[Graeme]

Will New Zealand be the first developed country to evolve a steady-state economy?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')ew Zealand will inevitably make a transition to a steady-state economy. The onset of energy descent — having less and less energy to use with each passing decade — will push it to do so sooner rather than later. The critical question is whether the transition to a steady-state economy will be by design or disaster.

It is a safe prediction that New Zealand will eventually develop a steady-state economy, one characterised by stable or mildly fluctuating levels in population and consumption of energy and materials, with birth rates on par with death rates, and production on par with depreciation, all within levels of material throughput that do not exceed ecological limits.[1]

This is the inevitable outcome for all nations whether they set this goal or not. The reality of a steady-state economy will be determined in the end by non-negotiable natural laws rather than government edicts. How well human needs will be met in this process will be determined by whether we accept the challenge of ensuring our policies and practices are compatible with these natural laws. If they are, we have some chance of evolving a desirable steady-state economy that meets human needs into the foreseeable future — the good design scenario. If we continue policies which violate these natural laws we will also get to a steady-state economy — but one which is so degraded that it provides little output for human wellbeing — the disaster scenario.

[kiwichick]

birth rates on par with death rates?

[Lore]

No such thing. They're talking about the fantasy of a perpetual motion machine.

[SeaGypsy]

Ever heard that the virtually all one way migration from NZ to the big island west of there increases the average IQ of both countries? This morning I heard a story from NZ the economists there are very worried that if anything happens to collapse tourism, their whole economy goes down the gurgler.

On the other hand the place does have a lot going for it, good volcanic soils, plenty of water and a fairly tough population.

[Lore]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'T')his morning I heard a story from NZ the economists there are very worried that if anything happens to collapse tourism, their whole economy goes down the gurgler.

[yeahbut]

Will NZ be the 1st country to evolve a steady state economy?

Not if the voting public of NZ has any say in the matter. We have just re-elected a conservative govt even more hostile to issues of sustainability and sensible long-term planning than the previous "left-wing" (yeah right!) Labour govt.

A rather more relevant couple of paragraphs from the same article:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')ew Zealand’s geographic isolation will be a major factor in its experience of energy descent. A relatively small market at the far end of the energy supply chain, New Zealand is particularly vulnerable to both reduced supplies and high energy prices — one of the easiest customers to drop in favour of larger, closer and more lucrative markets. A market-driven energy decline could be both unexpected and abrupt.

A serious danger is that New Zealand will increase its foreign debt to maintain energy and other vital supplies. The ensuing debt slavery would quickly erode the nation’s autonomy and accelerate the depletion of its natural resources. New Zealand’s natural endowments may attract imperial powers willing to use both economic and military advantages to secure its resources for their own use. This “disaster” path to a steady-state economy will enrich a few in the short term but devastate New Zealand’s land, impoverish its people and ensure a bleak future for generations to come. Unless it is challenged, the current growth-oriented political mindset, influenced as it is by wealthy vested interests, will see this course vigorously pursued.

There is an exciting and inspiring alternative to this negative scenario: New Zealand appreciates that it will be the first developed country to seriously suffer from energy descent and prepares accordingly.

[kiwichick]

did the greens get 11% of the vote in the last election?


and who are the 18 - 24 's voting for?

[AgentR11]

Sounds good, but I wouldn't bet on it. You have a neighbor that is much to close who would love to sell you as much coal as you could ever possibly manage to burn.

I'd say, as long as Australia is exporting coal, NZ has no chance of achieving and remaining at steady state.

[ralfy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AIppqNePdM

[AgentR11]

ralfy's vid link worth clicking.
Very Funny!

[yeahbut]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AgentR11', 'r')alfy's vid link worth clicking.
Very Funny!

[Serial_Worrier]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yeahbut', 'N')ot if the voting public of NZ has any say in the matter. We have just re-elected a conservative govt even more hostile to issues of sustainability and sensible long-term planning than the previous "left-wing" (yeah right!) Labour govt.

[Serial_Worrier]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('kiwichick', 'd')id the greens get 11% of the vote in the last election?


and who are the 18 - 24 's voting for?

[yeahbut]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Serial_Worrier', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yeahbut', 'N')ot if the voting public of NZ has any say in the matter. We have just re-elected a conservative govt even more hostile to issues of sustainability and sensible long-term planning than the previous "left-wing" (yeah right!) Labour govt.

[Serial_Worrier]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yeahbut', 'T')here is simply no question that the Nats are even further away from seriously considering the kinds of issues raised in the article in the OP than Labour were. But not much. Like most countries, apart from social policy you can barely get a cigarette paper between the two main parties these days.

[yeahbut]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Serial_Worrier', 'W')hen both sides dehumanize each other, there can't be any real progress towards our mutual goal which is sustainability.

[Serial_Worrier]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yeahbut', 'N')ot sure where you get "dehumanize" from SW. My post was simply pointing out that I don't see any trend in the voting public towards sustainability, quite the opposite. The National party won an historic victory in the Nov '11 elections, with one of the biggest percentage wins in its history(altho there was a pitifully low voter turn out), on a platform that was not notable for it's long-term sustainability plans.

[kiwichick]

hi sw

yes of course it is natural to assume that

and you will probably be right, to a degree

until the sh@t hits the fan

and then all bets are off

i'd suggest that at least a percentage of the population will support the political party that is shown to be closest to reality

of course the opposite might also be true

[kiwichick]

sw

don't know anybody in their right mind wishing for a dieoff

however that is extremly likely unless we start facing up to reality

as james lovelock has stated the sustainable population level is probably less than 1 billion.... and possibly a lot less

[kiwichick]

agent r 11

nz is already producing 70% of it's electricity from renewables and aiming for 100%

they can easily go to 100% with more geothermal and adding wave or solar

one of nz's biggest assets is that it is hundreds of kilometres from the nearest land

however it's economy has a large % of tourism in it and that will collapse