Great essay. I am very curious to understand what you mean by food and agriculture as commons. I have downloaded your paper to have a long and reflective read.
I like David Fleming's idea of deliberate waste to ameliorate excess growth. By deliberate waste he means putting capital into dead end pursuits such as beautifying buildings, elaborate carnivals and feasts, improving ecological conditions etc. These are activities which use up capital and prevent re-investment and growth accumulation, while at the same time building culture and providing pleasure.
The idea of "retiring" capital is quite appealing and I know that it has been around for quite a while. Most fixed capital, such as building and machinery are also losing value over time. The only "natural" example of capital that is growing is livestock which has the ability to reproduce itself. Ironically it is also the origin of the world capital.....The other component of economic growth is labour and Suzman identified art etc. as a way to "waste" surplus labour/energy. https://gardenearth.substack.com/p/why-will-never-run-out-of-work
Thanks Gunnar, I have just finished the paper - an excellent read.
I especially liked your framing of 'choice architects' and how preference has shifted from being dictated by local ecology to global markets. That explains a lot of our modern food system.
A thought that occurred to me off the back of this: The erosion of ecological distinctives and local limits (e.g, the homogenisation of the field system into improved grassland or fertiliser supported fertility cropping) thus helps the market in this regard by shifting the choice architecture ever further away from place based ecological limits. If ecological areas are homogenised to the improved-intensive standard, so too (to an extent) can their production be homogenised and better integrated into global homogenised markets. Wow, this explains so much.
Great essay. I am very curious to understand what you mean by food and agriculture as commons. I have downloaded your paper to have a long and reflective read.
I like David Fleming's idea of deliberate waste to ameliorate excess growth. By deliberate waste he means putting capital into dead end pursuits such as beautifying buildings, elaborate carnivals and feasts, improving ecological conditions etc. These are activities which use up capital and prevent re-investment and growth accumulation, while at the same time building culture and providing pleasure.
The idea of "retiring" capital is quite appealing and I know that it has been around for quite a while. Most fixed capital, such as building and machinery are also losing value over time. The only "natural" example of capital that is growing is livestock which has the ability to reproduce itself. Ironically it is also the origin of the world capital.....The other component of economic growth is labour and Suzman identified art etc. as a way to "waste" surplus labour/energy. https://gardenearth.substack.com/p/why-will-never-run-out-of-work
I hope my paper makes clear what I mean by placing food and agriculture in the commons, if not, this is perhaps more easily accessible, https://gardenearth.substack.com/p/rethinking-food-and-farming-as-commons
Thanks Gunnar, I have just finished the paper - an excellent read.
I especially liked your framing of 'choice architects' and how preference has shifted from being dictated by local ecology to global markets. That explains a lot of our modern food system.
A thought that occurred to me off the back of this: The erosion of ecological distinctives and local limits (e.g, the homogenisation of the field system into improved grassland or fertiliser supported fertility cropping) thus helps the market in this regard by shifting the choice architecture ever further away from place based ecological limits. If ecological areas are homogenised to the improved-intensive standard, so too (to an extent) can their production be homogenised and better integrated into global homogenised markets. Wow, this explains so much.