Green Design must include a ‘sustainable currency’

Green design needs to include currency considerations as we argue that a dollar can be exchanged for ‘stuff’ and as such is a claim on Gaia’s energy – her blood.  So that money = claims on Nature/Gaia = sustainability implications.  Consequently a measure of sustainability, a crucial aspect of Green Design, is the relationship between the stock of ‘money’, its ‘flow or velocity’ and the relationship of these to the overall amount of stuff available to buy with it.
From a foot-print perspective some authors argue we are using the resources of at least two earths at present and when one then looks at the volume of money and near money (around 20times world GDP when one includes derivatives etc.) then one sees a potential for a dollar – in aggregate – to be able to demand many times what Gaia can sustain.  So, we maintain, that a sustainability policy must include a ‘sustainable currency’.  In historical terms this is what the Ancient Greeks called Oikonomia – usually female (prudential household management) compared for instance to the other form of economics identified by Aristotle of Chrematistics or ‘love of money’ – often male.

Such a currency would need to reassert the link between the physical economy, which uses Gaia’s energy, and the financial economy which has claims on this but is artificial in that it is  simply printed on paper or electronic ‘0’s’ and ‘1’s’ and even worse is outside the control of any national or international system of Governance.

TEE is a component of what we call ‘Social Accounting’ and is an energy management system that fits with Footprint Analysis and draws from the discussion of Oikonomia above.  In short this approach maintains that any product should have on it TEE which means Total

---

Here we make the distinction between (fiat) currency (printed by government) with no inherent value and money (physical) say from a precious metal or other exchange good which has intrinsic value.  See also Maloney (2008).  Financial economics refers to the former and whether currency or money is the term used in this column the meaning is in terms of this definition of ‘money’.

See Wildman (2009a), (2012) on the Economic Meltdown in GFC1

Oikonomia is ancient Greek for ‘home economy’ meaning ‘prudential household management’ its counterpoint is chrematistics, ‘love of wealth/money/currency’, in short, greed.  Aristotle pointed this distinction out 500BC.  Today all that is left of oikonomia is home economics which has degenerated into cooking classes if it exists at all, whereas chrematistics the financial economy has triumphed and silenced our oikonomic discourse.

A concrete example of a Green Design application is the urgent need, within our call for social neg-entropy viz. a focus on Oikonomia, for what we call Fingerprint Accountability (FA) or more generally may be called Entropy Accounting (EA) and in concrete form Comprehensive Social Accounting (CSA) which by extension includes Total Embodied Energy (TEE). 

We submit that TEE should be listed on products as an ingredient and in a company’s balance sheet.  TEE would start with waste and include energy miles, environmental production costs, use, repair, reuse and eventual recycling costs in the whole systems life cycle of the particular product.  The lack of any framework for such accounting or any significant calls therefor, from any green groups that we know of, to us is a sign that much of the ‘green debate’ is structurally entropic with no real grasp on the deeper entropy issues at play. 

---

Embodied Energy, just like the ingredients of a product.  Such a TEE needs to include carbon produced, methane produced or released, component manufacture, assembly, use and reclamation – complete ‘product life cycle’.  It remains noteworthy that green policy still does not seem to have grasped the seriousness and urgency of this need in terms of overall economic policy.

In this sense TEE becomes a defacto sustainable currency.  The nearest analogue we can find would be the Green currency as discussed in our last Green Design coloumn say incorporated into a Local Energy Trading System modified for the above purposes.  See www.brislets.com   Furthermore TEE fits into an Oikonomic system for sustainable local/community economy development, along the lines set out below.  LETS is a remarkable system that collaboratively harmonises diversity without forcibly centralising conformity. [Also see Figure 1 for a resource on this topic and in particular Figure 2 bottom three green circles].  Critically I advocate that the community economy be seen as a learning system using methods of Kids and Adults Learning such as Action Learning Circles to achieve sustainability.  See Wildman and Schwencke (2003).  In a turn towards learning I prefer the concept cluster of ‘creative evolvability’ to ‘sustainability’.  Creactive means actively creative.

Figure 1: Community Economy Development as a Learning process

Source: Wildman and Schwencke (2003)

---

This critique can also be levelled at much of the Occupy movement.  Occupy sees as a solution for the very valid social conundrums it identifies, and responds with calls for increased regulation, government spending, public sector size and so forth.  All are generally entropic and, in a sense, what the movement is supposedly opposed to.

An outcome of our research is a hypothesis that EA could also include processes as well as products, for instance a value chain EA in Lean Production and a Community EA report.

---

Figure 2: The design of a Sustainable Community Economy as a context for a sustainable local currency (see the bottom three green circles)


Source: P Wildman 12-2012

We don’t see a GDCE (Green Design Community Economy) as a silver bullet solution to the big picture rather it is one aspect of a comprehensive anticipatory ‘presponse’ prior to the apocalypse.  As a bottom up system it needs to blend with top down tax law and inside out community development.  So at best in developed economies this system which is highly reliant on the informal economy may account for say only 20% of local economic activity however this may, for many communities, be the difference between sink and swim.  Furthermore as the south emerges ever more strongly in the north we find, as in other de-developing countries such as Spain and Greece now and undeveloped countries, the informal economy may well account for 80% of local economic activity.
Critically Australian research puts the informal care economy which is outside the States ‘cash nexus’ at a magnitude comparable with the formal economy. 

Conclusion
CRAFT strongly advocates for a ‘living currency’ to be designed in to any consideration of a sustainable society.  Such a living currency e.g. TEE as incorporated in a local currency such as LETS would in effect change the discourse on property rights and markets as the currency is not fiat and can, within limits, be created at the point of exchange by the participants in this sense is maybe seen as a ‘mutual aid’ currency.  Furthermore we advocate that TEE lists be incorporated on the list of ingredients on all products inc. houses, cars, refrigerators, roads, buildings, planes etc.  Critically here the currency is not rationed by the fiat of Government yet IS firmly linked to the carrying capacity considerations at the glocal levels.  Lane (2012).  For larger systems especially those involving public transport initiatives such as the Belgian example of the rail tunnel should be included.  Furthermore we propose an employment planning component in, for instance, Greenfield sites for new suburbs.  I have undertaken substantial work in this area [please see Jensen and West (2002), Wildman (2009b) and Wildman and Stanton (1997) – see bottom left orange circle in Figure 2.
In this regard CRAFT advocates a way that the future generations can have a say today as we ‘get it on the ground while we are still around’.  A way that links the nature of exchange, a part of human settlements since time immemorial, can be mutualised as well as embedded in the carrying capacity of our home planet Gaia.  The key to all this is in our view a sustainable living currency.

References
Belgium – rail tunnel: http://www.rail.co/2011/06/07/high-speed-rail-tunnel-in-belgium-gets-16000-solar-panels/
Jensen, R. and G. West (2002). Community Economic Analysis. Brisbane: Department of Primary Industries. 160pgs.
Lane, M (2012) Carrying Capacity Dashboard – Prototype.  http://www.carryingcapacity.com.au/
Maloney, M. (2008). Guide to Investing in Gold and Silver: Protect Your Financial Future. New York: Business Plus. 200pgs.
Wildman, P. (2009a). Three Economic Tsunamis: Should we have seen them coming? A boundary riders perspective. 16 pgs pgs 343-356, Ch 20. In Meltdown: Climate Change, Natural Disasters and Other Catastrophes:  Fears and Concerns for the Future. K. Gow. (ed) (2009). New York, Nova Science Publishers 430pgs. extended version.
Wildman, P. (2009b). Community Economy Development Site Plan (CESP) outline - Haigslea Eco- suburb: plan process outline. . Brisbane, KALGROVE Pty Ltd: 12 pgs.
Wildman, P. (2012). Economic Meltdown - Investing in The Light of the Three Economic Tsunamis: Should We Have Seen Them Coming?  And what Do They Mean About Our Superannuation and Investment Portfolios? A Boundary Rider’s Perspective. Brisbane: The Kalgrove Institute: 50pgs.
Wildman, P. and H. Schwencke (2003). Your Community Learning - action learning circles for learning and earning through community economic development. Brisbane, Community Learning Initiatives and Prosperity Press. Multi Media CD Rom with explanatory booklet explaining action learning and including cross walk between community economy development questions and ALC topics integrated through Community Economy Development Actions. Brisbane: Prosperity Press and Life Long Learning Council of Qld (then Community Learning Initiatives).  Available from the author on paul@kalgrove.com
Wildman, P. and R. Stanton (1997). Community Economy Site Plan: Design and Application of the Economic Policy of the Employment and Training Projection Model to the Greenfield Multifunctional Community, Pacific Centre for Futures Innovation: 25pgs.
Paul Wildman paul@kalgrove.com 1500words V4 01-01-2013 comm. 28-11-2012