Will the End of Economic Growth Come by Design — or Disaster? | Gaya Herrington | TED

翻译人员: Lening Xu 校对人员: Sue Lu

Let’s contemplate the word “enough,”

让我们考虑一下 “足够” 这个词，

because I think it will play an important role going forward.

我认为它将在未来发挥重要作用。

When I watch the news or scroll my feeds,

看新闻或浏览社交媒体时，

I keep coming back to the same questions.

我会不断回到同样的问题。

Why, despite all our knowledge and innovation,

尽管有种种知识和创新，

do problems like poverty and pollution keep plaguing humanity?

为什么贫困和污染等问题 仍然困扰着人类？

Why, despite astonishing advances

尽管可再生能源和资源效率进步惊人，

in renewable energy and resource efficiency,

is fossil fuel use at an all-time high,

为什么化石燃料的使用量仍创历史新高，

as is our global ecological footprint?

我们的全球生态足迹也是如此？

And why, despite being responsible for the main part of that footprint,

尽管富裕国家 对生态足迹负有主要责任，

have rich countries been experiencing stagnating,

为什么其福祉却停滞不前，

if not decreasing, well-being?

甚至有所下降？

I'm a sustainability researcher with a background in econometrics,

我是一名可持续发展研究员， 具有计量经济学背景，

and I believe the answer lies in the fact

我相信答案就在于，

that solving poverty, caring for nature or fostering well-being

解决贫困、关爱自然或促进福祉

is not the ultimate goal of our current economic system.

并不是我们当前经济体系的最终目标。

Its goal is growth.

它的目标是增长。

Many take this for granted.

许多人认为这是理所当然的，

But growth wasn't considered a moral goal for most of history.

但历史上大部分时期里， 增长并不被视为道德目标。

It was only officially measured

直到上个世纪中叶左右 才正式开始用 GDP 衡量增长。

around the middle of last century

through GDP.

It then shifted into the core of our economic thinking

然后，它转变为我们经济思维的核心，

and from there into policymaking and our collective psyche.

开始影响决策和我们的集体心理。

Growth became synonymous with progress.

增长成为进步的代名词。

Things went fast after that.

之后事情进展得很快。

Extinction rates went up, resource use and waste exploded.

灭绝率上升， 资源使用和浪费激增。

Some warned early on about the dangers of exponential growth on a finite planet.

有人很早就警告过 在有限的地球上指数增长的危险。

In 1972, a team of MIT scientists

1972 年，麻省理工学院的一组科学家

created a first-of-its-kind world model

创建了首个此类世界模型，

consisting of over 200 interconnected variables.

由超过 200 个相互关联的变量组成。

With it, they analyzed the question I mentioned earlier:

通过模型，他们分析了 我之前提到的问题：

why problems like poverty and pollution persist.

为什么贫困和污染等问题仍然存在。

They published a book on their findings called "The Limits to Growth,"

他们出版了《增长的极限》一书， 介绍他们的研究结果，

in which they warned that continuing the business-as-usual growth pursuit

书中警告说， 继续追求“一切照常”的增长

would lead to societal breakdown,

将导致社会崩溃，

setting in around now.

这种崩溃已经开始显现了。

Breakdown doesn't mean the end of humanity,

崩溃并不意味着人类的终结，

but a steep decline in well-being nonetheless.

但却意味着福祉的急剧下降。

The book was a bestseller, but you may have never heard of it.

这本书成为畅销书， 但你可能从未听说过。

The authors were derided as doomsayers

书作者被嘲笑为末日论者，

and their message, over time, buried.

随着时间的推移， 书中传递的信息也被掩没了。

A few years back, I compared their now decades-old projections

几年前，我将他们几十年前的预测

with what's happened since.

与此后的现实进行了比较。

I found empirical data closely aligning

我发现实证数据

with the model's business-as-usual scenario,

与该模型 “一切照常” 的 假设情景非常吻合。

which shows growth grinding to a halt around 2040 or so,

该情景显示，增长在 2040 年左右 停滞不前，随后出现急剧下降，

followed by steep declines

in things like food production and well-being.

主要是在粮食产量和福祉等方面。

My analysis also revealed that this breakdown could be avoided

我的分析还显示，崩溃可以避免，

by letting go of the growth pursuit

只要放弃对增长的追逐，

and redirecting resources to meet human needs

将资源用于满足人类需求

and protect nature directly.

和直接保护自然。

This indicates that what we do in the next few years

这表明，我们在未来几年的所作所为

will determine our well-being for the rest of this century.

将决定本世纪余下时间的福祉。

And this now-or-never moment in history is up to us.

而这个历史上机不可失的时刻 取决于我们。

Technology by itself will not save us,

科技本身并不能拯救我们，

despite aspirational talks of decoupling,

尽管人们对脱钩进行了 雄心勃勃的讨论，

the idea that the economy can grow

即经济增长，

without resource use and pollution growing along with it.

可以不使用资源，也不造成污染增加。

There's no decoupling,

脱钩并不现实，

certainly not for a full impact on the Earth.

很难对地球造成全面影响。

Raw materials consumption has been around 1.2 kilograms per dollar GDP

20 年来，每 1 美元 GDP 消耗的原材料量约为 1.2 公斤，

for two decades,

while biodiversity loss, water scarcity, plastic pollution are all worsening.

同时生物多样性的丧失、 水资源短缺、塑料污染都在恶化。

But even just considering carbon emissions,

但是，即使仅考虑碳排放 （每美元 GDP 的碳排放量有所下降），

which per dollar GDP have decreased,

sufficient, absolute decoupling,

我们所需的充分、绝对的脱钩，

which is what we'd need,

is nowhere in the data.

并未在数据中呈现。

Our choice isn't whether to keep growing or not.

我们的选择并非是否继续增长，

It's whether the end of growth will come by design or disaster.

而是增长的终结 是设计好的还是灾难造成的。

Either we choose our own limits,

我们要么自我设限，

or we'll have them forced upon us.

要么被迫接受限制。

Now that humankind has reached global, unparalleled power,

现在，人类已经拥有 无与伦比的全球力量，

“Limits to Growth” confronts us with a question we’ve never faced before:

《增长的极限》提出 一个我们从未遇到的问题：

Who do we want to be,

我们想成为谁，

and what world do we want to live in?

我们想生活在怎样的世界里？

Here's where "enough" comes in.

这就是 “足够了” 的用武之地。

If I were to describe the mantra we need in the 21st century with one word,

如果我用一个词来描述 21 世纪我们需要的信条，

it would be "enough."

那就是 “足够了”。

"Enough" as in "no more." This is the limit.

“足够了” 就是 “不能再多了”， 这就是极限。

Say, a planetary boundary.

比如说，地球边界。

And enough as in "sufficient,"

“足够了”也是“充足”的意思，

juxtaposing it to this exhausting grind for ever more

与其继续这筋疲力尽的劳作 为自己获取更多，

and instead invoking a notion of sharing, as in "enough for each."

不如取而代之唤起共享的理念， 即实现“每个人都有足够的”。

I believe the only realistic plan to avoid breakdown

我认为，避免崩溃并维持 全球福祉的唯一可行计划，

and maintain global well-being

lies in this mindset shift

要靠这种观念体系的转变，

from "never enough" to "enough for each."

即从 “永远不够” 到 “每个人都有足够的”。

Change the goal of our economic system

将我们经济体系的目标

from growth to human and ecological well-being.

从增长转向人类和生态福祉。

A well-being economy.

福祉经济

What would that look like?

会是什么样子？

We have an idea because we already pretend that's what we have.

我们有所了解， 因为我们已经假装拥有它了。

No vision statement reads:

没有任何愿景会这么写：

"A world where growth perpetuates at all costs indefinitely."

“在这个世界里， 我们不惜一切代价 永无止境地追逐增长。”

It talks about how this organization contributes to society,

它通常写的都是 这个组织如何为社会做出贡献，

because that's what we feel it should do.

因为我们觉得应该那样写。

In a well-being economy,

在福祉经济中，

business activities, government policies and citizen behavior

商业活动、政府政策和公民行为

are aimed at meeting our physical, social and spiritual needs

旨在满足我们在地球范围内 物质、社会和精神的需求。

within planetary boundaries.

It doesn't mean we're anti-growth,

这并不意味着我们反对增长，

it just means we're more selective about it.

这只是意味着我们对此 更具选择性。

We differentiate between what should and should not grow,

我们区分哪些应该或不应该增长，

depending on whether it contributes to well-being.

取决于其是否有助于福祉。

This implies different pathways towards a well-being economy

这意味着走向福祉经济的途径，

for low- and high-income countries.

在低收入和高收入国家有所不同。

At small material footprints,

在物质足迹很小的情况下，

growth more often correlates with well-being,

增长往往与福祉相关，

including through poverty reduction.

包括减少贫困。

So poorer countries below their share of Earth’s carrying capacity

因此，低于其地球承载力份额的较穷国家

may still need green growth,

可能仍需要绿色增长，

economic expansion driven by clean technologies.

即由清洁技术推动的经济扩张。

In richer countries, what has decoupled from growth is happiness,

在较富裕的国家， 与增长脱钩的是幸福，

so they can and should focus on reducing ecological footprints

因此它们可以而且应该 专注于将生态足迹减少到

to sustainable levels

可持续水平，

while safeguarding everyone's livelihood

同时通过更加平等地分享 来保障每个人的生计。

by sharing more equally.

Let me stress because I hear this misconception a lot.

让我强调一下—— 因为我经常听到这种误解

Decentering growth doesn’t mean shrinking the economy until it crashes.

——去中心化增长并不是 萎缩经济直到经济崩溃，

It means reducing our environmental impact

它是指减少我们对环境的影响，

to within a safe operating space for life as we know it.

让我们的生命拥有安全生存的空间。

That's not going back to a poorer past.

这不是回到糟糕的过去。

That's changing the forward direction away from a cliff.

而是改变前进方向，远离悬崖。

We'll still have houses with fridges,

我们依然拥有带冰箱的房子、

good schools, health care, profitable businesses.

好的学校、医疗保健和盈利的企业。

We'll go to jobs and parties.

我们仍会去工作和聚会。

But social norms and economic dynamics will change.

但是社会规范 和经济动态将发生变化。

We'll redefine what has value or what work we call productive.

我们将重新定义哪些有价值 或哪些工作富有成效。

With our needs securely met,

当我们的需求得到保障时，

this trade-off between social and environmental benefits,

这种社会和环境利益之间的权衡——

which we often take as given, dissolves.

通常被认为是理所当然的—— 就不复存在了。

Sharing more equally means less income and wealth inequality,

更平等的分享意味着 更少的收入和财富不平等，

improving social cohesion

从而提高社会凝聚力，

and reducing wasteful, conspicuous consumption.

减少浪费、炫耀性消费。

Efficiency gains are used to work less instead of produce more.

提高效率是为了减少工作量， 而不是增加产量。

By not pursuing growth at all costs,

由于不再倾其所有追求增长，

we can avoid a lot of costs,

我们可以避免大量开销，

like all the expenditure on health care and cleanups due to pollution.

例如污染造成的所有 医疗保健和清洁支出。

Moving to a post-growth society isn't choosing permanent recession.

转向“后增长”社会 并不是选择永久性衰退,

It's flexing our free will to change our notion of prosperity

而是运用我们的自由意志，

将繁荣的观念从“更多”变为“更好”。

from ever more to better.

How probable is this economic transformation?

这种经济转型的可能性有多大？

It's feasible. That's half the answer.

它是可行的。 这就是答案的一半。

We know what promotes well-being.

我们知道什么能促进福祉。

In fact, policies like zero tolerance on child poverty

实际上，对儿童贫困零容忍

or GDP alternatives

或 GDP 替代方案等政策

are exchanged already in WIEGO,

已经在一个自称为 福祉政府的联盟（WIEGO）中广泛交流。

a partnership of self-proclaimed well-being governments.

Dozens of cities are piloting post-growth frameworks

数十个城市正在试行“后增长”框架，

to operate within explicit social and environmental boundaries,

在明确的社会和环保界限内运作，

with practices like universal basic incomes.

采用全民基本收入等做法。

I love how companies that put people and planet legally above profit

我喜欢看到那些将大众和地球 合法地置于利润之上的公司，

generate billions each year.

每年还能创造数十亿美元的收入；

How communities are taking back stewardship of their commons

看到社区收回对公共资源的管理权， 通过合作社的形式和对可再生能源、

with co-ops and renewable energy,

water or food.

水或食物的管理；

Or how recent experiments with shorter workweeks for the same pay

看到最近的实验—— 缩短工作周但工资不变，

were so successful that most of those companies made it permanent.

是如此的成功 以至于大多数公司将其永久化。

We also have the technological capabilities,

我们还具备技术能力，

which will be pivotal, once directed towards the right goal.

一旦将其引向正确的目标， 将能发挥至关重要的作用。

This redirection is indispensable.

这种重新定向必不可少。

But of course, I'm regularly told the techno-optimist argument

当然，技术乐观主义者经常告诉我，

that it's not.

事实并非如此。

And I always respond.

而我总是这样回应。

Let's say we could replace the dying bee colonies

假设我们可以用机器人授粉器 取代垂死的蜂群。

with robot pollinators.

Why do that if we can also advance regenerative agriculture,

那为什么不推进再生农业呢？

which doesn't cause insecticide?

它不需要杀虫剂。

Why dedicate our innovative powers to tree-planting drones

为什么要把我们的创新能力 耗在植树无人机上？

when we can also use that thinking

既然可以用这种思维重新设计经济， 让现有的森林不会遭到砍伐。

to redesign our economy so that existing forest isn't cut down?

And that brings me to the other half of the answer,

这使我想到了答案的另一半，

to how probable a well-being economy is.

即福祉经济的可能性有多大。

It's promise.

这关乎承诺。

We'd have less stuff, but more of what we need.

我们会拥有更少的物质， 但更多我们需要的东西。

Connection.

关乎连接。

Maintaining a sense of community and purpose is hard

保持社区意识和目标感很难，

in this current economic system,

尤其是在当前的经济体系中。

which treats us as selfish, never satisfied consumers.

因为这种体系将我们视为自私、 从不满足的消费者。

Research shows we're not just capable of caring for life,

研究表明，我们不仅能够关爱生命，

we derive joy and meaning from it.

还能从中获得快乐和意义。

We can't be truly happy unless those around us thrive too.

除非身边的人也能茁壮成长， 否则我们不可能真正快乐。

This economic transformation

这种经济转型 并不是对严峻需求的妥协。

wouldn't be a capitulation to grim necessity.

We'd want to do it even if we were not facing ecosystem collapse,

即使没有面临生态系统崩溃， 我们也想这样做，

because a well-being economy fits much better who we want to be

因为福祉经济更 适合我们想要成为的人，

and a world we long to live in.

也更适合我们渴望生活的世界。

So we started with these global problems

因此，我们从这些全球问题开始，

and found that changing our economic system is imperative,

发现改变我们的经济体系势在必行，

but also feasible.

而且也是可行的。

And no sacrifice,

不需做出任何牺牲，

but simply a letting go of what's no longer serving us

只需放下不再有益的东西，

to find belonging in a post-growth world of embraced interdependence.

在相互依存的后增长世界中 找到归属感。

If that sounds spiritual, that's what a well-being economy delivers.

如果这听起来像是精神上的， 那就是福祉经济所带来的。

Physical sufficiency, social abundance and spiritual wealth,

物质充足、社会富足和精神富有，

including the peace of mind that this prosperity can last.

包括这种繁荣可以持久 所带来的内心安宁。

Thank you.

谢谢。

(Applause)

（掌声）

Logan McClure Davda: Thank you, Gaya.

洛根·麦克卢尔·达夫达： 谢谢你，盖亚（Gaya）。

So you spoke tonight about broader economic transformation.

今晚你谈到了更广泛的经济转型。

But what can we as individuals do?

但是，作为个人，我们能做什么？

Gaya Herrington: Yes. You have to find your unique influence in the system.

盖亚·赫林顿：是的， 你必须找到自己在系统中的独特影响力。

So that starts by changing the system's narrative.

首先要改变系统的一贯说法。

We've been told the story of separation.

我们听到的总是分崩离析的讲述，

We are selfish, violent beings, doomed to exploit our commons,

说我们是自私、暴力的生物， 注定要剥削大家共有的财富，

so the best thing we can hope for then is technology to save us.

所以最好的出路 就是指望科技拯救人类。

So you would have to start by working from a different narrative:

因此，你得从完全不同的讲述开始：

the story of interdependence,

这是个相互依存的故事， 因为我们是大自然的一部分。

in which we are nature.

Once our needs are securely met,

一旦我们的需求得到保障，

we rejoice in contributing to this web of life

我们就会欣然为 我们共同的生命网络做出贡献。

that we're all part of.

So you talk about bringing it back to the personal level.

所以你说的在个人层面作出努力，

That's actually very emotional work. It's deeply personal.

这实际上是非常感性的工作， 非常具个人意义。

But of course, it cannot stay there.

当然，它不能停留于此。

So then the next step is to build out this new narrative

所以，下一步是建立这种新的叙事、理念，

要在系统结构中进行。

in the system's structures.

And that very much depends on where you are.

这在很大程度上取决于你所处的位置。

If you're in a corporation,

如果你在公司工作，

look into regenerative business models.

可以考虑再生商业模式。

If you're in government, look into well-being government policies.

如果你在政府任职， 可以审视政府的福利政策。

If you're an investor, see if you can transition

如果你是投资者，看看是否可以转型，

from ESG assessments, which are relative,

从相对的 ESG（环保、社会与治理）评估

to the absolute assessments against social foundations

过渡到针对社会基础

and planetary boundaries.

和地球边界的绝对评估。

If you're an entrepreneur, look into employee ownership.

如果你是企业家，请考虑员工持股。

Everyone, citizens, buy at not-for-profit companies.

各位，请在非营利公司购物。

See if community solar makes sense for you.

还有，看看社区太阳能是否适合你。

So there's so many things that you can do, but it very much depends on where you are.

因此，你可以做的事很多， 但很大程度上取决于你所处位置。

不过我可以提供一个通用的建议，

But there is one general piece of advice that I can give,

and that's: work together.

那就是：共同努力。

And remember that systems change

请记住，系统变革不是线性的。

is not linear.

人们起初是非常零散地努力着，

People do this very disjointedly at first,

and then over time they build connections

然后随着时间推移，他们建立起联系，

until a critical minority mass is reached,

直到达到关键的少数群体规模，

typically around 25 percent or so.

通常为 25％ 左右。

And only then does the majority come along

只有这时，大多数人才会跟随，

because the system change becomes self-reinforcing.

因为系统变革会自我强化。

Now there's no guarantee that that will happen

没人能保证 我提议的经济转型一定会发生，

for the economic transformation that I'm proposing,

but if it does, it will have been because people like you

但如果发生了， 那是因为像你们这样的人，

that are gathered here today

今天在座的各位， 以独特方式为经济变革做出了贡献。

contributed to that change in their own unique way.

So thank you for listening.

因此，感谢大家的聆听。

LMD: Thank you, Gaya.

LMD：谢谢你，盖亚。

(Applause)

（掌声）