I just came inside from going outside to hang laundry. The wind is blowing, should dry in an hour, no energy use. Birds entertained me the entire time. Three species of woodpeckers, cardinals, tufted titmice, some unidentified warblers, mockingbirds sowing confusion about identification, catbirds, brown thrashers, chickadees, wrens, sparrows (three species), robins, blue jays and blue birds. Sufficiency is fun, as is electric biking (too many hills here for commuting on a regular bike). Your vision of the future not dominated by stuff is much more palatable than the abundance. Who needs it when you are surrounded by life?
Your posts always give me hope. They also reinforce my inclination to make do with what I have, and to encourage others to do that same. Thank you. Please continue.
Thank you for sharing such thoughtful and provocative reflections, Lloyd.
Language-wise, sufficiency feels like a hard sell. It sounds even less appealing than sustainability. No one aspires to a "sufficient" life — it doesn’t capture the imagination.
Abundance feels more aspirational, but I agree with James that the focus should shift away from material abundance and toward abundance of experience, connection, health, and beauty — things that often require fewer resources, not more.
Maybe that’s a way to frame it: abundance as the goal, and harmony — even sufficiency? — as the strategy. Abundance in life outcomes, enabled by a more balanced material world.
I was going to say this same thing. I’m in Argentina and the current government (our president gifted Elon Musk a government-prunning chainsaw 🫠) won sparking the imagination with growth and freedom. Previous governments were criticized of “pobristas” (something like “povertist”) for promoting suffiency and communitarian ideas.
Even for me, though I embrace forms of suffiency in my life and believe in public services, I don’t want to go back to working the land, and I don’t think people in general want that either.
So more is in fact appealing, even in terms of evolution (human beings have a force forward). But of course we need to go forth within planetary boundaries. I think doughnut economics, circularity and growth through regeneration are easier to sell ideas for environmentalism. In that way Abundance hits a good spot (and maybe people will get to suffiency when they’ve experienced that having it all doesn’t really cure existential problems 😂)
>> I’m in Argentina and the current government (our president gifted Elon Musk a government-prunning chainsaw 🫠) won sparking the imagination with growth and freedom...Previous governments were criticized of “pobristas” (something like “povertist”) for promoting suffiency and communitarian ideas.
What I have been saying for years -> Freedom first! The ability to succeed and not settle for "Be less, have less".
"Povertist" - I've not seen this word before so I'm going to add it to my vocabulary - thanks! And you are right, very few people want to live in poverty and most people aren't willing to accede to the strictures and shortcomings of having communitarianism set heavy on their shoulders. That's one reason why my constant refrain here (and back at TreeHugger) is how will you impose that (your given and self-chosen lifestyle) on others without force?
And I'm quite sure that it was imposed in Argentina for decades. And when Milieu stepped out with a message that grabbed peoples' attention and hearts, they went for it and threw off their governmental chains.
I absolutely agree with the need for sufficiency. Technology hasn't reduced our absolute energy and material consumption (Jevons paradox), and more wealth hasn't made us happier. I can imagine the word Sufficiency having a cultural PR problem in some places, like the reaction to Jimmy Carter and the energy crisis. Abundance and Growth have roots in ecology - abundance being a measure of biodiversity - but we use them mostly to talk about human centric issues. Could we start using the words differently? Or what is Abundance didn't refer to an abundance of material and energy, but actually referred to an abundance of relationships, community, or time to do what you love? If we can change our intrinsic motivations to lead a life of sufficiency, won't it then feel like we're also living a life of abundance?
I would take either future, Abundance or Sufficiency, I fear that the future is just as likely to be "Scarcity". In 2050, the world is still trying to claw its way back from the cataclysmic climate disaster due to the collapse of the gulf stream, or the nuclear winter from the Pakistan Indian war, or the Iran Israel war, the East Asian war when China went for Taiwan or The Ukraine war's escalation or.......
On a less depressive note, doesn't sound like Neither Lloyd's scenario nor the Abundance scenario factors in the population plummet that we are starting to see in the developed world.
I just came inside from going outside to hang laundry. The wind is blowing, should dry in an hour, no energy use. Birds entertained me the entire time. Three species of woodpeckers, cardinals, tufted titmice, some unidentified warblers, mockingbirds sowing confusion about identification, catbirds, brown thrashers, chickadees, wrens, sparrows (three species), robins, blue jays and blue birds. Sufficiency is fun, as is electric biking (too many hills here for commuting on a regular bike). Your vision of the future not dominated by stuff is much more palatable than the abundance. Who needs it when you are surrounded by life?
Your posts always give me hope. They also reinforce my inclination to make do with what I have, and to encourage others to do that same. Thank you. Please continue.
Thank you for sharing such thoughtful and provocative reflections, Lloyd.
Language-wise, sufficiency feels like a hard sell. It sounds even less appealing than sustainability. No one aspires to a "sufficient" life — it doesn’t capture the imagination.
Abundance feels more aspirational, but I agree with James that the focus should shift away from material abundance and toward abundance of experience, connection, health, and beauty — things that often require fewer resources, not more.
Maybe that’s a way to frame it: abundance as the goal, and harmony — even sufficiency? — as the strategy. Abundance in life outcomes, enabled by a more balanced material world.
I was going to say this same thing. I’m in Argentina and the current government (our president gifted Elon Musk a government-prunning chainsaw 🫠) won sparking the imagination with growth and freedom. Previous governments were criticized of “pobristas” (something like “povertist”) for promoting suffiency and communitarian ideas.
Even for me, though I embrace forms of suffiency in my life and believe in public services, I don’t want to go back to working the land, and I don’t think people in general want that either.
So more is in fact appealing, even in terms of evolution (human beings have a force forward). But of course we need to go forth within planetary boundaries. I think doughnut economics, circularity and growth through regeneration are easier to sell ideas for environmentalism. In that way Abundance hits a good spot (and maybe people will get to suffiency when they’ve experienced that having it all doesn’t really cure existential problems 😂)
Huzzah!
>> I’m in Argentina and the current government (our president gifted Elon Musk a government-prunning chainsaw 🫠) won sparking the imagination with growth and freedom...Previous governments were criticized of “pobristas” (something like “povertist”) for promoting suffiency and communitarian ideas.
What I have been saying for years -> Freedom first! The ability to succeed and not settle for "Be less, have less".
"Povertist" - I've not seen this word before so I'm going to add it to my vocabulary - thanks! And you are right, very few people want to live in poverty and most people aren't willing to accede to the strictures and shortcomings of having communitarianism set heavy on their shoulders. That's one reason why my constant refrain here (and back at TreeHugger) is how will you impose that (your given and self-chosen lifestyle) on others without force?
And I'm quite sure that it was imposed in Argentina for decades. And when Milieu stepped out with a message that grabbed peoples' attention and hearts, they went for it and threw off their governmental chains.
I like the way you have framed this. There are a number of glaring examples where material abundance has led to disharmony and wars.
I absolutely agree with the need for sufficiency. Technology hasn't reduced our absolute energy and material consumption (Jevons paradox), and more wealth hasn't made us happier. I can imagine the word Sufficiency having a cultural PR problem in some places, like the reaction to Jimmy Carter and the energy crisis. Abundance and Growth have roots in ecology - abundance being a measure of biodiversity - but we use them mostly to talk about human centric issues. Could we start using the words differently? Or what is Abundance didn't refer to an abundance of material and energy, but actually referred to an abundance of relationships, community, or time to do what you love? If we can change our intrinsic motivations to lead a life of sufficiency, won't it then feel like we're also living a life of abundance?
I would take either future, Abundance or Sufficiency, I fear that the future is just as likely to be "Scarcity". In 2050, the world is still trying to claw its way back from the cataclysmic climate disaster due to the collapse of the gulf stream, or the nuclear winter from the Pakistan Indian war, or the Iran Israel war, the East Asian war when China went for Taiwan or The Ukraine war's escalation or.......
On a less depressive note, doesn't sound like Neither Lloyd's scenario nor the Abundance scenario factors in the population plummet that we are starting to see in the developed world.
I think mine does, you can't get a steady-state economy if it keeps growing in population.
This needs to be shouted far and wide: “Land use and transportation are the same thing described in different languages.”
Thanks so much for such thoughtful writing. You are reminding me of EF Schumacher and Small is Beautiful
T'was ever thus.
Is your book available to your audience (already a paying subscriber) through Chapters, Amazon? Although, I'm avoiding Amazon ...