Construction of the foundations for a normative model based on the paradigm of Sustainability. FMT...

7/28/2019 Construction of the foundations for a normative model based on the paradigm of Sustainability. FMT Jess Martn

1/70

FINAL MASTER THESIS(FMT)

SEPTEMBER 2012

Jess Martn Gonzlez

[email protected]

(UNED UJI)

MSc Sustainability & CSR

(Corporate Social Responsibility)

Supervisor:

PhD. Mara Jos Bautista-Cerro

Construction of the foundations for a normative model basedon the paradigm of Sustainability. An approach to theimplications of the new situation in the company and itsCorporate Social Responsibi lity.

RESPONSIBLEWELLBEING

ENVIRONMENT

GLOBALETHICS

GLOBALRIGHTS


2/70

Construction of the foundations for a normative model based on the paradigm of Sustainability. An approach to the

implications of the new situation in the company and its Corporate Social Responsibility.

J ess Martn Gonzlez Page 2

ABSTRACT

In the beginning of this century, humanity is at a crossroads where the Bouldings

spaceship Earth has begun to become really unstable. On the one hand, it continues

with processes and ways of life based on a consumption that does not see the limits of

the planet and that affects it both from a social and an environmental point of view. In

addition, certain parts of the population, at the moment very reduced, are starting to be

more conscious of the problems of existence and with small steps balance the drift of

the spaceship Earth. From a perspective in which the Sustainability is a question of

values and consciousness, will be built a normative individual model based on this

paradigm. Three elements will be utilized for it: Spiral dynamics, Wilbers AQAL system

(1996) and some theories of human needs. The systemic and complex dimensions of

this model will constitute the extrapolated foundations for a normative model in

companies and their Corporate Social Responsibility. Finally, the process that happens

in a paradigm shift or change of values will be presented, as well as present examples

and initiatives that function in the road to Sustainability.

KEYWORDS

Sustainability, Corporate Social Responsibility, Wellbeing, Human Rights, Ethics


3/70




1. INTRODUCTION..5

1.1 MOTIVATION..5

1.2 CONTEXTUALIZATION OF WORK..6

1.3 OBJETIVES8

1.4 METHODOLOGY AND STRUCTURE .....8

2. A PERSPECTIVE OF PARADIGMS.10

2.1 ECONOMIC PARADIGM........11

2.1.1 Where do we come from?............................................................11

2.1.2 Where are we?..............................................................................13

2.1.3 Classical economics models and principles......14

2.2 PARADIGM OF SUSTAINABILITY...16

2.2.1 Economic model inc luding Nature.......16

2.2.2 Sustainable development and its implications .19

2.3 SPIRAL DYNAMICS AS A TOOL TO TRANSCEND PARADIGMS...21

2.3.1 Spiral dynamic theory......21

2.3.2 Features of the VMemes......25

3. CONSTRUCTION OF THE FOUNDATIONS FOR A NORMATIVE MODEL

IN THE COMPANY...............28

3.1 STATE OF ART IN COMPANIES AND ITS RSC.29

3.2 NEW DIMENSIONS FOR THE MODEL......32

3.3 THE INDIVIDUAL DIMENSIONS OF THE MODEL......36

3.3.1 Environment.....37

3.3.2 Responsible Wellbeing.........38

TABLE OF CONTENTS


4/70




3.3.3 Global Ethics....41

3.3.4 Global Rights.......44

3.4 THE INTEGRATED MODEL AND ITS ENVIRONMENT..45

3.5 A NEW VISION WITH THE SPIRAL DYNAMICS AND THE

QUADRANTS.........48

3.6 FUNDATIONS OF THE MODEL IN THE COMPANY OR OTHER

SOCIETIES.....51

4. GUIDE TO TRANSCEND AN ECONOMIC PARADIGM FOR A

PARADIGM OF SUSTAINABILITY..53

4.1 IS IT POSSIBLE TO CHANGE THE CURRENT MODEL? .................53

4.2 EXPLORERS: THE FIRST TO GIVE A STEP FORWARD......56

4.3 CSR IN BUSINESS AND POSSIBLE EVOLUTION ..59

4.3.1 Company 3.0.60

4.3.2 Common Welfare Economy..61

5. CONCLUSION...62

6. REFERENCES..65


5/70




The ideals which have lighted my way and time after time have given me new

courage to face life cheerfully, have been Kindness, Beauty, and Truth.

Albert Einstein (1879-1955)

1 INTRODUCTION

This document is a research Masters Thesis that I have developed as part of the

education in the Master in Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility

(CSR) which is taught jointly between Universidad Nacional de Educacin a

Distancia (UNED) & Universidad Jaime I de Castelln (UJ I ).

1.1 MOTIVATION

I have been in favour of the integration, in a constructive way, of all that I have learned

during the Masters with all my past baggage. I personally hold that it is better to add

and multiply than subtract and divide, as this way the result will be more enriching.

The first thing that has been done in this work was the integration of the two Masters

key concepts: on the one hand Sustainability and on the other hand Corporate

Social Responsibility (CSR). Secondly, as much as possible, I have added ideas and

concepts, many of them are related to each other, taken from the subjects of study.

Therefore, I have introduced the following aspects of these subjects.

- Introduction to economics: Economic concepts and models.

- Environment: The major environmental problems facing the Earth and how humanity

is dependent on Nature to survive.

- Introduction to Sustainability and CSR: Ideas on management, business, ethics,

sustainability.

- Relations with Society: The power of the Civil Society and the consumer.

- Development and International Cooperation: concepts of human rights, needs,

wellbeing.


6/70




Later, with the supervisors help, the project has been focused toward its utility and

from all of this work, focused on the interdisciplinary subjects in order to open new

grounds, perspectives and even debates about what is the meaning of Sustainability

and CSR in business and the environment in which it is exercised.

Finally, from a more visionary and optimistic focus about the great systemic global

crisis that affects the planetary citizen, I wanted to contribute some hopeful seeds for a

possible better world, that perhaps they may arrive or not to good soil. In this way, I will

have at least the certainty that they have been planted.

1.2 CONTEXTUALIZATION OF WORK

In April 2012, the Royal Society published its report People and the planet ,

elaborated by 22 experts at different fields of science, which warned about the deep

changes that can be produced in health and human well-being, as well as in the

environment.

The causes are mainly attributed to the increase in population and to the highest levels

of consumption. This is not the only one testimony of that type. Previously, a great

quantity of reports have been written, warning on identical issues, standing out among

them, Limits to Growth (Meadows, Meadows, Randers and Behrens, 1972)commissioned by the Club of Rome to MIT, the Brundland report (1987) presented by

the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) at the UN and the

report from World Resource Institute Ecosystems and Human Well-being

Synthesis: Key Questions in the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005).

All these warnings keep correlation with the visible consequences of the economic

model of growth on a finite planet. As highlighted in these reports, from an

environmental and sustainable perspective the loss of diversity in flora and fauna hasbeen multiplied in recent years. Pollution in seas, rivers, lakes and especially the

atmosphere has been additionally increased.

Non-renewable resources, especially energy, are decreasing at a high rate and the

global ecological footprint on the planet is above its renewal. Moreover, from a social

point of view, as stated in the Report Human Development Index (2011) by the

UNDP (United Nations Program for Development), the inequality of income gap keeps

getting wider, apart from the inequality of power and gender. The aforementioned

report evidences the relations between the environmental degradation and gender and

income inequalities. It also indicates that advances in income and health in developing


7/70




countries are in danger, due to inaction against climate change and the destruction of

natural habitats.

As Boulding (1996) with his spaceship Earth would say, the collapse is increasingly

possible. However, against the systemic movement of positive increase toward thecollapse of the spaceship Earth (Figure 1.1, left), another systemic of negative

feedback (Figure 1.1, right) has emerged and it is represented by a mass of people

becoming more and more conscious and sensitive to their habits and acts.

Environmental groups, NGOSs, Human Rights movements, more and more conscious

companies with their responsible activities and even a small country, Bhutan, are part

of this emerging mass. The latter has begun to move toward more qualitative

objectives, sustainability and wellbeing of its population.

Figure 1.1: Limits of growth

Source: Elaborated by the author based on Aracil (1995)

In this context, Marrewijk (2003) indicates the triangular relationship that occurs in the

society (our spaceship Earth) among States, Business and Civil Society. States are

responsible for controlling, creating and maintaining laws. Companies are responsible

for the market, creating wealth through competition and cooperation, and finally Civil

Society shape society through collective action and participation.

Morin (1999, pp. 24-25) reminds us of the relationship of complexity that exist in the

triad individual society species, where individuals are the product of reproductive

process of the human species, but this same process must be produced by two

individuals. The interactions among individuals produce the society and that whichcertifies the emergence of culture, retroacts on the individuals from the same culture.

Thus, in the first relationship, States Business Civil Society, we must not forget that


8/70




the three members are constituted themselves of individuals that are ultimately the

ones who decide the vicissitude of these organisms. Among other relationships, the

votes, decided by individual, both political and economic, take part in the increase of

complexity in our society and are, ultimately, the cause of the future of our species in

the spaceship Earth. Therefore, the focus of study was primarily directed to the

individual as the basic unit of society and species on the Sustainability. It will later be

aligning the basic characteristics obtained in the model to the complex relationships

among individuals, when some extrapolation for companies and even States may take

place.

1.3 OBJETIVES

On the one hand, among the objectives in this study there is a general objective,

Construction of the foundations for a normative model based on the paradigm

of Sustainability . Regarding the term normative as in normative economics, it is

indicated that some aspects are related in the area ought and therefore there are

implicated moral values. This model will be open to criticism on its possibilities or

improvements but, circumstantially, can turn on certain paths, unknown until now, so

new researchers or explorers can investigate these approaches.

On the other hand, supporting that general objective, there are a series of specific

objectives, including:

- Analyze and describe the systemic relations among the different subsystems in

the light of different paradigms

- Perform a guide to the processes that occur in the paradigm shifts or change of

values

1.4 METHODOLOGY AND STRUCTURE

In times ofcrisis, only imagination is more important than knowledge. Albert

Einstein (1879-1955)

The popular fable of the six blind wise men trying to know what was an elephant, each

one of them touching one of the parts of its body and later describing what they had felt

makes me reflect on the difficulty of approaching the reality. Which method can one

choose? As regards this work, an integrative methodology of several epistemologies

has been chosen as is summarized in the exposure of different perspectives (on the

table 1.1.)


9/70




Table 1.1: Search of the reality

SCIENCE COMPLEXITYINTEGRALHOLONIC

POSITIVIST CRTICAL PHENOMENOLGICAL

APPROACH Complex-dialogic

Holonic Empirical-Analytical

Critical-dialectical

Phenomenological-hermeneutic

EPISTEMOLOGICALFOUNDATION

Complexity InterdisciplinarityPositivismlogical

Critical Theory Phenomenology

LAST END Construction IntegrationExplanation-Control

Transformation-Change

Understanding

RACIONALITY Configurational Not circumscribed Instrumental Communicative Interpretative

ATTITUDE Open Interdisciplinary SplitDialectic-consensus

Epoj

SUBJET-OBJETRELATIONSHIP

DialogicIntersubjetivity

Intersubjetivity Objetivity Intersubjetivity Subjetivity

METHODAccording tothecircunstances

Triangulationresearch

Measuringinstruments

GroupdiscussionParticipantobservation

In-depth interviewParticipant observation

LANGUAGESPEECH

Not rigorous ArticulateQuantitativeimpersonal

Qualitative 1stperson plural

Qualitative 1st Person

Source: Based on Leal (2012)

Most of the work is initially approached with an investigating attitude of complexity, in

the attempt to construct a model and also with an interdisciplinary attitude to integratethe different dimensions in the corresponding model. However, why should one

renounce other attitudes? If a carpenter needs to make a piece of furniture, he does

not utilize a saw all the time. He also uses other tools. Therefore, in some moments of

research, and when it is necessary to take another approach to try to understand the

reality, it does not discard a positivist approach to explain and control the model or a

phenomelogical focus to try to understand it or even a critical approach to try to

transform it.

On the other hand, as Wagensberg (1994, p.83) says, besides the scientific

knowledge, there are two more forms of knowledge, philosophy and art. Regarding

scientific knowledge claims (own translation): Indeterminism is the scientific attitude

that is compatible with the advancement of knowledge in the world, while,

determinism is the scientific attitude that is compatible with the description of the

world.

In this way, with some indetermination, why not have, besides the scientific attitude in

this work, a moral attitude (utopian) in the sense of being conscious, or as Morin (1982)

would say, a science with conscience? Finally and in order to have a communicability

between author and reader why not do it with beauty or aestheticism?


10/70




Gadner (2011) reframes the classical concepts of Truth, Goodness and Beauty in

the eyes of this century. Throughout most of history, Truth has been quite stable,

however with the inclusion of the scientific method and the acceleration of complex

societies, the truths are occupied by new truths that soon they will give way to new

ones. As for the Goodness, Gardner (2011) integrates it with two complementary

elements. On the one hand, morality as a concept of neighbourhood relations among

people by virtue of their humanity on a community level. On the other hand, the ethics

of roles, more abstract and characteristic of complex societies where one represents

different roles. Finally, Beauty is no longer traditional but totally individual and

subjective, which the individual experiences if it meets three features: make it

interesting, make it memorable and stimulate new encounters.

The investigation presented has been structured into three differentiated sections and

according to Gardner (2011); they have the spirit of Truth, Beauty and Goodness.

The first part of the document, much more descriptive, will explain the Truth of both

paradigms, economic and sustainable, that wants to leave the previous in the past.

The first, as seen in Figure 1.1 pushing consumption without limits and the second one,

balancing our planet to avoid the collapse.

The second part, much more experimental and personal, is dedicated to the creation,the Beauty , which will establish the foundations of a possible normative future

model for the Sustainability.

Finally, third part will be dedicated to the Goodness, which will guide and show

different paths being taken in the present to achieve Sustainability.

2 A PERSPECTIVE OF PARADIGMS

It is not enough only tell the truth, but it is important to show the cause of

falsehood . The investigation of the truth is in one way hard, in another

easy. An indication of this is found in the fact that no one is able to attain the

truth adequately, while, on the other hand, no one fails entirely, but everyone

says something t rue about the nature of all things, and while individually they

contribute little or nothing to the truth, by the union of all a considerable

amount is amassed.

Aris to tle (384 AC-322 AC)


11/70




2.1 ECONOMIC PARADIGM

The analysis of the economic paradigm in which we are immersed in this global world

and the one on which have been written hundreds of books, would lead to an extended

length because of its high complexity. Therefore, this section will focus specifically onthree parts that will display a broad overview of the paradigm, consequently, one will

discover the features on which it sets up. Both first and second will refer to the

considerations to the questions asked by Novo (2006) in his reflections on sustainable

development: Where do we come from? and Where are we? The third part will be

an analysis of the model and the principles on which the present-day economy

operates.

2.1.1 Where do we come from?

At the dawn of humanity, human beings were hunter-gatherer taking from nature

necessary resources for their subsistence. They were a piece of the ecosystem and

although they affected nature, the equilibrium was very balanced except for some

ineludible homeostatic variations. According to some anthropologists, Sachs (2008)

indicated that the global population at the beginning of the Neolithic Age would have

been about ten million people. The first great revolution, with the appearance ofagriculture and domestication of animals, occurs about 10,000 years ago. Human

beings become producers. The consequence of this event that is expanded along the

planet is a great growth of the population. Thus, the population will double, more or

less, every seven hundred years, reaching approximately 150 million inhabitants

around the year 0. By the year 1600, prelude of Modernity, population reaches 500

million people.

Several important events that are shaping the human environment could be highlighted

in this long period from the first Neolithic revolution. In the first period, until theemergence of Greek civilization, the most important milestones are: the step from the

nomad to the sedentary life, technological inventions (the wheel, the plow, metallurgy,

sailing), work specialization, the appearance of cities and empires, large-scale trade

and writing. Latterly, until the modern age, its interesting to spotlight the concepts of

democracy and citizenship, the great religions like Christianity and Islam, the

universities, the printing and the gestation of the modern concepts of nation and state.

Human beings had already reached all the corners of the Earth and intervened with

much greater intensity in the environment where they progressed. The next revolution,the industrial revolution, XVIII and XIX centuries, is another major milestone in the

growth of the population. It reached 1,000 million people around 1800. It duplicated


12/70




around 1925 2,000 millions and by 1975 had already reached 4,000 millions.

Finally, at this time in 2012 the world population has already exceeded 7,000 millions.

From this period of Modernity, which Novo (2006) marks conventionally as the start

date in 1637 with the publication of Descartes Discourse on the Method, is whenappear all the cultural changes and ideas that support the present-day economic

paradigm. The separation between the object and the subject is the frame and

mechanistic and reductive vision of all this period which has come to our days. There

were born two branches: Descartes rationalism, through reason and Bacons

empiricism, through experience. Both philosophies seek general, universal and

abstract knowledge and they are the foundation of modern science. In contrast,

humanists like Montaigne and Desiderius Erasmus appealed critically to the possibility

of reaching certainty in a general way without taking into account the context. Thus

Montaigne quoted What a good pillow doubt is for a well-constructed head!

The ideas of J ohn Locke (1632-1704) and Adam Smith (1723-1790) also settled the

foundations of Modernity. The first, empiricist, studied society applying the mechanistic

paradigm, ignoring the more complex aspects of human living and second, sought the

economic laws through the mechanical vision of the world. In the thinking of Adam

Smith is not appealed to ethical and ecological limits in the process of guiding the

economy; only the principle of offer and demand, driven by the utilitarian search of

material goods that each individual develops like primary end of his actions. (Novo,2006, p.14). It would be the invisible hand or laissez faire which would regulate the

market.

Besides science, freeing man from his environment and economy, making rational man

maximize their preferences, there is a third element that will make this epoch

remarkable, productivism, which reached its climax with the industrial revolution.

Economic success was the prelude to social success. Science applies its methodology

for production. More is better. The industrial revolution brought a change of craft tools

utilized with the energy of human beings or animals by machines maintained with the

energy of coal and later with oil. The machines and the energy stored in the ground

during millennia completely altered the human being and their natural environment.

2.1.2 Where are we?

At this early second millennium we find a plane Earth populated with over 7,000 million

inhabitants. In almost 200 years, coinciding with the industrial revolution, the growthhas been exponential, multiplying by seven the residents who had at the beginning of

the XVIII century as is shown in Figure 2.1.


13/70




Figure 2.1: Evolut ion of World population between 10.000 B.C. and 2.000.

.

Source: ONU (Historical Estimates of World Population) (1974)

Looking at the graph one can glimpse the resemblance to the behaviour of positive

feedback models in dynamic systems (Aracil, 1995), where there is an indefinite growth

until some limits are reached and the system collapses.

Thinking about things in terms of progress itself has brought light and shadows. Among

the first, one can include: medicine, which has eradicated diseases and has increased

life expectancy, technology, which has improved the living conditions and has made

the planet smaller to move and for instant communications between either side of the

globe, etc. However, on the other hand, one has to balance the inconveniences that

make of this Earth spaceship a fragile ecosystem. Among these 7,000 million

passengers, there is a great inequality both economically and ecologically. Leonard

(2010) indicates significant data about where we are.

- Water scarcity affects about 1,200 million people, so that water is becoming a more

and more scarce resource.

- Scientists have established that 350 (ppm) of CO2 in the atmosphere would be the

maximum level in order that the Earth continues as we know, however this barrier had

been crossed in J uly 2009 with 378,81 (ppm).

- Nowadays, if one analyzes a body of a person anywhere in the world, including

newborn babies, one would find industrial and agricultural components with toxic

characteristics.


14/70




- 800,000 people die from outdoor air pollution, while 1,6 millions are due to indoor air.

- A great inequality of incomes represents at the present that the richest 1% people

accumulate so much as the poorest 57%.

- If all inhabitants of Earth lived in the style of an average U.S citizen, five planets

would be needed, so that only about 1,200 million people could live.

Moreover, transnational studies of subjective well-being led by Inglehart and

Klingemann (2000) show that, for example, in the period 1973-1998, the satisfaction

with life as a whole of the populations of several European countries had hardly

changed, with even a decline in some of them, in spite of the growth of the GDP.

The datum that can summarize the status and course of this planet is shown in the

Living Planet Report of 2012 which indicated that since the 70`s the demand of annual

natural resources has exceeded what the Earth can restore. Besides, the excess of

ecological footprint has continued to grow during these years reaching a deficit of 50%

in 2008. This means that the Earth takes 1.5 years to regenerate both renewable

resources that people utilize and the absorption of CO2 that is produced in the same

year.

2.1.3 Classical economics models and principles

Synthesizing all theories and definitions of economics in a short space is an arduous

task, therefore, this part will focus on the key concepts of a classical economics

paradigm.

The concept economics etymologically comes from the Greek oikos (house) and

nomos (administration) so that it would be equivalent to administration of a house.

Castaeda and Herrero (2011, p.5) define economics as a social science that studies

how use scarce resources (limited) for the satisfaction of alternative and unlimited

needs.

Economics as a social science also studies the relations that occur in processes of

production, exchange, distribution and consumption of goods and services. Because of

this, part of human needs, whether individual or collective are satisfied. A graphical

view of the relations is observed in Figure 2.2 which shows the circular flow of an

economy in a country without including the foreign sector.


15/70




Figure 2.2: Circular flow of income in a country

.

Source: Castaeda y Herrero (2011)

There are the following economic agents in the previous scheme: households,

businesses and governments. Castaeda and Herrero (2011) indicate that households

are consumer units which own the factors of production (labour, capital and natural

resources). Businesses are production units and Governments have, among others,

the economic functions of protecting property rights, producing goods and services to

satisfy certain needs that the market does not accomplish and correcting the

inequalities of income and wealth that happens because of the free functioning of the

market.

If the foreign sector is added, with imports - exports, input output, there is the globalvision of the agents in the economics. Regarding the factors of production used in the

exchange of goods and services can be classified into three main divisions: labour,

capital, either physical (machinery, equipment and technology) or financial, and finally

natural resources (land and raw resources) (Castaeda and Herrero, 2011).

However the economic growth takes place, there is either an increase in production

factors (increase of labour, capital or natural resources) or there is a technological

improvement that increases productivity. With regard to how to calculate the economic

health of a population, the GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is used, which measures the

valueof all final goods and services produced in a country.


16/70




Finally, as an appendix to introduce the next section where the environmental factor

will be introduced, it can be simplified to show that the relationship between economic

activity and Nature have produced a linear relationship (Figure 2.3) in which humanity

have exerted a control on Earth subtracting their resources to meet their needs but

ignoring any limits.

Figure 2.3: Linear conception of relationship Human Species - Nature

Source: Bengoechea (2011)

2.2 PARADIGM OF SUSTAINABILITY

After explaining where we come from and where we are, Novo (2006) poses the

following question: Where do we want to go? This section will discuss firstly the

economic model introducing the environment element that previously had been omitted

and then the definition of sustainable development and its implication in the different

perspectives of sustainability will be considered.

2.2.1 Economic model including Nature

To believe in unlimited growth in a finite world one has to be either a fool or aneconomist . Kenneth Boulding.

In the previous conception of classical economic activity and its relationships to Nature,

this was conceived as separated from human beings since these had exerted a

dominion on it without stopping on its accounting or its limits. As Bengoechea (2011,

p.5) indicates on the ISO 14,000 and EMAS regulation (Environmental Management

and Audit of the European Union), Environment is defined as: Surroundings in which

an organization interacts, including air, water, land, natural resources, flora, fauna,

human and their interrelation. It can be said, therefore, that human beings are

integrated in nature from this perspective.


17/70




J acobs (1991), as Bengoechea (2011), indicates the three main functions of

Environment in the economic activity of the human species. Table 2.1 presents a small

board where there is an overview of these features. A deeper level, which will not be

done in this work, leads to all instruments that human beings have created for the

environment management system.

Table 2.1: Funct ions of Environment

PROVISION OF

RESOURCES

NONRENEWABLERESOURCES

Finite resources. They cannot be regeneratedby natural processes (on a human scale oftime). Examples: oil, coal, minerals.

RENEWABLE

RESOURCES

They can always be regenerated by naturalprocesses unless it has not exceeded its

capacity for renewal. Examples: plants,animals.

CONTINUOUSRESOURCES

They are unlimited energy sources and theycannot be affected by humans. Examples:solar energy, wind energy, gravity.

ASSIMILATION OFWASTE PRODUCTS

Environment has the capacity to assimilate wastes and residuesto a certain limit. Moreover, the generation of such wastes andresidues decreases the capacity to offer the third function,environmental services.

ENVIRONMENTALSERVICES

SERVICESRELATED TODIRECT ANDCONSCIOUS

CONSUMPTION

Examples: aesthetic enjoyment of landscapes,the increase of knowledge through thescientific study of living and inert matter.

SERVICESRELATED TO

INDIRECT ANDCONSCIOUS

CONSUMPTION

It is the life-support that occurs by stabilizationof ecosystems, climate regulation,maintenance of genetic diversity in differentspecies.

Source: Based on Jacobs (1991)

The incorporation of Environmental functions in the production process and the

absorption of waste and residues , transforms the relationship from linear to circular as

shown in figure 2.4 where: RN: natural resources, RNNR: non-renewable natural

resources, RNR: renewable natural resources, P: production processes, C:

consumption activities, U: utility, D: waste and scrap, r: part of residues and waste that

is recycled,A: assimilative capacity of natural environment, h: rate of natural resourceextraction and g: rate of regeneration of natural resources.


18/70




Figure 2.4: Circular conception of relationship Human Species - Nature

Source: Bengoechea (2011) (based on Pearce and Turner)

Meanwhile, the planet continues to support exponential growth in the consumption of

materials and energy, and increases the waste and pollution that is typical in a linear

relationship with Nature, as shown in Figure 2.3. However, the assumption of humanity

that there is a circular relationship takes a considerable delay, as one can recognize for

the 40 years that have passed since the report Limits to growth. This situation in a

dynamic system where the positive feedback has not been counterbalanced by anegative or regulating feedback can, as Novo (2006) indicated, cause the system to

become unmanageable. Its again that we remember Boulding (1966), who warns that

the Earth spaceship is seriously damaged and close to collapse.

2.2.2 Sustainable development and its implications

As Gudynas (2004) alludes, the term sustainable has its origins in the fields of

biology, more precisely, among workers of the fishery and forestry sectors. In the 60s,

was begun the study of different strategies for maintaining, within their rhythms, the


19/70




complete renovation of the population of these renewable resources. In the 70s,

Meadows, Meadows, Randers and Behrens (1972) showed with the The limits to

Growth report that economic growth, as it was occurring, would lead to a collapse,

either because of lack of resources or because of pollution. The focus of the debate

was between those who advocated economic progress and those who demanded

environmental conservation. During the 80s, the presentation of the Brundtland

Report (1987) established the foundations of the term sustainable combining

development with sustainability. Hence, the definition of sustainable development

as Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the

ability of future generations to meet their own needs, conserves to our days a

canonical value.

In recent years, Gudynas (2004) notes that sustainable development has become a

plural concept with different concepts, nuances, assessments, interpretations and

perspectives. Similarly are used indistinctly the terms sustainable or sustained, since

the key is in the conceptions that hide behind the words. He finds, roughly, three

perspectives, without counting the attitude which does not incorporate the concept of

sustainability while maintaining a rejection of ecological limits and an ideology of

progress and economic growth.

The first perspective, weak sustainability does not use an open criticism of the

ideology of progress but it imagines that it is possible to lead to a sustainable

development through reforms in production processes. Gudynas (2004, p.64)

summarizes: It is a trend that discourses through a strong economization of

environmental issues and therefore it relies heavily on the judgements and decisions of

the technicians.

The second perspective, strong sustainability, continues to maintain an

economization of Nature but considers that it is ineludible to conserve a stock of

Natural Capital since it believes that it is critical for human beings and it must beprotected. Gudynas (2004) indicates that in this view there is a coexistence of both

technical and political decisions.

Finally, super-strong sustainability carries an intrinsic criticism toward the ideology of

progress where the assessment of Environment is manifested from various

perspectives and not only the economics ones. It opts for the term Natural Heritage.

Gudynas (2004) emphasizes the intrinsic value of Nature, beyond the value that

peoples report. From this perspective, where the plurality of reviews is recognized,

policy decisions are established according to the different positions. The different

perspectives are summarized in Table 2.2.


20/70




Table 2.2: Attributes of the three main perspectives on sustainable development

ELEMENTWEAK

SUSTAINABILITYSTRONG

SUSTAINABILITYSUPER STRONGSUSTAINABILITY

Perspective Anthropocentric Anthropocentric Biocentric

Development Material growth Material growthLife quality, ecologicalquality

Nature Natural Capital Natural Capital Natural Heritage

Assessment InstrumentalInstrumental,ecological

Multiple, intrinsic

Conservation Utilitarian Utilitarian, ecological Ecological, evolutionary

Actors Consumer Consumer, citizen Citizen

Personal attitude Individual self Individual self Self expanded

Stage Market Society Society

ScientificKnowledge

Privileged knowledge Privileged knowledge Plurality of knowledge

Other knowledge Disregarded MinimizedRespected,incorporated

Practices Technical managementTechnical advisorymanagement

Environmental policy

Timeline Years Century Milenium

Social J ustice Unlikely Possible Required

Ecological J ustice Impossible Possible Required

Source: Gudynas (2004)

In tune with the Gudynas super-strong perspective, Novo (2006) refers to the five

features that constitute a sustainable development: endogenous, integrated,equitable, glocal and viable ecologically. It must be endogenous, with an internal origin,

within each community to harness their potential, natural resources, traditions and

knowledge. Besides, she indicates that the processes cannot be juxtaposed rather

there would be an interdependence among them, causing its integrated character.

Another feature occurs because it must satisfy the principle of equity, offering a special

ethics, and social justice to people, especially to the poorest. Finally, the glocal

character refers to the systemic dialogic between local parts of the system with the

global problems of the world, while the ecological viability indicates to the subordination

of the carrying capacity of ecosystems.


21/70




2.3 SPIRAL DYNAMICS THEORY AS A TOOL TO TRANSCEND PARADIGMS

Meadows (2008) found that in systems, independently of their complexity, there are

certain points where in a way a lever can act more effectively to reform them

completely. Thus, from minor to bigger relevance, she orders the twelve places whereone can intervene in dynamical systems to increase the grade of effectiveness and to

transform them. Specifically, the leverage points which are more effective, but also due

to its greater complexity which requires more difficulty and time, are:

1) Transcending paradigms.

2) Paradigms: The mind-set out of which the systemits goals, structure,

rules, delays, parametersarises.

3) Goals: The purpose of the system.

4) Self-Organization: The power to add, change, or evolve system structure.

5) Rules: Incentives, punishments, constraints.

The second best of the leverage points from Meadows (2008) has been used, in this

part of the work, to describe the economic paradigm and the sustainability paradigm.

Now, an analysis will be made with the most powerful leverage point, transcend

paradigms, therefore the theory and model of Spiral dynamics will be employed. This

theory, inserted into the complex thought, will be a tool with a broad view both for

analyzing the previous paradigms as for building the foundation of the model.

Therefore, due to its importance to the second part of the work, this section will be

dedicated to its explanation.

2.3.1 Spiral dynamic theory

Regarding the origin of the Spiral dynamics, Chabreuil and Chabreuil (2008) mentions

the anecdote of the students of Professor Clare W. Graves (1914-1986) that tired of

studying each of the psychological theories, asked which one was the good one. Thisactive questioning of his students on what was to them a mature person, classified

thousands of testimonies collected during over 25 years. With this material, he

developed a comprehensive model of adult biopsychosocial system development, the

Emergent Cyclical Levels of Existence Theory that summarized:

Briefly, what I am proposing is that the psychology of the mature human being is an

unfolding, emergent, oscillating spiraling process marked by progressive subordination

of older, lower-order behavior systems to newer, higher-order systems as mans

existential problems change. (Beck and Cowan, p.28)


22/70




Graves did not write any books, except some papers and brief manuscripts.

Consequently, Beck and Cowan (1996), who worked with him, were the people who

divulged the model with its present name and who continued his researches after

Graves death. Beck and Cowan (1996) consider this theory as one of the three major

advances in management approaches of the complexity in 20th century. The other two

are the Dynamic systems Theory and Chaos Theory.

Beck and Cowan (1996, p.29) briefly indicate four of the basic conceptual features in

Graves model.

1) Human nature is not static, nor is it finite. Human nature changes as the

conditions of existence change, thus forging new systems. Yet, the older

systems stay with us.

2) When a new system or level is activated, we change our psychology and rules

for living to adapt to those new conditions.

3) We live in a potentially open system of values with an infinite number of modes

of living available to us. There is no final state to which we must all aspire.

4) An individual, a company, or an entire society can respond positively only to

those managerial principles, motivational appeals, educational formulas, and

legal or ethical codes that are appropriate to the current level of human

existence.

Dawkins (1976) formulated in his thesis that, as is the same as in biology the

information is transmitted through the genes, culturally ideas, habits, beliefs, skills,

behaviours etc. are transmitted through what he called memes, these being the

cultural unit. Graves suggested that there should be a kind of meta-meme, a system of

values that he called VMemes. These VMemes are organizational principles that act as

attractors of Dawkins memes. Therefore, on the one hand there are the memes as

ideas that are directly or indirectly visible and on the other hand the VMemes which are

always present but they operate invisibly and sometimes automatically. Figure 2.5

clarifies these concepts with the iceberg metaphor.


23/70




Figure 2.5 Memes and VMemes

Source: Schuschny (2009)

The VMemes are so vital that arrive through whole groups of people and begin to

structure the thinking on their own. These VMemes establish the rhythm and the

process of collection of the beliefs, besides the structuring of the thought, the systems

of moral values, political forms and worldviews of entire civilizations. They are a sort of

paradigm in which one is immersed unconsciously.

So far, eight levels of VMemes have been described, which Graves appointed by 2

letters, first indicating Life conditions (starting letter A) and second indicates Mind

capacities (starting letter N). The metaphor used is a double helix with the two

previous factors interacting. Systems emerge or decay when life conditions (historical

time, geographical place, existential problems and circumstances in society) change.

These life conditions change when, either new mind capacities emerge, adapting new

visions, beliefs, thoughts, etc., or there is a fall to oldest levels trying to solve the

alteration of those circumstances in life.

However, Beck and Cowan (1996) assigned a color code for educational facilities and it

would be the manner shown in this work. The eight colours with VMemes or

corresponding levels of existence and development are in order: Beige: Survival,

Purple: Safety, Red: Power, Blue: Order, Orange: Success, Green: Community,

Yellow: Synergy and Turquoise: Holism.


24/70




Figure 2.6: Spiral dynamic

Source: Elaborated by the author based on Chabreuil & Chabreuil (2008), Beck &

Cowan (1996)

The first six levels form a first tier, while yellow, turquoise and subsequent colours form

a second tier that involves a large quantum leap according to the words of Graves.

The VMemes of the 2nd tier, Yellow and Turquoise, have a global view of the spiral,

understanding all its complexity. These understand each of the whole first tier VMemes

and the positive and negative features of each one of them. Chabreuil and Chabreuil

(2008) found that the difference between the first and second tiers is that in the first

tier, VMemes are characterized by a structural fear of which they try to escape: not

finding food, not having shelter, being a victim of others, being punished by the last

truth, not having a status attained by themselves, being rejected socially. There is not

structural fear in the second tier, although there may be a fear linked to the particular

circumstances.

Before a brief explanation of each level, are summarized some ideas that Chabreuil

and Chabreuil (2008) expose for a better understanding of the development in the

spiral.

- The values of a person, organization or society can be of three types:

superficial, hidden and deep. The deep ones, corresponding to the VMemes of

the previous colours, are unconscious and they condition the other two.


25/70




- The dynamic spiral is not a type of classification of people. The coexistence of

several levels of existence within a person, organization or society, depending

on the situations, is possible.

- Life conditions are the ones that trigger mind capabilities to reach new levels ofexistence. Neither mind capabilities have anything to do with intelligence, nor

the progress of levels of existence with a progress of intelligence, but with a

greater complexity.

- No level of existence is good or bad in itself or can be judged superior or inferior

to another, but that level is the one which is better adapted to life conditions.

- Levels of existence are alternated expressing the I or its sacrifice for the We.

Thus, warm colours: beige, red, orange and yellow express the I meanwhilecool colours: purple, blue, green and turquoise express the We.

2.3.2 Features of the VMemes

The following features are a summary of the work of Beck and Cowan (1996),

Chabreuiland Chabreuil (2008) and Wilber (2000).

It is estimated 0,1% of the worlds population has this VMeme characteristic of their way

of life, i.e. their living conditions are pointed to the individual survival and their attention

is on the physiological needs. Their mind is instinctive, automatic and with reflections.

Its origin could date more than 100,000 years ago. Examples where it can happen:

newborns, people with Alzheimers, individuals with a very severe shock stress.

.

It is estimated that about 10% of the world population, which also owns 1% of power

has this VMeme as characteristic of their way of life. These individuals seek to calm a

threatening world of spirits, magic, mysteries, taboos. They are tribal and look for the

harmony and security in the group with values such as tradition and reciprocity. Its

origin could date back some 50,000 years. Examples where it can happen: children

aged one month, tribes and clans, some sports clubs and urban tribes.

BEIGE: SURVIVAL

PURPLE: SAFETY

RED: POWER


26/70




It is estimated that about 20% of the world population, which also owns 5% of power

has this VMeme as characteristic of their way of life. Their life conditions resemble a

jungle with threats. They are egocentric, proud, with high self-esteem anddetermination, authoritarian, and they need to fulfill their needs immediately. They

utilize the exploitation, the astuteness and sometimes heroism. Its origin could date

back some 10,000 years. Examples where it can happen: children from 2 years,

authoritarian bosses, dictators, juveniles stage of rebellion.

It is estimated that about 40% of the world population, which also owns 30% of power,

has this VMeme as characteristic of their way of life. Their life conditions are

determined by a sense, direction or purpose. They sacrifice to obtain a reward in the

future. Their world is controlled by the last truth. Its origin could date back some 5,000

years. They have values such as obedience, loyalty, morality and respect for the laws

of country. Examples where it can happen: children aged 5 or 6 years, fundamentalism

and dogmatic religions.

It is estimated that over 30% of the world population, which also owns over 50% of

power, has this VMeme as characteristic of their way of life. Their life conditions take

place in a world filled with opportunities and resources. They are independent and

oriented towards success and materialism. There is much competition outside what

causes they are in tension in order to increase their competitiveness and growth. They

move among values such as success, scientists, efficiency, change, autonomy and

personal achievement. Its origin dates from over 300 years. Examples where it can

happen: after the crisis of adolescence, shopping centers, Wall Street, individualism in

XX and XXI century.

It is estimated that more than 10% of the world population, which also owns 15% of

power, has this V

Meme as characteristic of their way of life. Their life conditions takeplace in a world where resources are common goods. Their priorities are relationships

and community membership. They move among values such as trust, egalitarianism,

BLUE: ORDER

ORANGE: SUCCESS

GREEN: COMMUNITY


27/70




harmony, authenticity, sensibility, empathy, etc. Its origin dates back some 150 years.

Examples where it can happen: environmental groups, social responsibility, human

rights, NGOs, etc.

It is estimated that about 1% of the world population, which also owns 5% of power has

this VMeme as characteristic of their way of life. This is the first VMeme of the second

Tier where a great change occurs regarding the VMemes of the first Tier. Their life

conditions occur in a complex, chaotic, uncertain world where one is responsible for

oneself but not at the expense of another. Despite their individualism, they care about

others and think globally. One could summarize with the quotation of the visionaryinventor Buckminster Fuller: If the success or failure of this planet, and of human

beings, depended on how I am and what I do, how would I be? What would I do?

Their values revolve around existence, acceptance, awareness, change,

interdependence, flexibility, synergy, etc. Its origin dates back just over 50 years.

Examples where it can happen: complex thought, system dynamics, chaos theory,

Wired magazine.

It is estimated that about 0,1% of the world population, which also owns 1% of power,

has this VMeme as characteristic of their way of life. Their life conditions take place in a

world with a delicate balance among the different interdependence of the various

elements that form the whole organism Earth. Their values lean toward experience,

consciousness, holism, global integration. Examples where it can happen: Gaia

hypothesis, pluralism and harmony in Gandhis ideas, Teilhard de Chardins

noosphere.

To finish this first part dedicated to the truth, science and part of the past, here

there is the speech of Professor Graves, obtained in Beck and Cowan (1996 p.319),

about the future seen from 1974, year in which he wrote it:

The present moment finds our society attempting to negotiate the most

difficult, but at the same time the most exciting, transition the human race has

faced to date. It is not merely a transition to a new level of existence but the

start of a new movement in the symphony of human history. The future offersus, basically, three possibilities:

(1) Most gruesome is the chance that we might fail to stabilize our world and,

YELLOW: SYNERGY

TURQUOISE: HOLISM


28/70




through successive catastrophes regress as far back as the Ik tribe has.

(2) Only slightly less frightening is the vision of fixation in the D-Q/E-R/F-S

[BLUE-ORANGE-GREEN] societal complex. This might resemble George

Orwells 1984, with its tyrannical, manipulative government glossed over by

a veneer of humanitarian-sounding double-think and moralistic

rationalization, and is a very real possibility in the next decades.

(3) The last possibility is that we could emerge into the G-T [YELLOW] level and

proceed toward stabilizing our world so that all life can continue. If we

succeed in the last alternative, we will find ourselves in a very different world

from what we know now and we will find ourselves thinking in a very different

way.

3 CONSTRUCTION OF THE FOUNDATIONS FOR A NORMATIVE

MODEL IN THE COMPANY

The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams Anna Eleanor Roosevel t (1884-1962)

Proportion is the beauty of measured order".

Ramn Llull (1232-1315)

3.1 STATE OF ART IN COMPANIES AND ITS RSC

Once made visible the proposals of the Spiral dynamics and focusing on the main

issue of this work, Sustainability, the company and its CSR, there will be an

evolutionary journey of the company through the perspective of the Spiral dynamics.Subsequently, it will be proposed the basis of a model that would be integral and

coherent, first, with the Yellow level and later with the Turquoise in the Spiral dynamics.

As indicated in Figure 2.6, yellow and turquoise levels are those for the

Reconstruction. In this reconstruction, not only it is admitted that human being is a

subsystem of the biosphere (already supported by the green VMeme) but that people

act accordingly. As a result of it, in the construction of the foundations of the model,

Environment will be taken as the starting point. The economic and materialistic

paradigm, so relevant in the Orange VMeme is subject to the Biosphere, which is


29/70




important in VMemes Green, Yellow and Turquoise. Wilber (2000) materializes it in a

holonic way in the figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1: Evolution of the Universe

Source: Based on Wilber (2000)

According to Table 2.2 of Gudynas (2004), it might say, with some margins on their

classification, that weak sustainability is nurtured by deep Orange VMeme, strong

sustainability by Green VMeme and super strong sustainability begins with YellowVMeme and it is strengthened in the Turquoise. Graphically, it could translate that

Orange VMeme is equivalent to Figure 3.2 where the economic dimension is the most

important and social and Environment responsibility are mere appendages. In figure

3.3, the three dimensions of sustainable development are equally important and

correspond to GreenV

Meme.


30/70




Figure 3.2: Orange vMeme Figure 3.3: Green vMeme

Source: Elaborated by the author from the dimensions of SustainableDevelopment

As indicated in Figure 3.1, where biosphere includes physiosphere and thus the

economic and materialistic paradigm, the importance lies in Environment in which

the human being is immersed. The transformation of that can reach a point of collapse

in which humanity even may not to survive. Observing all this, it will be clarified from

the point of view of values that the term sustainability, that Gudynas had examined

previously, has certain ambiguities. According to Varey (2004), the concept of

sustainability is lost in a maze. He indicates that one can get up more than 500

definitions of sustainability and by 1995 it had already found 386 definitions of

sustainable development. Regarding the difference between sustainable development

and sustainability, the fact is that it is not all the same, but if one frames sustainable

development in one of the many definitions of sustainability, some sort of resemblance

would be able to find.

Similarly, Varey (2004) finds a lot of instruments and concepts in that maze of

sustainability used by different specialists in sustainability: ISO 14001, the living planet

index, lifecycle analysis, ecological footprints, deep ecology principles, etc. The

questions, that those specialists according to Varey (2004), ask themselves is whether,

perhaps, this one is the object that they are seeking. Varey (2004) indicates that the

understanding of what these instruments and their differences are is a technical

challenge, what often takes a technical function. Therefore, it is a challenge for these

specialists why there are such as those instruments and what is their importance.

Finally, Varey (2004, pp.8-9) concludes: To begin to understand sustainability is toacknowledge one simple premise: Sustainability is not a defined technical term, but a

moral concept capable of individual definition within a social and physical environment


31/70




(ie a biopsychosocial construct). Sustainability is to be seen as a values-based term,

making it an ethical construct, and not just an objective fact. It is distinct from the

engineering processes, community actions or governance procedures which are the

visible indications of the application of that construct. In accepting sustainability is a

value based concept like love, justice, goodness, beauty or truth - we are provided

with a way through the maze enabling us to see sustainability with clarity.

Table 3.1: Corporate Sustainability & Value systems.

vMEMES CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY

RED

There is not sensitivity for Corporate Sustainability although there may besome situations imposed by the exterior (legislation or shopper boycotts).

Values: Respect, personal power, strength, territorial, rivalry, intimidation,loyalty to persons, hedonism.

BLUE

It satisfies with the welfare of society on the basis of legal liability as seenin one of the steps of Carrolls pyramid.

Values: Orderliness, duty, loyalty, obedience, discipline, guilt, conformity,permanence, clarity, justice.

ORANGE

Besides the legal issues also integrate the ethical and ecological.Itsmotivation is the "business-case". It is promoted if it has economic

repercussions.Values: Self esteem, reward, results, quality, productivity, careeradvancement, innovation, control, creativity, entrepreneur, competition,satisfaction, image.

GREEN

It consists of balancing the economic, the social and the ecological asshown in Figure 3.3. Here, motivation is directed to the importance ofhuman potential, social responsibility and caring for the planet.

Values: Harmony, consensus, conflict avoidance, equality, openness,participation, teamwork, decency, trust, honesty.

YELLOW

Functional and balanced solutions are sought synergistically.Sustainabilityis important in itself and is the inevitable direction of progress.

Values: Tolerance for uncertainty and paradoxes, insight, learning,flexibility, ability to reflect, integrity, systems thinking, long-term orientation.

TURQUOISE

Sustainability is at the heart of organization. It contributes to the qualityand continuity of life of every entity.Sustainability is the only alternativebecause of the interdependence of all beings and phenomena.There is a

global responsibility of each person or entity on the other beings.

Values: interdependence, inspiration, future generations, wisdom,sufficiency, responsible living, ability to forgive.


32/70




In Table 3.1, elaborated from Marrewijk and Were (2003) and Marrewijk (2010),

Corporate Sustainability is reconsidered in relation to a set of principles or value

systems according to the different colours of Spiral dynamics. The company in eachlevel of existence would be influenced by a number of values that are guiding its

structure and performance.

Varey (2004) and secondly Marrewijk (2003; 2010), highlight the importance of the

principles and deep values that transmit the different VMemes on Sustainability, both at

the individual and corporate or society level. All of the above underlines the importance

of using the Spiral dynamics as a tool for understanding and building the foundation of

the model.

3.2 NEW DIMENSIONS FOR THE MODEL

In this section, from a standpoint ofYELLOW VMeme, It will be built the foundations of

the model. Besides to the Spiral dynamics, it will be used the support of AQAL model

(all quadrants, all levels) of Wilber (1996) about the four quadrants offigure 3.4.

Figure 3.4: Four Quadrants

Source: Wilber (1996)

In his integral theory for developing a map of the reality, he divides this into four

quadrants, two of them individuals and two collectives or two internal and two external,

as it is shown in figure 3.4.

INTERIOR EXTERIOR

INDIVIDUAL INTENTIONAL BEHAVIORAL

COLLECTIVECULTURAL

(Worldspace)SOCIAL(System)


33/70




Wilber (1996, p.121) indicates The quadrants are all interwoven. They are all mutually

determining. They all cause, and are caused by, the other quadrants. This idea was

exposed by him with a simple example, the thought of going to a store. This thought

would correspond to the upper left quadrant, which would be a scientifically observable

behaviour in the upper right quadrant through brainwaves. This thought would make

sense within the cultural context of the knowledge of a language; therefore it would be

in the lower left quadrant. Finally, each culture has a social correlation in issues of

types of technologies, production factors or institutions that, in the case of stores as

such a factor could be observed in the lower right quadrant.

Before continuing in this investigative process of complexity to form the basis for the

model under the map of the four quadrants, it would be necessary to note what

Korzybski (1995) declared. For him, the map is not the territory and the name is not the

thing named. Apprehending reality with all its factors and conditions would be like the

whole map of the territory in Borges, so it is evident that an approach from complexity

is always indeterminate. However, if one tries to see this reality from different points of

views, the uncertainty can reduce.

As indicated Visser (2003), the economist E.F. Schumacher in his book A guide for the

perplexed (1977) distinguished four different fields of knowledge, exposed in Figure

3.5 that have some similarity to those designed by Wilber (1996) subsequently.

Figure 3.5: Four quadrants from Schumacher

Source: Based on Schumacher

Covey, Merrill and Merrill (1996) also developed a model of four elements to visualizethe personal reality. Extrapolating its dimension: Physical-Mental-Social-Spiritual into

the quadrants, the figure 3.6 materializes.

Ones own invisibleinner experiences

Ones own visible outerappearance

Invisible innerexperiences of others

Visible outer appearanceof others


34/70




Figure 3.6: Human dimensions.

Source: Based on Covey, Merrill y Merrill (1996)

Mallmann (1973) exposed the human needs and their satisfiers. Human Beings in their

human development needed, living {existence (subsistence, security) and coexistence

(belongingness, Esteem)} and growth {achievement (development, renewal) and

perfection (maturity, transcendence)}. From these arose nine human needs

(maintenance protection love understanding participation recreation

creation meaning synergy) and their satisfiers (intra-human, inter-human and extra-

human).

Figure 3.7: Human aspirations for development.

Source: Based on Mallmann (1973).

Later Max-Neef, who worked with Mallmann, would describe his thesis on Humandevelopment with four dimensions for the existential needs: being, having, doing and

interacting. At those existential needs, he added nine axiological needs (Subsistence

MENTAL PHYSICAL

SPIRITUAL SOCIAL

GROWTH LIVING

ACHIEVEMENT(Development and

renewal)

EXISTENCE(Subsis tence and

security)

PERFECTION(Maturity and

transcendence)

COEXISTENCE(Belongingness

and esteem)


35/70




protection affection understanding participation leisure- creation identity and

freedom) which would give a matrix of 36 cells (Max-Neef, Elizalde and Hopenhayn,

1991). Such needs could be met in three contexts:

1. In relation to oneself.

2. In relation to the social group.

3. In relation to the environment.

Wilber (1996) simplified his four quadrants in three, taking the right side (external) with

the possibility to be described with the objective language of the it, the upper left

quadrant described with the language of I and the lower left with the language of we.

Wilber (1996) called the Big Three (Figure 3.8) and suppose certain correlations with

other systems such as traditional disciplines, aesthetics, ethics and science or the

Beautiful, the Good and the Truth in Plato. Besides he linked it to the three worlds of

Karl Popper (subjective (I), cultural (we) and objective (it)), Habermas three validity

claims (subjective sincerity, intersubjective justness and objective truth) or Kants

trilogy (Critique of J udgment, Critique of Practical Reason and Critique of Pure

Reason). Finally one can find some similarity to Covey (1989): independence,

interdependence and dependence.

Figure 3.8: The Big Three

I (SELF) IT (NATURE)

Consciousness, subjectivity, self,

and self expression (including art

and aesthetics), truthfulness,

sincerity.

Science and technology, objetive

nature, empirical forms (including

brain and social systems),

propositional truth (singular an

functional fit)

Ethics and moral, worldviews,

common context, culture,

intersubjective meaning, mutual

understanding, appropriateness,

justness.

WE (CULTURE)

Source: Wilber (1996)


36/70




In this interdisciplinary bio-psycho-socio-cultural model will be established a dimension

for each quadrant. The three dimensions of sustainable development in Figure 3.3

economic, social and environmental from the Green VMeme will be replaced by a

new model with four dimensions which will be explained in more detail in the next

section. The model will be based from the quadrants of Figure 3.4 of Wilber (1996) and

the figure 3.7 Human aspirations for development of Mallmann (1973). As a first

requirement, within the Yellow VMeme and even also for Turquoise VMeme, is set the

behavioral and existence dimension of the right upper quadrant, ENVIRONMENT as

something visible and external where each individual interacts for existing and living.

Regarding the social and coexistence dimension of the right lower quadrant will be

established the GLOBAL RIGHTS . At the lower left quadrant as the basis of culture

and perfection will be placed GLOBAL ETHICS and finally at the upper left quadrant

as something intentional and achievement the RESPONSIBLE WELLBEING .

Figure 3.9: Basic dimensions for the normative model

GROWTH LIVING

INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLEWELLBEING

ENVIRONMENT

COLLECTIVEGLOBALETHICS

GLOBALRIGHTS

Source: Elaborated by the author

3.3 THE INDIVIDUAL DIMENSIONS OF THE MODEL

As a clarification to the construction of the foundations of the model, this will be created

from the individual and not from the company, being able to extrapolate from holonic

form, both to society (companies, organizations, countries) and to human species in

that triad of complex interrelationships of Morin (1994): individual-society-species.

Societies are composed of individuals and the values of these, if mostly have reached


37/70




the same level of mind capacity, should be aligned with the values of companies,

organizations or countries where they belong to. Thus, the foundations of that

conscious model, which will be used for the performance of any business or human

organization, will start to established. Furthermore, the foundations of the model, that

will be constitute here, can promote a wider field of research for more inquiries beyond

this work.

3.3.1 Environment

The choice of ENVIRONMENT instead of Sustainability is determined, as Varey said

(2004), because of the different values that had the multiple definitions of

Sustainability. Thus, it will be described and analyzed the Environmental functions in

relation to human beings in an objective language. Although the fact that this may have

an anthropocentric character, it will be the complex, systemic, big picture that will be

obtained in the interaction with the other quadrants what will give a more bio-centric

nuance later. Moreover, one must not forget that if there was a collapse of mankind,

adding besides their extinction, Earth or Environment would continue here, alive either

as bacteria or microorganisms or any other more complex living being. What matters in

this model is that the human being is also co-protagonist. Thus, thinking about the

dialogical relationship Wellbeing (in human beings) Environment has ananthropocentric component. These two upper quadrants with their connotations

Achievement / Responsible Wellbeing and Existence / Environment will be the ones

which guide, firstly, the whole model based on the Yellow VMeme.

The analysis in this quadrant, and the other quadrants, Wellbeing, Ethics and Rights,

will be realized the same layout as the model of basic dimensions of Figure 3.9, so at

the end one gets, as result, a model composed of 16 smaller quadrants. That is, each

of the dimensions (Wellbeing, Environment, Ethics and Rights), as a whole, will consist

of four parts and it will be the union of these four dimensions, as parts, that will give the

normative model based on the paradigm of Sustainability.

For the construction of this quadrant, Environmental functions in Tables 2.1 of J acobs

(1991) will be the foundation. In order to place these features on the map, the upper

right quadrant will be assigned provision of resources which is the exterior and

essential function of Environment for our existence. Regarding the upper left

quadrant, it will be set direct and conscious consumption services because recreation

of the landscape or the increases of knowledge are part of the internal achievement inan individual growth. Moreover, indirect and conscious consumption services for its

collective and cultural transcendence on life support, climate regulation and


38/70




stabilization of ecosystems will be placed in the lower left quadrant. Finally, it will be

located in the lower right quadrant, assimilation of waste for regulating socially the

disruption of the collective need for coexistence because of the possible effects that

human beings cause on the Environment. Therefore, the Figure 3.10 will be

established as follows.

Figure 3.10: Sub-dimensions of Environment

ENVIRONMENT

DIRECT ANDCONSCIOUS

CONSUMPTION

SERVICES

PROVISION OFRESOURCES

INDIRECT ANDUNCONSCIOUSCONSUMPTION

SERVICES

ASSIMILATION OFWASTE

Source: Elaborated by the author

3.3.2 Responsible Wellbeing

One of the points that may be a surprise is the change of the economic dimension in

the model of Green VMeme (Figure 3.3) to Responsible Wellbeing. Felber (2012) in

his conception of Common Welfare Economy, which I personally place in a transition of

values Green-Yellow, redefines economic success as a measure of what counts, the

goal, not the means. That is, monetary indicators are values of change but not social

utilities. People need food, clothing, hugs, clean environment, etc. However economic

balance sheets of companies and GDP in the different countries do not show reliable

information on wellbeing. As Felber (2012) indicates, current success indicators do not

report if people are stressed, if there is equality or discrimination, if there is justice in

the economic sharing, if there is confidence or fear, etc. Therefore, the Wellbeing

dimension will be an end and not a means although the economic factor will be

included in the quadrant, but simply as a means to the Wellbeing. Moreover, from

Date post:	03-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	responsiblewellbeing
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Construction of the foundations for a normative model based on the paradigm of Sustainability. FMT...

Documents