Economics

Революция замкнутого потребления

Jan 21, 2014 Frans van Houten

ДАВОС – В шестнадцатом веке астроном Николай Коперник сделал важное открытие о том, что солнце, а не земля, находится в центре известной нам вселенной. И хотя в то время многие осудили открытие Коперника как ересь против установленного христианского учения, разумеется, в конечном счете, революционное открытие Коперника открыло путь к новому, научному мировоззрению и повышению благосостояния человека.

Сегодняшний мир нуждается в аналогичном сдвиге парадигмы. Однако в этот раз речь идет о преобладающей экономической модели, которая должна быть преобразована.

К 2030 году глобальный средний класс составит почти пять миллиардов человек, каждый из которых будет ожидать тех же возможностей и удобств, которыми уже долгое время наслаждаются богатые жители. Это будет оказывать возрастающее давление на окружающую среду и истощать мировые запасы ресурсов.

To continue reading, register now.

Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.

As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.

Already have an account? Log in

PS Events: What Economics is Missing

Our latest event, What Economics is Missing, is now live.

Click the link below for opening remarks from Dani Rodrik, followed by a discussion among Ashwini Deshpande, Raquel Fernández, Minouche Shafik, and Vera Songwe on how to achieve inclusivity in economics.

Watch Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 15 Comments on this article

Afonso Falcão Gomes Jul 4, 2014

The overall concept is very well thought, however it's unfair to state that "The problem is that the world has long maintained a myopic focus on producing and consuming goods as cheaply as possible.". It was not a problem. It is becoming a problem. Cheap products mean that technology is available to more people and life quality improves. And a technology will only mature on top of rudimentary inventions. It was not a myopic vision, it was a vision that is evolving as the scale of this model is shifting and growing.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Peter Blok Feb 8, 2014

Dear Frans van Houten, what an excellent idea. One of the key issues will be ownership. In the field of labor we see a change in ownership too as knowledge, especially tacit knowledge becomes more and more important. The interesting thing is that this type of knowledge is owned by the (knowledge)workers themselves.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Guy Kessels Jan 29, 2014

Dear mr. van Houten,
very encouraging thoughts at which I would like to add one other area where we should act much more sustainable. And that is the way how we employ people. Quite a way to go there also.
- Peter Blok Feb 8, 2014
  
  The way we employ labor might change because knowledge becomes more and more important. The interesting thing is that knowledge, especially tacit knowledge, is owned by the (knowledge)workers. This might lead to completely new labor relations.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Dina Strange Jan 26, 2014

What a great idea. Absolutely love it!
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Gerry Hofman Jan 26, 2014

I suggest the 'circular economy' might find a start with the upcoming new innovation in the automotive industry, the 'self driving' car. Every major manufacturer is committed to putting an autonomous vehicle on the road after 2015, and mid century all premium, new vehicles will be self driving cars. By making these vehicles available for anybody needing transport, the amount of traffic on our roads could be cut in half, and by maximizing their passenger capacity, that traffic could be halved again. The responsibility for the maintenance of such vehicles will remain with the manufacturer, while the individual pays an access fee to purchase a licence to allow for primary use. Further use of the vehicle by 3rd parties would be decided by the vehicles' booking schedule and attract a simple fee paid to the primary user. With schemes like this already being discussed in anticipation of radical product change, it would seem that the development of the circular economy is not a possibility but a certainty.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
MK Anon Jan 26, 2014

Thanks you Mr Van Houten, it is very encouraging to read this, espcially from the CEO of such a big company.

However, the principle of 'renting' doesn't convince me, because you then rent your life. There are many steps towards a circular revolution that can involve ownerhsip. I would be your first costumer if these happen. Here are a few:

1) repairability: most product are impossible to repair. Pieces are almost impossible to get. It could also be "modular' products.. you send the broken piece and get the new one, for a fee.

2) Obviously, this limits inovation. However, you can still have innovation by having 'plugs in'. This is still with the modular idea

3) Mandatory guarantte of many years can be a solution too. In a recent product I bought, I got a 3 years warranty.. which costed as much as half the price of the product !!

4) To avoid trash and promote recycling, some countries tax trash. That doesn't work because many react by burning trash or throwing it in public space.. however, if all these equipment had a price the consumer get back, they would do the effort. Microships can be included in the product to track them for disposal.
It should also be to the producing company to organise the recycling: then products would be conceived in order to minimise recycling costs.

As you say, this must involve consumers, government and the business world. But I think the first impulse must come from the government, because this will not be profitable and no serious company would switch alone to the new model.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Rushil Ram Jan 25, 2014

One example: Instead of allowing poor children in third world countries to expose themselves to hazardous when in an attempt to salvage scrap metal from used electronics, perhaps companies and governments could be more active in organizing this process to allow for better yield and worker safety.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Mridula Ramesh Jan 25, 2014

Sir,
Thank you for an alternate viewpoint. God knows, the world needs it. While the circular revolution, analogous to a symbiotic environment in a natural ecosystem, is alluring, it may not work. We need to consider the fact the use of goods will be outside the ecosystem.
An alternate suggestion is to consider full costs - the ecological costs of doing business are not considered because "it is not our problem". Effects of global warming are likely to be felt most by either those not involved in generating the bulk of emissions or by our children, who are not making decisions today. If however, your organization could publish what is would cost to make, say a microwave, wherein there is no increase in an environmental footprint, or better still a reduction in the footprint, and take that price onto the world, and ask customers: "Are you willing to pay for that?". I think that would be a basis for a rich discussion, and hopefully lead to a meaningful change.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Kir Komrik Jan 24, 2014

There are two key elisions from this article I'd like to address.

First, the statement that,
"Sustaining the current model would require unlimited, easily accessible resources and infinite space for waste – something that clearly is not possible."
is scientifically, objectively and categorically wrong. Those that hold this view are still locked into the view that anything beyond Earth is science fiction. It is not. It is high capitalization to develop the technologies necessary, but it is not outside our technological grasp at all. And it can be made very actuarially sound, in the same way that dozens of 5 billion dollar deep sea rigs are bought and made profitable.

The second lacunae has to do with the vagueness of the principle. I have proposed a Public Trust that does much the same thing. The difference however, is that it doesn't allow capitalists, governments or the privileged to own everything then "lease" it to everyone else, which is slavery. And I think that is what this article is propounding. Rather, we need a Public Trust separate from government but established by constitutional law which is accessed and maintained by public fiduciaries who are elected.

The ideas in this article, if I understand the proposal clearly, are as dangerous as those of Anne-Marie Slaughter who advocates a secret, unaccountable world government with no Constitution or institutions by which the public can hold anyone to account.
What we have now is barbaric and backward and cannot scale, as the author and many others are finally now beginning to realize. In fact, capitalism itself doesn't scale. Big problem. There is so much privilege tied to capitalism I believe these TWO points I've made will be the primary determinants of whether humanity as we know it survives or not.
I hope humanity chooses wisely and has the insight to see proposals from this article for what they are.
- kk
- Rushil Ram Jan 25, 2014
  
  Your first point itself is a dangerous idea. You are essentially arguing that instead of addressing short term environmental issues related to resource depletion, innovation will solve the problem itself. I agree that we may develop the technology to address the issue, but it is crucial we proactively solve these problems before they become a threat to human safety.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Claudio Migliore Jan 23, 2014

Dear Mr. Van Houten,
I read your article with full interest. I am, probably more than most consumers, happy to own and use long lasting products with high long term utility at the expense of higher upfront investment. Owning several of your company's products however, I get the impression that most of them emphasise flashy design and superficial innovation at the expense of long term utility. For instance, my love affair with your electric shavers(handed down from my late father) has been deteriorating over the last few years, as newer one are ever more futuristic while less effective.
I hope your leadership takes your company down the path you describe, although unfortunately I only plan to be a potential client of yours for a small fraction of your five hundred year planning horizon.
- Rushil Ram Jan 25, 2014
  
  Look no further than the newest wifi-equipped refrigerators to understand that what you describe is an economy-wide trend. Planned obsolescence, while necessary for innovation, has diminishing marginal returns which we are beginning to see now.
  Perhaps with the global surplus of labor, it will become more efficient and sustainable to design products that are built to last and cheap to service and maintain.
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Zsolt Hermann Jan 22, 2014

I fully agree with the writer, but the paradigm shift has to be much more fundamental.
It is our own human nature that needs adjusting, adapting to the surrounding and governing natural system before we attempt any structural changes otherwise we will continue our failed experiments the same way, with the same result.
And such fundamental human change has to be based on positive motivation, not on coercion, trickery or scare tactics as otherwise again it will not work,
And the only way of achieving a fundamental, almost "super-natural" change in ourselves is through education for the young and for the adult at the same time. We need to change our complete operating software from subjective, individualistic to objective, mutual and collective.
We have all the necessary transparent, scientific information, and the practical data from the daily events of the crisis and from previous human social experiments, we simply have to put the program together and implement it, so we can truly break through into a circular existence from our present linear, fragmented, polarized one.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Paul Ross Jan 21, 2014

I wish you could hear me clapping, Mr. Van Houten. I will do my best to support your vision by looking for your products in preference over those who do not share your vision.

Thank you for being a breath of fresh air in the business world.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/U5kPQbtru

Революция замкнутого потребления

PS Events: What Economics is Missing

New Comment

Contact us

Log in/Register

Революция замкнутого потребления

PS Events: What Economics is Missing

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification