A
remarkable new study by a director at one of the largest accounting
firms in the world has found that a famous, decades-old warning from MIT
about the risk of industrial civilization collapsing appears to be
accurate based on new empirical data.
As
the world looks forward to a rebound in economic growth following the
devastation wrought by the pandemic, the research raises urgent
questions about the risks of attempting to simply return to the
pre-pandemic ‘normal.’
The
controversial MIT analysis generated heated debate, and was widely
derided at the time by pundits who misrepresented its findings and
methods. But the analysis has now received stunning vindication from a
study written by a senior director at professional services giant KPMG,
one of the 'Big Four' accounting firms as measured by global revenue.
Limits to growth
The study was published in the Yale Journal of Industrial Ecology in November 2020 and is available on the KPMG website.
It concludes that the current business-as-usual trajectory of global
civilization is heading toward the terminal decline of economic growth
within the coming decade—and at worst, could trigger societal collapse
by around 2040.
The
study represents the first time a top analyst working within a
mainstream global corporate entity has taken the ‘limits to growth’
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.
“Given
the unappealing prospect of collapse, I was curious to see which
scenarios were aligning most closely with empirical data today. After
all, the book that featured this world model was a bestseller in the
70s, and by now we’d have several decades of empirical data which would
make a comparison meaningful. But to my surprise I could not find recent
attempts for this. So I decided to do it myself.”
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.
The risk of collapse
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.”
The end of growth?
In
the comprehensive technology (CT) scenario, economic decline still sets
in around this date with a range of possible negative consequences, but
this does not lead to societal collapse.
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.
Although
both the business-as-usual and comprehensive technology scenarios point
to the coming end of economic growth in around 10 years, only the BAU2
scenario “shows a clear collapse pattern, whereas CT suggests the
possibility of future declines being relatively soft landings, at least
for humanity in general.”
Both
scenarios currently “seem to align quite closely not just with observed
data,” Herrington concludes in her study, indicating that the future is
open.
A window of opportunity
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.
“At
this point therefore, the data most aligns with the CT and BAU2
scenarios which indicate a slowdown and eventual halt in growth within
the next decade or so, but World3 leaves open whether the subsequent
decline will constitute a collapse,” the study concludes. Although the
‘stabilized world’ scenario “tracks least closely, a deliberate
trajectory change brought about by society turning toward another goal
than growth is still possible. The LtG work implies that this window of
opportunity is closing fast.”
“Changing
our societal priorities hardly needs to be a capitulation to grim
necessity,” she said. “Human activity can be regenerative and our
productive capacities can be transformed. In fact, we are seeing
examples of that happening right now. Expanding those efforts now
creates a world full of opportunity that is also sustainable.”
She
noted how the rapid development and deployment of vaccines at
unprecedented rates in response to the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrates
that we are capable of responding rapidly and constructively to global
challenges if we choose to act. We need exactly such a determined
approach to the environmental crisis.
“The
necessary changes will not be easy and pose transition challenges but a
sustainable and inclusive future is still possible,” said Herrington.
The
best available data suggests that what we decide over the next 10 years
will determine the long-term fate of human civilization. Although the
odds are on a knife-edge, Herrington pointed to a “rapid rise” in
environmental, social and good governance priorities as a basis for
optimism, signalling the change in thinking taking place in both
governments and businesses. She told me that perhaps the most important
implication of her research is that it’s not too late to create a truly
sustainable civilization that works for all.