Fascinating discussion led by @revikin of the ICS at @earthinstitute, with @KateRaworth & #HermanDaly, sharp as ever.

Lots of content but some things to consider a bit:

- productive vs extractive economy
- biogeo boundaries
- what next?

PS Daly is one of the founders of ecological economics, in a lineage of highlights that includes eg

Georgecu-Roegen > Daly > @robert_costanza > @ProfTimJackson > Raworth.

Ecol econ is one of three main strands of new sustainability science, w/ systems ecol + industrial ecol.

Discussion focussed on the diff btwn

- productive econ - stuff ppl _do_, to /make/ money

- extractive econ - stuff ppl _have_, to /take/ money, ie rentier leverage of land, money, info, ++.

It is agreed that extractive, growth economy hits biogeo boundaries.

Yep, check.

The question of what next was not dealt with much - here differences emerge.

Kate's takeaway was in part, focus on community-level esp health.

Herman's was, let's revist the history of economics.

Let's unpack this a bit, & check on the binary of productive vs extractive.

Community, healthcare, productive economics are complex to align bc cross currents emerge.

One of these, is how 'productive' is the medical sector?

More fiendishly, how do you get world-class healthcare in a ... local community? How do you make medical decisions ... as a group?

Having just had some serious hospitalization, I am very aware of the issue of pricing of healthcare.

What makes it affordable is not just a public taxation system - it includes mass produced disposable sterile precision equipment.

How does this arise in a ... community economy?

Some would argue that low prices for medical (or any) commodities is only possible through some kind of financial leverage - which opens the door to extractive economics.

Even if you exclude that, it's v hard to get around the efficiencies created through economies of scale.

And, to get this stuff, and the medical expertise to guide it, you have to assume big companies, global supply chains + global knowledge dissemintation.

Who wants to deny people healthcare at affordable prices that is available elsewhere?

This is not a binary issue, it seems.

So, the question is: while ecol economics is rightly focussed on emphasizing the productive economy, and constraining it within biogeo boundaries, what is the way to do that best?

Herman suggestively invited us revisit the history of economic thought - and mentioned JS Mill.

One thing characteriszing Mill's econ thought was ... a ground emphasis on competition! Why?

Clearly, in principle, competition can do something useful - and if we think classically, that means making things cheaper and/or better.

This is not 100% easy to align with community.

This & many other gaps in ecol economics - between the framing principles (ie productive wealth creation within biogeo limits) and actual needs (eg global-class skills, cheap-to-access commodities, in conventionally unproductive sectors) is what the discipline needs to supply.

If ecol economics has disappointed, it's that ready-baked econ theory & /policy/ within 'new' grand principles, is not yet v evident.

Communitarianism is only one track & can only solve a subset of econ needs.

Communities don't steer boats, perform surgery, compose concertos.

What I want to see, and am quietly working for, is a synthesis of the post-free-for-all economics, where

steady-state/degrowth
neo-ecoefficiency/green growth
circular econ/crade-to-cradle/PIOT-MIOT
systems ecol+econ/(non)ergodicty econ

find common ground & fill this space NOW.

The name I think for this synthesis space is probably going to be something like, and I proposed #embeddedeconomics.

What links ALL these reformists is the economy is 'embedded' in phenomena that supercede it, and must formulated and managed as such.

That a possible consensus.

Anyway, to all my architecture, urban, tech, VC, policy, economics, climate, friends who are missing the ground work, watch this lecture, and check out Daly/Raworth content.

Somewhere there are the foundations of the world we will have to build.

Now, what shall we build?

IMHO grps sufficiently pol neutral, technical, factual, informative, approachable, creative ... include

@ProjectDrawdown
@DemosHelsinki
Bits of startup, VC, tech community eg circles around @michael_nielsen, @patrickc
Some designers eg @fedenegro @andrewheumann

@Revkin sorry I missspelled your handle at the head of this thread, and if there is anything worse than a spelling mistake in a tweet, it's a spelling mistake in a thread ...