미래를 고칠 지속가능한 모델 찾기

Business models must take into account environmental and ecological factors if the world is to transition to a more sustainable economy. Photograph: Tim Tadder/AP

Riots, storms, oil spills, rising divorce rates. Most of us would say that these do not make our lives better. But, perversely, they might lead to higher economic growth measured in terms of GDP; people are employed in cleanup operations and rebuilding and lawyers to pick up the pieces.

We tend to measure success through economic growth, primarily because it brings new jobs. And jobs are, of course, desperately need at a time when youth unemployment in the UK is at one million and nearly 60% of young people in Greece are out of work. Jobs can create a virtuous circle of buying power, demand for goods, further jobs, more tax revenues, higher welfare payments and higher standards of living for all.

But economic growth – and even employment – is an incomplete indicator of wellbeing. It does not value other important things like community, security, or the quality of our environment.

Although new ways of measuring wellbeing are getting increased attention, politicians who talk about the sustainable economy or of measuring of wealth beyond GDP are often still viewed as out of touch with the reality of unemployment and welfare cuts and are urged to focus on getting people back to work. Equally, businesses often do not have the capacity to think beyond the next order book to the wider impacts of their activities.

But the model of economic growth we have seen in the past is not fit for the future. It has depended on two things; first, the availability of credit that enabled us to keep buying things we couldn't afford. The current recession resulted from the abrupt end of this spending spree.

Second, economic growth has depended on a process of taking resources, combining them, buying/selling them, using them and throwing away what's left; then moving on to repeat the cycle. This relies on a replenished pool of new resources and a continued stream of support services provided by the natural word – for example, clean water, fertile soil, a stable climate, pollination, clean air.

Business models built on outdated assumptions

Globally, we are now using up these resources at a rate 50% faster than we can replace them. And we have growing evidence of the depletion of ecosystems services across the world. Yet we continue to use the old business models that are built on an assumption of plentiful supply, and to measure success in terms of the assets that we have exploited.

Traditional economics tells us that the market will sort us out. When resources become scarce, the price goes up, people start innovating to develop or market alternatives, and the problem is resolved.

However, there are at least three fundamental problems with that analysis:

First, those of us who are richer are cushioned against the impacts of scarcity or instability, while poorer people are already suffering from a lack of water, less fertile land, changing climate and resulting conflicts. We won't react until we are the ones feeling the pain.

Second, our accounting system simply doesn't put an adequate value on many of the resources – and particularly the ecosystems services – we depend on, so that the price does not reflect the importance of maintaining them and the market does not send the right signals.

Third, there is a time lag. By the time the market recognises the problem, starts to value these resources and sends the signals, it may be too late. It takes time to develop alternatives – clean technologies to replace fossil fuels, new ways to purify or access water, new farming techniques that are less damaging to the topsoil.

It is therefore surely irrational to assume that we will be able to pull a technological or economic rabbit out of the tired old business model's hat without a more deliberate process.

How, then, can we be more proactive about defining and creating an economy that can enable people to lead productive, safe and healthy lives within environmental limits?

A challenge for all sectors

Scientists, governments, business and NGOs can be more systematic about understanding and communicating where the scientific evidence shows we are currently, or will soon be, bumping up against 'safe' environmental limits – for example, in soil productivity, ocean acidity, natural habitats – and about working out the implications of continuing with business as usual.

For example, the International Energy Agency stated in a recent reportthat without a major shift away from coal, average global temperatures could rise by 6C by as soon as 2050, leading to devastating climate change.

Business leaders and investors can explicitly seek business opportunities that emerge from new and current data. Some businesses are already getting serious about viewing their activities through a sustainability lens and innovating their process or product to use resources more efficiently, to find solutions to sustainability challenges or to develop substitutes for scarce resources. But most businesses are not yet taking action.

Governments around the world have to play a much stronger role in enabling business in this process, not only by incentivising companies and investors to allocate resources to finding innovative solutions, but also by developing tax and market mechanisms so that, where businesses contribute to the problem, they pick up the cost.

We can relieve some resource constraints through being more efficient, putting in place closed loop systems so that old goods are recycled, and we provide more services than products. These are all important aspects of a sustainable economy.

But will these changes be enough to enable 8 billion people to develop their potential and lead more productive, healthy lives?

Can poorer countries leap-frog our wasteful technologies and achieve less resource-intensive growth? Will some countries continue to seek land and minerals from others to fuel their own growth? What is the role, responsibility and self-interest of rich countries in enabling sustainable growth? Will increasing resource scarcity lead to escalating conflict?

These are difficult questions. They imply a number of risks that will need to be urgently identified and managed by business and governments. They also imply some opportunities for business and governments to play a positive role in developing much-needed leap-frog technologies.

But they make it clear that unless we understand what a sustainable economy looks like and work towards it, our quest for economic growth will make everyone worse off.

Alice Chapple is director of ImpactValue, a consultancy that helps investors and businesses to design their activities to have a more positive impact on people and the environment.