GEOG 352: Natural and Human Capital

Days 9-10: Chapters 6-7

Agenda for Today See the folder for details about the Rex Weyler talk on

Feb. 12. Also: tomorrow night Paul Manly’s new documentary – You, Me, and the S.P.P. – will be showing at the Theatre at 7, with a preview showing at 2:30 in Building 356, Room 109.

A reminder that VIU is offering a two-hour webinar on how to move an institution towards greenhouse gas neutrality next Thursday from 10 to noon. Let me know if you are interested.

We have two book presenters today: Alan and Tracy. I would like to discuss the idea of doing a field trip –

where and when – some more. Afterwards I would like to discuss Porritt.

Porritt- Chapter 6: '5 Capitals'

“Although it is true that many environmentalists and social justice campaigners remain wary of getting sucked too deep into the working practices and language of capitalism, the premise behind the idea of the Five Capitals Framework is that we can't reform capitalism without adopting some of its insights.” Do you agree with this? He acknowledges that some people fear that this will merely further the commodification of people and nature. What do you think?

He also suggests that “there is no inherent, fixed or non-negotiable aspect of capitalism in general... that renders it for all incompatible with the pursuit of a sustainable society.” Do you agree/ disagree?

Porritt- Chapter 6: '5 Capitals' Porritt says that the core of capitalism is the economic

concept of capital. “Capital is a stock of anything that has the ability to generate a flow of benefits which are valued by humans.”

Traditionally, economists and others have conceived of capital in terms of land, machines, and money. However, the model adopted by Porritt for purposes of moving towards a sustainable economy and society involves five distinct, but overlapping, forms of capital. Financial and manufactured capital are familiar, as is human capital, though in the watered down form of ‘human resources.’ Natural and social capital have only been theoretically and practically acknowledged in the past few decades.

The Five Capitals

He argues that of these five, natural capital is the preconditions for the others. Do you agree?

We will get into social capital in Chapter 9, but initially his definition is somewhat narrow, but he broadens it out later on. For him social capital is mainly about how in functioning in groups, with division of labour and specialization, people can be more productive and creative, but then he adds other aspects.

Beyond that he argues that, ultimately, all forms of capital derive from natural capital (powered by solar energy) and from human capital (the potential of our bodies, minds, and spirits).

Chapter 7: Natural Capital He reiterates that natural capital can be classified into

three categories: resources- renewable and non-renewable; sinks- absorbing, neutralizing and recycling wastes,

and services- such as climate regulation. He cites Herman Daly to the effect that, in the past,

man-made capital was the limiting factor (nature was seemingly unlimited), and it made sense to maximize economic productivity, but now nature is the limiting factor, and making optimal use of scarce resources means something quite different.

Chapter 7: Natural Capital

He makes an important distinction between keeping natural capital absolutely intact and what Paul Ekins has characterized as “the maintenance of critical environmental functions.... Manufactured capital is a substitute for natural capital if performs the same environmental functions as natural capital,” but only if. What are some examples, and what are the ethical and practical implications?

His mention that Norway and Alaska set aside money from the exploitation of non-renewable fossil fuels to develop renewable alternatives is an interesting one, and somewhat in line with a suggestion by H. Daly.

Chapter 7: Natural Capital

We have already discussed the estimated monetary value of ecosystem services, and he gives more statistics on the underappreciated value of biodiversity and the benefits of conservation.

We will largely have to defer the discussion of human and social capital 'til next time, but his definition of human capital is “the physical, intellectual, emotional and spiritual capacities of any individual.”

Do you think this definition makes sense, and what are some of the ways that our current social order both squelches and facilitates the expression of this capital? [And what about utilitarianism more generally, something we got into last time?]

Chapter 7: Social Capital

In Chapter 9, Porritt offers a fuller definition of social capital as “good networks, trust, shared initiatives and solidarity – the ‘social glue’ that keeps things bound together, often in the teeth of increasingly ‘atomized’ lifestyles…”

Two questions: 1) in what ways does capitalism itself, as competitive as it sometimes is, depend on social capital? and 2) how well do we rate here on the West Coast in terms of social capital, and how does it affect our daily lives (maybe think, by contrast, with societies which have very low degrees of social capital).

Chapter 7: Social Capital

Robert Putnam makes a distinction between bridging and bonding social capital – the former encompassing people from different social groups, and the letter involving intra-group solidarity. Some people also talk about linking social capital – between people of differing levels of influence or social status.

Two qualifiers are that sometimes bonding social capital can lead to parochialism and social exclusion, and that sometimes high levels of trust and civic engagement are possible when there is greater homogeneity. At the same time, city folks are often more tolerant, but lack the deep social linkages that people in smaller communities may possess. The latter may lack the spatially expansive links.

Chapter 7: Social Capital

See the list in this chapter of indicators/ measures of social capital. How well would you guess that we in Nanaimo score on some of these?

In this chapter, he also summarizes some of the claims made for the possible benefits for higher social capital:

facilitates higher GDP facilitates the job market facilitates educational attainment contributes to lower crime rates leads to better health improves the effectiveness of government. In general it can be said that sustainability is impossible

without high social capital. Why?

Chapter 7: Manufactured and Financial Capital

I’m not going to say much about these. Manufactured capital brings in the whole issue of

technology and whether it will save us (at least in part), or whether it is the problem (at least in part).

He cites Paul Ehrlich’s formula that environmental impact is a product of population X per capita consumption X the efficiency of technology.

Will manufactured capital someday go beyond the make, use, dispose model and take on the characteristics of biomimickry advocated by Janine Benyus and William McDonough (e.g. waste = food, etc.)?

The only thing I will say about financial capital is that there are many proposals for the radical reform of our current financial system, especially in light of the current crisis.