processes in place seem ineffectual. Or the purpose is changed but not the
paradigm, so the paradigm is inapt for informing proper strategies to get to the
declared purpose. This is the case that I made in this book: if the main paradigm
informing development decisions—mainstream economics—is not updated, the
declared purpose of sustainable development cannot be reached. The mainstream economic paradigm is blind to key aspects of this purpose (human needs
and nature’s integrity).
• ‘Paradigms’ are thus the source of system designs. Hegemonic ones stabilize
processes and work as reference frameworks for the narratives with which actors
engage in the creation and application of institutions and technologies. They
translate into unconscious programming and routine habits that psychologists
and neurologists explain are necessary for coping with the complexity of life. So
holding paradigms or biased mind-sets is both unavoidable and helpful in
organizing social life. However, there are always alternative paradigms, and
with them alternative individual and collective wills that have the potential to
incrementally irritate the status quo until windows of opportunity for conscious
questioning and more radical political action arise. Depending on how the
system is re-stabilized—a change in default or not—one might speak of a
paradigm shift and radical system innovation, or not.
The speed with which a system purpose can be changed—and the likelihood of
this change lasting—will depend substantially on the support or resistance of
powerful actors in the SETS. Power, here understood as the capacity to influence
processes and their purpose, is unevenly distributed in any SETS. It can be dispersed or concentrated, and has many facets that vary with each system’s configuration; control over production sites, infrastructure or land are obvious loci, but
outlets of public opinion, a recognized expert status in strategic discussions, or good
connections with key decision-makers can be equally important. Describing such
qualities as power potentials expresses the notion that one and the same aspect can
convey considerable influence in one system, but not in another.
One example for this could be fiat money: it needed new laws and regulations to
come into existence and many incremental changes in regulation and strong
paradigm support to become the powerful tool of private rule that it is today. Yet, if
a financial crisis wiped out trust in virtual wealth, this tool would cede its power to
material possessions or to human capabilities to actually plant food, educate children, build houses, and fix cars.
To sum up, large-scale transformations are tremendous, conflict-laden and
long-term tasks. The outcomes will typically be different to what the individual
actors in the processes foresaw. Nor are the processes linearly predictable.
A comparably small change in one subsystem may have huge ripple effects in
another. Often there are time delays between cause and effect, especially between
small single causes and the accumulated effect of a tipping point. No one knows
exactly when a critical mass or threshold is reached at which the fetters of the old
can start thriving, but the estimates of 10 percent of the people being sufficient are
rather encouraging (SNARC 2011).
160
5 How to Work a Great Mindshift for Sustainability Transformations
paradigm, so the paradigm is inapt for informing proper strategies to get to the
declared purpose. This is the case that I made in this book: if the main paradigm
informing development decisions—mainstream economics—is not updated, the
declared purpose of sustainable development cannot be reached. The mainstream economic paradigm is blind to key aspects of this purpose (human needs
and nature’s integrity).
• ‘Paradigms’ are thus the source of system designs. Hegemonic ones stabilize
processes and work as reference frameworks for the narratives with which actors
engage in the creation and application of institutions and technologies. They
translate into unconscious programming and routine habits that psychologists
and neurologists explain are necessary for coping with the complexity of life. So
holding paradigms or biased mind-sets is both unavoidable and helpful in
organizing social life. However, there are always alternative paradigms, and
with them alternative individual and collective wills that have the potential to
incrementally irritate the status quo until windows of opportunity for conscious
questioning and more radical political action arise. Depending on how the
system is re-stabilized—a change in default or not—one might speak of a
paradigm shift and radical system innovation, or not.
The speed with which a system purpose can be changed—and the likelihood of
this change lasting—will depend substantially on the support or resistance of
powerful actors in the SETS. Power, here understood as the capacity to influence
processes and their purpose, is unevenly distributed in any SETS. It can be dispersed or concentrated, and has many facets that vary with each system’s configuration; control over production sites, infrastructure or land are obvious loci, but
outlets of public opinion, a recognized expert status in strategic discussions, or good
connections with key decision-makers can be equally important. Describing such
qualities as power potentials expresses the notion that one and the same aspect can
convey considerable influence in one system, but not in another.
One example for this could be fiat money: it needed new laws and regulations to
come into existence and many incremental changes in regulation and strong
paradigm support to become the powerful tool of private rule that it is today. Yet, if
a financial crisis wiped out trust in virtual wealth, this tool would cede its power to
material possessions or to human capabilities to actually plant food, educate children, build houses, and fix cars.
To sum up, large-scale transformations are tremendous, conflict-laden and
long-term tasks. The outcomes will typically be different to what the individual
actors in the processes foresaw. Nor are the processes linearly predictable.
A comparably small change in one subsystem may have huge ripple effects in
another. Often there are time delays between cause and effect, especially between
small single causes and the accumulated effect of a tipping point. No one knows
exactly when a critical mass or threshold is reached at which the fetters of the old
can start thriving, but the estimates of 10 percent of the people being sufficient are
rather encouraging (SNARC 2011).
160
5 How to Work a Great Mindshift for Sustainability Transformations