Let us say a time-traveler from the 18th century gets dropped off on the Earth today. She will look around and find the place to be out of her ordinary. Of course, right? Let us also say that she was an inventor herself and has had interests in making useful things. When she observes the products built and developed by companies for human civilization over the next three centuries, she will be awe-struck on the highest note at the speed of development and distribution.
A quick recap in history. While several civilizations lost their way in the world, the human race kept evolving through time. We did not give up during the most extreme of circumstances like World World I or II or other financial breakdowns. The countries of Eastern Asia like Japan, South Korea, and Singapore were affected more than the others in the past, and they still managed to prosper aplenty. There is one definite reason that made this growth happen. It is the focus that humans had on economic sustainability without letting go of human rights.
Connecting the age of development through history and the current scenario of technological improvements, we can safely put forward a near-fact that driving economic sustainability is helpful for the betterment of civilization in terms of wellbeing and progress. Let us dive into economic sustainability and human rights in this article (we will also relate things to the function of design).
An exposition on Economic Sustainability
What do we mean by economic sustainability? In the book, Stubborn Attachments, the author Tyler talks about a plant called Crusonia, borrowing the concept from the Economist Frank Knight. This mythical plant is an automatically growing crop that produces more output than the year before and does not affect the environment negatively. Relating this theory to the current technological scene, it is about creating products that perform better than the past, without human interventions. If zero human intervention is not possible, then we could strive for minimal interference. How do we apply this in the field of design? By creating -
Processes and workflows that help with easier research and development
Design systems that produce better output in terms of the speed of design creation, delivery, and helpfulness for humans (designers and users)
Focussing on economic sustainability results in happiness in the long run (reasons explained in upcoming paragraphs). Hence, it is the right thing to do. Let us say someone argues about the benefits of creating design systems, meaning that they require extra effort and time. Such disagreements can be sorted out within the notion of aggregation, i.e., by making them understand that enough people will benefit from creating these systems in the longer run.
"The main point is simply that if the gains to the future are significant and ongoing, those gains should eventually outweigh one-time costs by a significant degree."
However, how can we say that a strong focus on economic sustainability will result in wellbeing when clearly someone is not happy. This is where the concept of Treadmill Effects comes in. As humans, we are attuned to worry about the present and the 'here.' If we are unhappy at this current moment, we decide to let that dictate every choice of ours. When, in fact, we have never been happier than before in terms of historical evidence. We have the necessary tools to build anything that we desire with our knowledge (AI methods, advanced prototyping tools, AR/VR, Cinema 4D, game design, and more), and we can also change our career paths whenever we wish to, in this digital age. The time-traveler from the first paragraph had none of these comforts. In conclusion, happiness is a relative term, and the people that are currently unhappy also prefer economic sustainability for its benefits of a higher salary and others as described above.
A case of Human Rights
Now, let us understand the 'human rights' part of the equation. If there is anything that must hinder economic sustainability, it is when human rights are exempted or let go. The author prefers the concept of Wealth Plus when discussing the disadvantages of using GDP to measure economic sustainability.
"'Wealth Plus,' if I may use that term to refer to the accumulated gains from growth, accounts for leisure time, household production (valuable activities you perform at home for free, be it mending socks or using Facebook) environmental amenities, among other adjustments. Current GDP statistics have a bias toward what can be measured easily and relatively precisely, rather than focusing on what contributes to human welfare."
He instills the conviction that for sustenance, we need to take into account the individual/institutions' rights for having leisure time, autonomy, and liberty while pursuing the goals of creating, earning, saving, investing, and redistributing (for charity). (Economic sustenance will also take environmental sustainability into account, which means we will have to pay heed in preventing man-made disasters and repressing the effects of natural disasters.)
How does this translate, as policies, in our companies? By providing -
Time off from regular work for innovation and play
Enough facilities for lowering the burn-out rate
Sufficient opportunities to grow in verticals that employees find interest in and nurturing their ideas
Creating a reliable support system for prolonged employment rates
Whenever we hear the word 'human rights,' we tend to think of it as intuition or fictional lie that does not have much to do with the work we do. More like how ethics can work in situations such as, "Would you let go of a designer who is not relatively skilled but poor or someone who is quite skilled and rich and will not be affected by the layoff?".
While these are essential quandaries to ponder upon, the author highlights the importance of following the rules/rights (with exceptions) in everyday decision making that will help improve personal lives and the civilization as a whole. The two pointers (rules) that stand out are:
An apparent short-term gratification is easy to fall into but might not result in consequential benefits in the longer run. E.g., Choosing to ignore design errors in the first stage of development will lead to accumulated errors in the final stage that would require more resources to rectify.
The different schools of thought in terms of utilitarianism (promoting sacrifice to the extreme) and common-sense morality (living self-centered lives) can exist together rather than fight with each other. E.g., Deciding to realize our potential by earning money, and then helping others can work out in both the schools of thought.
Ultimately, the author emphasizes the importance of the big picture goals by abiding human rights, presenting a compelling case for the civilization's prosperity. When in doubt, choose the decision that serves more people in the longer run (10 or 100 years from now).
For a designer, the takeaways can be as strong as a change in perspective about economic growth as an essential faculty in saving civilizations. Or, as simple as the positive effects of ethics and human rights in our day-to-day lives.
PS: I have skipped several concepts that the author touches upon such as being agnostic when it comes to short-term policies, ways to navigate uncertainty, and more. This is not a summary but a perpetuation of the concepts introduced in the book. There were several queries that I got to ponder on and would like to discuss with the author someday for enhanced clarity. Anyways, I’ll wrap things here for today.
If you've read till here, I'm obliged to call you my friend. I hope this article was worth your time. Let me know or subscribe! I’ll get to see you next week in your emails. Thank you. <3