dematerialize the economy. Growth itself is not the problem. Human societies need to advance, they need to improve. But basing our policies and decisions with the goal being growth causes harm and is not sustainable. If we can change the definition from how much stuff we burn, to how much we improve people's lives, we can reorganize the economy in ways that are sustainable and equitable. From growth defined and measured by GDP, to growth defined and measured by Solutions to Human Problems. This is still capitalism, but with the shift from our end goal of growth, to where we improve standards for all. We adopt thinking that puts the economy in service to life, both Society and the environment, versus the paradigm of an economy that is only in service to finance and trade.
In response to the constant call for more growth, Donella Meadows, who was an American scientist, educator, and writer, recognized that the goal of growth is embedded in our thinking, and is rarely challenged. She argued that "instead of blindly accepting growth, we should always ask: growth of what, and why, and for whom, and who pays the cost, and how long can it last, and what's the cost to the planet, and how much is enough?" (Raworth, 2017) Applying this thought process can bring about a kind of terror as one begins to see how our big economic system operates. But it also provides clarity around why we should challenge these old paradigms and then fosters the needed insight, ideas, and changes.
Our population will continue to grow, this isn’t in question. What we should be questioning: why is exponential economic growth the goal we still strive for? Is it still serving us today?
The broad term of growth can mean many things to many people. For city planning and citizen input purposes, our challenge is to expand the traditional focus from how we grow to why we grow, and then anchor our planning around a consensus for what our updated goal(s) ought to be. Without this open dialogue, citizens are unable to effectively provide valuable feedback to surveys that only address growth’s consequences while they are in a state of confusion about how growth is serving our community.
We get to decide what we want the goal to be. If the idea of thriving as a goal suits us and our environment more than growth for the sake of growth,, there would be a paradigm shift in the way we think and talk about how we approach our future. Considering a change from the word ‘growth’ to the word ‘thrive’ in how we plan our city’s future can sound pedestrian, and I realize there will be much debate on how we define thriving. But consider the following example in the power of a word to drive a mindset.
It is no accident that across this country we were taught to think of ourselves as consumers. Our economy depends upon it. Nearly 70% of our GDP is made up of consumer spending, and GDP remains the key measure of our economic success. In times of economic crisis, we are told to be ‘good consumers’ and to spend money to keep the economy running, or else it implodes. And in good times, whether we need more or not, psychotherapy-based marketing ensures we continue to spend to feel better about ourselves and to keep up with our neighbors, regardless of the negative downstream consequences of overconsumption, or the false promise that more will make us happier.
If we make one small change we make one small change to the noun, we use to describe ourselves, our mindset on consumption completely changes. We are not consumers. We are citizens. Yes, we do consume, but when you define yourself as a citizen versus a consumer you are forced to think outwardly and consider the bigger picture, versus thinking about just your needs and wants, regardless of the consequences.
If I we ask what it means for us, our city, state, country, and the world to thrive, we will all have different answers. And this should be the focus of our conversations and citizen surveys that drive our planning decisions. This small shift from inward thinking via growth to outward thinking via thriving changes the conversation and considers the future along with the present, and our global footprint along with our local footprint. This is where we find our commonality, and unify our community.
The moment is now for Cottonwood Heights! As a community we are better off making decisions if we can come together and agree on the starting point of our decision criteria: our underlying goal and how we measure its success. At this moment, there are at least five converging forces in our city that provide us with the undeniable timing to challenge our legacy mindset around growth, and to consider if it continues to serve us or has begun to fail us. These five things are as follows:
1. Citizens and leaders have anxiety about the effects of growth on our future but are unable to articulate why or what to do about it
2. New talent and experience in city hall – a new mayor and two new council members.
3. New General Plan is in the making
4. New survey of CH citizens is in the making
5. A new citizen mindset to rethink old paradigms spawned by two years of COVID-related restrictions and now war in Ukraine
Our Challenge:
This will not be easy. We have to recognize the human qualities that can stand in the way of rethinking old beliefs and encouraging others to do the same.
To do this, it is helpful if we recognize the tools we use to harbor old beliefs; which include our assumptions, our instincts and our habits. For most of us;
● We often prefer the ease of hanging onto old views over the difficulty of grappling with new ones.
● Questioning ourselves makes the world more unpredictable.
● It requires us to admit that the facts may have changed, that what was once right may now be wrong.
● Reconsidering something we believe deeply can threaten our identities, making it feel as if we're losing a part of ourselves. (Granted, 2021)
There is hope:
Hope lies in the fact that economics is not a physical law, but a belief system that can be challenged and changed. It just takes a lot of conversation and dialog. And we live in a country where we have the freedom to change belief systems.
When it comes to our knowledge and opinions, we tend to stick to our guns and we favor the comfort of conviction over the discomfort of doubt. But there is hope when you realize that rethinking isn't a struggle in every part of our lives. We can do it. “When it comes to our possessions for example, we update with fervor. We refresh our wardrobes when they go out of style and renovate our kitchens when they're no longer in vogue.” (Granted, 2021) It might sound trivial, but we can do the same with something even as big as our economic ideals.
Another place to find hope and the courage to challenge our beliefs is to ask ourselves if the growth issues we see are something happening to us or for us? Is this a blessing or a curse? One could argue the negative effects of growth could be a blessing. “It is feedback from the extraordinary system we call planet earth and the complex economy that drives our actions. That’s what feedback is for, it’s how life sustains itself and grows and changes.” (Hawken, 2019)
Our basic needs are already met. We are way past thriving so we tend to focus more on additional conveniences and higher levels of comfort than protecting what we have. In our developed country, and most certainly in Cottonwood Heights, most of us are in a great place to be able to shift our attention to how we thrive versus how we grow. And I am hopeful we can recognize that since we are in a good place now, that we can make the shift to think about protecting what we have so we can continue to thrive well into the future versus focusing on trying to gain more in the present.
“Without a shared ability to make sense of the world as a means to inform our choices, we are left with only the game of power.” (ConsilienceProject, 2021)
References
ConsilienceProject. (2021, march 30). Challenges to Making Sense of the 21st Century. From The Consilience Project: https://consilienceproject.org/challenges-to-making-sense-of-the-21st-century/
Cottonwood Heights General Plan Update. (2022, March). From Cottonwood Heights Tomorrow: https://ldi-ut.com/images/projects/Cottonwood_Heights/21-0621_CH_PUBLIC_ENGAGEMENT%20SUMMARY.pdf
Granted, A. (2021). Think Again-The Power of Knowing What You Don't Know. NewYork: Viking.
Hawken, P. (2019, October 20). Drawdown: The most comprehensive plan ever to reverse global warming. (P. Hawken, Performer) Marin Center, San Rafael , CA, United States. From https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3DTKUZsl2Y
Raworth, K. (2017). Doughnut Economics-7 Ways to Think LIke a 21st Century Economist. White River Junction, Vt, United States of America: Green Press Initiative.
Values and growth attitude summary. (2022, March). From EnvisionUtah: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5c059ead36099b1445c1d246/t/61f03fa58456cf190ba47c99/1643134889348/Values+and+Growth+Attitude+Summary.pdf
By John Adams, Cottonwood Heights, April 4, 2022