Predicting economic collapse: 1972 predictions revisited

Wheeee!!! I bought a brand new Black Smoker!

Loud, proud, does not care about the environment

and wants everyone to know how he feels

In 1972, a MIT study generated some scenarios indicating that slowed economic growth would lead to significant societal collapse or reversals in the 21st century. Collapse meant that economic growth would slow, stop and maybe even reverse. That would be accompanied by a decreasing standard of living for most people. Presumably rich folks would be, as usual, just fine, happy and rolling in dough. 

A recent reanalysis by a risk assessment wonk at KPMG (Gaya Herrington) of that original study based on current data indicates that according to two modeled scenarios, the human race is on track to basically follow the 1972 predictions. The updated study is published in the Journal of Industrial Ecology. One was the ‘BAU2’ or the business-as-usual scenario and the other was the ‘CT’ or comprehensive technology scenario. Both predicted a collapse would start sometime in the next decade or two in accord with the new analysis.

Gathering for a Black Smoker party!!

Vice writes:

The study represents the first time a top analyst working within a mainstream global corporate entity has taken the ‘limits to growth’ [LtG] model seriously. Its author, Gaya Herrington, is Sustainability and Dynamic System Analysis Lead at KPMG in the United States. However, she decided to undertake the research as a personal project to understand how well the MIT model stood the test of time.

Titled ‘Update to limits to growth: Comparing the World3 model with empirical data’, the study attempts to assess how MIT’s ‘World3’ model stacks up against new empirical data. Previous studies that attempted to do this found that the model’s worst-case scenarios accurately reflected real-world developments. However, the last study of this nature was completed in 2014.

Herrington’s new analysis examines data across 10 key variables, namely population, fertility rates, mortality rates, industrial output, food production, services, non-renewable resources, persistent pollution, human welfare, and ecological footprint. She found that the latest data most closely aligns with two particular scenarios, ‘BAU2’ (business-as-usual) and ‘CT’ (comprehensive technology).

“BAU2 and CT scenarios show a halt in growth within a decade or so from now,” the study concludes. “Both scenarios thus indicate that continuing business as usual, that is, pursuing continuous growth, is not possible. Even when paired with unprecedented technological development and adoption, business as usual as modelled by LtG would inevitably lead to declines in industrial capital, agricultural output, and welfare levels within this century.”

Study author Gaya Herrington told Motherboard that in the MIT World3 models, collapse “does not mean that humanity will cease to exist,” but rather that “economic and industrial growth will stop, and then decline, which will hurt food production and standards of living… In terms of timing, the BAU2 scenario shows a steep decline to set in around 2040.”

Unfortunately, the scenario which was the least closest fit to the latest empirical data happens to be the most optimistic pathway known as ‘SW’ (stabilized world), in which civilization follows a sustainable path and experiences the smallest declines in economic growth—based on a combination of technological innovation and widespread investment in public health and education.

While focusing on the pursuit of continued economic growth for its own sake will be futile, the study finds that technological progress and increased investments in public services could not just avoid the risk of collapse, but lead to a new stable and prosperous civilization operating safely within planetary boundaries. But we really have only the next decade to change course.  

“The necessary changes will not be easy and pose transition challenges but a sustainable and inclusive future is still possible,” said Herrington.

The 1972 scenarios predicting bad outcomes tend to be better matches with reality in 2021, than the scenarios predicting better outcomes. Maybe this gives us a reasonable indication of what is to come if rich and powerful people, special interests and rigid ideologues keep opposing regulations to protect the environment and masses of people, just like they have been for decades.

No doubt, climate science deniers, government-hating political and Christian ideologues, crackpot conspiracy theorists and the carbon energy and chemicals sectors, e.g., Exxon-Mobile, Dow Chemical, Koch Industries, some or most transportation companies, etc., will reject any analysis like this as flawed or whatever they deem is needed to argue this into oblivion and keep profits flowing and/or the cognitive dissonance at bay from reality-based ideological disturbances. We wouldn’t want to upset anyone’s serene Feng Shui, would we?

Hm. Yup, at least some of us would love to see some upset Feng Shui among the elites, rabid ideologues and crackpots.

Anyway, the seeds of human self-destruction and long-term misery are hard wired into our mostly irrational brains by evolution. Too bad we cannot learn from science or history. So let's just blindly blunder ahead into the hardship and misery that awaits us bottom ~99%. The misery fun and games maybe starts beginning about 20 years or thereabouts from now.

Real black smokers