From the margins to the mainstream

I recently had the opportunity to attend the Partners for a New Economy event exploring the concept of economic discourse and how we ensure the economy works for society as whole. Working in economic development, I am a firm believer in broadening my awareness of different schools of thought and looking to find ways to ensure that the economy works for society. While I could not attend in person, events such as this are vital in engaging in the discussion on how we can do more and secure an economy build on the principles of wellbeing. This article looks to capture insight from across our speakers and offer some links in to my own work in this space.

(Please note this "summary" is longer than my usual articles, and brings in expertise from an extensive range of experts in the field. Rather than introduce each, I would refer you to the hyperlink above where details on their contribution to these paradigms are available).

Following a brief introduction and consideration of the range of disciplines in the room (social justice, policy, economists, business owners), we were introduced to the keynote speaker Katherine Trebeck . I have long followed Katherine's work and asked in my own work the question: what is the destination for the economy? How much growth is enough? In opening, she recognised the challenge of this particular talk and a sense of uncertainty - we are not moving discussion at the pace needed. Reflecting on the gathered audience, there was a consideration of the collective: those gathered are great at generating ideas and recognising the failure in the current system, yet people are not turning to our solutions. People are turning to the politics of populism.

To bring about change, there is a need to be more strategic and engage with those who may not agree with the path proposed. While there are many who wish to be part of the movement for economic reform, we need to balance the need to do more, with the risk of burn out. We need to consider how we apply knowledge and move beyond the academic, towards specifically addressing inequality. We need to be ok with failure and recognise that prescribing solutions will not win over those who fear what will come next. A question was asked of when do we give up on managed change vs building for the forced change and looking to create resilience. Even now, as a society we find it easier to find resource for food parcels, instead of finding finance to build partnerships which would address issues upstream.

The speech moved on to explore the challenges of finance, recognising that ESG is built on a need for a financial return. As the market looks for security and opportunities which minimise risk, there is a clamour for existing solutions which do not address the diversity of intervention required. While finance is part of the solution, there is a need to empower champions who are capable of overcoming resistors and speak directly to those who are seeing their standards of life in decline. We need to consider how we act with compassion to help society adjust to change and secure their livelihoods. However, if we wish to build consensus around a more progressive future, we must be able to demonstrate movement and show how they are part of that journey. Katherine closed with a sporting analogy, speaking to the shared response to the Socceroo's in the recent World Cup. Regardless of age, background or ethnicity, there was a shared desire to see success. To find success in a new economy, we must adopt a team mentality which considers how we protect our goals, attacks failing in the current approach, and defends the purpose of the economy as a vehicle to support society.

Moving in to our first panel session, there was a desire to explore how do we "broaden the tent"? Following an introduction from Kelly Clark , we heard from Jakob Hafele who offered a clear indication of the scale of the challenge; conservation estimates believe 1bn people will die as a consequence of climate change. He spoke of the need to reinforce the role of Governments in ensuring life and the need to be joined up in approach rather than fighting each other. Ritse Erumi spoke on the need to place workers at the centre of the economy and how we address long standing inequalities. While there is often an invitation to the table, there is a questions of are their voices being heard? In a broader question, there was a desire to understand, who can offer expertise as we create something which has not existed; we need to build an ecosystem which works for all.

Our final speaker was Tom Brookes who considering the role of communication. He emphasised that we don't win because we are right, but because we are organised. Public opinion is developed through our "tribes" meaning it is possible to change the truth and ask the question of "what do we need to be true"? Sadly the only politics which is seeing growth is that of the right wing as people clamour to go back to what they had. Yet there is a need to confront the reality that going back will not be possible. As the panel came together, there was a shared belief in the need to focus on lived experience and hear the stories of those left behind. There was also a recognition of the need for research to have an impact and engage with an audience e.g. World Bank produces several reports which have never been downloaded (a point raised in my recent RSE summary). As we seek to build trust, we must avoid adding to the noise, and instead listen to what's there.

Our second panel looked to explore how we could move beyond Eurocentrism and avoid repatterning the past. Opening this session, there was a question of who does a post growth economy serve? Our first speaker, Carolina Duque sought to showcase why our new economies should not be built on colonial foundations and needs to avoid the hard wiring of what has come before. Mainstream theory change requires education, yet also a recognition of the violence which has built our current structures. There is a need to break learned habits and work through the illusion that we are somehow separate from the rest of our species. Ashish Kothari asked the audience to understand the structural roots of our current instability. The solutions developed by the gathered audience are those rooted in the problems which have been created. Instead, the global south is creating their own solutions and seeking to take ownership of their economy. Rather than refer to underdeveloped economies, we need to consider what development means.

Ana Gómez (WeAll) recognised that for many in the room, going beyond a Eurocentric solution brings discomfort. In many ways other solutions already exist but we are not listening. As an organisation, WeAll has been supporting the creation of new hubs, but learned that rather than come with solutions, we need to support the development of answers which meet local needs. Bringing together the speakers, there was a renewed call to share stories of success rooted in these communities, helping them reclaim power and address inequalities. There was also the question of how we address the balance between rural and urban development, recognising that most of the conversation is centred on our population centres, rather than those at the edges.

Following a break for lunch, the online event followed the workshop exploring Fiscal Futures, with a discussion between Sofia Hurtado Epstein , Katie Kedward Jean-Letitia Saldanha , Janek Steitz and Sarah-Jayne Clifton . The conversation centred on the question of how we finance a rapid, just transition to a climate safe global economy. There was a shared awareness across contributors that access to finance can mitigate the worst impacts of change. Yet despite being the Global North being the cause of most of the environment damage, the Global South will see most of the impact from the change. There is a question of how "just" can a transition be, when the voice of the South is often not part of the conversation. The International Energy Agency have flagged that there is a need for 4-6% of GDP to be allocated to addressing these challenges globally, and while public finance is largely on the right journey, private sector finance is not following suite.

When considering private finance, there was a question of how do we consider the rate of return and how quickly this is realised. When looked at in the context of third world countries, there is a risk aversion with a lack of patient investment. Even in "developed" economies, the public sector is often taking on the risk of driving change with implications on finance for other societal priorities. Looking at green transition from a financial perspective, there is still a challenge on making a positive business case. Even across academia there is a lack of consensus on how to engage the marketplace. The carbon credit approach has seen 25% of funds channelled in to a single intervention which has brought limited change, yet is used as a tool to justify continuing activity which directly impacts on sustainable development. When countries in the south are provided financial support, there is a concern about the significant conditionality and the burden this places longer term. If we wish to consider our shared future, there is a question of how finance, both from public and private sources, will help provide the momentum required.

The second streamed workshop looked to consider New Economies through the context of AI systems and Big Tech, with a conversation between Naomi Alderman and Rachel Coldicutt . Following introductions, there was a desire to consider the focus of the day and the creation of a new ecosystem. Yet there was a realisation that the majority of IT is designed around our current solutions and making incremental change, rather than addressing the need to propagate the new. As things stand, tech leaders are in many ways king makers, holding power and directing change in a way to reinforce existing norms. They have become the gatekeepers of our info and intelligence e.g. translation services have been trained using publicly owned data. As a society, we have been reinforcing these images, teaching our next generation that these individuals are role models for success; effectively reinforcing problems inherent in our systems. However rather than these issues being a technology problem, they are in fact a political problem which becomes a business problem. We clamour to compete with our neighbours and openly incentivise behaviour which is driven by the individual rather than the community.

With a change of focus, there was a question regarding the benefits of technology for individuals and society. While access to information is to be applauded, there are challenges regarding its ability to fragment society and help build echo chambers, where we only seek out those who reinforce our views. There is also a question of the "power of the button" and the immediacy of progress; we heralded the abolishment of slavery, yet we live in a society where the push of a button offers the delivery of goods by those with the smallest stake in society. However, there are also several opportunities to leverage technology in telling stories which can influence outcomes. While there are risks regarding the loss of control of technology, not everything has to scale to be successful. Sometimes it is about bringing people together and helping them connect in a physical space, or finding a role within society e.g. notion of time banks.

Our final session explored the notion of planetary intelligence and a desire to look beyond a anthropocentric worldview, with contributions from Apolline Roger , Tariq Al-Olaimy , Shritstee Bajpai and Alnoor Ladha . Opening this topic, Tariq asked the audience to recognise that the economy is not a standalone system, and that innovation requires engagement with the natural world. Despite this, we do not consider the 8m species which share this planet as a stakeholder, despite them supporting our life. As we approach COP28, there is a feeling that many countries are still delivering their own solutions and that our reliance on GDP is doing further damage. Alnoor returned to the concept of finance to drive change and recognising that capital acts as both a nutrient and poison in our system. At this point, nature is moving faster than culture, with small incremental moves not sufficient to address the issues which are building up. Shristee asked us to consider our sense of community and how this connects us to the environment. There is a need to identify nature as a living being, with many societies working to co-exist with nature. We must look to understand the notion of place and recognise we are cannot continue to take from a system without factoring in the cost.

In closing the event, we heard from Kelly Clark and Sonny Bardhan , reiterating the sense of imposter syndrome which exists across many of the speakers. While we share a common purpose, we are all learning from each other and seeking a means to coordinate the solutions underway rather than supplant them on others. This event sought to consider how we move from the margins to mainstream, yet this hinges on the need to consider our identity; through head, heart and hand, we are the economy. How do we address our own contribution to the problems faced? Finally there was a rallying call to consider how we reach out to those outside the event and build a consensus for positive change. Society is seeking to retain a sense of normality, yet we are faced with the reality of a constantly changing landscape. We must look to build resilience and provide the truth of what is to come, helping communities own this process.

From margins to mainstream

Moving beyond the motion, seeking out a solution

bringing together voices from across the disciplines.

A need for a destination where we can all arrive.

Yet how do we accommodate those who seek not to debate,

instead agitate and fail to relate to the need for change?

We must create the stories which resonate.

Hearing from those who are gathered here,

yet also those who are near and far.

Far from this discussion.

Far from our thoughts as we build solutions,

without recognising their challenges.

The finance to facilitate a fiscal foundation

which furthers our desire to address failure

is found to be a fa?ade.

Formalising our feeling of needing to facedown our foe.

We explore our links to technology,

as we build our tautology.

The truth shaped by a qualitative quest.

Connecting communities with their shared realities.

Placing value in each other.

While also looking beyond their place.

Considering the ecological enquiry.

The cost considered from consumption as we co-exist.

To move from the margins, we need to stop looking in the Overton window,

and open the door to discussion with those who we may disagree.

Finding our common ground, We All benefit.