By: Mieke Zijlmans published in Parool July 12th
Sustainability is a major headache for many entrepreneurs. That’s because we’re thinking about it backwards, argues economist Hans Stegeman. Rather than being an afterthought in economic development, sustainability should be the starting point.
From builders to farmers: anyone creating a development or growth plan today must incorporate sustainability from the outset. That can be deeply frustrating – without such a clause, you won’t get a permit, and you’ll likely face pressure from the green lobby as well. As a result, current sustainability legislation often demands significant time and money.
Economist Hans Stegeman believes it doesn’t have to be so difficult. “We need to completely rethink how we plan and think about economics,” he says. For him, sustainability shouldn’t be viewed as an obstacle, but as a positive foundation – the starting point for everything we create.
In June, Stegeman earned his PhD at Erasmus University in Rotterdam with a dissertation in which he argues that our current economic thinking is not fit to ensure ecological and social sustainability over the long term. The dominant economic model, he explains, is driven by a single ideal: growth, growth, growth. “The reason growth has become the main goal is because our approach is still rooted in economic theories from the 1930s. But back then, we faced completely different problems – scarcity, an economic crisis. We’re no longer in that situation. We’ve never had it so good as we do now.”
A shift in thinking
Businesses pursue ever higher profits, and many people are constantly looking to buy more things, Stegeman observes. But this can’t go on: we’re depleting the planet’s natural resources at breakneck speed. The rise of new economies is only accelerating the problem. “Continuing with our current economic model is a fantasy,” says Stegeman. “We must search for alternatives. It’s very simple. Our society is embedded within nature. If we continue down this path, eventually there will be no nature left. And without nature, society cannot exist. At that point, people won’t find life fulfilling at all.”
Those who deliver this message are often dismissed as ‘woke’, and Stegeman risks the same treatment. But according to him, a complete shift in mindset is necessary. Growth must no longer be the goal. Instead, sustainable production and living should take its place. But what does that look like, in Stegeman’s view?
“You need a turning point. When energy became unaffordable, suddenly there was more room for renewable alternatives.”
The most drastic example, Stegeman says, was the 1953 North Sea Flood. It had long been known that Zeeland wasn’t adequately protected from extreme high water levels. “But it wasn’t until after the flood that the Delta Works were developed. You need external factors to make the need for change undeniable. A tipping point that pushes people to adopt a different approach more quickly.”
A happier life
Stegeman isn’t suggesting that a disaster must precede a shift to sustainability – but he is calling for a major change in mentality. “Research by the Netherlands Institute for Social Research shows that people do understand we can’t continue on our current path – it’s a dead end. Eighty percent of respondents recognised the need for an energy transition.”
When that tipping point, that mental shift, arrives, Stegeman says we must already have plans in place. “So those need to be developed now. You shouldn’t wait to figure out what a sustainable transition looks like until there’s no other option.”
Planners, for example, could start every project by identifying the sustainability element first, and then build the rest of the plan around it. What matters, Stegeman says, is presenting this as a positive message: that sustainability is good for us. That when we protect nature, people are happier. “And that way, we’ll all end up living happier lives.”
Drops on a hot stone
The challenge with Stegeman’s argument is that progress in sustainability has so far been slow. Just drops on a hot stone, you might say. “This transition involves many different aspects, both for companies and for individuals. For businesses, a lot needs to change in terms of laws and regulations – that’s where government has a role to play.”
“But people can organise many things themselves too. More space should be made for collective initiatives. Individually owning lots of stuff costs each person money. We can think more about sharing goods – that often saves time as well, time you can spend doing enjoyable things. These are all small steps towards a less polluting economy, and one in which we can feel happier.”
Share this item
