Here I share the link where you can read or download the dissertation that allowed me to graduate as a Master in Science in Ecological Economics.
shorturl.at/nDKZ0
Abstract
Ecovillages
are communities that aim to live in a sustainable, resilient way. Since their
formal origins in the 1990s, when the concept was formally coined, several
studies have shown their ecological benefits. However, there is a lack of research
about the economic dynamics of these modern settlements. The present study aims
to contribute to the knowledge of the economics of ecovillages by researching
the livelihood options of its members and how capable they are to generate
enough resources to create a community resilient environment. For this motive,
one of the most famous and long-lived ecovillages in the world, Findhorn
Ecovillage, was used as a case study. Eleven interviews were applied, trying to
understand the overall economic situation of Findhorn Ecovillage’s members.
Results indicate that, while basic needs are successfully met and there is high
job satisfaction, the feeling of members about their economic situation, especially
regarding secondary needs, is ambiguous. Also, the youngest interviewees have
uncertainties about their financial future. On the other hand, the worldview of
the members shows a lack of financial ambition and monetary goals. Theirs is a philosophy of voluntary
simplicity. In this way, the presence of social capital seems to counteract the
deficiency of financial richness, as a source of well-being and community
resilience. The research concludes with new understandings of communal
resilience and with potential ways to enhance it.
Key words:
community resilience, ecovillages, Findhorn Ecovillage, social capital, voluntary
simplicity.
The
aim of this paper was to:
·
document livelihood options of the FE members
to understand better community resilience and the economies of ecovillages; and
with this,
·
contribute to fill in the present literature
gap, addressing ecovillage economics and its relationship with community resilience;
to secondarily,
·
offer valuable information to new ecovillage
projects.
The
main research question of this study is:
1. How successfully have ecovillages a resilient community environment?
And
the secondary research questions are:
2. What are the main personal economic choices and the general worldview
that members have about their economic lifestyle?
3. How comfortable are members with their current economic situation?
4. What are the main income sources of the members? Do they depend mainly
of jobs inside or outside the community?
5. Are there some benefits, either financial, intangible or subjective,
that come with living inside the ecovillage? If so, what are they?
Lastly, for the ones that want to take a brief look without download it, I share you the Introduction of the dissertation, as also the Contents (Index), besides a concept created:
Introduction
1.1.
Contextualization and justification
To keep the economic engine working, growing economies tend to encourage
the culture of consumerism. Jackson (2009, p.99) expresses that this
materialist culture can even act as a “substitute for religion consolation.” In
modern societies, consumerism and merchandise function as identification. The
upper classes try to differentiate themselves from the rest, which, according
to the Veblen's (1899) “conspicuous theory”, are constantly trying to imitate the former. For
Jackson (2009) this creates an “Iron Cage of Consumerism”, based on anxiety:
Materialistic values such as popularity,
image and financial success are psychologically opposed to ‘intrinsic’ values
like self-acceptance, affiliation, a sense of belonging in the community …
People with higher intrinsic values are both happier and have higher levels of
environmental responsibility than those with materialistic values. (pp.148-149)
After
realizing that there is a threshold in which more GDP per capita growth does
not increase happiness, Dietz and O’Neill (2013, p.163) recommended that to achieve a steady state economy[1],
consumerism should be replaced with nonmaterialistic lifestyles. One example
that presents such a lifestyle shift are ecovillages (Dietz and O’Neill, 2013, p.164). They are offered as an alternative
to individualistic and consumerist systems (Andreas and Wagner, 2012) and even as a “third political way”, different from capitalism and
communism (Gilman et al., 1995).
These
modern settlements has been identified as a source of inspiration in a transition
to a sustainable society (Accioly Dias et al., 2017) and how a “degrowth world” would look like (Cattaneo, 2015). The latest philosophy, which aims to overcome perpetual economic
growth, may be one of the main theoretical and practical products of the strong
sustainability viewpoint. This approach, differently from the weak
sustainability one, claim that natural capital[2]
is not replaceable for other kinds of capital. According to Gowdy (2014), ecological economics represents the strong approach, whereas
neoclassical economics represents the weak. Raworth (2017) adds that whereas neoclassical economics focuses on an individualist
methodological approach, ecological economics is based on a systemic paradigm.
Understanding practical and concrete cases of those sustainability paradigms
might be useful to cope with the current ecological crisis and its potential
solutions. Socio-ecological systems not only need to mitigate harmful
ecological practices to ameliorate global warming, but they should also adapt
to potential changes (IPCC, 2014) – community resilience is an indicator of the social sustainability
which facilitates adaptation to stressors (Magis, 2010).
Ecovillages
try to deal with the global crisis not in an individualist but in a systemic
way. This systemic view is supposed to be exhibited through three dimensions:
ecological, cultural-spiritual and social-economic (Jackson and Svensson, 2002). However, Lombardozzi (2017) argues that the economic dimension has not
been sufficiently studied. Andreas and Wagner (2012) also identify this
theoretical gap, mentioning that they could find just one study that shows
(partially) the economy of an ecovillage.
Moreover,
in contrast to businesses, the ecovillage’s economic activities tend to focus
upon generating community resilience rather than generating income[3].
This can create some difficulties that might paradoxically debilitate community
resilience. Especially considering that on the one hand, some ecovillage
initiatives depend heavily on owning enough personal assets that bring the
security needed for living in a simpler, low-consumption lifestyle (Jackson, 2009) – but on the other hand, most ecological-communities struggle
financially (Ludwig, 2017).
Therefore,
identifying the proper academic discipline and concepts that explain
ecovillages’ dynamics is important. Otherwise they could be judged and analysed
according to values and purposes with which they do not identify. In this
sense, it may be relevant to understand the general worldview and livelihood
options of ecovillagers, and in which economic approach they better fit in, in
order to clarify the communal resilience concept.
Findhorn
Ecovillage (FE), situated in the highlands of Scotland, has been commonly known
as “the mother of all ecovillages” (Meltzer, 2018, p.25). In 1995, the terms ecovillage
and Global Ecovillage Network (GEN)
were coined in a Findhorn Foundation (FF) meeting (Lombardozzi, 2017). Besides
its protagonist role in the ecovillage movement, FE has remained since its
foundation in the 1960s as one of the most long-lived ecological communities in
existence. Therefore, its experience
makes it one of the most resilient ecovillages in the world. This becomes suitable for the purposes of
this study, as will be understood in the following section.
[1] Steady state economy is a “dynamic society in which quantitative growth
is replace by qualitative social development and whose rates of resource
extraction and pollution are compatible with the rates of resource production
and waste assimilation by supporting ecosystems” (Rees, 2003).
[2] Natural capital refers
to natural resources, both non-renewable and renewable (Gowdy,
2014).
[3] Melissa Godbeer (Research Director, Findhorn
College), email message to the author, April 26, 2019.
List of Contents, Figures and Tables
CREATED CONCEPTS:
COMMUNITY RESILIENCE:
Community
resilience could be understood as the social and institutional[1]
capacities to adapt, resist or avoid external shocks that threaten the economic
and ontological security of community members.
[1] Institutional concept is
preferred here instead of governmental
or state ones. There is a branch
that understood ecovillages as an anarchist movement (Dawson, 2006). In the latter sense, institutional could be applied in a different
way, like the political capital of decision-making staff in contrast to
“grassroot” social capital. This should avoid restrictions in the use of the
definition.
