The Oil Drum: Australia/New Zealand | The Limits To Scenario Planning

85 comments on The Limits To Scenario Planning

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

SP on January 31, 2008 - 9:20am

In your longer article, and at the original on TOD we have the phrase "Powering Civilisation To 2050".

Of course this begs the question... whose definition of "civilisation".

And it is this unspoken assumed definition that is then examined/promoted/defended.

I got the impression from Stuart Stanifords article that that assumption was of a western technologically driven "growth" economy.

We should remind ourselves that "civilisation" is "just" the sum total of the collective behaviors and institutions in a culture during a particular defined period of time. Use of the term as if there is 'The' or 'A' civilisation that is the goal in many discussions about the future is annoying and, I think, blinkered.

For example, in Stuart Stanifords article, why does he use the term "requirements" instead of "assumptions"?

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

Big Gav on January 31, 2008 - 9:28am

Interesting point.

I won't presume to speak for Stuart, so I can't answer the last question.

Personally I don't view "civilisation", when I've referred to it, as meaning anything more than a technology based society that has industries involved in the mass production of goods and services.

Whether or not this is worth retaining is a separate (but interesting) question.

By and large I'm not against current day civilisation, I just think it needs to be transformed so that it operates in a truly sustainable way. That isn't a utopia of course - just a way for a large number of people to get by without enduring the overshoot / collapse outcome.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.