ISSUES 2 : THIS WAY, PLEASE!

Issues 2

: ThIs way, please!Preferred futures 2112

future Politics, business, art, and joy

Published by house of futures, aPril 2012

Pric

e: 1

69

,- d

kkr

issn

19

04

-34

14

: scenarIos for susTaInable socIeTIes In 100 years: a one year conversaTIon : how do mIndseTs shIfT? : paThs are made by walkIng : Two sensed fuTures : make more use : urban lIvIng : The sIgnIfIcanT evenT : and oTher movIng Issues

issues is Published by house of futures (hof),nybrogade 26a, 1.-2., dk – 1203 coPenhagen k.web: www.houseoffutures.dke-mail: [email protected]: +45 2021 1147

editor in chief: gitte larsen, editions / house of futures

art director: stine skøtt olsen, nxt / house of futures

layout: gitte larsen & stine skøtt olesen

articles: ole fogh kirkeby, steen svendsen, gitte larsen, søren steen olsen, dominic balmforth, flemming wisler, inga gerner nielsen, mad-eleine kate mcgowan, andrew todd, gry worre hallberg, steen hilde-brandt, rasmus ejrnæs, dr. saamdu chetri, hans fink, josePh bragdon, john fullerton, kathrine richardson, hardin tibbs, minik t. rosing, Peder andersen, ole jensen, camilla bjerre, malene annikki lundén, søren hermansen, thomas færgeman, robert costanza, dr. wendy l. schultz

Photos: stine skøtt olesen (where no credits given) rolando diaz (P 3) sille arendt (P 10, 67, 75, 104) adePt architects / sla, denmark (P 38) kodak (P 39), dominic balmforth (P 39), david ritter (P 39), berendsen (P 39), feliPe gabaldón (P 39), steve johnson (P 39), malene annikki lundén (P 44), matias jensen (P 143) søren m. osgood (P 143)

cover and illustrations:stine skøtt olesen, nxt

illustration (P 69, 77): dominic balmforth, susturb

Performers: birgitte klæbel, jens sPaze elvekjær klæbel, kenneth harri-son, line loklindt, anna lawaetz, trine mee sook gleeruP, louise yaa aisin, dj hvad, iwona rejmus, goodiePal, sarah armstrong, majken midtgaard karlberg, rebekka elisabeth anker, søren steen olsen, gry worre hallberg, inga gerner nielsen, madeleine kate mcgowan.

english adaPtation: inge tranter

Printed by globaltags a/s / atm arktryk.www.globaltags.dk

PaPer: cover 250 g multioffset, content 130 g multiart silk and 120 g multioffset.

Price (excluding Postage):denmark: dkr 169, sweden: skr 220, us: $34, uk: £18, euro: €23

order issues by e-mail to [email protected]

issn: 1904-3414circulation: 2000

issues is a commercial-free magazine

aPril 2012

the Project ‘in100 years – starting now’ is suPPorted by the velux foundation. www.veluxfoundations.dk

read more about the Project, watch videos and see Pictures from the four in100y-seminars at: www.in100y.dkwww.vimeo.com/in100years www.flickr.com/Photos/houseoffutures/

In100y – sTarTIng now

imagining what the world could be like in

100 years is practically a fool’s errand. still

we have an obligation to try and the pos-

sibility of creating a future worth living. let

us begin today. would you like to join us?

this way, please!

Photo: rolando diaz

ole fogh kirkeby, at the

first ‘in100y’-seminar.

ole fogh kirkeby

The myTh of mellon

The inhabitants always addressed themselves as “we” as in “we remember”, “we would like to eat” – but never “our name is X”. The proper name was only allowed as a greet-ing and recognition of Otherness. It was never used as the right to exclude. People never introduced themselves by name, and everyone seemed to know each other. Living creatures weren’t put into taxonomies, no distinction was drawn between human and animal, and even the smallest of creatures was awarded the respect of addressing it by its own name. Fish, fowl and animals seemed not to have been a part of their diet for ages, but the selection of ed-ible leaves was abundant.

The motives of others were never mentioned, and people refused to attribute negative psychological traits (like selfish, stingy, ambitious, or lustful) to themselves or others, as we so often do when apportioning blame. Only descriptions of a moral and ethical nature were given.

In general, not much was spoken. Gestures and facial expressions had evolved to an extraordinarily sophisticated level. Language was located in the face, in the eyes and in the hands. The body was language, much more so than the voice. It made for an oddly silent public life. This was heightened by an apparently total lack of transportation. How do I express this? Every person was their immediate presence. Nobody was alone, but neither really with anyone. We inferred that people must have a gift for visualization that we couldn’t comprehend. A child could sit alone on a chair at its parent’s home and yet at the same time be in a school class surrounded by other children. Parents went to work in the same way. All organizations were virtual – but mediated by nothing other than the individual consciousness.

We discovered that people’s voices resonated inside their own and others’ heads, but not in the space between them. This must have been due to a cognitive technology so radical we could never understand it. Maybe this was what made the silence necessary. They appeared to give each other an immense amount of attention - the degree of which I have never seen before. We sensed their intense presence of mind towards each other, and when they di-rected it at us we felt us strangely uplifted, deeply, almost terrifyingly joyfully, touched. We discovered that Logotopia had no police, military, courts or prisons. This can just be comprehended, but neither were there doctors, hospitals nor even graveyards. We had to accept that there was no old age, no deteriorating of the body, no sickness and no death. Equally startling was that every-thing was free. Cause and effect is hard to ascertain, but ap-parently no one had any interest in material possessions, and no desire to distinguish themselves from each other. They did not appear to be particularly concerned with themselves.

Perhaps due to the absence of death, greed, and mate-rial technology other than small scale production of food, there were no scientific institutions. People seemed to be in a purely mental relationship with nature, one I never quite grasped. Did they talk with the crops? We who had travelled together on that ferry met less and less. After some time, our encounters stopped. To ensure myself some sort of connection to the old world, I sometimes visited the ferry at the berth. It lay there, waiting. Soothing me. One afternoon it was missing, and never came back. I began to venture out into the countryside, and it dawned on me that Logotopia was an island. An island where people lived in love, having discovered the secrets of the soul and set it free amongst themselves. But I, who was not truly a part of this community, who did not know the secret, felt foreign and alien. I could not feel worried or fearful with them, as all they did was care and nurture. But having them reading my thoughts, looking right through me, feeling my feelings as I felt them and opening the doors to my sense of self – I have to admit, it made me desperate. So I went out of the city, into the countryside where it was completely unpopulated.

One day, I went further out than usual and came to vegetation more familiar to me than anything I had seen in a long time. A seemingly never-ending forest of pine and crippled oaks – perhaps the kind of oaks where only the tops are visible, because the roots once became cov-ered with sand. I wandered through this forest, drawing my path through the pines, the lowest branches of which were often high enough to allow me to pass underneath without crouching.

After many hours of meandering, I exited the tangled woods, appearing at its fringes in a terrain of fledgling saplings, heather and wild grasses. Maneuvering amongst brambles and buckthorn, I was startled to find a gravel path as I remembered them from my childhood. It led to a sandy area dotted with dunes. As I walked the path through the heather, the dunes rose around me and the place became more and more familiar to me. At first I thought my sight was deceiving me. Old, red wooden cabins, thatched with straw, banners flowing in the wind, the hotel and a lone automobile. When the road drew its oh so familiar bend through the little hamlet and its only two stores, a bakery and a grocery store, I saw the summer cabin precisely where it had always been.

I took the steps up the worn staircase, opened the door and started searching …

The Myth of Mellon is a tale about getting to the future by way of a shortcut through chronological time. I read the story in a book I found in a most peculiar way.

For many years, I dreamed frequently about the sum-mer cottage where I had lived as a child. A classic holiday town on the west coast, still sparsely populated. Back then, there were only a few houses on the sand dunes, red log cabins or straw-thatched brick houses so typical of the time, but each with their own unmistakable distinctiveness. The house was made of rough wood, but with a view over both the shore as well as the hinterland. Its interior was constructed from a cardboard-like veneer of the type since prohibited by fire regulations. It had no basement and a flat, tar paper roof.

In my dreams, I returned to search for an unspeci-fied something. Naturally, I knew the contents of the few drawers in the house, and its spare construction did not allow for any hidden spaces. Yet I continued to search. Observing my searching as logical scenarios, it seems that:

Sometimes I searched for something that, although I didn’t know what it was, had to be immensely valu-able. Something I felt had to be there. At other times, I searched for something I had no reason to believe was there, but which I was nonetheless compelled to look for.

Against all odds, I found a book in the bottom of a cupboard one night. Neither old nor new, it was timeless. In it, I read a memoir of a person describing how to return to the land of Mellon. The person who dares to believe this story must conclude that he is the only person ever to have made the journey.

The Traveler’s TaleNo person reaches Mellon without going through their memories. Somewhere within their memory lies an experi-ence that will prove to be the entry into Mellon. This does not mean that the journey has been made before, either dreaming or awake.

Nothing could be more wrong than searching for an entry in the traditional sense. There are neither doors, gates, hidden passages, nor cracks. It is both simpler and more obvious. Since your memory is wholly your own, there is only one entry that fits this exact memory. Only one sign, one entry. So you have to learn how to search first – you can only try.

I tried for many years. One morning, I walked down a steep hill to a narrow pier where an old ferry took any pas-senger who signaled for departure.

I sat down and tried to repeat this stroll from hilltop to firth. Behind closed eyelids I stopped at the small berth and raised the signal. As I slowly became submerged in the

atmosphere of this memory, I entered the experience so completely, that I was no longer present anywhere else.

As I waited for the ferry, I noticed a lively bustle behind me. Many others came from behind me as if they had seen the ferry approach from afar. Together we boarded and weighed the ferry down to the waterline, yet to our surprise, the vessel steered with agility into the ocean. The shoreline soon disappeared behind us, a gale created a high swell and before us, an insurmountable darkness loomed. As we pen-etrated the darkness, winter arrived. Before long, the ferry was struggling with ice floats, and before long, it got stuck.

Even though the ferry was stuck, we still moved forward. The ice itself must have been set into motion. The darkness gave way to an unending terrain, otherworldly clear to our sight. We continued like this for what seemed like years. No day or night could be discerned, just a radiant sky above us and a frozen continent carrying us forward.

One day, a strange bird flew above us. As more birds joined it, the ice began to melt.

New land appeared on the horizon. As we approached, we could see the contours of land, and sensed its saturated wealth of color and smell. Summer had arrived again.

At last, the old ferry arrived at a berth built of ma-terials we had never seen before. The city beyond it was equally foreign to us. The hinterlands of the city had stronger colors than even regions where lemons bloom, and its many bowers opened up blissful, quenching close-ness. We were struck by the beauty of the inhabitants, their race and color seemingly a mix of every ethnicity known – or perhaps a completely new ethnicity. Their overwhelm-ing kindness and infectious joy made us almost uneasy.

We realized quickly that the climate was unequalled, perfectly temperate. Nights were cool, with clear starry skies and warm afternoons under a tender sun, the glow of which was as if shone through muslin.

As the days passed, we saw that no clouds ever dotted the sky and the flora bloomed abundantly even though no rain fell. Or rather, that an area to the north was perpetu-ally misty, and the inhabitants went there whenever they wanted to experience rain.

We discovered that the rooms in the houses changed temperature to constantly match our needs. If we started getting cold, they heated up. When we started perspiring they cooled us down. We realized that the rooms could read our minds, but we never found any heating sources.

It was called Logotopia. Unfortunately, I can only describe this strange land in fragments, since these pages are finite in number, and my memory is failing me. Instead, I shall convey what made the most lasting impressions on me.

11290

20 134

Issues 2 : conTenT

4 intro: myth of mellon. a story about transition. by

ole fogh kirkeby

12 big Picture thinking. broadening the agenda

of sustainability and growth. editorial by steen

svendsen and gitte larsen

43 10 short stories about sustainability and

growth. industrial ecology/ cradle to cradle

denmark/ samsoe’s 2030 vision: independent of fossil

fuels/ transition towns/ nature rights – in bolivia/

novozymes in africa/ the 4th bin/ the People’s super-

market/ occupy wall street/ the future we want

164 outro: the oracle

sCeNarIOs TOWarDs 2112. PreFerreD FUTUres FOr sUsTaINaBle sOCIeTIes IN 100 Years.50 welcome to the futures

56 baseline scenario. building blocks for long-term

preferred futures.

60 introduction to the two scenarios.

63 man-made world. the light-toch society.

71 Power of nature. living in oneness.

78 overview of the scenarios.

82 this way, Please! how to use the scenarios.

FaCTs aBOUT The PrOjeCT ‘IN 100 Years’19 to me “in100years” is …

28 a one year conversation

30 shortcut to the ‘in100years’ project

31 4 in100y-seminars

32 the core grouP

33 to me “in100years” is …

34 future mind tours – 4 tailor-made performance

installations of in100y


98 in100years: Productions and findings.

133 to me “in100 years” is …


a la CarTe arTICles

14 living in a time of transformation. by søren

steen olsen

17 concePts of sustainability. by søren steen olsen

36 release our resources, make more use.

by dominic balmforth

40 Paths are made by walking. interview with martin

lidegaard, danish minister for climate and energy. by

søren steen olsen and steen svendsen

87 how do mindsets shift? by ole fogh kirkeby

107 Performing the future. exPerimental futures

studies. by gry worre hallberg, madeleine kate

mcgowan, inge gerner nielsen and gitte larsen

120 the transformative imPact of future mind

tours. by inga gerner nielsen and gry worre hall-

berg

124 biology towards 2112: dealing with the un-

known. interview with Professor of biology carsten

rahbek. by steen svendsen

126 time with time. interview with martin manthorpe,

ncc denmark. by flemming wisler

129 sensing the future. by inga gerner nielsen

142 taste the new mindset. interview with amongst

others carla cammilla hjort. by madeleine kate mc-

gowan

149 urban minds. by dominic balmforth

151 narci-city or theatrum mundi? the urban

stage of the future. by andrew todd

154 wisdom council. by gitte larsen

158 the significant event. establishing universes,

creating movements. by gry worre hallberg

164 online articles

COmmeNTs35 the new world citizens. by steen hildebrandt

42 let it become! by rasmus ejrnæs

47 haPPy nations. by dr. saamdu chetri

48 a truly holistic concePtion of nature. by

hans fink

86 100 years reflection. by joseph bragdon

89 a letter for the hoPeful inhabitants of the

anthroPocene. by john fullerton

105 achieving sustainability. by kathrine richardson

106 the last 100 years: looking back from 2112.

by hardin tibbs

111 fuel the future by the Power of the imagina-

tion. by minik t. rosing

123 sustainability – each generation’s resPonsi-

bility. by Peder andersen

128 a resPectful view of nature. by ole jensen

145 be the change! by camilla bjerre

146 renewal through “commonality communi-

ties”. by malene annikki lundén and søren hermansen

148 a new lifestyle. by thomas færgeman

153 the solutions generation. by robert costanza

156 a vision of life in 100 years in the city of

‘acorn falls’. by wendy l. schultz

contentcontent

editorial

bIg pIcTure ThInkIng. broadening the agenda of sustainability and growth

Our dream at House of Futures is that we, the people of this planet, are able to promise each other more than survival during the next 100 years. We need an open and inclusive approach to be able to do this – since we know so little about what will during the next 100 years. Sustainability and growth/development are the ulti-mate issues for futurists and, indeed, for anyone interested in the future of mankind: how can we sustain, develop and enrich human existence given the limited and priceless resources available? This fundamental question has decisive implications for governments, businesses and organisations – for us, today’s people and future generations.

sUsTaINaBIlITY IN a hOlIsTIC PersPeCTIveSustainable development touches on the very foundations of human existence, and we are entering a new paradigm. In just the past 100 years, the population of the Earth has quadrupled; biomass consumption has more than tripled; raw material extraction has increased eight fold; fossil fuel consumption has increased twelve fold, economic output has increased twenty-two fold. More than three-quarters of the economic output of the past 2000 years has been produced since 1900 – a quarter since 2000 alone. The ‘limits to growth’ debate, which in the 1970’s was about the scarcity of fossil fuels and other raw materials, has been supplemented with the challenge of global warm-ing. In addition, a host of other problems have arisen: the acidification of the oceans, consumption of fresh water, the phosphorus and nitrogen balance and the loss of biodiver-sity, among others. Some say we have already pushed na-ture’s balances so far that we will be compelled under any circumstances to adapt to new conditions with regard to patterns of climate and disease. It will be a warmer future

no matter what we do today. We face enormous challenges we cannot meet without profound changes to our present, unsustainable, course of development. In the light of the prognoses for population develop-ment and economic growth, we must realize we cannot simply be a little more sensible and a little more care-ful. We must fundamentally change our interaction with nature. Therefore we need long-term thinking and holistic thinking – and we need mind-shifting operations and new local and global practices here and now. IN 100 Years - sTarTINg NOWThis edition of ISSUES gives you much more than a sneak peek into the project In 100 Years – starting now. Rework-ing sustainability and growth, a one-year conversation about long-term preferred futures. We present the most important findings from this interdisciplinary process, not least the two qualitative scenarios for sustainable socie-ties 2112, and several articles concerned about sustainable development. In 100 Years is a unique project and a necessary one – and it has been different for a reason. At House of Futures, we want to make more than yet another contribution to the debate on sustainability and growth. We want to expand the agenda - to set a broader and deeper agenda - by including different approaches and insights that can form the basis of new synthesis and ideas. We want to go beyond ‘alarmists’ and ‘deniers’ and instead emphasize the transformative perspective of the long view. The thesis underlying the project is that we can neither go on nor go back. We must redefine our lives in the future – maybe even ourselves – if we are to make sustainable fu-tures possible. We must think differently, and that is what

this project is about. What we must all fear, if fear should be part of our common future, is the day when there is only one true way of thinking about the future of our planet – then we would really be in trouble. To create the future we want for humanity, we must be able to imagine what the future could be like. The future is always different from the past, and it always has been. We DID IT!In recent decades, there has been a considerable and increasing awareness of sustainability and growth, and in-creasing work on these issues on many fronts. In practice, crucial connections exist between sustainability, identity and culture, lifestyle and the economy, politics and nature – and between sustainability today and in the long run. Thus, there is a great need to combine and conjoin knowl-edge from an interdisciplinary field and from scientists as well as visionaries and practitioners. This is not to save the world, as we know it today, but to create the world of tomorrow. In the scenario section you will find two mind-set sce-narios, two preferred futures, looking back from the year 2112. ‘Man-made World’ is about moving on, about adapt-ing and about ambitious political leadership. The ‘Power of Nature’ scenario is more about revival and going with the flow of the inner mind and the wild unknown. Both scenarios are all about discovering new common ground. They are political, social, artificial and spiritual movements towards a more just, fair and joyful society. We hope the scenarios will create awareness of the long and holistic views on our sustainable futures. And we hope they will inspire you to further development with regard to your own doings.

ThaNksWe want to thank each of the almost 170 participants who joined us for one or more of the In100Y seminars and who travelled with House of Futures. One participant told us that he liked the project because ‘the perspective is so long that you cannot figure it out.’ He also told newcomers that ‘nobody was there to perform the solutions, but to become inspired, experiment and learn.’ We hope we succeeded in creating a open-minded meeting place worth remember-ing and building on. Finally, we want to thank the VELUX FOUNDA-TION for supporting the project In 100 Years – starting now. It has been a pleasure being able to work with sus-tainability and growth/development in the long perspec-tive – to explore and broaden the concepts and to take part in framing the preferred futures. Let’s break new common ground – not as a compro-mise, but as a promise. Let’s change and add some “P’s” to the ones we already have: People, Planet, Prosperity, Participation and the Promise to create a Preferred future. Enjoy ISSUES!

steen svendsen, futurist and Partner house of futures, and gitte larsen, futurist and director house of futures, sharing the

project management of the project “in100years – star-ting now.” from the third in100y-seminar at “skovskolen” in nøde-

bo, university of copenhagen. get an overview of the project on p. 30-31.

gitte larsen,

editor-in-chief and

Project manager of

in100years

steen svendsen,

Project manager of

in100years

issues #2: this way, Please!

www.houseoffutures.dk www.houseoffutures.dk

13issues #2: this way, Please!12 editorialeditorial

lIvIng In a TIme of TransformaTIon. the quest for sustainability as a driving force

we are living in a time of transformation – if not by choice then by necessi-

ty. there are limits to any Particular Path of growth, there always have been,

and we are aPProaching the limits of the one we are on.

by søren steen olsen, Public futures /

house of futures

Many societies have succumbed to unsustainable strains on their environment and resource base. Others have succeeded in overcoming critical sustainability threats by transforming themselves technologically and economically, only to find themselves locked in new variations on this theme further down the road. The sustainability agenda is about the limits we are up against next and about the next wave of large-scale structural transformation. The debate on sustainable development is often framed as a conflict between sustainability and economic growth. A conflict between ecology and economy, between caring for nature and caring for the fulfilment of human needs. This makes for a polarization where proponents of sustain-ability tend to come off as opponents to growth and vice versa. On a deeper level, this polarization is supported by an often implied notion of how the world has developed until now, which is broadly speaking the story of a one way street. A development through history from societies of hunters and gatherers via settled agricultural societies, industrial societies and information societies to globalised societies based on knowledge, service and networks. This development is accompanied by an ever growing global population with a rising standard of living and – as a consequence – a growing claim on the global resource base and strain on the biosphere.

FOrgeT The arCheTYPICal TalesThis underlying stylized story, then, is viewed in different ways. At one end of the spectrum we have an interpreta-tion focused on economic development as a continuous alienation from nature: From a world where humans lived as a harmonious part of nature to one where nature is dominated by humans in increasingly unsustainable ways, and where humans live in built environments with little or no contact with nature. On the opposite end we have a focus on the increasingly better living conditions for

humans, and the view that further growth in prosperity, knowledge and technology is a prerequisite not only for human betterment but also for securing environment and nature with all its valuable qualities. In order to deal with long-term challenges 20, 50 or even 100 years ahead, our understanding of the past is crucial. The way we perceive the driving forces of the past is invariably projected into the future. And so, we can start by asking which of the two archetypical views on history is the right one. The answer is neither one. Development is not a one way street, and it is not binary. Neither the past nor the future is about any straightforward choice between dynamic growth and harmonious sustainability. And tran-sition from one type of society to another is by no means a simple result of cumulative growth but at least as much of dramatic qualitative changes on many levels, often fraught with conflict. Conflict between different political and economic interests, between different social patterns, and between different human mindsets. By the same token, we need to realise that sustainabil-ity is not a harmonious or stable condition, but something which is constantly being renegotiated between society, humans and the surrounding environment. Growth is ob-viously a dynamic driving force in its own right, but so is what you might call the quest for sustainability. This quest is in fact a driving force which is at least as dynamic in its effects on social change, transformation, development and growth.

We are The sUrvIvOrsWe tend to forget the immense challenges humans have always faced in their interplay with nature, and how dif-ficult the great transformations have been that they have caused in society, economy, culture and mindsets. The interplay with nature has in fact often come riddled with setbacks to humans. At the same time we need to be aware that the last two centuries represent a decisive break with the path of development stretching back 10,000 years of settled societies and 500,000 years of hunter-gatherer life forms before that.

We are the descendants of precisely those who made it through adversity. Those who came before us actually succeeded in transforming themselves and their societies – changing the energy and resource base on which they re-lied, developing new technologies, new economic systems, new patterns of life, and new ideas about themselves and the world. All in order to overcome the limitations that nature sooner or later would present to any given path of development. It is possible to describe and interpret history from precisely this point of view, and in light of the current debate on sustainability, it is increasingly relevant. Accord-ingly, it is a theme that attracts increasing attention from academic scholars and science popularisers alike. The result is a vast body of work which is of course full of a myriad of details and facets, from how the Siberian hunter-gatherers pushed the mammoth to extinction to political complica-tions in ancient Rome. The present need for a fundamental transformation of our current path of development is far from being unique to our era, but it is a basic condition for human existence throughout history. The question is not if, but how the coming transformations will unfold. It is also a ques-tion of which type of development we want. We have to consciously prepare ourselves for great changes over the coming century in society and economy as well as in our relationship with nature. Equally great changes as those that have taken place over the previous century – and the centuries before that. And we have to do it according to the conditions specific to our time.

The rOaD aheaD: TrIal aND errOrIt is only in retrospect that past developments may appear as following a straightforward trajectory which lends itself to being described by growth rates and apparently smooth trajectories. And it is only in retrospect that, say, the ag-ricultural societies of 18th century Europe, or prehistoric hunter-gatherer forms of life appear stagnant and/or idyl-lic according to temperament. Every generation and every society has always had to painstakingly muddle its way

through to finding solutions to the problems at hand. For 99 percent of human history we were hunter-gatherers. Whilst hunter-gatherers live in close contact with and dependency on nature, they are not necessarily in harmony with it. They are also at its mercy. They have to follow animal migrations. They have to protect themselves against harsh weather, dangerous animals, hostile tribes and diseases. They need to develop skills on how to read nature, assemble knowledge on useful and edible plants, continuously develop and refine their tools. Prehistoric hunter-gatherers were able to take advantage of more fruitful and diverse ecosystems, but in spite of that they needed access to large territories to sustain their way of life. It has been estimated that the hunter-gatherer way of life requires about 25 square kilometres per individual (varying with specific conditions). This compares with even early settled societies which sustained 25 people per square kilometre. i.e. hunter-gatherers needed 625 times as much space as early farmers. When humans spread out from our ancestral home-land in Africa, a sense of adventure may have played its part, but the rule of 25 square kilometres undoubtedly also had its say. When population in a given area grew, it became less sustainable and trying your luck further afield became attractive. And luck really was a large part of it. We know that our ancestors survived in sufficient num-bers to reproduce – eventually resulting in us – but we do not know how many attempts at crossing deserts, climate zones, rivers and oceans failed. Similar lessons apply for agricultural and industrial societies. Their development has been marked by ongo-ing processes of learning that entailed numerous setbacks, large and small. Cultivation methods and technologies frequently failed until more stable solutions were ultimate-ly found. These, in turn, invariably ran into new problems that had to be solved sooner or later. Answers and solu-tions often required the system to change. A central driver of both early industrial society and our present globalised knowledge economy is the market mechanism. This is one big, continuous trial-and-error-

we are the descendants of Precisely those who made it through adversity.

those who came before us actually succeeded in transforming themselves

and their societies – changing the energy and resource base on which they

relied, develoPing new technologies, new economic systems, new Patterns

of life, and new ideas about themselves and the world.



15issues #2: this way, Please!14 living in a time of transformationliving in a time of transformation

concepTs of susTaInabIlITy

introductory article on sustainability concePts with a focus on

the broad concePts of “weak” and “strong” sustainability

by søren steen olsen, Public futures /

house of futures

The Brundtland report has the status of being the launch-ing pad for the global agenda on sustainability. That is why the Brundtland report’s definition of sustainability is a safe starting point to use as a base: “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. It is a fairly broad and general definition: What, for example, are current and future needs? Just as with the concept of growth, there are different definitions of what sustainability is and there will always be different views on what values one should attach to biodiversity, landscapes, habitats etc. In the debate in the West, the Brundtland report is regarded as having put the global environment on the agenda, but one of its great strengths and reasons for its impact was that it connected global environmental issues to the need for global development and reduction of poverty. Until then, there had been a conflict of inter-est between the rich countries’ increasing focus on the environment and the poor countries’ focus on poverty. The Indian leader, Indira Gandhi expressed it as follows at the UN’s Stockholm conference in 1972, which became one one of the launchpads for the UN’s environmental program UNEP: “Aren’t poverty and need the most important pollu-tions? How can we talk to villagers and slum-dwellers of the need to protect the air, the ocean and rivers when their own life is contaminated? The environment cannot be improved in conditions of poverty” (http://www.bu.dk/pages/25.asp). The Brundtland report thus aligned social sustainability as a necessary element. This is also the reason for it being so positive towards economic growth, as the case is: “What is needed now is a new period of economic growth - a growth that is strong as well as socially and environmen-tally stable.”

It is important to bear in mind that sustainability is not a definitive concept. It means that there will always be a political position - either conscious or unconscious - in relation to the choice of development in environment and production. Generally, we distinguish between two concepts of sustainability, so-called “weak” and “strong” sustainability. (See OECD’s Glossary of Statistical Terms http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/search.asp).

TWO geNeral CONCePTIONs OF sUsTaINaBIlITYThese can be characterized briefly as follows: - Weak sustainability: Depletion of resources, break-

ing down of ecosystems and species extinction can be compensated for if this takes place in a process that supports opportunities for continued maintenance or expansion of economic opportunities. Nature, in this respect, is a form of capital, which can be substituted with other kinds of capital. Development is sustainable for as long as it does not harm the prospects of the continued fulfillment of economic necessity.

- Strong sustainability: this viewpoint lays emphasis on development not leading to irretrievable loss of resources. Plants and animal species, ecosystems and raw materials have a value in themselves and not just as input in the economic process.

Many of the indicators for development, which have been suggested as alternatives or supplements to the GDP con-cept can be classified according to these two sustainability perspectives (Neumeyer). These two perspectives lead to potentially fundamen-tally different views of the given pattern of development. They weigh very differently between economy and ecology and thus also give vastly different policy recommendations. They are, however, not necessarily always in conflict with each other. In Danish environmental policy, conserva-tion legislation is a classic example of a strong sustainability perspective, whilst weak sustainability is a characteristic of everything from the issuing of environmental permits for

machine which rewards those developments that meet with a sufficient market demand. The results and side effects of the market mechanism constantly lead to numer-ous new agendas and transformations in everything from technology and internet to regulations, social protection and general political developments. Politics and political trial-and-error processes on many levels will be crucial for how the sustainability challenge will be met in the future. And so will business strategies and patterns of consumption. This is true locally whether it concerns hypoxia in Danish coastal waters or the droughts and soil erosion of Uganda and it is true globally with global warming, exhaustion of non-renewable resources and threats to biodiversity high on the agenda.

The NexT TraNsFOrmaTIONsGlobal warming is emblematic of the sustainability problems now crowding our agenda. And this is a problem where present high-income countries are by far the big-gest culprits, presently as well as historically. There will be losses as well as benefits in this, and they will by no means be evenly distributed. Some parts of the world will see a higher fertility and longer growing season. Others will be

hit by a higher frequency of droughts, floods or hurricanes. So whilst we share the same planet which is going through these climatic shifts, we do not necessarily have shared in-terests vis-à-vis the consequences. This makes it even more necessary to develop our skills of taking the long view and looking at things in a broader context if we are to succeed in making the next transformations. On the bright side, it is worth pointing out that there are a number of developments indicating that the trans-formation is underway – although possibly not as fast as is necessary. There are many signs of transformation. The widespread awareness of sustainability issues and the rising orientation towards non-material values of life are signifi-cant new developments as compared to earlier prevailing norms and mindsets. Perhaps these signs do not yet add up to the colossal proportions necessary to make a sufficiently radical transformation if we are to achieve genuine sustain-ability, but they are here, and there is something to build on.

Søren Steen Olsen is partner in Public Futures and House of

Futures. He is economist, policy developer and futurist. Con-

tact Søren at [email protected]

at the first in100y-seminar in june 2011 we asked the participants: “imagine that you are now in the year 2112 and look-

ing back at the 21st century. if you were to put a label on the last 100 years, what would it be?” some of the answers

were: tectonic shift of values and paradigms/the century of biology/ change/ shame/ humanity went from egoism to

collaboration / the most decisive 100 years in history/ from consumerism to sustainability/ we did it!/ sustainable

growth/ the green revolution/ explosion of energy and non-sustainable growth/ the downfall of an arrogant culture of

growth/ happiness/ reconstruction years/ transformation of urban living.



17issues #2: this way, Please!16 living in a time of transformation concePts of sustainability

businesses and agriculture to building permits for housing and to the construction of new infrastructure. The discus-sion is, in other words, just as old as it is fundamental. It should also be mentioned that there can be funda-mental uncertainty about the consequences of the eco-nomic activities. It is often here that the main part of the debate is located. The most recent example is, of course, the question of global climate, where there have been attempts to calculate future consequences of the present-day emissions by means of constructing large computer models of the global climate, which are regularly upgraded with data from e.g sea and air temperatures, drilling of the inland ice in Greenland and with subsystems such as e.g feedback effects from clouds, the sea and any melting of tundra. The prognoses will thus also be reviewed regularly. In the light of these uncertainties, the proponents of strong sustainability will presumably refer to the “precau-tionary principle”. There is a tendency for sustainability to be identified with reluctance, almost abstinence, and that the concept also has moral overtones. Thus, it may also appear to some as a boring and “born-again” concept, which preaches con-stantly. It is interesting that the Brundtland report itself foresaw some of these aspects, as is evident in the follow-ing quote: “Ultimately, sustainable development is not in a fixed state of harmony, but rather a process of change in which the exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation of technological development, and insti-tutional change are made consistent with future as well as present needs.”

indicators of strong and weak sustainability

examples of indicators based on the weak sustainability

concept:

- the united nation’s development index (hdi). it is a

simple average of three indicators, namely income per

capita, life expectancy and education. a decrease in

one indicator can thus be offset by a rise in another.

note that the hdi does not actually include any environ-

mental indicators, but has been published since 1970

for a large number of countries.

- the world bank’s genuine savings indicator. this is a

concept that works on the basis of national assets rather

than national income. the national assets consist of

three main forms of capital: natural assets, produced

assets and the so-called intangible assets. development

is measured in the total growth in assets - hence the

name “genuine savings”. but it can also be seen that

the outflow of natural capital can be invested in a larger

increase in intangible capital, e.g education or the con-

struction of institutions so that one achieves a positive

development in the genuine savings (kirk hamilton: the

changing wealth of nations).

examples of indicators based on the strong sustainability

concept:

- isew/gPi (index of sustainable economic welfare/

genuine Progress indicator). this concept was devel-

oped by, amongst others, the steady-state economist

daly, friends of the earth. the concept seeks to explic-

itly include strong sustainability considerations.

- ecological footprint (global footprint network). an indi-

cator based on material consumption, which calculates

material consumption and calculates how large an area

will be needed to supply all the resources concerned

and to absorb the emissions that the consumption

causes.

To me “In100years” Is …

… a hope beyond us.

… when human nature is the greatest asset on earth.

… the transition into a new paradigm by acknowledging that the universe is in a grain of sand and that the time is now.

… a place nearby; I grew up with people born in the 18th century.

... an open gesture.

… a cornucopia of visions, wills and ways of mindshift and change.

… a journey into the forest of original experience,the place we will shape a new mind set.

… an opportunity to let stringent observations evolve into elaborate images.

… a lovely time-producing experience.

… a child being born.

at every seminar the participants have been asked to finish the sentence: to me

‘in100y’ is ... this is the list of answers from the members of the household in

house of futures written after all the four in100y-seminars. see the video with our

sound bites before the project started at www.in100y.dk/videos/



19issues #2: this way, Please!18 concePts of sustainability

mInd The long run, baby!

neither sustainability, growth nor 2112 is a

destination, it’s a journey. we are not the first

human beings to design a new and better

world, but we may the last generation to have

the choice, and yet there are no real experts.

we will have to learn on the way – to live the

future while we create it.

Pictures from the first In100Y-seminar: ‘Imagi-

nary Tour’, ‘The Gates’ at Borups Højskole,

conversation about the significant event, pass-

port to the future and ‘Night Walk’, Copen-

hagen, 8-9 June 2011.

journeyIng 2112!

the anthroPology of the image. drawing on

the theories suggesting a new anthropology of the

image,‘image’ is not understood merely as a painting on

the canvas or the motive in a photography; it is some-

thing that happens as a result of a complex, performative

process, as a result of the interaction between

body and medium. the image is thereby a phenomenon

that comes into being in the moment, and so are the

futures of in 100 years - starting now.

The old gods are dead or dying and people everywhere

are searching, asking: What is the new mythology to be,

the mythology of this unified earth as of one harmonious

being? [...] For it is the artist who brings the images of a

mythology to manifestation, and without images (whether

mental or visual) there is no mythology.

– joseph campell, ‘the inner reaches of outer space:

metaphors as myth and as religion’, new york, 1986.

a one year conversaTIon. a sPecial thanks to all the ParticiPants in the seminar Project ‘in 100 years – starting now’

alexandra hayles, business development coordinator at world-watch institute europe

anders bjørn, Partner, head of m&a tax, kPmganders buhl, head of climate and culture, seas-nveanders thingmand henriksen, Psychologist working in the field

between philosophy, psychotherapy and buddhismandrew todd, ma in architecture and english literature, founder of

studio andrew todd (fra) ane hendriksen, deputy director, villum and velux foundationanita Pirc velkavrh, Project manager, strategic futures, european

environment agencyannette hastrup, cradle to cradle denmarkanna lise mortensen grandjean, head of secretariat danish coun-

cil for sustainable developmentanne cathrine garde, student in master of international business

and Politics, copenhagen business school, steering committee, suitable for business

annelise ryberg, social entrepreneur, ducks in a rowanne louise carstens, global Platform facilitator, mellemfolkeligt

samvirke/actionaid denmarkanne grethe holmsgaard, former member of the danish parliament

(sf) and chairman gate21 aske tybirk kvist, intern, concitoastrid kann-rasmussen, member of the board vkr foundation/usaziz fall, csr director iss, former adviser at the danish institute for

human rights and founder of citizen21bo lidegaard, editor in chief, Politikenbo normander, director, world watch institute europe, and chair-

man the ecological councilbirgitte escherich, director, kostkompagniet apsbjørg ilsø klinkby, suitable for business, copenhagen business

schoolcamilla bjerre, ma landscape management, university of copen-

hagencarsten rahbek, Professor at biological institute, ecology and

evolution, director of center for macroecology, university of copenhagen

cecilie bach johansen, vice chairman, aarhus sustainability network

charlotte biil, director mdichristian ege, director, the ecological councilchristian have, creative director, have communicationchristian Poll, blogger about green lifestyle, danmarks naturfred-

ningsforeningchristina blak, copy and strategy, we love Peoplecindy frewen wuellner, futurist and architecht (us)claus homann, head of department, operations and maintenance,

aarhus vand a/sclaus stig Petersen, director of sustainability, novozymes, and

adjunct Professor at aalborg university cornelia daheim, futurist, z_punkt (ger)daniel o’neill, director of european operations, casse - center

for the advancement of the steady state economy (uk)daved barry, Professor of creative organization studies, depart-

ment of management, Politics and Philosophy, copenhagen business school

ditlev nissen, chairman, danish association of eco-societiesdominic balmforth, director, susturb aps (uk/dk)dorthe steenberg, Paqo, owner of Power spirit eli dollerup nielsen, assistant manager, biosa danmark apsellen k. hansen, maa, dacemilia van hauen, sociologist, author and trendadvisorerik hagelskjær lauridsen, senior researcher, dtu management

engineering department of management engineering, innova-tion and sustainability, technical university of denmark

erik nielsen, executive director, biosa danmark aps

erling halfdan stenby, head of department, dtu chemistry, techni-cal university of denmark

erling jelsøe, associate professor, department of environmental, social and spatial change, roskilde university

esben fiedler røge, consultant, the academy of technical sciencesesben strandsgaard, msc in innovation management, chairman,

network and corporate Partners, aarhus sustainability networkfinn arler, department of Planning, division of technology, environ-

ment and society aalborg universityfrank Pedersen, vice dean for knowledge exchange, Program

director, associate Professor in finance, department of business studies, aarhus university

gail baglow (uk)hans fink, Professor, department of culture and society, depart-

ment of Philosophy, aarhus universityhans henrik samuelsen, climaforum09 and 10, mutual knowledgehans kann rasmussen, chairman velux foundation hans Peter jensen, member of the board velux foundationhardin tibbs, futurist, synthesys strategic consulting ltd (uk) henrik hassing, head of cleantech, forcehenrik hermansen, department manager, department of manage-

ment, Politics and Philosophy, copenhagen business schoolhenrik larsen, vice President maersk Procurementhenrik tronier, head of humanities and social science Program,

velux foundationshelene bjerre jordans, head of environment Program, villum

foundation and velux foundationhelene kimø, senior manager – international hr relations, People

& development dong energyinge røpke, associate professor, dtu management engineering,

department of management engineering, innovation and sus-tainability, dtu

jacob fuglsang mikkelsen, artist & creative director, co2 e - race/the danish cultural institute

jacob a. sterling, head of climate and environment, maersk line, a.P. moller-maersk

jacob hartman, grønne erhverv, muncipality of copenhagenjan rotmans, Professor in sustainability transitions, erasmus univer-

sity rotterdam (ne)joseph bragdon, general Partner of conservest management com-

pany and author (us) jeanne bragdon, deep ecologist and executive director, dana

meadows institute, norwich, vt (us) jennifer jarratt, futurist, leading futurists (us) jens hoff, Professor, department of Political science, university of

copenhagenjes lind bejer, Project manager, the business innovation fund / the

danish enterprise authorityjessica carragher wallner, futurist, kairos future (swe)josephine rydberg-dumont, advisor and idea director, j. rydberg-

dumont ab (swe)julie desrosiers, coach creative leadership and business develop-

ment (swe)jørgen steen nielsen, journalist, informationkaren blincoe, founder and leader of the international centre for

creativity, innovation and sustainability and chairman of da-nish designers

karina holm henriksen, account director, we love Peoplekarsten bruun hansen, Post doc, Ph.d. aalborg university, copen-

hagenkathrine richardson, Professor in biological oceanography and

vice dean for Public outreach, faculty of science, university of copenhagen

kenneth olwig, Professor, department of landscape architecture, Planning and heritage, swedish university of agricultural sci-ences (dk/swe)

kim klastrup, director, corporate branding, grundfos management a/skjeld juel Petersen, villum and velux foundation klavs birkholm, editor-at-largekristian stubkjær, vice-chairman villum foundationklaus olsen, head of development at rysensteen gymnasiumkurt emil eriksen, active house, vkr holding a/slea schick, Ph.d. fellow, it university of copenhagenlars e. kann-rasmussen, chairman villum foundationlars lundbye, future designer and business angel, blu skylars Pehrsson, ceo, merkur, den almennyttige andelskasselars ravensbeck, Phd. fellow, institute of food and resource

economics, foi, unit of environmental and natural resource economics, university of copenhagen

lasse stær, student in master of Philosophys and economies, copenhagen business school, board member, suitable for business

laura tolnov clausen, department of enviroment, social and spatial change, roskilde university

laura watts, assistant Professor, international network for social studies of marine energy (issmer), it university of copenhagen

lene andersen, author, philosopher and publisherlene skrumsager møller, partner, csi consultingleonardo lacerda, environment Program director, oak foundation

(sui)lilli sander jensen, Phd, cluster biofuels denmarklone feifer, Project director, velux a/smalene annikki lundén, samsoe energy academymarianne zibrandtsen, member of the board velux foundationmartin fluri, director cradle to cradle denmarkmartin manthorpe, director of strategy and business development,

ncc martin lidegaard, danish minister for climate and energymartin spang olsen, ma and polyhistormette termansen, Professor in environmental economics, department

of environmental science, aarhus universitymette thyssen. merkur andelskassemervyn kurlansky, designermia rahunen, senior adviser, nordic council of ministersmichael eigtved, associate Professor, Ph.d., department of art and

cultural studies, university of copenhagenmichael minter, head of communication, concitomikkel stenbæk hansen, senior consultant, copenhagen resource

institutemichael stubberup, ceo synergaia and member of the board of

vækstcenteretmichael wolffhechel, Project manager, co2 e - race/the danish

cultural institutemichael zwicky hauschild, Professor, section manager, dtu man-

agement engineering department of management engineering, technical university of denmark

minik thorleif rosing, Professor, natural history museum of den-mark, university of copenhagen

mona jensen, Project assistant, the danish board of technology, and member of illutron

nicoletta isar, docteur ès lettres (sorbonne), associate professor, department of arts & cultural studies, university of copenhagen

niels elers, Professor and director of forrest and landscape, life, university of copenhagen

niels johan juhl-nielsen, omstilling danmarknis christensen, deputy head of division, strategy and crosscutting

issue, danish ministry of the environment, danish environmental Protection agency and eco-innovation

olav hesseldahl, student in master of arts in Philosophy, university of copen-hagen board member, suitable for business

ole fogh kirkeby, Professor, dr.phil., department of management, Politics and Philosophy, copenhagen business school

ole jensen, Prof.em., dr. theol and author Patrick edvard renault, ma Psych. Peder andersen, Phd, Professor and head of the environmental and

natural resource economics group, university of copenhagen Peder agger, Prof.em. biology, former head of the danish council

of ethics and danish nature council, chairman of Planning committee in the danish society for nature conservation

Pernille blach hansen, director of sustainability/csr, grundfos management a/s

Pernille kallehave, head of development, interdisciplinary centre for organizational architecture (icoa), consultant to the dean (sustainability), business and social sciences, aarhus university

Per löfberg, cradle to cradle sweden (swe)Per meilstrup, climate director, mandag morgenPouline middleton, blogger, zebra Productionsrasmus adser larsen, suitable for business, copenhagen business

schoolrasmus ejrnæs, Ph.d. in biology, section leader for biodiversity &

conservation, aarhus universityrené karottki, sustainable development Partnersrobert costanza, Professor in sustainability, institute for sustainable

solutions (iss), Portland state university, and editor in chief, solutions

robin millington, director external relations, european climate foundation (us/ne)

rikke dalsgaard, consultant, dalsgaard a/sroxana kia, trainer in personal excellencesangay Penjor, head of gnh commission bhutan (bhu)saamdu chetri, dr.,director of gnh centre bhutan (bhu)sarah louise balle, visionary leadership facilitator and consultantsascha amarasinha, director respond – center for communication

and evocative leadershipsteen hildebrandt, Professor, aarhus university stefan meisiek, senior lecturer, Phd, department of management,

Politics and Philosophy, copenhagen business school stine wamberg broch, Phd., forest and landscape, life, university

of copenhagensusanne bøgh, brand strategy, velux a/ssøren hermansen, leader of samsoe energy academysøren lyngsgaard, director and business developer, cradle to

cradle denmarksøren mark jensen, Project manager, nature agency, ministry of

environment søren winther lundby, chief executive officer, globalcitizen tania ellis, advisor and author, the social business companytanja larsen, ministry for climate and energy teresa ribeiro, head of foresight, european environmental agencythomas hessellund, chairman, aarhus sustainability networkthomas færgeman, director concito thomas trøst hansen, head of section, center for globalization,

ministry for science, innovation and higher educationtina monberg, lawyer, Psychotherapist and founder of mediation-

centertrine dam ottosen, filmdirector, alba film, and active member of

occupy cph. tor nørretranders, author and adjunct Professor at copenhagen

business school torben crintz, head of knowlegde development, concitotove enggrob boon, senior researcher, forest & landscape, life,

university of copenhagenulf boman, futurist, kairos future (swe)wendy schultz, futurist, infinite futures (uk)william (bill) s. becker, senior associate at natural capitalism insti-

tute, policy adviser and co-founder of the future we want (us)



29issues #2: this way, Please!28 facts about the in100y-Projectfacts about the in100y-Project

shorT cuT To The In100y projecT

abouT The projecT

WhaT the project “in 100 years – starting now” was developed

and facilitated by house of futures between 2011-12. the

project explored and discussed questions such as:

- how can we sustain, develop and enrich human exis-

tence given the limited resources available on planet

earth?

- what does it take to co-create long-term sustainable

societal growth/development?

- and what are the preferred sustainable futures?

WhY“in 100 years – starting now” has two overall purposes. the

first is to develop and present alternative visions for sustain-

able societies to the general public and to decision makers

in the public and private sector. the second purpose is to

assess how and whether the velux foundation should

support the establishment of a center for environment and

sustainability in denmark. a core group of high profile dan-

ish experts followed the four seminars and will be present-

ing their recommendations to the foundation in april 2012

based on a parallel backcasting process.

hOWthe four in100y-seminars will play a central role in re-work-

ing the agenda of sustainability and growth/development.

the first seminar focused on visions of sustainable growth,

the second on policy and business models, the third on na-

ture and technology and the fourth on people and mindsets.

the seminars were independent events but were also a part

of a scenario process over the course of almost a year.

futures studies methods in a 100 year scope combined with

Performance art were our primary tools when we met with

participants, and in gathering information, analyzing the

material from the seminars and framing the necessary and

preferred transformations and futures.

the process involved 170 inter-disciplinary experts and

thinkers from different fields, all reworking and co-creating

visions of sustainable futures (see page 28).

scenario

Process

center assessment

Process (core grouP)

seminar 1

seminar 2

seminar 3

seminar 4

this way, Please!

Preferred futures for

sustainable societies 2112

assessment to

the velux foundation

support a center of

sustainability and

environment in denmark?

seminar #1 / program 8-9 June 2011

Mind the long run, baby!on the future of “sustainable growth”

seminar #4 / program 18-19 january 2012

it’s our future, love!on people and mindsets

seminar #3 / program 2-3 november 2011

No fixes, pal!on nature, science and technology

seminar #2 / program 21-22 september 2011

Doing gooD, thanks!on sustainable policy and business models

semINar 1: mIND The lONg rUN, BaBY!

on the future of ‘sus-tainable growth’

location: borups højskole

element: water / emotions

Performance installa-tion: the imaginary tour. sailing through the canals of copenhagen 2112. sustain-ability is a journey!

sPeakers: søren steen olsen, house of futures (dk) / jan rotmans, university of rotterdam (ne) / daniel o’neill, casse (uk) / john fullerton, the capital institute (us) / steen hildebrandt, aarhus university (dk) / jen-nifer jarratt, leading futurists (us).

workshoPs: culture and consciousness / nature and science / societies and systems / defining ‘sustain-ability’ and ‘growht’ / what the future needs to know.

closing ritual: a floating emsemble of futures. sailing boats put into the canal with personal vision written on the individual boats. see what people wrote www.in100y.dk/downloads/articles/floatingfutures.pdf

semINar 2: DOINg gOOD, ThaNks!

on sustainable Policy and business models

location: life, university of copenhagen

element: earth / body

Performance installa-tion: two sensed futures. in an art-based research pro-cess we embodied the two scenarios ‘man made world’ and ‘Power of nature’ in order to engage and inspire the following dialogues and knowledge production on the topic. getting your hands dirty!

sPeakers: joseph h. brag-don (us) / ole fogh kirke-by, copenhagen business school (dk) / dr. saamdu chetri, gnh centre (bhutan) / stefan meisiek and daved barry, copenhagen business school (dk).

workshoPs: business models / Policy models / organizational designing.

closing ritual: ‘the first ring of in100years’; Planting a tree placing visions at the roots in the soil. see what people wrote www.in100y.dk/downloads/articles/in-100ysem2_article-first-ring.pdf

semINar 3: NO FIxes, Pal!

on nature, science and technology

location: skovskolen in nødebo, university of co-penhagen

element: air / mind

Performance installa-tion: the mystery of acorn falls, exploring the aesthetic, poetic and transformative mo-ments in life. it’s in the air!

sPeakers: vaughan lindsay, dartington hall trust (uk) / søren hermansen, samsø energy academy (dk) / carsten rahbek, university of copenhagen (dk) / katherine richardson, university of co-penhagen (dk) / martin fluri, cradle to cradle denmark (dk) / martin lidegaard, dan-ish minister of climate, energy and buildings (dk) / cindy frewen wuellner, futurist (us) / karen blincoe, icis (dk).

workshoPs: urban minds / mind of nature / sce-narios towards 2112.

closing ritual: blowing the promise of a significant future event into soap bub-bles. see the bubbles www.in100y.dk/downloads/articles/in100ysem3_article-in_the_air.pdf

semINar 4: IT’s OUr FUTUre, lOve!

on PeoPle and mindsets

location: carlsberg aca-demy, valby

element: fire / spirit

Performance installa-tion: the head quarters of ‘future mind tours’ copen-hagen, experimenting with art based research about mindsets and mindshifting. minds on fire!

sPeakers: bill s. becker, the future we want (us) / karen blincoe, icis (dk) / inga ger-ner nielsen, house of futures (dk) / hans fink, aarhus uni-versity (dk) / hardin tibbs, synthesys strategic consulting (uk) / dominic balmforth, house of futures (dk) / ole fogh kirkeby, copenhagen business school (dk).

workshoPs: delphi round two / transformation and mindshift / nature Percep-tions / business / Politics / living / wisdom council.

closing ritual: litting a flame of commitment and oath to manifest the qualities of greatest importance to the new mindset. see what people said www.in100y.dk/downloads/articles/in-100ysem3_commitment.pdf

watch the videos from the in100y-seminars at in100y.dk



31issues #2: this way, Please!30 facts about the in100y-Projectfacts about the in100y-Project

The core group

Peder andersen

Professor, head of the

environmental and natural

resource economics unit, in-

stitute of food and resource

economics, university

of copenhagen. expert

in environmental and re-

source economics.

camilla bjerre

cand.scient. landscape

management. masters the-

sis on how farmers’ attitudes

towards voluntary participa-

tion in agri-environmental

schemes are affected by

society’s perception of them.

karen blincoe

founder and leader of the

international centre for

creativity, innovation and

sustainability (icis) and

chairman of danish design-

ers. Phd fellow and former

director of shumacher col-

lege (uk). expert in sustain-

able design and education

for sustainability.

thomas færgeman

director of the independent

green think tank concito.

expert in climate, carbon

neutral transitions, the dif-

fusion of green technology

and in policy strategy and

development.

memBers OF The COre grOUP IN The PrOjeCT ‘IN 100 Years – sTarTINg NOW’ are:

steen hildebrandt

Professor, institute of leader-

ship, aarhus university.

expert in sustainable lea-

dership and works on con-

necting social responsibility

and human potential.

ole fogh kirkeby

Professor, institute for

management, Politics and

Philosophy, copenhagen

business school. expert in

consciousness, myths, art

and leadership.

carsten rahbek

Professor, department of

biology, director of center

for macroecology, evolu-

tion and climate, university

of copenhagen.expert in

biodiversity, climate change

and socioeconomic aspects.

claus stig Pedersen

senior director, head of

sustainability development,

novozymes, and adjunct

Professor at aalborg uni-

versity. expert in corporate

sustainability.


... how wealth can be maintained and be fair across generations.

... potentially transformational.

… securing resources for future generation.

... when the human ecological footpath is a contribution and not a threat to the balances in the planet’s biosphere

– and life is still tremendous fun!

... a highly intensified consciousness about sustainability in practice.

... that truth and beauty is one.

… people living quality lives in balance with nature.

... far far away, but on the doorstep for humans.

at every seminar the participants have been asked to

finish the sentence: to me ‘in100y’ is ... this is the list

of answers from the members of the core group given

after all the four in100y-seminars.



33issues #2: this way, Please!32 facts about the in100y-Project

fuTure mInd Tours – 4 TaIlor-made performance InsTallaTIons of In100y by fiction PimPs / house of futures

FUTUre mIND TOUrs, BürO reIseNDe

future mind tours travels within the human body and mind in order to dive into the conscious and subconscious. our special technique has been explored and evolved throughout the generations and we are now the proud owners of a subtrønic model 645©. this allows us to investigate your inner human landscape on the most comfortable journey and almost without any complications. however, sometimes our presence might manifest as distur-bances*. the most sublime outcome of this journey is a mind shift in the specific reisende potentially resulting in a shift in paradigms in the external social land-scape.

*subject-reports state following symptoms:

overwhelming inspirations, headaches, moments of

spontaneous enlightenment, symbolically loaded dreams,

hallucinatory shivers, stutters, butterflies in the stomach,

incredible teamwork, memory loss, fever, diarrhea and

inexplicable rashes. if you experience symptoms that are

not listed here please report back to future mind tours,

büro reisende.

Watch all videos by Future Mind Tours created as part

of the performanceinstallations at www.in100y.dk/

cph-seminars/future-mind-tours/ or www.vimeo.com/

in100years.

gry worre hallberg, ‘the imaginary tour’, in100y-seminar #1, made-

leine kate mcgowan, ‘conscious construction site’, in100y-seminar #2,

inga gerner nielsen, ‘acorn falls’, in100y-seminar #3, all three found-

ers of the performance agency fiction Pimps and partners in house of futures.

Performers (from the top left): birgitte klæbel, jens sPaze elve-

kjær klæbel, kenneth harrison, line loklindt, anna la-

waetz, trine mee sook gleeruP, louise yaa aisin, dj hvad,

iwona rejmus, goodiePal, sarah armstrong, majken

midtgaard karlberg, rebekka elisabeth anker and søren

steen olsen.

steen hildebrandt, Professor, university of

aarhus. member of the core group of the project

in 100 years – starting now. read his lecture from

the first in100y-seminar at www.in100y.dk/cph-

seminars/1-mind-the/from-the-seminar/

The new world cITIZens

Sustain means to hold up, to support to bear. Sustain-ability means that something is capable of carrying or maintaining itself or something else. This is more or less what philosopher Peter Kemp wrote in a chapter of the book Verdensborgeren om Bæredygtighedens begreb (The World Citizen - on the Sustainability concept). He adds that we, with the word sustainability, are facing a new concept which presupposes the modern development of science and technology which reaches radically into the physical and biological basic conditions of life; and, I add, that it is both about material and biological as well as existential basic conditions. Sustainability is, at the one extreme, about maintaining the planet. Sustainability, at the other extreme, is about whether I can keep and maintain myself. Sustainability is about the planet and about individuals on the planet; the globe as a huge physical and biological system, and the in-dividual as a unique and divine being who has been given a capacity, a spirit, a consciousness which enables mankind to think of and have visions and plans for the future. Mankind can make decisions that reach far beyond its own immediate needs. Yes, mankind can destroy the planet. It is, therefore, not only interesting but necessary to link the concepts of sustainability and citizen of the world together. World citizen is the individual who helps to maintain the planet or in Peter Kemp’s definition: “The world citizen of our era is the person who addresses the current big, burning global issues of concern in order to contribute to solutions that can be of benefit to all mankind” . The concept of sustainability is in its infancy and must, within the next few years, develop and be put into practice as a kind of bio- or life science, a science about the planet, about life on the planet and the sustainable development of life. Herein lies an invitation to, and a requirement for professionalism and interdisciplinary cooperation. Some of

the disciplines (sciences) that we know today, must be as-sumed to be introductions and experiments which, in the future, will be integrated and develop into new sciences which, in this way, will have to accommodate ever larger unifications and explanation structures. It is the world citizens who will contribute to an ever more sustainable development on the planet. The chal-lenge is to create social trust at the global level, if mankind is to develop in an ever more sustainable direction, or what Jeremy Rifkin calls a “seamless, integrated, socially just and sustainable planetary economy.” Very big words, but perhaps not so big if we imagine them taking shape in classrooms filled with inquisitive children who are not hampered by the mistrust and thought patterns of the past, but who find themselves in what might be called the blogosphere’s social networks. They are globally orientated in their consciousness and communication. Classrooms are laboratories for the preparation of biospherical and existential awareness of the rising generations. Children are trained in the knowledge that everything they do, their whole way of life has an ecologi-cal footprint which affects the lives of all fellow creatures and for the biosphere in which we live together. Children understand that we are as closely connected to each other in the ecosystems of the biosphere as we are on the social network of the blogosphere. They transfer their empathic feelings to the biosphere and create social trust globally. They contribute towards the preservation and development of the power of cohe-sion in the large as well as the small. They might talk about the many dimensions of sustainability; sustainability as an ethical concept, an existential neuro-scientific concept, a social concept, a natural philosophical concept, a biological concept, an economic concept as well as a legal concept. We are the new world citizens.



35issues #2: this way, Please!34 facts about the in100y-Project comment

release our resources, make more use

imProving the ecology and economy of material resources.

we can stoP being only consumers. we can become users

and releasers of resources to make more use.

by dominic balmforth, susturb/ house of futures

There is a lot of talk at the moment about how to sup-port human life with the limited resources on offer from a supposedly finite world. I do not believe that the world’s capacity to provide natural capital is as limited as we are being led to believe. Even if nature was our only provider, then we could still expand the stock by expanding nature, by creating more nature. We should be precious with nature, but not with the idea of nature. We can care for nature and create new nature simultaneously. No other life form can do this, only humans. Nature is not the only resource stockpile available to us. All man-made resources that exist in circulation add up to a vast potential supply of new material, but this volume is currently wasted instead of recovered. Cradle-to-Cradle classifies the first material group as biosphere (organic materials) and the second as technosphere (non-organic material). In order to reap the full resources of both sets of materials, it is best to keep them separate. Also, in order to achieve the most productive cycles of supply-recovery-new supply, we need to actively design, manage and maintain the cycles. Nature is programmed for its own cycle to function productively. In the process of ongoing life and death, eco-systems are designed to both feed from as well as contribute rich nutrients; sunlight, oxygen, carbon, nitrates etc. At any one time, any one ecosystem is constantly giving back to its own cycle or to others. When we learn from nature, and not only about nature, then we can apply nature’s program to our own man-made world. We can make each action of consumption into a simultaneous action of production. Instead of only consuming, we can use, recover and release many more resources in the process of our everyday lives. Recent research shows the damage done when we buy and own personal products to the extent and frequency that we do today (see box on this page for GHG emissions). Em-bedded in our clothes, furniture and electronics is twice the carbon attributed to energy-use and more than four times the carbon attributed to burning car fuel. Outside this research, others are revealing the impacts on rapid depletion of natural resources, and rare metals in particular.

BUYINg vs. CONsUmINg It is important to make the distinction between buying and consuming. We do not consume durable personal possessions as we consume food, drink, elec-

tricity and fuel, we simply buy and own them. This means that we can significantly reduce the impacts of so called mass- consumption if we can enable many people to use and then release the same products and materials many times over. This for me, is a key con-cept towards changing the way are currently wasting valuable resources. Companies can exploit the concept in order to benefit both global ecology and their own economy. This requires that they change their infrastructure and their business models in order to maintain control of their products and all embedded material beyond the initial point of sale. To this end, a com-pany’s infrastructure can be changed, creating two distinct but overlapping cycles; the material cycle and the product cycle. A company’s business model can be aligned to these cycles, generating revenue according to a material economy and a product economy. From the perspective of the company, the new system must be easy, simple and profitable. From the perspective of people or customers, the new offer must fulfil all needs whilst being convenient, good value, and high quality.

maTerIal CYCle, maTerIal eCONOmY As a company, I change my material recipe so that all my products contain only few, clean materials. I start mak-ing high volumes of these products in order to achieve a high volume of material downstream. I combine materi-als physically, but never mix them chemically in order to separate the respective material streams later. Once I have

sold my products, or whilst I am selling the ongoing use of these products (according to new product cycles; see below), I use a track and trace location mechanism and a return-reward customer incentive scheme in order to recover all my material assets. I set up point-of-return thresholds in my store (parallel to the original point-of-sale cash registers), which receive all products leaving the product cycle. I set up new ‘back-stage’ facilities to disassemble used products and direct the materials down specific material streams to be ground, shredded or melted down into new base materials. I use these base materials to source the creation of my own new products, or when the market is ripe, I sell some of this base material to other companies.

PrODUCT CYCle, PrODUCT eCONOmYAs a company, I begin selling the use of products, not only the products themselves. I sell the use of the same product many times over, thereby making more money from the same amount of material resources. There is a limit to the number of times a product can be used without losing its functional or material performance. This varies depending on the prod-uct. A garden chair has five ‘next-use’ cycles, a high quality power drill has hundreds. I define the cycle-limit for each of my products and call the products back in when their time is up. They then re-enter the material cycle and continue to generate revenue under the material economy. Today, the average power drill is used for less than ten hours per year. Despite this, the majority of households in western societies own one. Think of the amount of material, energy and emitted carbon we would save by producing one tenth or one thousandth of the number of power drills to ful-fill the needs of the same number of users. Think then of the gains to the host company’s economy if they exploited this.

lIve sUsTaINaBlY!Today, as a consumer I am told to adopt a more sustainable lifestyle. But I can only really change what I buy. I cannot significantly change how I buy, consume, use or how much material I can release as new resource, because the mecha-nisms are not in place which allow me to do so. With this in place companies and so-called ‘consumers’ can start right away. We can buy, consume and use things differently to give us more use of better performing products, at less cost, taking fewer resources and giving more back. We can stop being only consumers. We can become users and releasers. We can release our resources and make more use.

sources: hans fink, senior associate professor; phi-

losophy and cultural research, aarhus, denmark has six

conceptions of nature. he discusses how we consider dif-

ferent domains to be nature without consensus that any one

is the correct perspective. ‘cradle-to-cradle, remaking the

way we make things’, michael braungart, and william

mcdonough (2002, north Point Press). ‘brøset, a unique

brøseT – how To become a green suburb

as part of a wider design team, i tested these concepts in a

project in brøset, a new green suburb of trondheim, norway,

where the brief demanded that we cut carbon emissions per

resident per year from 12 tonnes to 3 tonnes. by designing

a dense, compact city with low emission, high frequency bus

system, car-sharing and energy generating buildings we man-

aged to reduce carbon per capita to 4.6 tonnes per year.

the remaining cut to under 3 tonnes would come in time by

adopting new ways of living, supported by new offers for the

daily provision of food, household products, home improve-

ment activities and material resource recovery (see graphs on

next double spread page). the idea was that as residents see

the benefits of these new offers, then they become common

practice. the offers were as follows;

suPer-basket provides local, organic food delivery to

many households at once. People only buy what they eat,

each day. Purchase is per kilo and return of organic waste

is registered and rewarded as credit per kilo.

suPer-fridge is a community sized fridge which is always

full. People buy milk, cheese etc. per unit volume or unit

weight each day. this reduces food waste and saves trans-

port to/from supermarkets.

suPer-clean is a shared cleaning service which al-

lows households to pay either for home-cleaning or for a

share in environmentally approved cleaning products, or

both. again, people pay per unit volume of say, cleaning

detergent, tapped from a common tank. this avoids lots

of unnecessary packaging and means kitchen cupboards

don’t get filled up with half-full plastic bottles.

suPer-fix is a community sized tool box which allows people

to buy the use of a common set of high performance tools

instead of having to buy their own. the less time you use

the tools and the faster you return them, the less you pay. a

professional craftsperson is available to help you with your

projects for one evening and one saturday morning every

fortnight. you bring your project to the community tool box,

rather than vice versa. there is a large roof cover to enable

many projects to be accommodated simultaneously.

ghg emIssIons per capITa In denmark

the danish green and independent think-tank, concito,

published a report in 2010 listing the amount of tons of

ghg emissions per capita in denmark due to the use and

consumption of products and services in different catego-

ries. the result is listed here:

1. Public services/collective infrastructure (incl. public

buildings, police, roads etc.) = 6 tons per capita

2. Personal possessions = 5 tons

3. food and drink = 3.2 tons

4. electricity and heat = 2.1 tons

5. fuel to car = 1.1 tons

6. flights = 900 kg

7. service/communication = 700 kg

everyday life’; as part of norway’s ‘cities of the future’

programme, 2009-2014, trondheim, norway. Project

team; susturb.com with sla landscapers, adePt architects,

atkins engineers, life copenhagen university. these

design moves alone brought emissions down from 12 tons

per capita to 4.6 tons per capita.



37issues #2: this way, Please!36 release our resources, make more use release our resources, make more use

62%NORGE

24%BRØSETi morgen

1

2

38%BRØSETi dag

PRIVAT

BOLIG

TRANSPORTANNET

NORGE I DAG

1. BRØSET I DAG

FLYTTE TIL BRØSET

2. BRØSET I MORGEN

HUSHOLD

PRIVAT

BOLIG

TRANSPORTANNET

HUSHOLD

14%

17%19%

13%

÷7,4T

4,6T 2,9T

12T

2%

4%

5%

4%

CO2 sparing ved å flytte til Brøset. Tal i prosent af Norges CO2 utslipp pr. innbygger i dag.

CO2 sparing ved ændret livsstil.Tal i prosent af Norges CO2 utslipp pr. innbygger i dag.

62%NORGE

24%BRØSETi morgen

1

2

38%BRØSETi dag

PRIVAT

BOLIG

TRANSPORTANNET

NORGE I DAG

1. BRØSET I DAG

FLYTTE TIL BRØSET

2. BRØSET I MORGEN

HUSHOLD

PRIVAT

BOLIG

TRANSPORTANNET

HUSHOLD

14%

17%19%

13%

÷7,4T

4,6T 2,9T

12T

2%

4%

5%

4%

CO2 sparing ved å flytte til Brøset. Tal i prosent af Norges CO2 utslipp pr. innbygger i dag.

CO2 sparing ved ændret livsstil.Tal i prosent af Norges CO2 utslipp pr. innbygger i dag.

2.1 | Å BO PÅ BRØSET

Å B

O P

Å B

RØ

SET

2.1

I dag har en gjennomsnittsnordmann et CO2 ut-slipp på 12000 kg i året. å bo på Brøset vil med-føre til en reduksjon i CO2 utslippet fra 12000 kg til 2900 kg CO2 per person. Reduksjonen vil bli fordelt i 5 hovedgrupper som vist i skjemaet.

• Transport/Reise• Privatforbruk• Boligensforbruk• Driftogvedlikeholdavhusholdningen• Annet

Se detaljert beskrivelse nedenfor.

p 8 · Det eNestÅeNDe HverDagslivet · teaM sla Det eNestÅeNDe HverDagslivet · teaM sla · p 9

brøseT Tomorrow

other 2%

4%

4%

5%

13%

14%

19%

17%

transPort

household(maintenance / cleaning)

home(building / energy-use)

Personal Possessions

norway Today havIng moved To brøseT

Percent C02 saved by moving to Brøset. (relative to national emissions per capita 2011)

brøseT Today

othertransPort

household

home

Personal Possessions

Percent C02 saved by changing daily life patterns. (relative to national emissions per capita 2011)

stealing art, stealing utility

metal theft costs the uk £1 billion a year and causes 16,000 hours of train

delays due to the loss of metal cables. the waste and metal theft taskforce

in bexley, south-east london has now been established by scotland yard. in

2005, the henry moore sculpture ‘reclining figure’ was stolen. valued at 3 mil-

lion pounds, with a reward of 10,000 pounds and allegedly sold as scrap for

1,500. in 2011, the barbara hepworth sculpture (image to left) was stolen. val-

ued at 500,000 pounds, with a reward of 1000 pounds and yet to be found.

sTolen 2011

ever-use work-wear

the company, berendsen, sells the use of clothing, sheets, towels etc.

their primary customers are the catering and hospital sectors. the above

system at holsterbro hospital in denmark allows hospital workers to collect

clean uniforms and deposit dirty ones again via a mechanised closet system.

failure to return, or late returns results in deduction of credit stored for new,

fresh uniforms.

the system operates via membership and log-in in order to meet personal

needs for sizes and specific work-wear performance; surgeon, nurse, porter.

contents consumed,

casing re-used

in denmark, a deposit system enables

all Pet soda bottles to be returned

and deposit reimbursed. the number

of refillable bottles returned in 2010

totalled 106% the number of full

bottles sold; that is, more bottles were

returned empty than sold full!

the company, kodak sells the use

of their disposable camera casings as

a ‘host’ product. as a customer, you

buy the camera but then bring it back

in return for your pictures. the same

casing is then reloaded with film,

repackaged and resold to the next

customer.

3 tonne suburb, brøset, trondheim, norway

‘brøset, a unique everyday life’; as part of norway’s ‘cities of the future’ pro-

gramme, 2009-2014, trondheim, norway.

Project team; susturb.com with sla landscapers, adePt architects, atkins engi-

neers, life copenhagen university. see article, “Release Resources, Make more use”.

3.1 | DET PERfORMATIVE BYLANDSKAP

DET

PER

FOR

MAT

IVE

BYLA

ND

SKA

P3.1


ad

ePt arc

hitec

ts / sla

, den

ma

rk

dense & intensemax. humanism max. resource use

FRA JORD TIL JORD SPORT OG TRANSPORT FOR ALLE

Det er ikke langt til hverken transport eller rekreasjon i den nye bydelen. Det er alltid noe å gjøre - også i snøværet.

Økologi, sterkt nærmiljø og felles utnyttelse av ressurser er en sentral del av Team SLA’s for-slag om en bærekraftig bydel

NYE

RA

MM

ER F

OR

HVE

RD

AG

EN2.3


ad

ePt arc

hitec

ts / sla

, den

ma

rk

Pho

to: beren

dsen

Pho

to: steve jo

hn

son

Pho

to: stin

e skøtt o

lesen

Pho

to: d

om

inic

balm

forth

Pho

to: ko

da

k

Pho

to: feliPe g

aba

ldó

n

Pho

to: d

avid ritter



39issues #2: this way, Please!38 release our resources, make more use release our resources, make more use

paThs are made by walkIng

‘we want to coPy denmark!’ martin lidegaard, danish minister of climate,

energy and buildings, and a key figure in dennmark’s eu-Presidency since 1

january 2012, hears this statement frequently when he visits other coun-

tries. he believes that denmark is, and should continue to develoP as, a

laboratory for testing sustainable solutions.

by søren steen olsen and steen

svendsen, Public futures / house

of futures

We met Martin Lidegaard as an en-gaged participant at the first In100Y-seminars, where he – prior to being appointed Minister – was a member of the Core Group of experts in the project ‘In100Years – starting now’ (see p. xx). He also visited the third seminar as a newly appointed min-ister to give a keynote speech about sustainable development in the long term, which he concluded by quoting the Spanish poet Antonio Machado: ‘Traveller, there are no paths. Paths are made by walking. Walk!’ We met Martin at his office just around the corner from our office, and had a chat about visions and specific climate and energy initiatives. When evaluating the major changes that we face as a society as a result of climate and environmental issues, do you think that we need to adapt to the challenges or do you think that we face a fundamental transformation of our society? That is a very, very good question. I think it is a different society we’re talking about in the sense that our modes of production and consump-tion patterns will change. Consump-tion of knowledge and services will grow, whilst material consumption will decrease. We are moving towards a quality society, and products will be of a better quality than we may have been accustomed to over the past 20-30 years.

Will it be unrecognizable as a soci-ety? I am not sure. I do not think that all of our current values will change. The changes we are talking about will happen within a relatively short period - two to three decades. This is a very long time in a technological context, but with regard to changes in values and consciousness, it will be short. I think changes in our techno-logical, production and consumption purposes could achieve a lot over the next decade, but our mindset and our fundamental relationship with nature and each other will change profoundly, of that I am in no doubt. How do you see general developments over the years to come?In Denmark, we will be taking big strides within my field – that is, within climate and energy, which is outstanding in an international context, because we have undertaken many comprehensive changes over a very short period of time, all of which are pretty exceptional and farsighted. Allow me to mention two things. One is energy and resource ef-ficiency, where we will be aiming for up to a 14% reduction in total energy consumption, whilst maintaining eco-nomic development. This is a pretty demanding target. The other target is for over 50% of our electricity supply to come from wind by 2020, and this means almost a doubling of the current levels. This will provide an entirely new electricity system and an entirely new pattern of consumption. I do not believe that we, in Den-mark, would be capable of conducting

this kind of politics and still get the very strong support that we do if it were not for the fact that there is an awareness in the population that this is the right and necessary way to go about things. In Denmark, we have worked with this particular agenda for over 40 years. It is something that people have heard about since el-ementary school, and it is something that occupies much of the political universe. When I talk to colleagues in other countries, I get the impression of a much weaker popular backing, and most politicians would not be able to implement these kind of policies in their own countries. On the other hand, it is quite clear, from looking at the political debate, that there is nobody who seriously questions the whole model of eco-nomic development. There is no-body who questions the relationship between man and nature, nor whether we should give up our prosperity. And why not? There are many explanations, but one reason is that we as human beings have, up till now, been capable of developing incredibly well in rela-tion to new living conditions. We are a very adaptable species, but there could be a genuine conflict between what we choose to do in the present and our future in the longer term. That is why I am very concerned with formulating and developing political visions, which give hope and provide attractive answers to the chal-lenges that we actually face. This is not an alternative to telling the population that we are in a serious situation. As a politician, you have to be able to do

both – both formulate the problem as well as provide solutions.

Do you have a picture or a vision of the society of the future in your daily work?I don’t have a crystal clear image of where we will be in 10 or 20 years. Maybe it is just as it is in your own life, where what you plan is not always what happens, when it comes to the crunch. But it is possible to push development in the right direction. I think that is also how it will be with regard to the society of the future. I would also like to specifically single out certain fields which we will definitely be developing, and where I have a sense of the direction things are moving. The first is energy, which has been and is one of the really big issues. In short, you could say: energy and food. If we solve these two problems in an intelligent way, then we will have achieved a lot. In Denmark we are actually well on our way and have recently agreed on the most ambitious energy legislation in the world. The other field is the whole bio-field, of which I believe we will have a completely different understanding of within the next 10-15 years. Of what it is, in the broadest sense. How do we make optimal use of biomass. Must we make plastic out of it? How will it integrate into food production? Our total biomass concept will also change character, so we will be able to exploit all materials more intelligently than we do today. A lot can be solved technologically, but some of this also requires behavioral changes. And I am also convinced that there will be profound changes in the field of taxation. We are moving towards a higher taxation of resources in the broadest sense and a lower taxation of human labor. We will need incentives for more labor and less resource use, so this will be a natu-ral development. Take for example Ireland, which until recently had very low taxation. In their new tax regime

a very large share of the extra revenue will come from green taxes. I have no doubt that we, as a global society, will be pushed in this direction, and that there will be many options for solutions. How do you see Denmark’s inter-national role and possibilities with regard to long term sustainability?I travel quite a lot at the moment and there is always a colleague who will make a comment such as “We want to copy Denmark”. It is thought-provok-ing how many countries feel the need to push for new solutions. I find that there is an enormous amount of inter-est, and I believe that the only way that Denmark can play a role inter-nationally is by being a good example and showing that what we do is not in conflict with a healthy economy. To demonstrate new solutions in the big laboratory. To show that it can be done. There is a great deal of interest in this.

As you know from your participation in the project In100Years, we are working with a model that contains four perspec-tives of sustainable development; inner (culture, consciousness, values) and outer (physical conditions, systems) as well as top-down and bottom-up. How do you see the interplay between the four ap-proaches?I am convinced, after having worked with bottom-up as well as top-down, that there is a need for both ap-proaches. it is clear from my attend-ing international climate confer-ences that top-down initiative makes important contributions in some areas, but is also totally inadequate in others. It is actually impossible to do top-down without bottom-up. Con-versely, some political action is needed to enable bottom-up solutions Both are necessary. Inner and outer are also crucial. What makes us happy? What actu-ally makes us happy in daily life? Is it when our salary rises in real terms

by 20% over the next ten years, or is it that we can live lives in which we have time for our loved ones, and where we can also look our children in the eyes? These kinds of considera-tions also need to be taken when we assess the bigger picture. All four perspectives are impor-tant and necessary. This is also linked to the fact that you cannot make political regulations in these areas without appealing to the inner too. It just cannot be done.

Does the happiness agenda pop up in your meetings with your foreign col-leagues?No, I wouldn’t say so. My own phi-losophy as a politician is that it is a difficult agenda. I am more inclined to “show it, don’t tell it”. Without having thought it through completely, my instinct tells me that no matter how difficult the GDP target is – and I really do think that it is problematic to put economic prosperity into such simple statistical formulae, it will be just as difficult to put happiness into statistical formulae. What creates happiness for people in the long term, is something I believe comes as much from within as from outside. This means that as politicians we must create the best framework for as many people as possible to create the good life. That is how I think it is.

søren steen olsen and steen svend-

sen are policy developers, futurists and

partners in Public futures and house of

futures. contact them via email at sto@

houseoffutures.dk and steen@houseoff-

futures.dk

Read Martin Lidegaard’s speech from

the third In100Y-seminar in Novem-

ber 2011 at www.in100y.dk/cph-

seminars/3-no-fixes/from-the-seminar/



41issues #2: this way, Please!40 Paths are made by walkingPaths are made by walking

10 shorT sTorIes about sustainability and growth

rasmus ejrnæs, Ph.d. in biology, section leader for

biodiversity & conservation, aarhus university

leT IT become

Evolution works by spontaneous emergence of a variety of life forms followed by selection between these forms. The useful forms prosper whilst the rest vanish. There is a certain balance between emergence and selection, and it varies through time. During some evolutionary periods, the Earth was a busy place, covered by individuals, with few vacant resources. During other periods, mass extinc-tions freed up space. Sometimes the evolution of new life forms, such as the flowering plants, expanded the space. When all available space is occupied competition is tough and selection rules. When there is unoccupied ecologi-cal space, the balance shifts towards the emergence and becoming of new life forms. Human consciousness has an impressive capacity for selection. We have selected the most useful breeds, crops, game, fish, soils and raw materials. We have also modified our environment by reducing the ecological space to fit our notion of the useful. We have drained the land, cut the forest, ploughed the soil, fertilized the fields and dammed the rivers. This extreme selection has left us in a situation where every generation of humans is larger than the previ-ous and leaves less variation in environment and life forms for the following generation. The outcome of human selection and occupation is a biodiversity crisis that has been coined the sixth mass extinction. It differs from the former five mass extinctions in two important respects. The obvious difference is that for the first time in the history of Earth a single species is driving other species to extinction. Less obvious, but perhaps more critical, is that while the former global mass extinctions freed space for new creative evolution, the mass extinction of our time leaves no vacant space. On the contrary, its very mechanism is the increasing occupation

of the Earth by people, cities, industry, roads, plantations, crops and livestock. Reversing the loss of biodiversity is one of the great-est challenges that humans face and several transforma-tive steps are required if we are to meet this challenge. The most obvious step is the full acknowledgement that continued growth in human consumption of resources and occupation of space cannot continue. We have consid-ered limiting growth for decades, but obviously haven’t convinced ourselves yet. The less obvious step is to fully acknowledge that such degrowth is not primarily a neces-sity for survival but rather a call for love and compassion. Biodiversity is a product of profound creativity more than of clever selection and therefore akin to arts more than to industry and farming. So when we release space, it is not to avoid doomsday, but to allow the living world to emerge. The generous giving of space to wildlife will be like an open door – it turns both ways – and will therefore also stimulate evolution inside us. Our challenge is thus to change the perspective and modus vivendi of the human consciousness. We are in se-rious need of a weakening of our preference for selection, giving way to creative emergence. We may stimulate this process by human degrowth in consumption and occupa-tion and I believe this will require a conscious relaxation of the individual and its unending desires. The chances are then that we discover that we are all, individually and collectively, part of this wondrous life. Such a future will know of birth, love and joy as well as death, grief and sorrow, just as the present. But there may be more peace, flowers, butterflies, elephants and lions, if we dare and care.

‘we have now gone into a new geological era called an-

thropocene – the era of the humans, where it is clear that

we, to a large extent, are shaping the future of the earth.

right now we are doing a really bad job in handling this

stewardship. we have to consciously start implementing

a different design strategy for the way we interact with

our surroundings. for that we need a new vision, a new

big idea to guide us forward - we have to dare to dream

again’, said martin fluri, director of cradle to cradle

(c2c) denmark, in his presentation at the third in100y-

seminar. according to him, cradle to cradle represents

a crucial aspect of such a new big idea at the level of

matter. it takes the premise that it is not enough to do less

bad, which is what most of our sustainability thinking and

initiatives revolve around today.

c2c started out as an environmental design

philosophy, and it is continuously developing as such.

today it is also becoming an attractive business model

for foresighted companies. martin fluri presented the

principles of the cradle to cradle design process and

mentioned two examples of present focus in denmark:

a growing interest from the building industry to build

according to the c2c principles, and an initiative

from maersk to produce the worlds largest container

ships according to the c2c principles. watch the one

minute youtube movie (google maersk + c2c).

there are many practical and acute reasons for

why we should start practicing the c2c principles

large scale, one being that we are running out of a

number of materials. for instance, we are running out

of copper much sooner than oil. motivated by the mate-

rials scarcity situation and inspired by the c2c design

strategy the new danish minister of environment, ida

auken, recently declared that denmark no longer has

a waste strategy, but instead now has a resource strat-

egy.the principles behind c2c are: 1. waste equals

food, 2. use current solar income, and 3. actively

support to diversity. . Read more at vuggetilvugge.dk

industrial ecology

industrial symbiosis in kalundborg, 105 km from

copenhagen, is a collaborative enterprise in which the

byproducts of one industry become valuable resources

for one or several other industries. the motivation for

exchange arose in the early 1970s from a mutual effort

to reduce costs by seeking income-producing uses for

“waste” products. gradually, those involved realized

that a carefully managed exchange of energy and

materials could enable mutual economic benefit whilst

reducing the environmental impact of large industrial

operations.

today, kalundborg’s industrial symbiosis comprises

eight core companies; dong energy asnæs Power

station, statoil-hydro refinery, gyproc a/s, novo

nordisk, novozymes, recycling company rgs 90

a/s, waste company kara noveren i/s and kalun-

dborg municipality. each company is bound to each

other via an intricate network of flows; flows of steam,

gas, water, gypsum, fly ash and sludge. cradle to

cradle principles encourage us to make waste into

food and fuel just as nature does. kalundborg’s indus-

trial symbiosis shows the benefit to both economy and

environment which can occur when such principles

become reality.by 1988, kalundborg could already

boast that internal collaboration between industries had

amounted to savings of 160 million dollars since the

project’s outset. Read more at www.symbiosis.dk

cradle to cradle denmark



43issues #2: this way, Please!42 10 short storiescomment

novozymes in africatransition townsclimate change and dwindling fossil fuels might seem

like a dystopian vision of a future far ahead, but for the

transition town movement it is a very real challenge that

affects how they live their everyday lives. faced with the

impending twin plights of global warming and Peak

oil, the transition towns not only try to avert them, but

actively prepare and practice lifestyles that make the

towns and local communities resilient to the changes

and challenges to come – creating a robust system that

can weather the shock from changes in its surround-

ings through local self-sufficiency and sustainable use of

resources.based on strong local initiatives, the movement

uses hyper-modern tools for organizing and enabling a

return to simpler and more sustainable livelihoods. al-

though their practices comes from the permaculture move-

ment and maintains its inherent ruralism, they make great

use of modern technical and social technologies. the

movement spreads virally by replicating self-contained

units coupled in a network organization, and uses new

media to share the knowledge and lessons they learn

from their ongoing pragmatic experiment. Read more

about the 400 towns at transitionnetwork.org

the 4th binthe 4th bin (nyc) collects, reuses or recycles un-

wanted electronic goods in new york city in order

to prevent the accumulation and export of hazard-

ous waste; e-waste. in 2009, discarded televisions,

computers, peripherals (including printers, scanners,

fax machines) computer mice, keyboards, and cell

phones amounted to about 2.37 million short tons.

Previously, this waste was mixed with other

waste, sent to landfill or exported to other countries

(including those in the developing world). it contains

pollutants (lead, barium, mercury) which can have

long-term devastating effects on both ecology as well

as human health.

the 4th bin initiative collects e-waste from private

addresses and companies. used electronic goods

are then sorted and sent for re-use wherever possible.

otherwise, goods are broken down to their compo-

nent or material parts and sent to source the supply of

new products. 4th bin reuses first, recycles second.

since 2009, the 4th bin has been responsible for

diverting 500 short tons (1 million pounds) of e-waste

generated in new york city.

Read more at www.4thbin.com

the PeoPle’s suPermarketthe People’s supermarket (london, uk) is a sustain-

able food cooperative which profits from its commu-

nity (via labor time and customer commitment) whilst

the community profits from it (via high quality food

produce, education and training, shares in economic

profit). anyone can buy fresh, local food at reason-

able prices. anyone can become a member. when

you join, you offer your time (four hours in every

four weeks) plus a yearly subscription fee (25 british

pounds) in return for a 20% discount on all foods.

you become customer, worker and part-owner of the

company. the urban community is connected with

the local farming community. Priority goes to keeping

food high-quality, fresh and british, before organic

(although organic stocks are available and popular).

transport links are kept short, decreasing the need to

refrigerate and decreasing carbon emissions.

the People’s kitchen uses food produce from the

store to make soups, salads, sandwiches and ready

to eat dinners. sourcing in-store food which is close

to its sell-by date means that food waste is mini-

mized. for the people, by the people!

Read more at www.thepeoplessupermarket.org

see the entire Poster at

http://www.novozymes.com/en/about-us/brochures/documents/african_agriculture.pdf

cleanstar mozambique community bio-innovation

limited is an integrated food, energy and forest

protection and rural development business project,

which novozymes, as part of their sustainability and

‘rethinking tomorrow’ strategy, are part of in coop-

eration with, amongst others, cleanstar ventures.

cleanstar ventures is an environmental venture devel-

opment group that combines risk capital, technology

and expertise to create sustainable long-term value

for shareholders and stakeholders.

the mozambique project is working with small-

holder farmers to introduce a restorative and profit-

able system for producing food and energy for

attractive, deep and unconventional local markets.

the systems utilized by the majority of the population

are inherently unsustainable, and are resulting in an

interconnected downward spiral of biodiversity loss,

a rise in poverty and a lowering of family health.

by 2013, approximately 3000 smallholder farming

families will implement an agroforestry cultivation

system on 6000 hectares of their own land in sofala

province. commodities will be produced and pre-pro-

cessed through cleanstar’s community-based centers,

before being transported to a centralized bioprocess-

ing facility. this project helps to reduce deforestation

by satisfying demand with ethanol-based cooking

fuel, and drives a major improvement in nutritional

needs by introducing a more diverse and healthy mix

of fruits and vegetables. by 2014, the business will

have proven that all goals are possible, commercially

profitable and immensely scaleable.

Novozymes is a Danish bio-innovation company us-

ing biotechnology to improve the use of resources in

more than 40 industries around the world. With over

5000 employees and $1.8 billion annual revenue,

Novozymes offers the leading technology platform for

bio ethanol production. Read more at www.cleanstar-

ventures.com and www.novozymes.com

nature rights – in boliviaone of the pressing issues when looking at the long term

future of the planet and its population is the relationship

between man and nature. is mankind just one amongst

many species or the supreme shaper and shepherd of the

biosphere? few doubt the intrinsic value of human life,

and the legal rights that stem from this are universally

acknowledged. but what is the legal status of nature?

in bolivia, the Plurinational legislative assembly passed

“ley de derechos de la madre tierra” conferring legal

rights on mother nature, giving nature status as a

juridical player in line with human beings, corporations

and ships. whilst details on how to enforce this status

have not yet been decided, mother earth will get her

own ombudsman and 7 specific rights: to life, diversity,

water, clean air, equilibrium, restoration and to exist free

of contamination

the law draws heavily on the spiritual worldview

and imagery of indigenous groups, and contains a

curious mix of legal designations and mythical descrip-

tions, defining mother earth as both ‘a collective subject

of public interest’ as well as a being who is ‘sacred,

fertile and the source of life that feeds and cares for all

living beings in her womb. she is in permanent balance,

harmony and communication with the cosmos. she is

comprised of all ecosystems and living beings, and their

self-organization.’ how’s that for legalese?

samsoe’s 2030 vision: inde-Pendent of fossil fuels

Pho

to: m

alen

e an

nikki lu

nd

én

the energy academy has set up a new vision for the

the renewable energy island samsoe succeeded in

becoming 100% self-sufficient with renewable en-

ergy over the course of just 10 years (1998-2008).

the next goal is to gradually become independent

of fossil fuels over the next 20 years. today, 70%

of fossil fuel is used on transportation by roads and

the ferry, and the 4000 inhabitants plus the 3-4000

guests who visit the academy annually can look for-

ward to driving e-cars in the near future. a reduction

in the heating of private households of around 30%

towards 2020 will make them independent of fossil

fuels. this means new business for car mechanics,

gas stations and many other local businesses.

Read more about the renewable energy island at

www.energyacademy.dk and read Malene’s and

Søren’s comment in this ISSUES on p. 146.

books. ‘vingesus’, malene annikki lundén, 2008

(danish and english edition). ‘fælledskaber’, tor

nørretranders og søren hermansen, 2011 (danish

edition). Order the books at www.energyacademy.dk



45issues #2: this way, Please!44 10 short stories10 short stories

the future we wantoccuPy wall street

occupy wall street (ows) is a people-powered

movement for democracy that started in manhat-

tan on september 17, 2011 and rapidly gained

momentum. Protest against the economic exploitation

of the financial sector spread rapidly to 951 cities in

82 countries. their compelling slogan “we are the

99%” portrayed the financial sector as a parasite,

amassing wealth at the expense of the rest of society,

a message that resonated at a time of cuts to welfare

programs and soaring unemployment.

whilst the physical mobilization of the masses

may be reminiscent of the countercultural critique of

capitalism in the 70’s, this protest moves beyond mere

physical space in our time. this is particularly evident

in the involvement of the notorious hacktivism group

_anonymous_, which leaked online manifestos for

the movement clad in their characteristic guy fawkes

masks. this aesthetic draws on both cyberculture as

well as mass movements and creates both a fictional

universe in which the co-creators of the movement can

manifest and project their dreams and desires for a

fair and sustainable future, but also a very concrete

space for action and change in the physical world.

the imaginary world thus creates a framework where

significant events can unfold. the universe reverberates

in the co-participants, allowing them to manifest their

message again and again, a succession of significant

events like pearls on a string.

happy naTIons

Pho

to:o

ws/

cc

oc

cu

Py wa

ll street Poster

Read more at occupywallst.org or follow Capital

Institutes blog about OWS at www.capitalinstitute.

org/content/responding-occupy-wall-street. Capital

Institute believes OWS is a movement whose time has

come.

william (bill) s. becker, co-founder of the future we

want, spoke at the fourth in100y-seminar in january

2012 for the 80 selected participants.

the future we want (fww) ‘is a global initiative

to envision what we want our lives and communities

to be like 20 years from now.’ the idea is to gather

promising ideas and visions for a positive future from

all over the world using everything from modern tech-

nologies to grassroots communication.

three years ago a group gathered and started to

define ‘the future we want – the power of positive

thinking’. “we have since then defined a program

that focuses on co-creating a 20 year positive vision,

which we presented to the un. they liked it so much

that they want to make it an integrated part of the

rio+20 conference 2012. we are very happy about

this since it means we will now get a large distribu-

tion of the message and interaction with people

worldwide to define the future we want and make

it come through,” says bill s. becker, and reminded

us all that the futurama new york world fair in 1939

set the standards for the design of cities and energy

consumption and that we still follow those standards

today even though we can no longer afford it.

the plan with the future we want according

to bill s. becker is as follows: before rio we will

engage in local conversations with a focus on creat-

ing the future we want through actual change with

a 20 year goal. during rio, we will make the input

visible in an exhibition, and after rio we will follow

up and continue worldwide distribution.

bill s. becker is also a senior associate at natural

capitalism solutions and author of ‘the 100 day ac-

tion plan to save the planet’.

Visit www.futurewewant.org to take part in the con-

versation.

dr. saamdu chetri, director of gnh centre and ap-

pointee of the prime minister of bhutan to his office. find

his presentation from the second in100y-seminar at

www.in100y.dk/cph-seminars/2-doing/from-the-seminar/

Let me begin with a quote by my king: “Today, Gross National Happiness has come to mean so many things to so many people. But to me it signifies simply ‘development with values’. Thus for my nation today, GNH is the bridge between the fundamental values of kindness, equality and humanity and the necessary pursuit of eco-nomic growth. GNH acts as our national conscience guid-ing us towards making wise decisions for a better future.” What is GNH? It is a holistic approach balancing the mind and the body with the conviction that man is bound by nature to search for existence. In 1972, the fourth Bhutanese king, Jigme Singay Wangchuck, ascended the throne at a young age – and looked around for develop-ment models for his country. Realising that the single most common desire of every human being was happiness, he propounded the idea that “Gross National Happiness is more important than Gross National Product.” We have walked this path for past 40 years. It is a challenge, and we know we will make mistakes and fall, but we will rise again and walk the path until we get there. For the past four decades, government policy and plans have been based on the four GNH pillars: equitable socio-economic development, cultural preservation and promo-tion, environmental conservation, and good governance. These have been further elaborated into nine domains: psychological well-being, standard of living, health, culture, education, community vitality, good governance, time use, and ecological integration. Based on the 2010 survey, the early results indicate that no Bhutanese is completely happy. On average people are deprived in six of nine do-mains. How does this result help us? Among other things, it will help us evaluate, monitor, set goals, build national consciousness and involve people in mindful development planning and practices. If we do not learn in schools what nature is, how shall we appreciate and mindfully consider the protection of

ecology? If we do not learn the effects of harmful sub-stances, smoking and junk food, how can we expect to be healthy? If we are ignorant about what causes climate change, how can we help save the Earth? If we do not learn politics, how can we make informed choices about voting and develop a healthy democracy and government? If we do not learn about our culture, how can we serve our community and the world? Therefore, we have begun the process of teaching and practicing GNH in schools, which we all know will have a multiplying and far reaching effect. I will not conclude that Bhutan has achieved GNH, yet, and we gain many aspirations through the initiations of so many countries who are trying to pursue similar paths. On 19 July, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously resolved, without a vote, that happiness is a standalone goal and a holistic approach to development. Our prime minister thus happily concluded, “Happiness is now accepted by the international community as a timeless, common vision that binds all humanity, rich and poor.” The world is crumbling under the devastating impacts of climate change – it is felt everywhere with earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, pollution, species extinction, inequal-ities, terror, financial insecurity and entrenched poverty. Greatly pained by such changes, my prime minister, our GNH teacher, holds the deepest and longest dream to build a GNH Centre in Bhutan – a beacon for a common consciousness for sustainable living. He wants to create a GNH Centre that fully embodies and models the princi-ples of GNH in every aspect of its design, function, activ-ity and human interaction – manifesting simple and sus-tainable living in harmony with nature and other beings, and teaching and demonstrating both to our own citizens and to international visitors how to bring GNH values and practices fully into their daily work, life, community, country and world. It will be a beacon for our nation and, we hope, for those far beyond Bhutan’s borders.



47issues #2: this way, Please!46 10 short stories comment

a Truly holIsTIc concepTIon of naTure

In my lecture at the fourth In100Y-seminar in January 2012 I tried to argue that nothing short of a completely all-inclusive conception of nature can be made consistent and adequate for thinking about sustainability. In this conception everything, absolutely everything, has a nature and a place in nature. We cannot name anything without thereby regarding it as having a nature of its own and as member of the species and genera that it belongs to. I have my own nature, and I exemplify human, mammal and perhaps even rational nature. In a comprehensive conception, my nature is all that is true about me, all that can happen to me, and all that I can do. And so it is with all other things in the universe. Nature in general, the nature that everything has a place in, simply is the way all natures fit perfectly together. Nature is the all-encompassing totality, not regarded as a mere sum or a very, very long list, but as the dynamic interconnectedness from which items can be singled out by certain other items like me and you. This is the only conception of nature that is truly holistic, and – I would add – truly consistent and sober-minded. Nonetheless, this conception of nature is neither the only nor the dominant one. We normally use the word ‘na-ture’ in a contrasting rather than a comprehensive sense. In daily life we tend to think of nature as that which is more or less unaffected by human interference such as the wild as opposed to the cultivated, the rural as opposed to the urban, or the organic as opposed to the synthetic. We may also regard nature as the material or physical as opposed to the mental, the abstract, the ideal or the normative. From a religious point of view we may regard all of this as natural in the sense of the earthly and secular as opposed to the divine and eternal. It is all of these more common contrasting concep-tions of nature that we have to free ourselves from if we are to begin to understand all of human nature as fully

integrated with the nature of everything else. We should start stopping ourselves whenever we think of humans as somehow above, below or otherwise outside of nature, and we should start to stop ourselves when we think of nature as anything less than the whole. It is crucial that we begin to understand that the world as it unfolds can be divided up in many ways, but that no part of the whole could be more natural than the whole itself in the sense of being more original or basic. We should also start stopping ourselves when we think that we are about to destroy nature or that it is up to us to save or care for nature. Nature is indestructible. Lo-cal developments may undermine themselves and thus be unsustainable, but Nature as such is always sustainable. It is crucial that we realize that we have the best of rea-sons to diminish the careless pollution of the atmosphere and the oceans, to leave substantial areas of the surface of the earth in a wild condition, to control the growth of our cities, to encourage a shift in the use of scientific knowl-edge, to develop new forms of science taking all of human nature into account, and to remind ourselves that we have not created the world, whether or not we believe that a deity has done so. We should exhibit cosmic modesty. We are neither lords nor stewards of nature. We are parts of the whole, and all we do always fits immediately into all else that happens. We must keep trying as best we can to learn from our mistakes and try to be decent and responsi-ble persons, because we and everything else is going to live and die, exist and perish, both with the foreseen and the unforeseen consequences of all that we do as the parts of nature we are.

Read Hans Fink’s full lecture, including the five other con-

ceptions of nature, at www.in100y.dk/cph-seminars/4-its-

our/from-the-seminar/

hans fink, dr.Phil, senior associate professor, aarhus

university. his specialities are ethics, the philosophy of

nature and cultural research.

scenarIos Towards 2112. preferred fuTures for susTaInable socIeTIes.


www.houseoffutures.dk

48 comment

welcome To The fuTures

introducing the Preferred future scenarios for sustainable

societies towards 2112

by gitte larsen, søren steen olsen and

steen svendsen, house of futures

In this section, we will present you with two preferred futures for sustainable societies in the long term. The aim is to create alternative, coherent visions of future societies based on a sustainable relationship between mankind and nature which can be discussed, shared and acted upon. We have also established a baseline scenario of how the future could unfold if we do not act now.

We NeeD mOre FUTUreThe world is changing, and people are changing too. Our values, perceptions of nature, belief systems, conscious-ness as well as the whole range of our capacities as human beings are not the same today as they were back in 1912. And they will not be the same in 2112 either. Regard-less of whether you see it as an evolvement of the rational human mind, a new enlightenment or a growing spiritual movement, it is happening. We are moving into a new era, and we need to envision positive images for the future that we want to unfold and create.

Over the course of the seminars of the “In 100 years - starting now” project, many of the above issues and challenges were raised and addressed. Amongst them, a re-curring theme that was both explicitly articulated and also underlay much of the discussions was the need for three things; positive visions, holistic thinking and a mind shift.

The need for positive visions is not just generally desirable, but is also specifically necessary in the debate on sustainability and growth, a debate which is often domi-nated by threats to be avoided rather than opportunities to be pursued. Holistic thinking is the deep and broad understanding that our actions have consequences that we need to take into account and take responsibility for. And the call for a mind shift is rooted in the idea that a genuine transformation of humanity’s relationship with nature requires not only solid scientific knowledge, but also requires us to act continually on this knowledge.

Working with scenarios in the form of preferred futures is a method perfectly suited to addressing these

themes. Preferred futures are alternative, potentially desirable, and comprehensive stories about future states of the world. And working with more than one possible preferred future enables us to examine a wider range of positive opportunities.

hIsTOrIes OF The FUTUreUp until 1970, futures studies and planning were primar-ily based on traditional extrapolative methods. Significant societal changes during the sixties, like the moon landing, oil crises, youth culture, new societal values and the grow-ing speed of change, challenged that assumption and the methods for doing futures studies changed too. The future was no longer just an extrapolation of the past. The future was considered uncertain. With this new focus, there was a serious need for developing new techniques. Scenario methods became one of these techniques.

Scenarios can be defined as “internal, coherent descrip-tions of alternative images of the future”. Futurist Joe Coates has defined scenarios as “holistic, integrated im-ages of how the future may evolve” and futurist Hirschorn formulated the shortest version, which seems to sum it all up quite well. He described scenarios as “histories of the future”.

Despite the variety of specific scenario methods used in futures studies, there is consensus that scenarios are not predictions of the future. The aim of scenario processes is not to foresee the future, but rather to show how differ-ent interpretations of driving forces can lead to different futures. Scenarios are not plans, but tools to promote constructive ideas about the future. They can serve as a framework for our common debates about the long-term future and they can be applied by individual institutions and social agents as reference points for their own visions and plans.

By formulating alternative futures, your comprehen-sion of your own conception of the future and the present is expanded, and new possibilities and risks appear. We are given the opportunity to work with interpretations, weightings, priorities, strategies and most importantly of all, we are given a choice.

PreFerreD FUTUres – NOrmaTIve sCeNarIOsThere are many different methods of constructing sce-narios: normative, explorative, descriptive, and quantita-tive, amongst others. Following our aim of developing preferred futures, the scenario method used in the project ‘In100Years’ can best be described as normative scenarios.

To understand the concept of “normative” scenarios, it is helpful to note that applied futures studies generally deals with three types of alternative futures:

- Plausible (a possible future in which relevant causal factors can be specified even though it may stretch the imagination to do so);

- Probable (a plausible future that is considered to have a reasonably high likelihood of coming to pass); and

- Preferable (what we would prefer and will try to achieve).

The word, “Normative,” then, is a type of futures studies that deals with preferable futures, and the question we ask at the outset of the scenarios is ‘preferred by whom?’ A preferred future is always - consciously or unconsciously - somebody’s future.

To explicitly specify our basis for understanding preferable and sustainable futures, we have chosen to draw on the definition of sustainability formulated by the Brundtland commission back in 1987, which stated: ‘Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.’

There is, however, a challenge with this definition when looking 100 years into the future. Who are we to define the needs of the future generation? Or in other words; how can we best do that? The basic question we put to ourselves to begin with, knowing that we were going to make long term future scenarios for sustainable societies, was: ‘What are the preferred sustainable futures for man-kind which are worth envisioning, discussing and working towards?’

lONg Term sCeNarIOs In recent years, public authorities, researchers and organi-zations have developed numerous scenarios for sustain-ability. Many of these scenarios are defined by a 10 to 20 year perspective.

Contrary to these scenarios, we want to develop sce-narios with a long time span - up to 100 years - because the long time span gives us the possibility of including a broad ( ) and deep ( ) set of perspectives and changes that correspond to the transformations we can expect on the road to a sustainable society of the future.

However, sketching out scenarios for sustainable societies for the next 100 years is virtually a fool’s er-rand. It is almost impossible to make any plausible direct extrapolations from historic trends a hundred years into the future. To see this, you need only look back 100 years and try to find the historic trends that would extrapolate in any direct fashion from 1912 to the present day. And if that seems difficult even with the benefit of hindsight, try imagining people in 1912 attempting to predict a century of as much change and turmoil as the one we have had.

Depending on your perspective today, the world of 1912 may look stagnant and boring, or poor, cruel and dangerous – or perhaps pure, harmonious and innocent. It is definitely very alien to the world we live in now – yet it undeniably contained the seeds of the present.

In much the same way, the present contains the seeds of the future, but it is very unlikely to unfold in any straightforward manner. That is why we need scenarios to get a better idea of the enormous transformations that will happen in the next 100 years, including how we might try to shape the future and create the ones we prefer.

mIND seT DrIveN sCeNarIOs The long time horizon also places particular demands on the key drivers that shape the scenarios. Normally you would work with, e.g political, technological or economical devel-opments, as drivers, but with a 100-year perspective, politi-cal agendas, economic cycles or technological innovations become less crucial. It is rather a question of what power is, what economic value is and what we mean by technology?



51issues #2: this way, Please!50 scenariosscenarios

As a key driving force in both scenarios, we have chosen the understanding of the relationship between hu-mans and nature. By doing so, the scenarios are driven by different perceptions of nature/mind sets, and it is through the various mind sets that we see and develop the holistic stories of the future sustainable societies in the scenarios.

Our basic understanding of ourselves and the nature we are a part of is less volatile and in many ways more important than technological and economic development when we talk about sustainability in a 100-year perspec-tive. Our human consciousness has a deep memory that stretches far back and far forward in time.

With the long time span, the scenarios are focused on how we think and feel about the future today. The two sce-narios presented in this section are, we believe, what will be the two basic and archetypical approaches to sustain-able development.

QUalITaTIve sCeNarIOs“In 100 Years – starting now” is a project with a broad aim. Mind set, growth, development and sustainability are themes that require an open approach, an approach that al-lows for working with technological and economic growth as well as development in human goals and values. This is ensured by using a broad qualitative approach that can inspire constructive consideration of decisions and paths of development. However, it assumes that they are qualified and well grounded. The scenario process is a fitting way to include knowledge and ideas from many different sources and engage them in clear and constructive way.

It is necessary to rethink our relationship with Planet Earth, and in this process to develop new mindsets. We are talking large-scale paradigm shifts comparable to the age of the Enlightenment or to pioneering breakthroughs like those of Copernicus or Darwin – breakthroughs that changed our understanding of ourselves and nature.

The scenarios which follow describe two possible transformative future mindsets that could drive sustain-ability forward. We call them the “Power of Nature” and “Man-Made World”. They are two very different kinds of mindsets which point to two different futures and lead to different paths to the future. And the key to these dif-ferences lies in different expressions of our perception of nature.

Both scenarios draw on the same baseline scenario called “I=PAT”, which is a future directly extrapolated from the past and present. Turn the page and we will welcome you to the futures of human existence in the long term.

gitte larsen, futurist and editor, owner of Editions, part-

ner and director in House of Futures. Project Manager of

‘In100 Years’. [email protected].

søren steen olsen, policy developer, futurist and

partner in Public Futures and House of Futures. sto@houseof-

futures.dk.

steen svendsen, policy developer and futurist, partner

in Public Futures and House of Futures. Project Manager of

‘In100 Years’. [email protected].

how we dId IT dIfferenTly

the scenario process of ‘in100years’ differs from more

traditional scenario processes in several respects:

- the scope was ambitious, with sustainability and devel-

opment for future generations as the focus

- the 100 year perspective is rarely used and even more

unusual for qualitative scenarios

- with mind set and perceptions of nature as the main

drivers, we expanded the long list of scenarios driven

by systems and external conditions

scenarIos

scenarios are alternative images of the future which can

inform decisions in the present. it is an approach that is

used by decision makers in the public and private sec-

tors, on many levels and in many contexts. there are many

types of scenarios, and the choice of scenario depends on

the purpose. one can work with many or few, qualitative

or quantitative, broad or specific, and long or short term

scenarios.

some of the more highly profiled scenarios were devel-

oped for the un and in global corporations. within the un,

the range of scenario types can be gleaned from different

approaches such as the un’s population projections and

iPcc ’s scenarios for the emission of greenhouse gases.

the un’s population projections run to 2100 and con-

sider a medium, a high growth and a low growth scenario.

these alternative scenarios represent calculations made in

a model with relatively few variables (primarily fertility and

mortality) and the best bet based on tendencies in the de-

velopment so far. they are quantitative and have a limited

focus on a single variable: population growth.

the iPcc’s scenarios for the emission of green-

house gases also run to 2100, but consider 6 so-called

families of scenarios for the emission of greenhouse gases.

these scenarios build on a model with a larger number of

variables such as population growth, economic growth, the

input intensity of production, the composition of energy use

by sources etc. added to this are the more qualitative vari-

ables such as the degree of regionalization or globalization

of the world economy.

tellus, a boston-based not-for profit organization, has

developed a set of global sustainability scenarios in a

classic futurist style. some of their scenarios are quantified

in great detail projecting numbers for key variables like

energy, carbon emissions, water use, forest area, gdP,

population, international equity and hunger. tellus works for

a “sustainable, just, and livable global civilization” which

requires “new values, a planetary consciousness and a

sense of global citizenship”.

eea, the european environmental agency, conducts an

ongoing effort of gathering information on scenarios for

european environment. they run an information portal listing

and organizing scenario work on many issues – everything

from water and energy to forests, biodiversity and climate

– and from many sources. they also initiate expert meet-

ings, most recently a workshop on global megatrends in

copenhagen 2010.

even more qualitative approaches are to be found in

the private sector, where scenarios are a common tool in

the strategic toolbox. one example is the global business

network, whose scenarios for technology and international

development are based on relatively few qualitative vari-

ables brought together in four broad, but distinct scenarios.

one of the big private players working systematically with

scenarios is shell, which also works with a few qualitative

scenarios – although they build on mathematics and focus

on the global energy markets. they are used to broaden the

perspectives of decision makers to include possible devel-

opments, and to qualify strategic decisions.

- the combination of performance arts and methods as

well as future studies made it possible to sense the

scenarios and to open up to the development of new

mind sets.

- the scenarios are formulated in a dynamic process,

with inspiration and engagement from 150 visionary

people from a variety of fields of study and experiences

gathered at the “in 100 years” seminars of 2011 and

2012.



53issues #2: this way, Please!52 scenarios scenarios

journeying. time travelling. imaginary

tours. destination: 2112.

oceanianorthern america

latin america

europe

africa

asia

total global population

1812

1815

1820

1825

1830

1835

1840

1845

1850

1855

1860

1865

1870

1875

1880

1885

1890

1895

1900

1905

1910

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1965

1970

1975

1980

1985

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

2020

2025

2030

2035

2040

2045

2050

2055

2060

2065

2070

2075

2080

2085

2090

2095

2100

2105

2112

sources: historic data series: (1750-1950): the world at six billion. un, 1999

data series 1950-2100: world Population Prospects, the 2010 revision – medium variant. un, 2011

1910: 1,822 m

2010: 6,896 m

1850: 1,260 m

1950: 2,532 m

1980: 4,453 m

2100: 10,125 m

total global PoPulation & forecast

baselIne scenarIo. building blocks for long-term Preferred futures

there is a lot of inertia and irreversibility built into factors such as PoPulation, technology,

economic growth and mindsets. to show why the course we are on is unsustainable, yet

irreversible – we cannot go on, and we cannot go back – it is useful to look at a baseline

scenario as a Point of deParture for how we can move forward.

søren steen olsen and steen svendsen,

Public futures / house of futures

One of the aims of the project “In100Y” is to consider and create ideas for futures that are possible, and preferable. In order to do that in a plausible way, we must acknowledge a couple of building blocks – structural trends that will contribute to forming any probable future. Over the next 100 years, global population will increase from the present 7 bn people to 9 bn people around the middle of this century and to around 10 bn people 100 years from now. This is the UN’s midrange projection. Whilst this is an enormous increase in numbers, in historic perspective a striking feature is the levelling off of population growth af-ter three centuries of unprecedented growth. This, in and of itself, is a significant transformation already going on, even if it does come with its own new challenges such as how to accommodate ageing populations. See figure 1. Population trends have a lot of inertia, even as we project 100 years into the future. Of course there is a significant uncertainty, but it is not in the order of mag-nitude. We may feel less sure when it comes to economic development, and its impact on resource use, particularly in a situation like the present. Nevertheless the system that broke the “Malthusian trap” providing us with steady increases in average prosperity was invented 200 years ago and has proven quite resilient and dynamic. This system fused market capitalism, science and technology in a way that transformed the world, not least by making continu-ous economic growth a fact of life. An important feature of this system is its reliance on fossil fuels as the dominant source of energy. Whilst reliev-ing the Earth’s forests from an unsustainable pressure and multiplying the amount of force available to humans, fossil fuels are a non-renewable resource, and their combustion gives rise to the emission of greenhouse gases that are changing and potentially destabilising the global climate.

Thus, the relationship between economic output and its attendant resource use is of central importance to judg-ing the scope of the transformation challenge. Figure 2 shows how economic output is on an exponential growth path. It also shows that the extraction of fossil fuels has been growing along with it until in recent decades when a decoupling has occurred, so that energy use has not been growing at the same pace as GDP. This, also, can be seen as a sign of transformation of our path of development. But is it enough?

IPaT – BaselINeWe can get an idea of the scope of the need for transfor-mation by having a model of which impact the current path of growth will have on our resource base. This would give us a baseline scenario. A general workhorse model is the so-called IPAT equation which is originally devised by Paul Ehrlich. It states that:

Impact = Population x Affluence x Technology

One straightforward numeric application of this equation is asking about one specific type of impact, namely CO2 emissions. Projecting P as the standard population projec-tion shown above, projecting A (affluence as expressed by annual growth in GDP per capita) along the historic trend (ca. 2% p. a.), and projecting T as the historic trend of technologically induced decoupling between output and CO2 emissions (ca. 0.7% p.a.), the resulting impact, I, is an 80% increase in CO2 emissions by 2050. This contrasts with the IPCC’s recommended target of a decrease of 80% by 2050. This particular calculation is due to Tim Jackson in ‘Prosperity without growth’, but it is a simple exercise, and similar calculations have been done by many others. Taking P and A as given, decoupling will have to in-crease from its present rate of 0.7 per cent a year in recent

gdP in international 1990–$

fossil energy carriers

total

biomass

global material extraction and gdP1900-2005 (index: 1900 =100)

1900

1906

1912

1918

1924

1930

1936

1942

1948

1954

1960

1966

1972

1978

1984

1990

1996

2002

source: krausmann, f., gingrich, s., eisenmenger, n.,

erb, k.h., haberl, h., fischer-kowalski, m.:

growth in global materials use, gdP and population

during the 20th century. ecological economics 2009 (in

press: doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.05.007).

global material extraction and gdP

1900-2005 (index: 1900 =100)

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

80% of the last 2,000 years of outPut

was Produced since 1900

Percentage of total economic output (1990 $) and years lived

total economic output (1990 $)years lived

1st

2nd

3th

4th

5th

6th

7th

8th

9th

10th

11th

12th

13th

14th

15th

16th

17th

18th

19th

20th

21th

*

century *up to 2010

source: angus maddison; un; the economist

55

50

45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0




coloured areas show emissions of carbon dioxide in million tonnes (= Pxaxt)

2050 at baseline trend

2050 at iPcc target

2007

1990

t: g co2 Per $

Pxa: global gdP in bn y2000-$

1000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

00 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000

decades, to a rate of 7 per cent, i.e. by a factor of ten over the coming decades, if the IPCC target is to be reached. Figure 3 gives a graphic illustration which really drives home the point that the pressure on the T variable – expressed as kg CO2 per $ of economic output – is huge if we are to have any hope of meeting the 2050 emission target. The yellow area represents the baseline scenario to 2050, i.e. a scenario where decoupling continues at the pace of recent decades, and the much smaller brown area represents the scenario that meets the IPCC target. The IPCC target may not be set in stone, and we may be able to survive overshooting it. But the exercise does indicate that we have a challenge, and that our current path of development needs further transformation. This simple exercise also gives cause for thought about the affluence factor of the equation. Might we redefine affluence in a way that would reduce the impact on global climate and resources? Taking our cue from a variety of sources, from various wisdom traditions and bottom-up efforts to so-called happiness research, there could be good reason to question whether the specific kind and distribu-tion of affluence that is the output of our current path of development is worth pursuing at all? This question particulary touches upon the material, resource consuming part of that affluence. Might we, indeed, transform and rethink our mindset and behaviour in ways that would make us better off from

some truer perspective while at the same time reducing the pressure on our only planet? This line of reasoning opens up very different areas of interest to pursue. Instead of being primarily a technical, economic, and/or political question, we are touching on questions about what consti-tutes human well-being, and happiness. It also raises the fundamental issue of our relationship with nature – and might even be said logically to pose the age old question about the meaning of life. Normally, such questions go largely unexamined in debates on sustainability and growth. But as seen in a 100 year perspective, it might make sense for them to be part of any scenario building exercise. So, which kind of transformation should we aim for in order to create a preferred future? This is not a ques-tion with just one possible answer. Even if we might agree on the need for transformation, there are many possible visions and ways of realising it. In order to illustrate this and inspire the discussion, it can be useful to work with different scenarios of preferred futures.

Søren Steen Olsen and Steen Svendsen are policy develop-

ers, futurists and partners in Public Futures and House of

Futures. Contact Søren at [email protected] and Steen

at [email protected]

Questioning. not feeling yourself today? nei-

ther is the world... can you stand the long run?

i can, but not like this!



58 scenarios

scenarIo #1:man-made world

we realize that when we Put our minds to it, we

can develoP technologies, organizations, Political

institutions and business models that allow us to

ProsPer in ways that do not jeoPardize Planet earth.

collectively, we are aPProaching a state of global

stewardshiP in which we manage our Planet ration-

ally, like any sensible landowner would his ProPerty.

scenarIo #2:power of naTure

we realize that everything is nature, and so are we.

we are one with mother earth, and we share a com-

mon biology and collective consciousness. on a

deePer level, these are the sources of meaning that

we all taP into, regardless of nationality, religion

or culture.




man-made world. the light touch society

by søren steen olsen and steen svendsen,

futurists, house of futures

In 2112, we live in a “Man-made world.” If you look at that world from a 2012 perspective, you will be surprised by the responsibility that we, as humans, exhibit towards nature - the clean cities, the fertile landscape, the light-touch clean economy and high prosperity. YYou will be fascinated by new technology and new innovations, and you may be shocked by the changes in human physiology. But you will recognize general social patterns. Let us give you the story of how this future unfolds, where it has its historic roots and what drives the transfor-mation. Then let us describe to you the future perception of nature. Finally let us portray what politics, business, living, art, science and technology will look like in this world.

DrIvers aND BaCkgrOUNDThe mindset that drives “Man-made world” is responsi-ble determination. It is informed by the realization that human activity has created a new geological epoch, the Anthropocene, where we have become the most important driving force for changing Earth’s geology, climate, and ecosystems. We are responsible and we have to assume this responsibility. “Man-made world” is created by vigorous political initiative and rational science-based planning. And it arguably has roots stretching back all the way to the Club of Rome with its message of “Limits to growth” due to the finiteness of fossil energy and raw materials re-serves. This gave rise to an increasing awareness of nature’s boundaries to human activities. Also, it led to a process of institutionalized global political consultation, negotiation and formulation of targets. The Brundtland commission and Kyoto protocols were some early milestones in a pro-cess with plenty of twists and bumps along the way to the Anthropocene breakthrough. In the 1970s, the oil crisis that ended three decades of historically unprecedented economic growth worked as a

powerful demonstration of the exact vulnerabilities that “Limits to growth” had pointed out. This run of events was a precursor for the early decades of the 21st century when increasing temperatures, hurricanes, floods and draughts put pressure on our resources and economies thereby demonstrating the message from the scientific community about planetary boundaries. The ideas driving Man-made world were under way for many decades, and often quite high on the agenda of public discourse and policy. They were picked up by media, by NGOs and grassroot movements and by segments of consumers and producers. But the wholesale radical change that marks “Man-made world” required a new generation of political leaders taking over as the old generation failed to inspire and weren’t up to tackling the challenges. It became clear that global action on a massive scale was needed in order to reverse, mitigate and/or adapt to the challenges. Consequently we saw a refocusing and a revitalization of political processes on local, national, regional, and global levels. New generations of policy entrepreneurs were taking the lead in taking responsibility.

PerCePTION OF NaTUreA strong and conscious perception of nature is abso-lutely central in the ‘Man-made world’. We see nature as a living system and a wonderful resource. We can rely on it to provide us with much of the material basis for our existence. But nature is a finite resource. Since the industrial revolution, humans have become the single most powerful force affecting nature’s develop-ment, changing physical landscapes, climate, material metabolisms and biodiversity, both globally and locally. We are living in a geological epoch of our own mak-ing. Now we also named it: the Anthropocene. This was a call on us to be responsible and rational in how we use the world’s resources. We learnt to be knowl-edgeable and conscious about how our activities effect the fragile balances of nature.

gesturing. celebrating

the power and the vitamins

of the sunlight in the universal

body language.


63issues #2: this way, Please! scenarios

Nature requires us to keep researching and studying nature, as well as ourselves and the interplay between hu-man societies and nature. Nature inspires us to recognize the beauty and the endless opportunities and scope for innovation that it presents us with, but also to be acutely aware and mindful of the boundaries that nature sets for our utilization. We must assume responsibility. We must acquire the means to control and manage our own power and collec-tive behavior in order to harness nature without damag-ing it. We need to take on the role of responsible and conscious custodians, stewards or managers of nature - like any landowner would his property. All in order to be able to continue to be the biggest beneficiaries of nature.

POlITICsPreviously it was sometimes said that we knew what needed to be done, we just didn’t know how to do it politi-cally. It was somewhat natural to take a cynical view given the previous disappointingly inadequate political action even in the face of a long-standing public awareness of the challenges. We were irresponsibly gambling with the future of the planet. Everybody was waiting for someone else to take the lead and do something. The emergence of a new generation of political leaders changed the dynamics. It was a generation whose outlook was shaped by the ongoing debate on sustainability and by growing impatience and frustration with the inadequacy of political response. They entered the scene with an ambi-tious outlook, a firm belief that change is possible, and a deep sense of responsibility towards nature and future generations. There was a new optimism and enthusiasm for what we can accomplish. A feeling that we actually can make a bet-ter world if we put our minds to it. “So let us be masters of our own fate and take responsibility for the destiny of our planet. We can do it!”, as one political leader famously put it.

Growing public realisation that old methods and politics simply couldn’t deliver urged a tectonic shift in the balance between old vested interests and forward-looking inter-ests. The new political agenda was global in its worldview and resonated with people everywhere, especially younger generations. Beginning in North Western Europe and the EU, governments all over the world devised and imple-mented strategic policies using a variety of instruments. The frontrunners were countries where there was a strong awareness of the importance of a new course. A culture which was influenced by a generally high level of economic development and public welfare, and above all by education. A culture based on co-creation. The global process that unfolded was partly negotiated, cooperative, and coordinated, and partly an uneven process of pioneers and emulators, leaders and followers. Inter-national and global institutions gained renewed relevance and were quick to pick up on this agenda assuming their designated role as facilitators of global political dialogue and will. Democracy was revitalized primarily due to the sys-tem’s ability to respond to the challenge, but also because of a new political culture based on a dynamic development in digital and local platforms creating a new responsive-ness between people and politicians. As for strategies, one key was to get prices right. Tax systems were used in various and often innovative ways to ensure that prices reflected true ecological costs. Another key was investing massively in sustainable infrastruc-ture: Energy, smart grids, transportation systems, welfare technology, recycling and waste disposal. A third key was support for open source technological development and sustainable innovation. The overall effect was to move the economy on to a new path of development.

BUsINessOnce the political direction was clear, businesses and consumers were remarkably quick to respond. Break-throughs in solar, wind, smart grids, waste disposal and

material technologies came in rapid succession and were speedily implemented. New patterns of consumption and production emerged that were radically more friendly to the environment. A light-touch, clean and prosperous economy emerged. What was most surprising to many in the beginning of the transition was that the structural changes to the economic system went hand in hand with an economic boom. The new ecologically sustainable economic system was highly competitive. Frontrunners were those businesses who not only responded to new pricing signals and market demands but who truly comprehended the new policy direction and based their vision and strategy on it. They were the ones who delivered the myriad of new products, services and business models that built the light-touch economy. The transformation that was set in motion succeeded in completely replacing the fossil fuel based economy with one that was based on energy from clean, renewable sources. It saw a materials revolution driven by the devel-opment of new eco-friendly synthetic materials, and by super-efficient recycling markets and waste disposal sys-tems. And not only did it succeed, but success came much faster than anyone had predicted, or even thought possible. Once set in motion the process quickly gained momentum and became self-reinforcing as political initiative, busi-ness response and technological innovation combined in a powerful drive for sustainability and renewed prosperity. In fact, a dynamic arose in which countries, econo-mies and businesses that embraced sustainable strategies became economic powerhouses and front-runners. To be stuck in the age of gasoline and coal was the biggest structural danger to an economy. Some large economies, notably those rich in fossils, and those poor in political effectiveness, struggled to make the transition but eventu-ally had to follow suit. We have learned that responsible management of our relationship with nature is not only right. It is also highly rewarding in many regards.

‘it’s very hard to find a well-educated economist that thinks

gdP is a good measurement of wealth/well-being/happi-

ness, and we all know that there are more to add to this’.

– Peder Andersen, Professor, University of Copenhagen,

quoted from his lecture on the first In100Y-seminar, 2011.

‘regarding the role of finance, it must evolve to serve the

real needs of a sustainable economy, and it must power the

transition to such an economy. this is a vital role, but also a

radical shift from its current impact’.

– John Fullerton, Founder of Capital Institute, qouted from

the videointerview shown at the first In100Y-seminar, 2011.

voices from 2012

‘we must develop a serious approach to the fact that emo-

tions, thoughts, assessments, and decisions originate in the

psyche, and as such are firmly based in human beings.

again: we cannot change the outer world without chang-

ing the inner world. this has to do with the single leader

and with the single leadership team’.

– Steen Hildebrandt, Professor, Aarhus University, qouted from

his lecture on the first In100Yseminar, 2011.

‘companies that mimic life are more profitable. this new

reality will inspire a corporate renaissance that should rede-

fine the next century’.

– Joseph H. (Jay) Bragdon, Author of ‘Profit for Life’ (2006),

quoted from his lecture at the second In100Y-seminar

2011.

voices from 2012

anThropocene – The age of man

the world’s geologists are considering whether to formally

adopt a new term for the present geological epoch: the an-

thropocene or, “the age of man”. adding new epochs to the

officially recognised geological time scale is not something

the scientific community takes likely. but humans really and

truly have become a decisive force on a planetary scale:

moving earth, changing the composition of the atmosphere,

affecting climate change, melting glaziers, erasing forests,

influencing ecosystems and biodiversity.

nobel Prize-winning atmospheric chemist Paul crutzen

is perhaps the most prominent advocate for adopting the

term. significantly, he sees it not only as a matter of de-

scribing geological developments scientifically accurately.

he regards it as a matter of realising that we have a re-

sponsibility for the planet and that its very fate – and by ex-

tension our own fate - depends on whether we are capable

of assuming this responsibility. ‘we must change the way

we perceive ourselves and our role in the world. students

in school are still taught that we are living in the holocene,

an era that began roughly 12,000 years ago at the end of

the last ice age. but teaching students that we are living in

the anthropocene, the age of men, could be of great help.

rather than representing yet another sign of human hubris,

this name change would stress the enormity of humanity’s

responsibility as stewards of the earth. it would highlight

the immense power of our intellect and our creativity, and

the opportunities they offer for shaping the future’.

there is of yet no definitive agreement on the start date

of the anthropocene, but based on atmospheric evidence

many geologists consider it to start with the industrial revo-

lution (late 18th century).

Sources: Paul J. Crutzen and Christian Schwägerl: ‘Living

in the Anthropocene: Toward a New Global Ethos’, Yale

Environment 360, 24 January 2011. ‘The Anthropocene’,

The Economist, May 26th 2011.




lIvINg aND arTLife in the light-touch society is high prosperity, low-impact. Intelligent systems handled the metabolic ex-change with nature, secured the safe and efficient recycling of materials and disposal of waste. Our relationship with nature was respectful and sustainable. As people lived in clean and attractive built environments, nature was not top-of-mind all the time. Many spend a lot of their time in digitalized virtual reality rather than in nature. At the same time people very much appreciated nature, and it still had a powerful appeal. It offered great experiences whether you were an adventurer seeking extreme authenticity, or whether you would rather opt for themed nature resorts where people could experience sights and landscapes, some with carefully managed stocks of wild animals. Pre-historic theme parks complete with dinosaurs and swans were particularly popular. Remarkably, art became big business and the single-most dynamic sector in the economy. This was a result of prosperity and individualism that saw art as the ulti-mate form of self-actualisation. The ability to create and appreciate artistic expressions was the ultimate human characteristic, one that was eagerly sought after and high in demand. New technologies and knowledge of the functioning of the human brain and body have opened up a variety of new artistic fields and art forms. But the one parameter that came to dominate the field was authenticity. That is, the experience of a significant event which takes place at a particular place and time and therefore is unique and cannot be replicated. The develop-ment and careful staging of such events constituted a large and fast growing part of the economy and employment. New artistic megahalls and art stadiums sprang up in cit-ies around the world in a fierce competition for the most prestigious and creative public spaces for art activities. The goal was to merge intellect and intuition in new ways, constantly experimenting with new forms of human consciousness, expression of language, story-telling, sound,

music, imagery and sensory stimulation. To many this kind of endeavour was the closest thing to having a meaning of life.

sCIeNCe aND TeChNOlOgYScience was very visibly an important driver in the transi-tion to a sustainable Man-made world, and the string of technological breakthroughs that it spurned gave it a new-found prestige in society. Big science made a decisive comeback, not least when cheap and clean nuclear fusion energy came onstream by the latter half of the 21st cen-tury. Their cool and quiet gigantic domes were an aestheti-cally pleasing addition to the landscape. Science pursued further advancement in a range of fields stretching from genetics to space. Sophisticated modelling was applied to complex systems such as eco-systems, climate and weather in order to optimize our management of them and in order to facilitate advances in the dynamic field of geo-engineering. There was a new focus on anticipation and prevention instead of problem fixing and symptom treatment. The scientific study of nature kept offering exciting op-portunities to learn from something that was not human-made. The extraction and storage of genetic information from all life forms was one project that promised to enable regeneration of any extinct species that might be deemed valuable or interesting. Given advanced knowledge of managing ecosystems, this would also make it possible to create new types of ecosystems. Artificial intelligence, robotics, genetics, merging of man and machine, were some of the developments we saw. The re-engineering of humans and the possible prospect of immaturity began to raise a host of new practical and ethical questions.

‘humans are the dominant animal on the planet, and our

behavior plays a central role for the earth’s capacity to

function’.

– Minik T. Rosing, Professor, University of Copenhagen,

quoted from his lecture at the fourth In100Y-seminar, 2012.

‘the relationship between man and nature will need to

transform in order for humankind to thrive in 100 years’.

– Katherine Richardson, Professor, University of Copenha-

gen, quoted from her lecture at the third In100Y-seminar,

2011.

voices from 2012

‘man-made world’ dystoPia. man forgot the nature of

man. in ‘man-made world’ we have made it. literally. how-

ever, what is it that we have made? and what have we lost

in the process? haven’t we controlled everything so tightly,

including our own bodies and minds that we have suffocat-

ed spontaneity, surprise and genuine feeling? haven’t we

managed life to death?

Pho

to: sille a

rend

tissues #2: this way, Please!



visualizing man-made world 2112. all outside

surfaces are covered with a shallow film of water (as-

phalt was too expensive for constant repair in inclement

weather and made urban flooding unmanageable). water

is bio- filtered and drained off to underground tanks which

source urban cooling, heating and the city’s water supply.

Personal (not private) transport (the blue) float smoothly and

in constant flow. they are hop-in/ hop-out lily carts. big

white ferries (canal) for mass rapid transport (trans-urban/

trans-regional) (left side of painting). all buildings stretch

upwards to double their current height. roof funnels capture

rainwater for internal heating in the buildings, cooling and

water supply. internal forest on top of thorvaldsens museum.

this absorbs c0 and c02 and emits oxygen for use in all

internal environments (= buildings, sky bridges and glass

walkways). People are always inside. People are separated

and protected from wild nature. tame nature is man-made

and cultivated to suit human needs; as are food, energy,

water and air purifiers etc.

illustratio

n: d

om

inic

balm

forth

embodying man-made world 2011. frames from the

performance installation ‘two sensed futures’. the groups of

people who visited this sensed future on the second in100y-

seminar, sat behind two wires, which were part of a larger

visual web of lines. these divided the room into parts of a

larger, visual geometric structure of a social performance

design. three specimens of one of nature’s perfect creations,

the orchid, hung from the wires, demonstrating how elements

of nature have been implemented and studied as part of a

defined system controlled by man – the designer.

every move in this future was pre-planned and new

developments are monitored by the two designers from idd

(institutional democratic design). the designers use the

advanced tools of bio-mimicry to design and develop them-

selves and their expression in the process in accordance

with the specific situation.

Read more at http://in100y.dk/downloads/articles/

In100Ysem2_article-sensed-futures-participants.pdf

gammel strand, the streets aorund the canal in the oldest part of copenhagen, 2112. by dominic balmforth, architect

and partner, susturb / house of futures.




power of naTure.living in oneness

by gitte larsen, søren steen olsen and steen

svendsen, futurists, house of futures

In 2112 we live in a world transformed by the power of nature. You will be surprised at how much human life has changed. Consensus councils for politics, sharing for busi-ness, and meaningful living in ‘co-naturality’. And you will understand that all this is the result of deep changes in the way we perceive ourselves and Mother Earth. But you will recognise the impulse within yourself. We as living beings are nature and therefore the power of nature is also the power of us. The power to change. The power to redefine ourselves and conceive nature and humans as one. This is the story of how we changed the world by changing the understanding of ourselves and by remembering what it is like to be one with nature. Let us give you the story of how it unfolds, where it has its historic roots and what drives the transformation. Then let us describe to you the future perception of nature. And finally let us portray what politics, business, living, art, and science and technology will look like in this world.

DrIvers aND BaCkgrOUND The mindset that drives ‘Power of Nature’ has in a sense al-ways been present insofar as humans have always been part of nature and been able to recognize this. But the powerful activation and unfolding of it in the 21st century had its roots in currents, movements and thoughts that first began to arise around 1970. These came both as a culmination of an era of unprecedented material progress and at the same time as a reaction against it. E. F. Schumacher’s book ‘Small is Beautiful’ was emblematic of the new agenda as were the movements his ideas helped to create. It was a rejection of a way of life that was based on a mindless materialism oblivious to nature and its boundaries, and founded on the creation of large-scale systems, bureaucracies, governments, corpora-tions and mass society. A model of economic development that seemed to satisfy material needs, but in fact perpetu-

ated itself by constantly creating new artificial needs. The eternal race for growth in material prosperity increasingly came at the cost of alienating us from nature, from each other and from our basic, deeper, spiritual and more au-thentic needs and potential. Throw-away consumerism and economic growth were not making people happy. The fact that this was not sustainable was a big problem but the roots of the problem ultimately lay with ourselves. It triggered a broad search for new ways of connecting with inner as well as outer sources of meaning. It was not a question of just making it, possibly surviving by scaling back our standard of living, and/or by way of technological devel-opment. We wanted to experience the richness of being. There was a new found interest in philosophy, wisdom, spirituality and practices from all kinds of ideologies and traditions, from indigenous peoples and ancient sources. New artistic and cultural expressions developed. There was a spontaneous flowering of experimenting with new ways of living, working, producing and consuming. For many decades all this was part of culture, some of it quite mainstream and influential, but most of it more subcultural and fleeting, constantly morphing, and constantly expanding in a process that absorbed and was affected by the cross-cultural inclusion of people from all over the world. What really made all this come to a head resulting in a true mind shift – a paradigm shift – on a global scale were two things. First of all, the failure of leaders and systems to offer new valuable and transforma-tive agendas that would advance human fulfillment and happiness rather than merely aiming to deliver more of the old. Second, a sustained run of adverse developments that triggered global crises on many levels. Climate, hurricanes, flooding, draughts, food scarcity, economic crises which overwhelmed the established leaders and systems. This created an acute sense of disillusion with authorities and a loss of legitimacy for the economic and political system based on experts and representatives. All this came on top of the deep, underlying discontentment with the system of old-style consumerism.

curiosity. diving into the unknown

waters. trusting and enjoying the

mixture of oceans and the newest

species. here she goes again.


71issues #2: this way, Please! scenarios

The old mindset and paradigm of the modern age that historically underpinned the spreading of democracy and capitalism on a global scale was based on the idea of universal human rights. It became clear that this human-centered paradigm was too narrow, too anthropocentric. We were living in the Anthropocene, but we had forgotten the nature of man. The new mindset had to be capable of including the inherent value of other forms of life and of life itself. Life was created out of the apparent mess and mistakes of nature, and in that sense it was sustainable. The inert wisdom of nature always knows when to let go and release new forms of life and social ‘contracts’. The mindshift of ‘Power of Nature’ rivaled previous social and cultural mindshifts, like the one that established the human rights paradigm itself. Other examples include the Copernican and Darwinian revolutions and – in the social sphere – the changes in relationships between races, between men and women and between adults and children in which the stereotypical, hierarchical and even bigoted views of earlier eras have largely been transcended.

PerCePTION OF NaTUreEverything is nature, and so are we. Life is, as far as we know, unique to Mother Earth, and our sentient apprecia-tion of life is unique to humans. Therefore we must respect nature, we must respect life, and we must respect ourselves and each other. We must strive to develop and expand our inner and outer capacity for living in ways that are consist-ent with all life, and the realization that everything is con-nected with everything else. And that we humans do not have an exclusive right to dominate the world on which we rely, or to deny the dynamics of Mother Earth. This perception of nature is a deep and authentic human intuition which arguably precedes all types of religious for-mulations, and which forms the basis for spiritual feelings and cosmic authenticity. Myths and traditions and their attendant tales and ritu-als can be seen as rooted in this deeper-running intuition

about nature that is part of the human makeup. And so is our sense of aesthetics, our capacity for artistic expression, our ability to communicate and our need for meaning to our existence. This leads us to pursue all kinds of meaningful ‘co-naturality’ activities to get in contact with ourselves and thereby nature – from rituals and art to the academic pursuit of knowledge and insights. Even technology and com-mercial innovation are ultimately expressions of the urge to create what is innate to humans.

POlITICsThe transformation was accompanied by radical political changes in a broad sense, but the paradox was that most of this took place outside the established institutions. Much of it was a change in attitudes, and thinking on an individual and grassroots level. There was a strong realization that we needed to turn our attention from the outer to the inner world. The problems in the outer world of political domination, of economic competition and of unsustainable exploitation and pollution were identified as symptoms of a failure to connect with our inner sources of meaning. One consequence was the hasty erosion of legitimacy of outer authorities like governments, bureaucracies, scientific experts and corporations. They had their compe-tences which continued to sustain them, but they were no longer able to guide development. It was not expressed as a collective revolt, rather as a gradual transition where more and more people lost interest in the old political system and kind of said ‘So long, we will follow another path.’ Instead local and global connections and flow on a person-to-person level became increasingly important. These were the fora where new models of thinking, living, and behaving were developed. Models that were based on oneness and a truly holistic perception of the natural world. The emergence of the Consensus Council as a wide-spread social institution was one reflection of this. Con-

sensus Councils were not formal assemblies of representa-tives for various established social interests. They were the framework for an open process of dialogue in which participants represented different perspectives on the agenda at hand. They took different forms in different lo-cal contexts, but generally functioned as an important and ongoing exercise in deliberative wisdom. In general a new kind of political consciousness and a new culture of networked decision-making enabled spon-taneous agenda-setting, coordination and participatory problem-solving.

BUsINess Economic life and business practices were equally deeply transformed. From a reliance on exchange and markets to an emphasis on generosity and sharing. From competition to cooperation. From material to immaterial and spiritual fulfillment. From knowledge to wisdom. An economy built on trust and reciprocity. True business is all about be-ing in good company, and when people changed, business changed. Old economic concepts had new and different mean-ings ascribed to them. Markets were understood as a form of social conversation. Value became a multi-dimensional concept transcending the mono-dimensional idea that was associated with money. Wealth was no longer a question of economic growth, but a concept denoting social sustain-ability, and economic actors were capable of ‘we-behavior’. New economic models for production and consump-tion developed locally and were frequently upscaled by emulation and copying, sometimes only locally, in other cases globally due to the many vibrant channels of com-munication and the openness to inspiration. In every field, craftsmanship was important, not only to customers but as a source of genuine satisfaction for the practitioner. Spontaneity and self-organization were guiding principles, and not by accident but by conscious emulation of nature in a biomimicry effort on the social

oneness – a voIce from 2012

at the first ‘in100y’-seminar, dorthe steenberg connected

us to the spirit of water, the primordial waters that nourish

mother earth, when we arrived at the seminar location after

an ‘imaginary tour’ of the canals of copenhagen in 2112.

below is an excerpt of dorthe’s speech.

‘remember that in every drop of water there is an ocean.

70% of all living energy on earth is vibrating and communica-

ting through water. remember always to connect to water, to

honour water, and to let the essence of water flow through

you, while you talk and communicate freely. water is what

binds all life; everything in water is divine.

in denmark, we have the famous little mermaid in our

harbour. in h.c. andersen’s fairy tale about the mermaid,

she becomes aware that there is an offer and a sacrifice, in

moving from one element, water, to another, the world of the

humans. being a water creature, she knows that she is one

with everything (the whale do not think mussels are odd), with

all living energy, but when she falls in love and wants legs to

walk on the ground with her beautiful prince, she must forever

give up being a water creature. she regrets it, and jumps

back into the ocean to stay a mermaid, but becomes foam.

she is again one with water, but is also forever transformed.

for me, this story illustrates that we cannot leave one-

ness to become separate; if we remember to honour water

and let it flow inside of us, it will not happen. the people of

denmark, a water nation, have an obligation to honour and

share the wisdom that naturally flows in our part of the world.

if anyone on mother earth can bring this essence, which is

the essence of freedom and spaciousness, it is we who are

gathered here today.’

Dorthe Steenberg is the founder of Alchemy of Peace and is

hosting the Peace Summit 2012 in Iceland, an annual inter-

national wisdom gathering, www.alchemyofpeace.org/

‘the way we think in the next hundred years must be shaped

by caring for everybody and everything, and we must leave

our ego-centric way of thinking and behaving behind us. if

we do so, it will set a new agenda for our political life, and

pragmatism will be a new radical humanism’.

– Ole Fogh Kirkeby, Professor in Philosophy, Copenhagen

Business School, quoted from his lecture at the second

In100Y-seminar 2011.

‘from the best to the next’.

– Malene Annikki Lundén, Samsoe Energy Academy, from

the evaluation form from the second In100Y-seminar, 2011.

voices from 2012

‘everything is globalised, except the institutions [...]50% per-

cent of the world economies are entering a green economy,

and once a new system penetrates by 20-50%, it will

change the system. others will have to follow’.

– Hans Joachim Schnellnhuber,CBE Director, Potsdam

Institute for Climate Impact Research;Professor for Theoreti-

cal Physics, University of Potsdam;Chair, German Advisory

Council on Global Change, Sustainability Lecture: “Sustain-

ability as a social contract”, University of Copenhagen, 18

November 2011.

‘nature is what is before any beginning and after any end

– before any creation and after any destruction’.

– Hans Fink, Professor in Philosophy, quoted from the work-

shop about mindsets at the fourth In100Y-seminar, 2012.

voices from 2012




level. The ubiquitousness of this, and the easy and global circumvention of traditional power centres in society were helped by breakthroughs in communication technology, including translation and new forms of deeper communi-cation.

lIvINg aND arTLife in the transformed society was materially simpler, but higher quality and spiritually richer. Hunger and poverty on a massive scale, as known from the previous centuries, was eliminated by generosity and sharing. The enormous and varied selection of products of all kinds that the previ-ous society had excelled in providing for, and the acquiring of which had compelled people to a never-ending pursuit of material wants and rivalisation, were eliminated and replaced with new goods and services. Settlements, towns and cities were a highly integrated part of surrounding ecosystems with small-scale urban farms all around. Spending time on contemplation and various forms of meditation became an important part of life as a way of connecting with one’s inner nature; the mind, the heart and the will. It was also found that the development and observance of various kinds of rituals and ceremonies that celebrated life served the purpose of strengthening social bonds and mutual understand-ing between people whether in the family or in the wider community. One of the forms of language that became an impor-tant driver in its own right was art. It was the indispen-sable means of developing and unfolding new captivating narratives of the meaning of life on Mother Earth and the role of human beings. Stories, images, sounds, dancing and performances became integral to people’s lives, not as something to passively watch and admire, but as activities that people themselves would take part in. Art served as a tool and a facilitation process for con-necting with our inner intuition. And it served as a means for transcending differences in language, culture, and tradi-

tions. It was a great synthesizer and bridgebuilder among humans and among different kinds of insights. At the same time, art in a sense represented the only truly man-made phenomenon, one that was a clear expression of the specifically human nature and that only humans were able to appreciate. Art was how we expressed and connected with universal meaning. Therefore it increasingly became integral to everyday life.

sCIeNCe aND TeChNOlOgYMany great scientists played an important part in the en-tire transformation process, like Benjamin Franklin, Niels Bohr or Andrei Sakharov had done in earlier times, sup-plementing their scientific insights with holistic wisdom and communicating inspirational messages of guidance of our relationship with Mother Earth. Science acquired a deeper quality as a pursuit of knowledge and insight about nature that was valuable in its own right. After all, science is a way of acknowledg-ing and connecting with nature. New branches of science emerged as there were intense efforts of research into spirituality and consciousness as well as a revitalization of fields like philosophy and the humanities. Technology turned small-scale and local-based, exploit-ing the huge potential for decentralization that was inherent in digital technology and many sources of renewable energy such as wind, solar and waves. The distrust of large-scale systems, bureaucracies and centralized power made it dif-ficult for large scale technologies to develop. But that didn’t stop the intense and dynamic development and diffusion of small-scale systems, drawing on sharing of knowledge, com-mon consciousness and holistic responsibility.

‘Power of nature’ dystopia. life is not only being. in a

‘Power of nature’ world, there is a tendency for introspec-

tion and a paradoxical risk of self-absorption in the world

guided by powerful social norms. there is a downside risk

of a closed-minded life dominated by big mother. there

is even a risk of cynicism as the holistic view of the world

and the emphasis on the cycle of life might spill over into

fatalism regarding individual human life. disease, hunger,

conflict and material misery may be factors that could haunt

the ‘Power of nature’ world.

‘if people lose interest in nature, they lose interest in them-

selves’.

– Gry Worre Hallberg, Fiction Pimp and partner in House

of Futures, quoted from the workshop about mindsets at the

fourth In100Y-seminar, 2012.

‘inventing of local and special currencies – a new kind of

money. grassroot business.the joining up of local busi-

nesses makes the global’.

– Hardin Tibbs, futurist, quoted from the workshop about

business at the fourth In100Y-seminar, 2012.

voices from 2012

Pho

to: sille a

rend

tissues #2: this way, Please!



illustratio

n: d

om

inic

balm

forth

visualizing Power of nature 2112. the city is

flooded 4m above the original ground level. water has

occupied the ground floor of the entire city. over time, this

has generated a rich, diverse, aquatic life, fish, plants and

nutrients. nature feeds off nature and in addition, reclaims

stones, metal ore and oil deposits from a submerged,

man-made world. it turns these back into nutrients. with its

power, nature breaks down old man-made structures, mak-

ing them inhospitable to mankind (in part), not as an act of

destruction but simply to claim back nutrients to power the

flow; this is nature’s only agenda; nature is ever contributo-

ry. above the water surface, trees, plants and other species

build a new air-borne ecosystem in layers.the higher up

you go, the cleaner you are. newborns start at the top and

decompose with death at the bottom.

nature and man strike a new working relationship. na-

ture is not tamed but accepted. it is allowed to grow and

in doing so, provides humans with food, clean water and

shelter. trees are ‘implanted’ with all mankind’s intellect; the

tools of technology and biological engineering. mankind’s

assumed wisdom, its power and governance is not allowed

in. bio-genetic fusion enables natural and manmade struc-

tures to morph; upper branches stretch out, wind around

and form themselves into love nests. these are temporal

human habitats allowing work; love and support for nature

and human homes; love for and between other humans.

embodying Power of nature 2011. frames

from the performance installation ‘two sensed fu-

tures’. a female creature in office white, nude stock-

ings and high heels approaches slowly, and with

increasing trust. she looks at the visiting woman

with longing eyes. her ‘home’ is a ‘cottage’ built in

the remains of industry and archives overgrown by

nature. nature has taken over the culture that was

once built by mankind. and mankind has become

something else – this creature over nature. oth-

ers look on passively, and many are frightened.

whispers are heard in the room. will this be our

world if mankind allows the forces of nature to take

over? does this room represent the romantic longing

for a ‘natural state’of being? sounds of wind in the

trees, howling owls, swamp water, the scratching

of nails and then ... music ...the remains of what

mankind used to be, laughter, a baby crying. in-

stinct is present, and the creature reacts instinctively

to the gazes she receives from the surrounding and

engaging participants. when she is looked upon

with disgust, she becomes aggressive, when she is

met with love she becomes loving.

Read more at http://in100y.dk/downloads/

articles/In100Ysem2_article-sensed-futures-partici-

pants.pdf

gammel strand, the streets aorund the canal in the oldest part of copenhagen, 2112. by dominic balmforth, architect

and partner in house of futures.




categories man made world

mind set responsible determination

drivers and

background

roots of origin: 1970s and e.g. “limits to growth”.

the realization that in the epoch of the anthropocene we have to assume responsibility for manag-

ing the planet sustainably.

crises, inadequately handled.

Political initiative by a new generation of leaders.

PercePtion of

nature

nature is a living system and a resource.

we are the greatest beneficiaries of nature, and we need to manage it properly – like any land-

owner would his property.

Politics

a new generation of political leaders takes the lead in setting a new agenda in co-creation with

the public and stakeholders.

new optimism and enthusiasm: we can make a better world.

some countries take the lead and the international institutions follow.

Partly coordinated, partly uneven process.

business

Producers and consumers respond quickly to the new clear direction including tax incentives and

price signals.

innovative and commercial breakthroughs for sustainable technologies and products.

light-touch, clean and prosperous economy.

living

and art

high prosperity, low-impact living.

intelligent systems handling metabolic exchange with nature.

virtual reality entertainment and joys.

irl nature experiences with dinosaurs and swans.

art is the single-most dynamic sector of economy.

technology opens up new forms of art.

authenticity is high in demand – significant events and experiences.

closest thing to having a meaning of life.

science and

technology

an important driver with renewed prestige.

breakthroughs for big science.

sophisticated modelling of complex systems enabling eco-management and geo-engineering.

artificial intelligence, robotics and genetics.

re-engineering of humans and the creation of a form of hi-tech immortality raises new questions.

dystoPias

man forgets nature of man.

everything managed and controlled.

no authenticity.

life managed to death.

categories power of naTure

mind set holistic consciousness - oneness.

drivers and

background

roots of origin: 1970s and e.g. “small is beautiful”.

a rejection of the race for material prosperity.

a new paradigm transcending anthropocentric thinking.

crises, inadequately handled.

loss of legitimacy of established systems.

self-reliance, local activity, global connectedness.

PercePtion of

nature

everything is nature and so are we.

we must strive to expand our inner and outer capacity for living in ways that are consistent with

all life.

Politics

radical political change outside of established institutions.

new thinking and participation on grassroots level.

a new kind of political consciousness and a culture of networked participatory decision-making.

new models like local and digital consensus councils .

business

economic life transformed with a new emphasis on sharing and generosity.

new economic models emerging locally and diffused via emulation.

craftsmanship important.

markets are understood as a form of social conversation. value is multi-dimensional

spontaneity and self-organization.

living

and art

materially simple, but high quality and spiritually rich.

hunger and poverty more or less eliminated through sharing and generosity.

towns and cities highly integrated in surrounding ecosystems, small-scale and urban farming.

meditation and rituals important parts of everyday life.

art is an indispensable means of unfolding the overarching holistic narrative and meaning.

a truly participatory, engaging activity.

a way of connecting with inner intuition.

integral to everyday life.

science and

technology

great scientists combining science and wisdom give important inspirational guidance.

deep-quality science connecting all living is valuable in its own right.

new branches of science of the inner world.

small-scale, decentralised technology.

renewable energy based on local sources.

dynamic diffusion of small-scale tech.

dystoPias it’s all about being true and good, but there is a tendency for introspection and a paradoxical risk

of self-absorption in the world guided by powerful social norms.




exploring. Planetary extensions exists in our

imaginations. we can watch them on the sky,

under the water and in the horizon. as long

as we do not only have one future, the future

is ours to create.

ThIs way, please!

by søren steen olsen and steen svendsen,

futurists, house of futures

The two scenarios are very different, which is obviously by design. Indeed, one of their primary purposes is to il-lustrate how two different mindsets could drive the future in wholly different directions. But they share something important: they represent futures in which we successfully make the transition to a sustainable society, futures in which we are – to use the Brundtland formulation – meeting the needs of the present without compromising the needs of future generations. They are, also by design, preferred futures that express an encouraging message: we can do it! They share another very important feature: whether we go for ‘Man-made World’ or ‘Power of Nature’, we must realize a radical change of mindset to create the transfor-mations ahead. Either way, our tomorrow will not be the same; we will not be the same – just as today’s world is far different than that of 1912. In fact, maybe even more different, given the challenges ahead and the ever-acceler-ating speed of change.

arCheTYPesAlhough they describe ideas about the future, the sce-narios are real at some level because they reflect discus-sions, themes and views shared by the participants in the In1000y seminars. Still, we believe their reach extends beyond the seminars. Also, the two mindsets represented in ‘Man-made World’ and ‘Power of Nature’ are present in our time, society and culture. They coexist today. We would even suggest they may represent archetypes of what it means to be human.

The Urge TO mergeAfter presenting the two mindsets at the seminars, one reaction was swift. Many participants spontaneously said: “we need both!” This ‘urge to merge’ often arise when two scenarios contain attractive and indispensible elements. Yet they are not necessarily easily merged elements. Further, reaching a sense of how you can think and act strategically in relation to two scenarios often requires working with them separately. New combinations, more scenarios and more strategic options may spring from such a process.

We believe you can benefit by being aware of both scenarios and mindsets. Each scenario could be seen as fundamental to the other. The mindset of ‘Man-made World’ is indispensable because we require practical action directed at challenges in the physical world. But we also believe we must have a more valuable agenda than one de-signed merely to overcome challenges in our present way of life. As described in ‘Power of Nature,’ we need a sense of greater purpose, belonging and fulfilment. The two scenarios are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Perhaps they can both be realized at differ-ent times. Especially when working over a century, we open the possibility of having the near future – the next 20 to 40 years, say – characterized by ‘Man-made World’ initiatives and developments. In the meantime, people could increasingly express a desire for ‘Power of Nature’ and long for oneness (however perceived and expressed), bringing these to fruition in the second half of the 21st century.

TO reaD aND WOrk WITh FUTUresScenarios are building blocks of futures thinking. They do not predict the future, but help you make decisions today. Let us look at how. First, how you read them is important. You must be ready to inhabit them one at a time. Immerse yourself in the world, thinking and mindset of a scenario. Think with, not against, the scenario: do not reject it on the basis of individual improbabilities. Instead, go along with the spirit of the scenario. Feel secure in doing so – after all, the other scenario awaits! This is a valuable exercise in creative and synthetic thinking that often uncovers new ideas that can be applied strategically. Try the scenarios on. Stretch your imagination by asking: How would our organization look in this scenario? Which visions would we work with? Which strategy would we pur-sue? How would we make decisions? What abilities would we need? Note that the scenarios described here are largely based on qualitative information. We live in a world that often stresses quantification, measurability, data, and objectivity. These are important, and can often inform and strengthen qualitative scenarios. But the qualitative scenario method is not an analytical tool that produces a quantitative result.

It is a method that gives the decision-maker in all of us a choice of futures and is aimed at expanding the strategic space of opportunity.

ThaNk YOU, Dear Traveller ‘Man-made World’ and ‘Power of Nature,’ the two mindset-driven scenarios presented here, are a result of a unique scenario process. The scenarios are inspired by the participants and discussions at the four In100Y seminars held in Copenhagen in 2011 and 2012. These gathered more than 150 visionaries and practitioners from a variety of fields and backgrounds within sustainability. We warmly thank all the participants at the four seminars for their enormous enthusiasm and inspiration. In every sense, it was a great experience. And the resulting scenarios are so interesting and deep-rooted that they are will inspire and inform our work and thinking at House of Futures. We hope and believe you will feel the same way and will continue to join the effort along the way!

ThIs WaY, Please!This way, please! is an invitation to join us in creating the sustainable societies of the future. It is a way paved with the general assumptions originated in the In100Y project:

- To think “long term,” because we are in the midst of a historic transformation on a scale corresponding to the transition to industrialization, urbanization and democratization.

- To think holistically, because the challenges encompass all aspects of society, our lives and our mindsets.

- To think in new ways, because we confront the un-known.

Finally, This way, please! is an invitation to develop and use the scenarios for a common understanding of two alpaths to sustainable societies.

how To use scenarIos

in general, scenario methods and processes can be used in

several ways, including

broadening the outlook – opening up to long-term,

outside-in perspectives – for inspiration, consideration, and

visualizing alternative developments and pathways to the

future. scenarios can be seen as horizons and thereby cre-

ate awareness and new possibilities.

strategic tool – outlining choices with regard to bar-

riers and opportunities, based on alternative futures. Part

of this strategic work can be the formulation of a specific

future that optimises the degrees of desirability and prob-

ability. on the basis of such a “focus scenario”, a more

detailed profile or specific strategy is drawn up.

catalyst for creating debate – internal or external

to the organization. scenarios can be a powerful tool for

generating debate.

clarifying tool – developing a common frame of refer-

ence or consensus. this may be applicable when an orga-

nization wants to start an internal discussion that possibly,

but not necessarily, can lead to a reformulation of strategy,

and needs a clarification of purposes and assumptions.





... a chance to interact as humans instead of institutions.

... maybe the most exciting period ever… or with respect to the seminar

an eye-opening way of creating an open mind.

… a beautiful flower of heart related individuals with a range of colours from all the different potentialities.

... the beginning of a new way of meeting and sharing knowledge that helps us to focus

on the right values now and in 100 years.

… a seed in the fertile soil of transformation.

at every seminar the participants have been asked to finish

the sentence: to me “in100y” is ... this is a selection of the

full sentences from the four in100y-seminars.

how do mIndseTs shIfT?

what is a mindset and a mindshift? these two questions have haunted us through-

out the Project of ‘in100years’. according to Professor in PhilosoPhy, ole fogh

kirkeby, any mindset is anchored in our assumPtions and beliefs as well as in our

emotions and ways of wanting and willing. our basic values are thus the Platform

from which we could initiate a new beginning. the question is, are we are ready?

josePh (jay) h. bragdon, investment manager and

author of Profit for Life: How Capitalism Excels, published

by the society for organizational learning (sol) in 2006.

the book distills his 40 years of research into the links

between corporate stewardship and profitability.

100 years reflecTIon

Most economists, politicians and business leaders be-lieve in the doctrine of “bigger is better” – that perpetual economic growth is necessary to maintain prosperity and social harmony. While this formula worked for much of the industrial era, it has in the past few decades become counter-productive. If humanity wishes to survive and generate meaningful value over the next hundred years, this mindset must shift radically. The tragic flaw in the “bigger is better” doctrine of industrial capitalism is its dismissal of marginal effects. Whenever the marginal costs of an economy or busi-ness exceed marginal benefits, the enterprise becomes self-destructive. Unfortunately, that’s where we are now. If we include the costs of ecological destruction, mineral depletion, global climate change, fraying social safety nets, compounding interest and bank bailouts, the expense of maintaining our current system vastly exceeds the benefits. To keep the false hope of GDP growth alive – and the promises of social comity that arise from those hopes – governments today conceal the growth of ecological and social overhead costs via deceptive national accounting and by hiding sensitive data. Such manipulation distorts pricing data, which in turn muddles rational decision-making. Consider how the U.S. Federal Reserve spent or lent $29.6 trillion to bail out the banking system between 2007 and 2009 – a sum that was double annual GDP.* This astonishing information was withheld from the public until the Fed was sued for its release under the Freedom of Information Act. Although most bailout funds have been repaid, the fact remains US debt is growing three to six times faster than GDP. The lower ratio of GDP is based on total credit market debt outstanding (explicit debt). The higher number includes the implicit debt of underfunded liabilities to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. A full cost accounting of GDP should include all costs, not just those that governments and business want us to

see. Absent this information, we cannot competently price risk or make rational economic decisions. To create a sus-tainable future for the next 100 years we must be able to see with clear eyes and operate from a realistic worldview. Fortunately, a renaissance in economic and business thinking is developing, which understands this neces-sity and conceives a more effective way forward. It arises from a biocentric perspective rather than the mechanistic one that emerged from the industrial revolution. Unlike a machine, which has little or no consciousness, the new thinking works much like Nature, continually sensing, learning, adapting and creating as it goes. The corporate leaders of this emerging renaissance mimic life in the ways they are organized and managed. They seek harmony with the living world rather than control or dominance. This radical cultural shift catalyzes extraordinary creativity and profitability. Its operating leverage – much like that of leading NGOs and transi-tion towns – arises from engaging people’s hearts as well as their minds. Its energy is derived from a unifying sense that if we are an interdependent species and if we don’t adapt, we die. To paraphrase the late Joseph Schumpeter, we live in an era of “creative destruction.” Obsolete systems are failing as more creative ones rise to take their place. The question for us then is: “To be or not to be”: Whether to become active change agents in the ex-citing renaissance now unfolding or to drift towards destruction along with apologists for the old system.

*James Felkerson, Nicola Matthews, “29 Trillion: A

Detailed Look at the Fed’s Bailout by Funding Facility and

Recipient,” Levy Economics Institute at Bard College, Work-

ing Paper #698, December 2011. www.levyinstitute.org/

publications/?docid=1462

by ole fogh kirkeby, coPenhagen business school

What is a mindset? One reasonable answer would be that it is a closed set of questions and answers of major existential questions at the common sense level. Yet there are no simple answers to questions such as: what is a hu-man being and what is childhood, gender, life, death, labor, economy, time and nature? Consequently, a mindset would consist of games of experience, language, knowledge, truth and actions. We might not, however, be able to create a fundamental understanding of such ‘games’, since we are part of them ourselves, and since they shape our ways of perceiving and reflecting.

The CaPITalIsT mINDseTThe capitalist mindset – inside which we have to admit we are still living – delimits knowledge in a positive and a negative way. Positively, it makes it possible to under-stand the forces of history and the interplay between the economical basis and the culture answering to it. Nega-tively, this might block our understanding of the powers of culture, since capitalism transforms culture into an epiphenomenon. There are probably universal values like the Good, the Just, the True and the Beautiful, in spite of their historical-cultural interpretations. Beyond this, today it seems as if liberalist capitalism is the dominating mindset in the world, in spite of religious and political attempts at negating its magic of ‘a good life’. Since capitalism was paradoxically integrated in Christianity and the Human-ist movement, and was the aspiration to the civil, political and social rights creating societal structures and forms of living (which defied the influence of parochial narrow-mindedness, religious dogmatism and totalitarianism), it also produced uncontrollable markets, complicated relations of domination inside and between nations, and, unfortunately, an accelerating destruction of nature. This Janus face of capitalism defines our mindset, as well as any reaction against it. The burning question is, whether it also sets the horizon of any conception of the future?

If we ask who defines and represents this mindset, the answer would probably be, that we all do. This implies that even if any reaction against this dominating mindset must be political, it also has to be reflective in the sense that change presupposes a mental labor on our selves. We must learn to think, feel and imagine alternatively in order to transgress this mindset through action. Any mindset is anchored and incorporated in pre-re-flective assumptions and beliefs, in bodily experiences and capacities, in emotions and ways of wanting and willing. It is also incorporated in our mores and our faith, in our sense of reality and certainty, and it is carried by a deeply rooted normativity and by a practice of discursive reason or reflection. However, normativity, our basic values, and our powers to think, are also the platform from which we could initiate a new beginning. a NeW BegINNINgHow does all this emerge? It is, after all, hard to give up the notion of the existence of one true mindset, and about a progressive development of mindsets, or even about an evolution of the mind? This experience of the revelation of truth is not confined to religious experience, but applies to science as well. There are countless narratives incorporating the mindset shift of scholars; ‘Newton’s Apple’ is perhaps the most well known. However, the change of mindset presupposes rather complicated causal structures, incorpo-rating power and pragmatism. When the Protestants encouraged the publishing of Copernicus’ ‘De revolutionibus orbium coelestium’ in 1543, when the pope had banned it, they knew that the helio-centric world view could obviously both negate and affirm the Bible. However, since it challenged the dogmas, and hence the power of the Catholics, they chose it. Scientifi-cally, they seemed to be on the side of progress. Such choices might, after all, not confirm any ‘wisdom of history’. The First World War produced an anti-armament, anti-war, pro-peace mindset in the English people and its politics. But it also provided Hitler with an opportunity to mobilize and conquer Poland. Even



87issues #2: this way, Please!86 how do mindsets shift?comment

imperialism,

communism,

oil, world war

crisis, fascism,

totalitarianism

knowledge labor, bric,

the political consumer,

nature’s revenge, green

economy, islam

1950-2000: atomic power, welfare

state, fall of the wall, technology,

www, soft management

2000-:corporate social

responsibility (csr), social

innovation, sustainability

mindset changes with an ethical acumen do not guarantee anything, unless their impact is close to global. It has long been discussed whether the rebellious optics of the enlightenment, which produced the Ameri-can Constitution and the Rights of Man, transformed feudal France into a military dictatorship and whether the reformation of the institutions of agriculture in Denmark, only confirmed the rights of the bourgeoisie? However, the ideologies of individual freedom fostered nationalism, liberalism as well as utilitarianism. The effect was a free labor market in Europe, the powers of the factory owners, industrial capitalism, and hence, a production and an im-mense oppression of the lower classes, both economically, politically and culturally, which in turn prepared the road to militarism and imperialism. It also made trade unions and socialism possible and necessary. Karl Marx’s book ‘Das Kapital’ incorporated a mindshift, which, contrary to its aim, came to legitimate communist totalitarianism. There seems to be a huge gap between the consciousness of the mind shift movers in front and the underlying forces and their dynamics which have consequences probably neither imagined nor desired. To this one must add that a new mindset is always SOMEBODY’s mindset, i.e. it belongs to a politically or culturally dominant class. It has never yet comprised the whole national population, let alone the so-called ‘Third World’. It always was, and it still is, the ‘conquerors’ who usurp the right to dictate the content and to tell the stories of mindset-shifts, as Nietzsche wrote.

The NeW mINDseTIs a new mindset, the core of social responsibility and sustainability, beginning to emerge, and is this at all possible within liberalist capitalism? Which individual at-titude would answer to it? Would it be theoretical wisdom,

scientifically inspired consciousness or practical wisdom? To list the causes of a new mindset is very complicated, if not impossible, but amongst the triggering events are: The victories and catastrophes: Salamis, Versailles and Hiroshi-ma. The new technologies. The establishing of regimes. The scientific revolutions. But also the, so to speak, ‘ultimate event’ and its stories, above all the crucifixion. If a mindset is a closed set of definite questions and answers and the individual ‘micro-level’, we have no mindset at the common sense level. We do not know what death is. We do not know the universe, neither its mean-ing nor its mechanisms. We neither agree on the condi-tion of nature nor about the essence of man. And most importantly, we do not share common conscious interests, although one could ascribe sustainability as a shared inter-est to everybody. We are atheists, Christians, Muslims, socialists, libertarians, vegetarians, greedy consumers, reck-less exploiters of all available resources, environmentalists, imperialists, Buddhists, critical intellectuals, shareholders, drug addicts, analphabets and unemployed ... the biggest problems facing the ideal of a common, global mindset are dogmatism (political and religious), cynicism and igno-rance (analphabetism), indifference, greed, recklessness, desire for power and egoism. Is a new mindset the result of a reflective process delib-erately effectuated with conscious knowledge of knowl-edge? Is it staged by power through political pressure, education, laws, rules of conduct, threat of punishment, surveillance and control, or does it just happen, i.e. emerge from the bottom? Or is it change by my will to transform myself ? My guess is that all three elements are necessary.

Contact Ole Fogh Kirkeby, Professor in Philosophy, CBS,

via mail at [email protected]

examples of mIndseT shIfTs durIng The lasT 200 years

1800 1850 1900 1950 2000 2050

individualism, nationa-

lism, liberalism,

utilitarianism, trade

unions, socialism

a leTTer for The hopeful InhabI-TanTs of The anThropocene

‘Two mental constructs will direct human thinking in the next Millennium, relativity and holism.’ - Albert Ein-stein, 1926.

Dear Global Citizens of 2012,The relative calm we experience in the early 2100s makes it easy to forget just how turbulent and uncertain life was in the first half of the 21st century. We now consider the hor-rific events of September 11, 2001 to have been the trigger for the Great Emergence. More accurately, it began with the quiet observation in 2000 by Nobel Chemist Paul Crutzen and his colleague Eugene Stoermer that human civilization had shifted into the Anthropocene, the Age of Man. The stable twelve thousand year Holocene had come to a close. What has become clear a century later is that 9-11 marked the turning point from the expansionist industrial era to the beginning of the interdependent knowledge era. With that shift, gradually over time, a competitive world culture began to give way to the cooperative world culture we experi-ence today. It would take half a century before we would see how much the global community benefited from having women leading the majority of nation states and global institutions. Embedded within the cooperative world culture that characterizes the Great Emergence, of course, lies the exponential and cumulating growth of knowledge that de-fines human civilization today. This emergence wasprobably inconceivable by concerned holistic systems thinkers staring over frightening exponential growth curves of atmospheric carbon, soil loss, and biodiversity loss around the beginning of the 21st century. How their concerns could have been ignored remains a mystery to this day. Today it is obvious that our survival as a species re-sulted from the shift to holism as the organizing paradigm for the human economy. In the year 2020, when the future looked particularly grim, a young South African PhD student studying holistic finance at the Capital Institute discovered a letter from Albert Einstein to Jan Smuts (the last South African leader to oppose apartheid before Mandela) written soon after the publication of Holism and Evolution in 1926. The letter was a footnote in the landmark “Third Millennium Economy Report” published

by the Capital Institute and a group of leading ecological economists and systems thinkers in 2012. That report ex-plained how our ethics, our economy and finance, and our governance systems all need to be grounded in the bio-physical reality of the earth as understood by modern sci-ence, rather than in failed Cartesian ideologies from what were once called “political parties” competing for power. It was the inspiration for the vital Earth Reserve Coopera-tive, providing all critical biosphere operating data with which to holistically manage the global economy. The idea of holism was nearly a century old in 2020 when the Einstein letter to Jan Smuts went viral on CommunityShare, the community owned social network platform that replaced Facebook without warning not long after its historic IPO. Holism was an idea whose time had come. What had been so hard for many early holistic management practitioners like Allan Savory to explain suddenly became obvious. Almost overnight, the financial markets connected the dots and discounted the reality that peak oil didn’t matter after all. Statesmen and corporate executives had no choice but to negotiate how to share the economic pain of leaving all remaining coal and Tar Sands oil safely sequestered in the ground, as well as 80% of conventional oil, and 25% of natural gas in order to mitigate the looming ecological catastrophe that was plain for all to see. The expansionist industrial era was over for the devel-oped world. Despite the difficult decades that followed, the ground was laid for the cooperative, knowledge driven Great Emergence that exploded seemingly out of no-where. Nowhere and everywhere: the vast and ever com-pounding knowledge resource network that defines our post-modern economy, creating the unbounded prosperity we enjoy today.

With gratitude for your courage, Jack Fullerton, grandson of the Founder, Capital Institute 2112

Listen to the interview with John Fullerton, shown at the

second In100Y-seminar in June 2011. www.in100y.dk/

videos/speakers-attending-in-spirit/

john fullerton, President and founder,

capital institute. www.capitalinstitute.org



89issues #2: this way, Please!88 how do mindsets shift? comment

doIng good, Thanks!

Preferred futures. how can public and private

organizations contribute to long-term sustain-

able growth? Policy and business models of

the future are developed all over the world

every day due to changing global working

and production processes, climate and finan-

cial crisis, and human suffering. it’s time to get

your hands dirty!

Pictures from the second In100Y-seminar:

‘The first ring of In100Years’ (planting a tree),

‘Two Sensed Futures’, ‘The Future Construction

Site’, and the intrance to the ‘Festauditoriet’ at

Faculty of LIFE Science, University of Copen-

hagen, 21-22 September, 2011.

geTTIng your hands dIrTy!

embodying the futures. the quality of your attention to

the future is important and determines the manner in which it

will evolve. in the performance installation ‘two sensed futures’

participants of the second in100y-seminar were provided with

a space in time created by the means of sound, movement and

a few but powerful symbols to open up a mental as well as a

bodily experience of possible outcomes of preferred futures.

Across the board, we collectively create outcomes (and side

effects) that nobody wants. Yet the key decision makers do not

feel capable of redirecting this course of events in any signifi-

cant way. They feel just as trapped as the rest of us in what

often seems to be a race to the bottom. The same problem

affects our massive institutional failure: we haven’t learned to

mold, bend, and transform our centuries-old collective patterns

of thinking, conversing, and institutionalizing to fit the realities

of today.

– otto scharmer, ‘theory u’, 2007.

visions. “we are nature. created by it. creating it. co-cre-

ating”. it is basically a unifying vision which brings together

a wide range of views among the participants. and it is also

a vision that implicitly points to a focal tension between what

and how much we as humans create nature and the extent to

which we are created by nature.

barriers. ”we are becoming machines”. isolation from na-

ture, growing apathy, greed and lack of leadership coupled

with a technological and societal development that pushes

us as human beings towards “becoming machines” seems

dreadful, but not necessarily utopian. it’s the dystopia of

“man made world” scenario.

oPPortunities. ”stewardship”. stewardship in all its forms

and opportunities is reflected in many responses. and many

are counting on bottom-up rather than top-down. one group

has lost patience and demands action rather than spending

more time trying to achieve consensus:”we don’t need to

agree”.

actions/initiatives. “the power of the positive”. asked

about specific examples of initiatives that can be taken here

and now, the participants identified initiatives directed at

changing the actors role, mind set and gaining new knowl-

edge. opportunities to show how mankind can benefit from

connecting with nature were highlighted as well as using the

positive vision as a powerful driving force today.

Highlights from the dialogue session on the first day of the

second In100Y-seminar.

leadershiP and system change

The morning session on the second day of seminar 2 centered

on how leadership and systems can and must change in order

to advance sustainable societies for the long term. Some of

the major themes that came up were the following.

short term thinking. both the business and the political

environment are characterized by short-term thinking. some

explanations point to the structural conditions that leaders

face. in politics they are things like the media and voter

concerns, and in business it is a focus on share prices and

quarterly earnings.

lack of holistic thinking. a leader is responsible. not

just for achieving immediate political, organizational or busi-

ness goals. she is also responsible for the wider implications

of her actions and decisions, i.e. how do they affect people

in and around the organization, how do they impact and

interplay with the community, society, the global, nature etc.

interest-driven outlook. leadership can be difficult

because of resistance to change from vested interests. these,

almost by definition, are rooted in past conditions, and, as

the saying goes, the future has few lobbyists. one risk is that

sustainability is seen as a threat rather than an opportunity.

room for action. several participants pointed out that

we can actually do something. that we can make a differ-

ence. we can decide. we can act locally. we can create

green jobs as a solution to the crisis. it may not be easy, but

it is possible.

be generous! being generous is an attitude, not a precon-

ceived plan; a mode of being which puts one outside one’s

self. when we are generous, we offer more of ourselves to

all our relationships. as such, being generous can support a

richer, more effective common practice of everyday life, busi-

ness and politics. the practice of being generous can train us

in the art of acting as we want to instead of as we have to.

sustainability and growth

What is ‘sustainability’ and ‘growth’? And what would the

biggest breakthrough in your field of work be? Questions

asked for pair wise discussions among the participants at the

first In100Y-seminar.

responses to the conceptual questions ranged from the defini-

tional and descriptive, to the normative and personal. there

was no real disagreement on how to perceive sustainability.

most are comfortable with something like the brundtland

definition, even as some participants seem to view it primarily

in terms of nature and environment while others see a need

for extending the idea to the social, political and cultural

spheres. as for growth, some see it as a goal to be simply

abandoned – i.e. it is understood in terms of ever-increasing

use of scarce resource inputs and waste outputs which is

damaging the future of the planet and of coming genera-

tions. others had a perspective which allowed for qualitative

growth, i. e. growth in the quality of life, broadly speaking,

which would not necessarily be incompatible with sustainabil-

ity. also, there were a couple of responses noting that growth

is a part of nature, and part of circular processes of life.

as for breakthroughs in participants’ respective fields of

work, there were two big groupings. one that saw break-

throughs in terms of specific, even measurable developments

– such as co2-emissions cut to 1/10 of current levels; the

creation of a cradle to cradle passport; the realization of

sustainable farming; the establishment in practice of a steady-

state economy in one or more countries; the embedding of

futures studies in public education systems. the other one took

an more process-oriented approach, and pointed to changes

in values and perspective – for instance that more systems

and nations would be working together; that a common

consciousness with clarity on goals and results be created;

that relationships between inner and outer sustainability be

established; that a new “scientific spirituality” would prevail;

that there would be a broader acceptance of other values

than economic ones; and that a “credible time machine” be

invented where people can feel the future and the develop-

ment path we are on.

In100y: producTIons and fIndIngs

the four in100y-seminars gathered a large number of highly knowl-

edgeable PeoPle within the broad landscaPe relevant to sustain-

ability. academics, visionaries and Practitioners shared their diverse

insights with each other and develoPed new syntheses and new

ideas. the overarching message was threefold: we need Positive vi-

sions, we need holistic thinking, and we need a mindshift.

by gitte larsen (ed.), house of futures

backcasTIng – The power of The posITIve

backcasting is a simple and effective framework for

thinking about the future. it’s a three-step process that

starts with the creation of a vision – a preferred future

– and couples the vision with strategy and present

action. it’s a method for working with the future today.

opposite forecasting, you start out in the future and

work your way back to the present. the first step is

to formulate your vision, followed by identification of

barriers and opportunities for realising the vision as the

second step. third and finally we’re back in the present

and the development of specific and concrete initia-

tives that can overcome barriers and exploit the oppor-

tunities, and thereby make you vision come through.

Present future

concrete initia-

tives, and ideas

for action now

barriers and

opportunities for

realizing the

vision

visions for

sustainable

societies

agent hallberg, agent nielsen and agent mcgowan from the fictional travel agency “future mind tours” arriving at “syd-

havnen” 8 june 2011, and about to take us all on the “imaginary tour”, initiating the journey of “in100years”.



99issues #2: this way, Please!98 in100y: methods and findingsin100y: methods and findings

“how can ... be a driver towards sustainability?”

Politics. there is a lot that can and should be done politi-

cally in order to promote the transformation to sustainability.

this goes for governments as well as supranational institu-

tions like the eu and global fora like the un. many policy

instruments would be highly effective at steering us on to

a better course, especially if they were applied by global

agreement. despite some setbacks on the sustainability

agenda, notably the global warming agenda, there are

positive developments on some levels that bring new voices

to bear, one being the arab spring, another the occupy

movement. but as far as democracy as a framework for

politics is concerned, winston churchill’s dictum applies: it

is the worst system of government except for all the others.

the challenge is at least twofold: one, powerful inter-

ests are defending the status quo. and two, the challenges

are long-term and any effect of present policies have costs

now, whereas election cycles are short-term and costs are

unpopular. what can be done? awareness needs to be

raised, the issue must be promoted, and movements must

be created. and not necessarily one big organized effort. if

many independent organizations, voices and popular opin-

ions pull in the same general direction, the entire political

agenda can and will move. “we need to create a parade

that is so broad and numerous that politicians will want to

jump in front of it as leaders”, said bill becker. in the u.s.

this task at present seems very hard. Prospects might be

better in europe and even in china. but ultimately and long-

term there must be a place for optimism.

business. business has been driven into a crisis which is

largely due to the disconnection between user and pro-

ducer. the chain has become very long. Products are rarely

manufactured locally and in recent years the propellant for

development has increasingly become cash flow. this has

put the function of businesses as community builders under

pressure. there is rarely a direct link to the user-driven csr.

instead, it has become business policy to adopt local men-

tality, and company policy can change easily when its life

is under threat. capital markets have developed their own

logic which has triggered the global financial crisis. Politi-

cians have intervened by pouring new financial fuel into the

system, but this will not solve the problem in the long term.

it is necessary to restore the link between people, resources

and business. the future of business will be to create this

connection and the driving force will come from a growing

awareness of resources triggered by the lack of resources.

the development will emerge from below through local

and cooperative business models, where terms of trade may

not be money but benefits and resources. increasingly, social

networking is spreading ideas and the crucial thing is when

and how big business follows developments; because big

business is here to stay and will adapt itself from the assump-

tion that the business of business is sustainable business.

living. movements are rising which give power back to the

people. arab spring has toppled unwanted systems. occupy

continues to challenge the blind belief that industrialism,

materialism, capitalism, individualism are the only options.

the potential of such movements is not only the potential to

change how we can live but the potential to change how

we think we can live. when we begin to imagine something

else, then what does our new age look like? do we want a

new renaissance where we shed what we each buy for what

we each feel, sense, express and share? can we go beyond

an economy which boxes the arts, culture, tourism and

spirituality as mere commodities? when we travel can we do

so in order to change a situation instead of merely escaping

our own situation? Perhaps we travel less often but for longer,

burning less collective carbon whilst engaging the commu-

nity, generating economy and nurturing ecology in the place

we are at. Perhaps we should give more validity to so-called

alternative communities popping up all around the world.

in eco-village and freedom-village people live the solutions

in order to test what works and what doesn’t. in alternative

communities on and offline, we can live our dreams. we can

fuel transformation, not by forcing blueprints for living from

one onto the next, but by linking these different initiatives and

communicating their impacts. create, show, listen and learn.

Perhaps globalization is a barrier in disguise. are we using

the hope of global consensus as an excuse not to get going

on lots of small ways to do new, do better, do different?

Findings from workshops, the fourth In100Y-seminar.

‘the most beautiful experience we can experi-

ence is the mysterious. it is the source of all true

art and science’. – albert einstein.

‘imagination and intuition are vital to our

understanding, and although the usual popular

opinion is that they are chiefly valuable to po-

ets and artists, they are in fact equally vital to

all the higher grades of science, even physics,

the strictest of all applied sciences, depends

to an astonishing degree upon intuition, which

works by way of the unconscious’. – c.g. jung.

acorn falls discovery

during the seminars we created spaces, in which we

could bring out the imagery and knowledge derived from

dreams, stories and poetry, letting these twirl into and fuel

conversations and findings of in100years. acorn falls is

such a space. it exists in an awakened dream state, in the

interaction between mind, matter and place. through your

submission to its mystery, it should be possible for you to

re-search old memories – or turn over ideas lingering in the

unconscious, now unlocked in your consciousness by the

impression and unfamiliar though strangely familiar imagery

and sensation of the place.

there, walking for hours through the woods and mead-

ow of acorn falls, i discovered a new kind of self-reflection

in a looking glass, an object i had initially used to magnify

the world of insects with. as a fiction Pimp and agent of

future mind tours i have projected myself into- and embod-

ied different kinds of characters in several fictional worlds,

but i had never seen myself quite like this before. i kept

staring into the looking glass and smiled at myself at the

thought of narcissus, who had unknowingly fallen in love

with his own reflection in the pond of another eternal forest.

most people today know this myth, and it is often used to

portray the extreme amount of time people use looking into

the mirror. i guess, to some extent, we all have to. the mir-

ror guides us, when imagining how we appear in the eyes

of the people we live and work with. staring through the

transparency of my own reflection in the looking glass and

the fusing blurry colours and shapes of the forest, i thought

about alice and how she had fallen through the looking

glass into a strange land of great wonder. what if we all

looked beyond our immediate reflection and saw our selves

moving further into other kinds of worlds? – into dreams,

mythology and fiction. and into nature…

i would not have thought of this without the looking glass

in acorn falls, i thought: “seeing myself reflected here in this

poetic dimension of nature by the means of an instrument

of technology”. i immediately wanted to share my discov-

ery. “Please describe how you see yourself.” i repeated as

i approached other characters and reisende. holding the

looking glass up in front of them, i instructed them to search

for and describe their reflections; how they saw themselves

exploring in the world of acorn falls.

then two things finally dawned on me. first of all, using

technology is a great way of making the invisible visible.

equipped with this looking glass, i could now interact with

the reisende and use it as an instrument to help them author

their own mythological tales – as they lived them in acorn

falls. secondly, maybe this could be a living metaphor of

how technology may bridge the return to imagination and na-

ture in one gesture? i asked agent olsen and agent reimus to

help me play with new methods to test my discovery, in terms

of its quality as a new kind of mythological image-maker.

the image made visible through the looking glass still in-

spires my thoughts in an alchemical spiral of experience and

interpretations. these reflections point to a very significant

finding of in100years; we have to find ways of venturing

together into and exploring the unknown sites of the future.

methods combining art, qualitative research and technology

may help us go there and bring back knowledge into the

field of interpreted experience.

Findings from the mysterious city of ‘Acorn Falls’ at the third

In100Y-seminar. Read more at http://in100y.dk/down-

loads/articles/In100Ysem3_article- AcornFalls_discovery.pdf




interior/inner exterior/outer

collective/toP-down

individual/bottom-uP

behavIoral (objecTIve)- individual actions

InTenTIonal (subjecTIve)- values, meaning of life, consciousness, personal experiences

socIal / sysTemIc (InTerobjecTIve) systems and infrastructure

culTural (InTersubjecTIve)- discourse, language, worldview

susTaInablesocIeTIes

INTegral FUTUres

integral futures studies

interdisciplinary creation of futures is the heartbeat of future

studies, and in recent years the integral futures approach,

which draws on the integral theory and systems thinking,

are becoming more central to futures work. by explicitly

respecting and valuing plural perspectives, integral futures

meets the need for a holistic yet structured outlook. integral

futures thinking identifies four primary dimensions of reality,

emerging from two key distinctions.

- outer/exterior/objective vs. inner/interior/subjective

- individual/bottom-up vs. collective/top-down

in the project ‘in100years’, together with the core group

(see p. 31-32), we have added ‘top-down’, ‘bottom-up’,

‘outer’ and ‘inner’ to the original model used in integral

futures studies. in the figure on the opposite page the four

perspectives are illustrated as dimensions that have an equal

impact on the long term future. these must all be taken into

account exploring and planning for a preferred future.

QouTIng 2 vIsIonarIes

donella h. meadows (1941-2001). co-author

of Limits to Growth (1972).

‘if we don’t know where we want to go, it makes little

difference that we made great progress. yet vision is

not only missing almost entirely from political discus-

sions; it is missing from our whole culture.’ qouted

from a speach, donella wrote for the third biennial

meeting of the international society for ecological

economics, held in costa rica 1994. she talked

about the need to strenghten ourselves to endure the

pain of the enormous gap between the world we

know and the world we profoundly long for.

Read more about the works of Donella Meadows at

www.donellameadows.org

barbara marx hubbard. futurist, author and so-

cial architect. founding board member of the world

future society.

‘our spiritual capacities are ancient, but in the past

people projected their own innate abilities onto

gods, masters or institutions. now, millions of us are

feeling the spirit within ourselves, becoming spiritually

activated: co-creative humans. we are bringing the

gods home as our own evolutionary potential. we

can appreciate our challenges without judgement. in

the social realm, no one has ever asked to evolve a

planet before. there are no experts. nobody on this

earth has seen a co-evolutionary, co-creative society.

we are being asked to divine the design of social

evolution – to design a world.’ from the book ‘trans-

forming through 2012’, yinspire media, 2010.

Read more at www.BarbaraMarxHubbard.com

why we need a holistic view

Finding from our minor Delphi ‘live’ ‘The Delivery Room’ at

the fourth In100Y-seminar.

the quadrants provide us with four important perspectives

on sustainability. applying this model to sustainability in the

long run, we would like to ask you two questions:

1. which of the four quadrants do you think will be most

important in the transformation towards a sustainable

society? (please place red dot)

2. in which of the four quadrants is your present work

primarily concentrated? (please place black dot)

on the first day of the seminar participants placed their dots

on the poster and on the second day a smaller group went

back to discuss the results as they (shown to the right). many

were experiencing that much of the work done in the area

of sustainability lies in the top right quadrant, and many

agreed that we need to pay a lot more attention to the left

quadrants as main drivers of sustainable development – and

not least that we need to combine all the drivers of perspec-

tives shown in the figure, and one of the next step must be

individual action.

The delphI meThod

a delphi survey is a recognized future studies method,

used mainly in quantitative foresights indicating break-

throughs in technology. the assumption is simply that

group judgements are more valid than individual judge-

ments. in the standard version a group of experts answer

questionnaires in two or more rounds. the participants

are encourage to revise their earlier answers in light of

the replies of other experts.

Photo to the left: hans fink, Professor in Philosophy, com-

menting on how the black and red dots are places on the

poster at the second round of the minor ‘live’ delphi survey

at the fourth in100y-seminar.




Photo: sille arendt

achIevIng susTaInabIlITy

The human demand for many natural resources is now so great that it exceeds the Earth’s ability to replenish these resources. This resource demand is changing not only local environments but also the way in which the entire Earth System functions. A compelling example of this comes in the form of changes in the Earth’s climate processes resulting from overuse of a common resource - the global atmospheric garbage dump for greenhouse gas waste. If use of this resource is not contained, then resulting climate changes may, ultimately, dramatically change the habitat conditions that have characterized the planet over the last 12,000 years. We are certain that human societies can prosper under the environmental conditions that the Earth has provided during this period because, although modern humans have existed on Earth for around 250,000 years, it has only been during these last 12,000 years that our species has really flourished. We do not, on the other hand, know how human societies would fare under drastically changed environmental conditions. Climate change is not, however, the only resource issue facing our society. Resource scarcity (fossil fuels, water, land, phosphorous, biodiversity, metals, etc) is the single greatest threat to continued societal development. An absolutely fundamental prerequisite for, and the great-est challenge to, achieving sustainability is, then, that the human demand for the Earth’s natural resources is brought to within the global supply. This is true both for those resources which are mined, harvested and otherwise col-lected from on or near the Earth’s surface as well as those ecosystem services that are more difficult to quantify than material resources but just as essential for our survival. The Brundtland Report (1987), at least indirectly, acknowl-edged this when it proposed the now widely accepted

definition of sustainable development, i.e. “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. The bad news is that the demand for resources has only increased relative to the global supply over the past 25 years. The good news is that society is much better equipped today than it was at the time of the Brundtland Report to actually quantify resource demand relative to global supply and, thereby, identify what actions are neces-sary to achieve and to monitor progress towards achieving this prerequisite for sustainability. What has made it so is recognition that the Earth functions as an interconnected system and that human activities are a force that influence the workings of the system at the global level. Understanding – at least in overall terms – how this system works, makes it possible to identify the components and functions of the system (i.e. resources) that are particularly important and which of these are most vulnerable to human impact. Scien-tists are now beginning to propose what might be called “safe limits” for the amount of human impact that these components of the Earth System can tolerate without jeopardizing our global habitat. Thus, a capability has been developed within the natural sciences to quantify both the global supply and demand of many critical natural resourc-es in the years since the Brundtland Report. Of course, that capability, in and of itself, does not bring society any closer to actually achieving sustainability. It does, however, provide decision-makers with a framework for identifying milestones en route to the goal of sustainability and a tool for assessing progress. Without concrete milestones and assessment tools, the vision of sustainability will never be more than just that – a vision.

katherine richardson, Professor and leader of the

sustainability science centre, university of copenhagen.

see presentation from the third in100y-seminar at

www.in100y.dk/cph-seminars/3-no-fixes/

from-the-seminar/

makIng The InvIsIble vIsIble

all four in100y-seminars have been framed by various

performance designs that could bring forth the inner im-

ages of the seminar participants – making the invisible

visible and shared between the participants as part of a

new mode of knowledge production. on this page and

page 100 you can see examples of this work.

the time is nowthe ‘reisende’ approached the door. the sign said ’oc-

cupied’. thus, a line was forming. they looked through the

windows. twelve people assembled around a round table

wearing butterfly masks, the symbol of transformation. we

are at the copenhagen headquarters of future mind tours.

and the time is now. the time for alchemy and creation of

the new mindset suitable for the new paradigm.

we talk of mindshifts, but before we can shift our minds

we must know what mindset to shift into. the new paradigm

is yet undefined. we know that one world is dying while

another is being born. the new world. created by people,

turning into systems, turning into the mode of everyday life.

the paradigm that we are leaving behind has been domi-

nant since the industrialization, the economic paradigm, with

its premises of efficiency, duty, rationality and discipline.

the new one? this is our chance. the chance of the people

assembled around the roundtable of fire and commitment.

the time is now. the sheet of transformation was passed

around amongst the participants and they all entered, wrote,

the qualities that they considered to be the most important

for the new paradigm in the human shapes. slowly filling

them out. slowly creating the new mindset and by doing so

externalizing their inner landscapes. bringing it forth, taking

responsibility. and thus, the time for co-creation.

the co-creation of archetypes for the new mindset. the

essence of the sum of words, qualities in each human shape.

and the discussion went high. ideas were shared. leading to

new archetypical qualities such as: the farmer, the parent,

the child and Pleroma, the perfect unity between human

and surroundings. the difficulties of describing the new with

the language of the old, also led to the creation of the new

word ’ator’ – someone who moves and shakes the world

(motivator, innovator, aspirator) but not bound to the con-

notations of the old. these archetypical qualities where then

written on the back of one of the butterfly masks of transfor-

mation. the next person that will be wearing this mask will

then be inhabited by and embody this quality, and thus start

living it. this is the mystical power of the mask. remember to

consider: what are the first signs of the mindset? how is it

facilitated? how is it upheld?

Findings from the fourth In100Y-seminar.

future construction sitethis site was the last station of the participants’ journey

in the ‘two sensed futures’ performance installation. the

guard proposed that the ‘reisende’ share their elixir of the

future – a few words, which they believed, summed up the

reflections from the scenario journey they had just travelled.

after instructions, their hands were cleansed in chalk-water,

preparing them for openness. standing in a line, they were

instructed by the white guard to approach the creature in

the heavy chair, one after the other, the silence only broken

by the monotonous beeping sound from the detached tele-

phone on the floor, a direct link into the future void, futures

not yet shaped. when each reisende stood before the

creature, they would be facing the future void, and all their

words and reflections – their elixir – would penetrate this

void, resonating empty spaces, collected by future mind

tours for the creation of future scenarios. at the same time,

this situation was also a ritual for each reisende, an activa-

tion of their oath and an articulation of their vision.

Findings from the second In100Y-seminar.



105issues #2: this way, Please!104 in100y: methods and findings comment

performIng The fuTure. exPerimental futures studies

“create the future while you live it!” – but how is that Possible? house

of futures is exPerimenting with how to make futures studies more

sensuous by combining it with Performance art. in the Project ‘in-

100years’ our aim has been inter-disciPlinary co-creation of long-term

Preferred futures based on a holistic aPProach that involves not only

our minds, but also our bodies.

The lasT 100 years: lookIng back from 2112

by gry worre hallberg, madeleine kate mcgowan,

inga gerner nielsen and gitte larsen, house of

futures

Futures Studies is not about predicting the future, but all about anticipating it. Creating awareness about the future in the present and thereby of the alternatives to a present trajectory or strategy is fundamental to all Futures Studies. Usually we do this by working with plausible and pos-sible scenarios or images of the future in different kinds of facilitated two-dimensional workshops and processes. But in the four seminars of ‘In100Years’ we have gone beyond this framework and made three dimensional images and scenario experiences part of the knowledge production design and seminar set-up. The future is not something we can plan for ratio-nally – especially not the long-term future. No experts can predict the future, but visionaries within all different kinds of fields and non-fields can create and co-create the future as we speak and move. We wish to inspire that awareness in people we meet and to trigger their lust for manifesting those actions of future importance with an equal amount of joy, reflectivity, sensuality and poetry. And we believe that Performance Art can be of great significance as a method for creating the future in the present. We work with an understanding of performance art as something rooted in the tradition of rituals and theatre. And so we incorporate elements of both as an activist method to embody the future – starting now. Used as a method to portray the world, performance art becomes a way of emphasizing the presence and sensuous knowledge of all our minds, including the body, in the perception and the co-creation processes.

hOlIsTIC FUTUres sTUDIesBased on the pre-analysis to the scenario project and process ‘In100Years’, that has involved 150+ visionary participants within the broad field of sustainability during

four seminars, we decided to work with the long run (100 years) and to focus on mind set scenarios. Futures Studies normally have a 10-25 year scope and to look 100 years into the future is unusual even for futurists. It is none the less necessary for encompassing the full extent of sustain-ability, environment, social change and mind shifting in the long run. In order to focus on mindsets and mindshift we wanted to engage people in an exploratory journey by not only drawing on their intellectual minds, but also their emotional, sensoric and bodily ‘minds’ and experiences. Through an intersection of our different disciplines within House of Futures we created an experimental seminar environment for the participants to engage in and for them to begin co-creating our common future from a holistic perspective, and we did it by placing the body of the individual and the collective body of the group at the focal point of the knowledge produced. To us, this might be the beginning of a new generation of Futures Studies. At least we hope it is a contribution to the development of the field. The five overall approaches to studying the future (see box on next page) have all been very important building blocks in the project ‘In100years’. Also the Integral Futures approach, which has played a more central role in the field of Futures Studies during the last decades, has been a great inspiration. Integral Futures includes not only the outer but also our inner environment as an important perspec-tive or driver for change (read more about Integral Futures on p. 103). As shown in the illustration above, Theory U is an illustrative way to visualize and communicate how we are thinking and working. Applying performance art in the process of the project ‘In100Years’ has, together with different kinds of Futures Studies methods, been our tools to dissolve the dualis-tic position between feeling and thinking or acting and reflecting. It has helped open peoples minds to the need for a broadened agenda of sustainability and growth than the one we see today, and we believe that many people are longing for a more holistic, spiritual or playful approach

Back in 2012, a futurist said: ‘To me, in 100 years is the beginning of a golden age – if we can use all of today’s enormous potential to solve all of today’s enormous problems.’ It is now January 2112, and the problems of unsustainability that loomed large exactly 100 years ago have been decisively solved. The solutions came from two sources: industry and the tipping point in cultural values that occurred early in the 21st Century. The shift in cultural values seemed to happen quite suddenly after 2012, surprising most people. The shift to the worldview we take for granted today, which emphasiz-es environmental quality and universal social well-being as the overriding concerns of society, swept around the world in a matter of years, aided by internet-based social media. Consumers soon made it very clear that they expected industry to use its technological know-how to address the problems of unsustainability. This would allow both com-panies and society itself to become sustainable. The success of this led to the big ‘shared value’ strategy that has guided business for most of the last century. Once industry focused seriously on the question of sus-tainability, it quickly came up with a diagnosis of the core problem. The challenge was rooted in three global system fundamentals:

1. The fixed size of the global environment, i.e. the area of the planet surface and the size of the biosphere – the planetary network of ecosystems – are fixed.

2. The scale of industrial production worldwide, which was literally as large as nature, when measured by com-paring the volume of industrial flows with the flows of the various chemical elements in and through the biosphere, for example carbon.

3. The exponential growth of economic consumption, which was doubling every 20 years in the late 20th and early 21st Centuries as a result of the combined growth of popula-tion and affluence. Put together, these three fundamentals

meant that by 2030 the volume of consumption would be (if it could get there) twice the size of the biosphere. But this could never happen, since 20th Century-style economic consumption ultimately drew resources from the biosphere, which would break down under the load.

This crunch of factors signaled that the global industrial economy would collapse before 2030 if it wasn’t reinvented to work on different technological principles. By 2012, the rumblings of this potential collapse could already be heard. The price of oil was rising as it got scarcer, in turn driving up food and commodity prices, and helping to trigger the global financial crisis. The solution involved facing the three global system fundamentals head on, and treating them urgently as a ma-jor challenge that industry had to meet. Because consumer demand was rising exponentially and resource provision couldn’t keep up, resource provision had to change. The ob-vious way to do this was by turning the flow of all resources into a continuous loop. This had been known in principle for decades, but was only taken seriously in the period lead-ing up to 2020. Using a combination of systems design and new technology, industry developed sustainable product platforms. They used closed loops of a few basic materials, and managed to leapfrog the environmental and scarcity problems about to engulf conventional resource supplies. Following a fundamental economic rethink, the new production methods enabled, as we have seen, genuine abundance for everyone. Today we are all free to pursue personal development and well-being goals, and we live in conditions that 100 years ago were regarded as an impos-sible utopian dream.

See the slides from Hardin Tibbs’ lecture at the fourth

In100Y-seminar about human values at a tipping point at

www.in100y.dk/cph-seminars/4-its-our/from-the-seminar/

hardin tibbs, futurist and ceo of synthesys strategic

consulting ltd., a business futures firm in london.



107issues #2: this way, Please!106 Performing the futurecomment

to the way we do business, politics and leadership. ‘It was good to be able to meet as persons and not organizations’, as one participant put it.

PerFOrm The ChaNge YOU WIsh TO seeLet us take you back to the fourth and closing ‘In100Y’-seminar about people and mindsets for a moment. The seminar was held on 18 January 2012 in Copenhagen at Carlsberg Academy. The 80 participants, all visionaries in different sustainability fields, had already listened to a lec-ture on the performance theories and motivations behind the rites of the fictional travel agency ‘Future Mind Tours’ (see presentation on p. 34 and read the article ‘The impact of Future Mind Tours’ on p. 120), and therefore they knew that moving down the halls and into the different rooms would involve participating in an interactive performance installation that would show the choreography and archetypes of potential new mind sets. In this setting, the participants were not locked into the traditional audience seats looking into a spectacle created before them. On the first journeys of ‘In100Years’ the participants had taken part in different ways of working with how we imagine and embody the future. On the first seminar we had created encapsulated images in simple gestures presented on different institutional milestones along the canals of Copenhagen. On the second seminar they had entered into the installation ‘The Two Sensed Futures’, where they had been immersed and surrounded in the atmosphere of two sketches – or two possible outcomes – of the scenarios for sustainable societies 2112. At the third seminar they became part of the mystery of ‘Acorn Falls’, exploring the aesthetic, poetic and transformative mo-ments in life. Now, on the final seminar, the participants themselves would start creating these kinds of art futures. Walking down the hall the participants would feel the deep bass of the future tickling in the chessboard pat-terned marble floors. The sound came from DJ Hvad’s Indian drone machines and other sound devices on a set placed in the room labelled the ‘Conscious Construction Site’. In here, among ancient statues and movable pillars of black, white and red boxes, stood performers and partici-pants experimenting together to transform the idea of a new mindset into sound, collages and movements. This was just one of the artistic rooms and poetic settings to visit and explore mindsets and mindshifts at the fourth seminar. In another room, ‘The Delivery’, the Oracle of Delphi was placed in the middle together with a performance artist who guided the participants to ask any question regarding sustainability in a 100 year perspective (see page 164). All the rooms at this seminar and the dif-

ferent performance installations of the other three semi-nars have invited the participants to engage in artful crea-tion by activating more personal, imaginary and intuitive dimensions than usual on our professional and industrial work scene. Also, we wanted to let the inner images of the participants become visible during the knowledge produc-tion at the seminars, making the invisible visible. Thus, one of our methodical questions guiding the action research of this project has been how to access the inner images that shape and direct our desire of preferred futures. As part of the action research we have interviewed a number of participants, and you can read about their experiences of the performance installations of ‘In100Years’ in the article ‘Sensing the future’ on p. 129.

a seNse OF FUTUresWhen working with performance art and strategies of fiction, we are very conscious of the installations we create containing the possibility to suspend, challenge or play with the social norms in a given situation or place through the creation of a symbolic in-betweenness, thereby opening up for a potential transformation of the involved place or people. By employing performance strategies we immerse participants in an intimate envi-ronment, engaging the individuals’ intuitive and poetic sense and allowing them to experience the visions of future tangibly in the present and create a space for the potential of a deep-rooted mindshift. We believe the body is a set of possibilities for percep-tion. Its appearance in this world is not predetermined by some manner of interior essence, but a continuous and incessant materializing of possibilities, a manner of doing. This ever-shaping reality is interesting to us as on exten-sion of our focus on manifesting the future in the present. Because if you perform yourelf, then your personality is created every minute by your gestures. By inspiring people to move in certain ways or visualize themselves in certain contexts, we thus believe that it is possible to embody the future in the present. To articulate it in another way, we believe that we can decide to perform change – perform the future. In this way, we synthesize the insight of Futures Studies with the expressiveness of Performance Art and this can take many forms – ritual, installation or interven-tion – but common to them is the opportunity to tran-scend habits and ingrown beliefs and attain deep-rooted change in the consciousness of the participants. Images OF The FUTUreAll strategies and plans for the future either explicitly or implicitly have a certain idea of what the future will be

lIvIng The fuTure now

susPending

let go of outdated and not unsustain-

able ways of experiencing, see and feel

(broaden the agenda of sustainability).

Pre-sensing futures

who is my self? what is my work?

(through interactive performance art

and seminar designs).

embodying

Performing and achieving results

through practices, infrastructures

(consciousness, mindsets and mindshift).

fictions strategies

deep dive and letting go. see-

ing with fresh eyes and sensing

from the field. (moving into the

unknown, artful creation).

scenario building

allowing in and enacting.

Prototyping, co-creating strategic micro-

cosms, visions and intentions

(preferred futures).

Pre-sensing:

being ‘present’ and ‘sens-

ing’ makes you connect to

the source of an open mind

heart and will. to empower

our ability to create good,

healthy and sustainable

solutions to the challenges

of the future.

co-sensing futures co-creating futures

living the future now. ‘theory u’ aPPlied to the Project ‘in100years’ as an illustration of the combination

of futures studies and Performance art. otto scharmer, ‘theory u – leading from the future as it emerges’, 2007.

our 5 approaches To sTudyIng long-Term fuTures

#1. broad approach. the future is shaped by technological

change, but also by cultural, economic, political, psycho-

logical, artistic and social driving forces and changes. it

results from the interplay of different angles – individual

and psychological as well as collective and systemic. in the

short term, an isolated tendency or economic cycle might

make an impact, but in the long run these and many other

parameters come together in a broader picture.

#2. Interdisciplinary approach. it follows from the above that

there is a need to employ an interdisciplinary approach.

interdisciplinarity is always important in futures studies,

and even more so when the subject carries the weight that

‘in100years’ does. many contributions are characterized

by different disciplines offering separate predictions and

foresights. as such, interdisciplinarity in the field of sustain-

ability is a purpose in itself.

#3. deep approach. while most futures studies include

many disciplines and perspectives there can be a tendency

to overlook psychological or individual aspects and focus

on outer and social matters. in the project ‘in100years’

we explicitly involve both the personal, the physical and

the psychological. citing futurist richard slaughter we

work both with what is “out there” in the realm of systemic

and structural change and what’s “in here” of individual,

personal and conscious change. Performance art, rituals

and spiritual approaches have all played a significant role

in the project.

#4. Imaginative and historical approach. futures studies

deal with the possibility of that which has never occurred.

imagination, curiosity and creativity are essential elements

in all futures studies. tomorrow isn’t like today, and with a

continuous rate of change due to developments including

technological progress and mindshifts, enormous change

can be anticipated in the next 100 years. as history is the

best available input to the future, it is, along with imagina-

tion, necessary to have a good understanding of the historic

development of the system under investigation. a rule-of-

thumb is to look at the subject twice as many years back in

time, as we project the subject into the future.

#5. Involving approach. the project ‘in100years’ has

spanned a year, and in that time frame more than 150 dan-

ish and foreign researchers, visionary professionals and de-

cision makers from different sectors have contributed to the

development of the project and the scenarios. at the same

time, we continuously work to involve even more partners

through both online as well as through special events.



109issues #2: this way, Please!108 Performing the future Performing the future

like. If we have no images of the future, and therefore no sense of it, how can we know if our strategies and plans will create the future we really want? Unfortunately, there is so much we don’t know – much more than we know – when we are looking 100 years into the future, but this must not keep us from trying our best to create a future worth living. It is as if the general aware-ness of humankind’s role in creating the future is moving to the forefront. During crises we tend to stick to the ‘business as usual’ as we think this is the only way we can survive. It might be in the short run, but never has been in the long run. We need to stretch as far as 100 years into ourselves and therefore we need to improve our ability to think long term. During the ‘In100Years’ seminar process we have asked people whether the long perspective would be more present in their everyday life, and the number of participants that answer ‘yes’ to this question has risen from 24 % at the first seminar to 74 % after the last semi-nar (from June 2011 to January 2012, and approximately 70 % of the participants at the last seminar had partici-pated in either one or two of the previous seminars). Long-term thinking is an opportunity to invite our poetry and imagination into the process of discussing and visualizing the future we actually want. The image and the imaginary have played a central role in the project ‘In100Years’. Using performance strategies is not least intended to physically manifest and execute scenarios or possible images of the future. Our work thus includes an intersection of the anthropology of the image. Drawing on the theories suggesting a new anthropology of the im-age, ‘image’ is not understood merely as a painting on the canvas or the motif in photography; it is something that happens as a result of a complex, performative process, as a result of the interaction between body and medium. Image is thereby a phenomenon that comes into being in the moment, through an interaction between the image and the viewer – and so are the futures of ‘In 100 Years starting now.’ In recent years, the terms performance and performa-tivity have grown to be tremendously popular in a wide

range of traditions such as literature, anthropology, politics, art and the social sciences. As a term, performance trans-gresses boundaries and will not be pinned down. What is certain, though, is that performance only exists through action, interaction and in the relation between certain aspects. Performance is thus never found in something, but occurs in the meeting between different elements and in certain contexts. The idea that ‘all the world’s a stage’ is not new, but considering everything a performance is new and increasingly relevant. Futures Studies and scenarios are about making or anticipating future times and concrete images of probable, possible or preferred futures, but to us it is also becoming a matter of creating the future while we live it. Living the future now! And the future lives in us as an image, and if we become aware of this, we might be able to project and use this knowledge to shift into ways of creating and living preferred futures. This idea is also aligned to the Theory U when it comes to the co- and pre-sensing as part of a change and developmental process.

BreakINg NeW grOUNDsCombining Futures Studies methods and Performance Art is an ongoing experiment in the House of Futures, and it is always challenging and exciting to break new grounds. From a Futures Studies’ perspective, we believe that we are developing an approach that has an impact on how people see the long run, and we have also crossed the threshold into a space where we open up into the future inside of you – and thereby we can raise awareness about the future in the present. After more than 20 years of practicing Futures Studies in cooperation with private as well as public companies and organizations, House of Futures thinks there is a need for further developing the methods to engage people in futures thinking and living. And with a thorough experi-ence and action research activity in the use of performance strategies we continuously develop our methods and tech-niques, and in doing so, we allow ourselves to experiment with new ways of studying the future.

fuel The fuTure by The power of The ImagInaTIon

minik t. rosing. Professor in geology, nor-

dic center for earth evolution, natural history

museum of denmark, university of copenhagen.

[email protected]

Human ideas, aspiration and desires deeply impact the functionality of our planet because our activities claim large shares of Earth’s total energy budget. The dominant source of Energy on Earth is sunlight, which provides 342 watt of energy to every square meter of Earth’s surface. One third is reflected directly back to space. The remaining two thirds are mostly converted to heat, but a very small fraction – about one watt in a thousand – is used by plants and algae to produce biomass from water, CO2 and mineral nutrients. The global production of biomass by plants and algae captures solar energy equivalent to about one quarter of a watt per square meter of Earth’s surface. This is the energy that fuels the activities of all animals and most other organisms. This quarter of a watt controlled by life is two to three times greater than the amount of energy Earth expends on keeping its interior glowing hot, produc-ing the magma that pours out of volcanoes, moving the continents across Earth’s surface and building mountain ranges where the continents collide. Humankind impacts the global environment not so much because of our physiological needs but more severely due to our behavior. We only need one thousandth of a watt of energy per square meter of Earth’s surface. With the development of thermodynamics during the 18th and 19th centuries, humans realized that energy could be transformed from one form to another. This insight gave us the means to use our passion for fire to get work done. Cultures that understood thermodynamics became major world powers, because they could perform work similar to populations far greater than the biological productiv-ity that their land could sustain. However, the concept of thermodynamics not only completely transformed society but also changed the trajectory of Earth’s geological

evolution through the deep environmental impact of CO2 emissions. Industrialization made humanism affordable, and paved the way for the abolition of slavery. As soon as it became less expensive to perform hard labour by machines rather than by feeding people to do the work, the ethical aspiration of freeing the human race became practicable. The Enlightenment in the 18th-19th century was contem-poraneous with, and probably spurred by, the decreasing need for human physical work. As innovation became the main provider of prosperity, the human spirit became a more valuable resource than human body force. Democra-cy and humanism form the basis of some present societies because it is easily affordable. What makes us human is that we spend lots of energy beyond our physiological needs on activities related to arts, culture and social interaction. Modern society causes massive environmental problems, because we acquire most of our energy from fossil sources, but that should not fool us into regarding the spending of energy as an evil for which we all share guilt. It is useful to remember that solar energy is available at a rate of 342 watt per square meter, more than ten thousand times as much as the three hundredth of a watt per square meter we currently get from burning fossil fuels. Even at 7 billion people or more, our physiological needs can be accommodated by Earth’s ecosystems, and renewable sources derived from sunlight can provide ample energy to sustain healthy societies for everyone.

See the slides from Minik Rosing’s lecture at the first In100Y-

seminar about the power of imagination at www.in100y.dk/

cph-seminars/1-mind-the/from-the-seminar/

agents performing images of the future, the “imaginary tour”, first seminar. www.in100y.dk/videos/video-seminar-1/



111issues #2: this way, Please!110 Performing the future comment

no fIxes, pal!

starting now. we are facing the challenge of

transforming our systems in order to sustain

human development and the earth’s resources.

we are aware that we cannot go on, and we

cannot go back. actions and initiatives are

already being taken, and these are the seeds

that the future will grow from, the acorns on

the ground.

Pictures from the third In100Y-seminar: The site

of the mysterious city ‘Acorn Falls’ and lunch

at the ‘Kåte’, ‘Skovskolen’ in Nødebo, Faculty

of LIFE Science, University of Copenhagen,

2-3 November, 2011.

IT’s In The aIr!

making the invisible visible. in the mysterious city of

‘acorn falls’ there is always something in the air, and the

old oak tree stands firm as the spine of our daily lives.

strange winds are blowing and questions are being asked

in the corners of this landscape inhabited by visitors from

2112: what is the final blow that makes an acorn fall,

where does it land, and who picks up the acorn? the

future is in an acorn ...

The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysteri-

ous. It is the fundamental emotion which stands at the

cradle of true art and true science. Whoever does not

know it and can no longer wonder, no longer marvel, is

as good as dead, and his eyes are dimmed.

– albert einstein

The TransformaTIve ImpacT of fuTure mInd Tours

mindset-shifting oPeration: ‘future mind tours’ is the Performance universe that framed the

four in100y-seminars in 2011 and 2012. artistic intervention can have a transformative

imPact, if we are willing to oPen uP to a more holistic way of being in the event. the reason

is simPly that it activates not only our mental caPacities, but also all our senses. read about

why house of futures decided to let Performance art be a central Part of discussing and

reworking sustainability and growth together with 150+ visionaries.

by gry worre hallberg and inga gerner nielsen,

fiction PimPs/ house of futures

To allow a series of seminars about sustainability and growth in the long term to be framed by a performance uni-verse is an experiment. In the House of Futures we wanted to create unusual and memorable seminars by involving participants in a more personal, holistic and playful way. We wanted to create an explorative framework to underscore the fact that the transformational period of our era is basi-cally about mindsets and mindshifts – about the software of human nature and the way we relate to ourselves and each other. Our aim is to create new opportunities for transform-ative moments, facilitate new interdisciplinary meetings and hopefully break new ground together. We, the Performance Agency ‘Fiction Pimps’, have several years of experience in planning and executing per-formance installations and a strong academic background in theories related to theatre, rituals, performance design, visual communication, ethnography and action research. The experimental element of framing the In100Y-seminars in a performance universe by means of inventing Future Mind Tours as a fictional framework, is about mixing Futures Studies and Performance Art (read the article “Ex-perimental Futures Studies” on p. 107) and about playing with a more activist intervention in the capital system as we know it today (see box on the opposite page). There is a global need for companies to manage the capitalist market system in a way that will not kill us all – and we, the people, are responsible. Over the past year we have used a metaphor for how we in House of Futures,

as employees and consumers, engage in reproducing our economic and consumer-oriented system, namely that we all put the consumer capital system on like clothes or spectacles every morning before we go out into the world. Out there, some people and organizations want to do good, but most are simply satisfied by doing less harm. We believe that there is a need to promise each other more than survival during the next 100 years. As we said on the Imaginary Tour around the canals of Copenhagen 2112, where Future Mind Tours initiated the journey of the seminar project ‘In100Years’, “We have been told that the world suffers from an alarming lack of visions [...] Come on, baby, take a chance with us!”

OUr BUrNINg QUesTIONsAs stated, we want to challenge the traditional mode of being in our capitalist and consumer oriented society as well as the way of being in a seminar – our basic and habitual mindsets – by asking ourselves two research questions:

1. How can a ritual potentially facilitate a mindset-shift? 2. How can we use performance art to turn an event like

‘In 100 Years – Starting Now’ into a ritual that empha-sizes the importance of intersecting disciplines in new experimental modes of knowledge production, thereby activating the mind and the body in the process?

The performance art and universe of ‘In100Years’ is designed to be used. It is for participants to plunge into a different mode of being, a parallel universe, in order to explore other dimensions of themselves and more per-

fuTure mInd Tours, a bÜro reIsende

‘future mind tours’ is a travel agency specializing in

guided tours in travelers’ inner landscapes. they describe

themselves as a ‘büro reisende’ traveling within the human

body and mind in order to plunge into the conscious and

subconscious world of the reisende.

future mind tours has facilitated the journey towards

2112 and been of personal assistance to all reisende at

the four in100y-seminars. the most sublime outcome of this

journey is a mindshift in the specific reisende resulting in a

potential shift in paradigms in the external social landscape.

InTervenTIon InTo The arT - and capITal sysTem

according to a series of social theoreticians, the economic

system’s terms such as efficiency, duty and discipline have

dominated western society since industrialization. these

terms seem to be in direct contrast to the premises of aesthetic

systems such as the sensory, desire and the emotions. accord-

ing to dr. phil. Professor kirsten drotner (2001), the aesthetic

experience potential is isolated from the working and daily

lives of ‘ordinary people’ in the modern art system, because

it is located in an inaccessible system where ‘special people’

- artists - can provide special cognitive insights. today, how-

ever, we can see tendencies towards relational, dialectic and

interventionist art, which open up the isolation and exclusivity

of artists at the same time as shifts are taking place within

the system of capital. in the direction of arts’in’business and

cultural economy, art or the aesthetic experience space is a

tool to shift the capital system in a more sustainable direction

in order ultimately to transform it from within.

Read the whole article about the modern capital - and art

systems by Gry Worre Hallberg at www.in100y.dk

Three phases of a rITual

in the house of futures, we have decided to work with

‘in100years’ as a ritual, and see what would happen if we

incorporated the liminal potential and aesthetic dimension

of performance art into the seminars and our future studies.

when designing rituals, we work with a classical anthro-

pological process oriented model of a ritual and the three

phases to create liminality, the ‘rite of passage’ (the term

invented by arnold van gennep in 1909 as a description

of this experience). liminality describes a mode of being in

which a physical, mental and spiritual transformation has

the potential to take place. it is a powerful and dangerous

place to be, because it will sometimes involve a sacrifice of

the old persona in order to give birth to a new one.

every ritual has three phases: The pre-liminal signifies the

phase of a ritual, where the participants are prepared for

immersion into the liminal state of the ritual. this could be

done through instructions, monumental passages or various

psychosomatic exercises. in the liminal phase of a traditional

ritual, a drama or a game may be played, intensifying the

participants’ personal connection with the mythological tale

or choreography performed. in some of these performances

you will be able to see the features of the root metaphors that

guide the basic values and mindset of a group, a system – or

society as a whole. in the post-liminal phase, when the ritual

ends, the participants are brought out of the liminal state and

are reintegrated into daily life, with potentially transformed

selves related to a reaffirmed perception of a given reality.

fIcTIon pImps and ‘fIcTIon pImpIng’

the Performance agency, fiction Pimps, manifests ‘cracks’

in everyday life – sensory fictive parallel universes which

aim at activating the aesthetic dimension of an experience

to enrich the given situation and the persons involved in it.

the term ‘fiction pimping’ refers to a fictionalization of a

given situation, thereby tailoring a story, a myth, a ritual

for a specific site or concept. while ‘fiction pimping’, we

manifest and thus point to the dormant images, stories and

parallel universes, which we consider to be latent in all situ-

ations; be that a conference, a political meeting, a debate,

a factory, a nightclub or on the street.



121issues #2: this way, Please!120 the transformative imPact of future mind toursthe transformative imPact of future mind tours

sonal visions for the future. Our art works have a purpose beyond the aesthetic and sensory. The exchange between the performers and the participants is the artwork and is co-creative by nature. There is no backstage and front stage – just one stage, where new meetings can take place.

The POTeNTIal OF rITUals In times of crisis, such as the one the world is in today, the rituals of societies become particularly important, because of their ability to reestablish the sense of community and belief in a system. But the breach in the symbolic order might be too deep and too wide to shut with traditional rituals and so, new ones may have to be invented in order to bring society from one stage in history to another. Which rituals in con-temporary society do we have which could be used to create the necessary new mindsets? In the artistic and activist work of Fiction Pimps, we embrace this era as an opportunity to use our knowledge of the potential of rituals to open up a site, in which we co-create new root-metaphors as vessels to carry us into the unknown. Now let us look into the rituals of the Future Mind Tours. On the first seminar, we prepared the participants in the pre-liminal phase (see box on previous page) for a different kind of seminar experience, by making them trav-el to an unknown part of the industrial docks of the city, and taking them sailing through the canals of Copenhagen in 2112. We thus introduced the long term aspect of the project ‘In100Years’ and from the beginning, we pointed in the direction of the seminar not only being a place to discuss change, but that the seminar itself should be a site of transformation. On the second seminar, we moved the participants and the seminar process deeper into the liminal phase. We did this by transforming the two sketches of preferred future scenarios, “Man Made World” and “Power of Nature”, into two performance installations titled “Two Sensed Fu-tures”. With these installation we introduced a new mode of knowledge production in a Future Studies process; by making the scenarios three-dimensional and bringing the whole body into the process of relating to - and develop-ing the future. In other words, we manifested the notion that the future must be sensed and heartfelt.

In seminar three we created a mystery – the universe of Acorn Falls. By surrounding and immersing the whole seminar in a parallel universe, we insisted that the aesthetic experience and its poetic language should be intersected in the knowledge production at all times during the process of discussing and visualizing the future. In one of the lectures on the third seminar, biologist Carsten Rahbek stated that a key skill in the future will be the ability to move into and maneuver within the unknown. The metaphor of this particular ability was embodied by the participants as they walked deeper into the red forest of Acorn Falls. In seminar four, we invited the participants into the HQ of Future Mind Tours – the heart of our research of mind-sets and mindshifts. In the HQ we had prepared spaces in which the participants could see their visions of the future developed and expressed in different kinds of art and rituals. They were invited to co-create the archetypes of the new mindset, to shape their consciousness by giving it form through encounters with performers and to uphold the level of poetry by not touching the floor but rather walk on float-ing books. This performance installation was opened with the following words: “Now, go inspire and help us co-create new journeys into the future. The Time is Now!” These are examples of how the participants became part of a performance aimed at signifying the necessary mindset for creating the future now. We ended the second day of each seminar with a closing ritual. These rituals will always be about emphasizing the significance of the post-liminal phase. In different poetic ways, we asked the participants to reflect upon the process of the seminar, and what they wanted to take with them and integrate into their everyday lives. In the first seminar, we ended at the canal with a floating ensemble of visions for the future written on small paper boats. In the second, we planted a tree, ‘The first ring of In100Y’, in the third we blew our visions into the air encapsulated in ‘soap bubbles’ and in the fourth seminar, each participant lit a fire and stated their visions for a better future. Looking through ISSUES you will see many of these images created in the rites of ‘In 100 Years’. Some of these might serve as images that will inspire the mindset, which could be sustained through continuous participation in the rituals of the future.

Mankind’s well-being depends heavily on ecosystem services and erosion of nature is thus a threat to future generations. It is the responsibility of each generation to manage the use of nature and the environment, the extrac-tion of natural resources and the genuine saving in such a way that future generations’ standard of living is sustain-able. This is the core principle of sustainability. In the economic literature, two definitions which both focus on equality amongst generations are common. The classical Brundtland definition ‘Development that meets the needs of present generations without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ (1987) and the Asheim definition ‘A requirement to our generation to manage the resource base such that the average quality of life we ensure ourselves can potentially be shared by all future generations’ (1994). The question is, how much should each generation sacrifice to maintain or perhaps even improve future generations’ welfare? This is an ethical and moral question closely related to fairness between generations. The sustainability concept is a difficult one and consists of at least three components: Environmental sustain-ability, economic sustainability and social sustainability and the key question is: Does overall sustainability permit any trade-offs amongst the three goals? And a second key question is: Will economic growth based on technical progress and improved efficiency ‘solve’ the sustainability challenge? Or is economic growth the obstacle to ensuring sustainable development? The answer is strongly related to the degree of substi-tution between natural resources and man-made capital and to weak versus strong sustainability concepts. If we do not accept some degree of substitution between natural resources and between natural resources and other kinds of goods and services, then it will be very difficult to avoid a negative genuine saving. Extraction of non-renewable resources means less for future generations but investment in human capital and research capacity can be a substitute

for the decreasing stock of non-renewable resources – and future generations will be as well off as the present genera-tion. This is true if, and only if, some degree of substitution is possible and the weak sustainability concept is accepted. It often comes as a surprise to non-economists that economists do not believe that GDP and national account measures for consumption equate to wealth/happiness/well-being. Furthermore, economists know that an appropriate and good measure for wealth is difficult to find and that sustainability cannot be achieved through the free market. The fundamental problems are market failures and ‘bad’ governance and that we are facing the tragedy of the com-mons. This results in too much pollution, global warming and nature of low quality as well as in-optimal exploitation of non-renewable and renewable resources. Consequently, sustainability is threatened. At the same time, our knowl-edge of future generations’ preferences is unknown and the question is to what degree this should influence our be-havior. Uncertainties are fundamental and the adoption of the precautionary principle is one way to cope with future uncertainties regarding the preferences of future generations and the reaction of nature to major changes. The good news is clearly linked to the economists’ toolbox. Economic instruments are very powerful in man-aging sustainability. Taxes, user fees and transferable quota are all incentive-based instruments and the power of these instruments is supported by empirical evidence. But in some cases, direct command and control such as technical standards are preferable, or in combination with economic instruments. Some serious problems remain unresolved due to the fact that international coordination is difficult. No international institution has the responsibility and power to ensure and enforce actions needed to secure a sustainable development. The prisoner dilemma problem remains unresolved in worldwide politics and this is a threat to the well-being of future generations. Sustainabil-ity and international cooperation go hand in hand – and it is each generation’s responsibility.

Peder andersen, Professor in resource economics and

head of the environmental and natural resource eco-

nomics unit, institute of food and resource economics,

university of copenhagen. member of the core group of

the project in 100 years – starting now. see presenta-

tion from the first in100y-seminar www. in100y.dk/cph-

seminars/1-mind-the/from-the-seminar/

susTaInabIlITy – each genera-TIon’s responsIbIlITy



123issues #2: this way, Please!122 the transformative imPact of future mind tours comment

bIology Towards 2112: dealIng wITh The unknown

“we are the masters of our own fate”, says carsten rahbek, Professor at

the dePartment of biology and director of the center for macroecology

at the university of coPenhagen. meet him in this interview with steen

svendsen, futurist and Project manager of ‘in100years’.

by steen svendsen, Public futures

/ house of futures

It is a quiet autumn morning in Co-penhagen, and the year is 2011. I am sitting in a meeting room looking at a giant map of the world hanging on the wall, and it has the same mesmer-ising effect on me as looking into a fire place. Opposite me sits one of the leading Danish and internationally renowned researchers in biodiversity, Professor Carsten Rahbek. I have planned a number of key questions about nature and the relationship between nature and humans in the future. In a moment he will tell me that humans are in “an arm race with microbes”, and that we might be on the losing side. We drink coffee.

The esseNTIal QUesTION OF The FUTUre“We are doing a large-scale experi-ment with our own planet and that is global climate change. We know from the study of life on earth, that in the past 5 billion years, abrupt and signifi-cant climate change caused dramatic changes to the composition of life on earth. Right now, we are entering a phase of this kind, with mass extinc-tions of species and global destruction of ecosystems. So you could say that we are in a very exciting phase of hu-man history, because the fundamental processes that shaped life on earth as we know it – with which we have become very abundant, very successful and very rich – are now changing. The underlying system is transforming, and it will be interesting to see whether we

will be able to adapt and benefit from the new world that is to come.

We have to remember that climate change is already upon us, and when we go out and look at empirical phenom-ena, things are changing dramatically already. In the history of Earth, climate change wiped out 30-50 percent of spe-cies in the past. What is interesting now for humans, is the question of whether we are so technologically advanced that we no longer depend so extensively on natural ecosystems to sustain and feed us? Can we adapt to the changes in the ecosystem that have provided us with the resources and surfaces that we build our life upon, or can we overcome changes to the functioning of the eco-system with technology and develop-ment? That is a BIG question.”

arms raCe BeTWeeN mICrOBes aND hUmaNs“Research indicates that many of the occurrences of neglected and forgotten diseases could be directly linked to our heavy modification of ecosystems and climate change. We have always been a target for diseases, so the evolutionary arms race between microbes and hu-mans has always been in progress. One of the reasons that humans have been so successful until now is that we have been ahead of the arms race with the microbes that cause human diseases. The question is now, due to our very rapid and destructive changing of the underlying system and our experiences with the increased prevalence of many neglected and forgotten diseases, will we continue to stay ahead in this arms race?

Scientists from Harvard Medical School have stated that we are current-ly in a state of life, where microbes are renegotiating their deal with humans, and humans are on the losing side. So if you are looking for a doomsday per-spective, then it is probably not going to be the redistribution of resources or alternation of ecosystems. What could really have a devastating impact is to be on the losing side against diseases, and in the past decade or so we have seen the increasing impact of micro organisms on humans.”

NaTUre Is NOT sTaTIC“We like to view nature as static, and we like to preserve nature as we know it. This is a challenge, when the bio-physical factors impacting the world are changing. If you look at a lot of international conventions, e.g. habitat directives, the way that policy is put together is very much about preserv-ing things as they are. The question is whether that is a wise strategy, when we know that in the future things are not going to be the same. It is very challenging for humans to think out of the box and try to make a strategy for a world that we don’t know, so instead we try to focus on a strategy which aims at maintaining the world as we know it. This is a huge mental challenge for politicians and all deci-sion makers.” “ Over the past 20 to 30 years, Denmark has been in a transition, where we culture-wise are losing our connection with nature. My parents’ generation knew quite a few species out there, they knew some basic stuff.

My generation knows a little bit, the next generation knows ‘Pokémon’. That has an impact on the way we connect ourselves to the world around us. That is not how it is everywhere though, and if you go to Sweden they have not lost their contact and natural history knowledge to the same extent as we have. They still have their nature-cultural background, but here in Denmark the entire issue about climate change, nature, biodiversity and ecosystems services is linked and understood exclusively in terms of economic development. Broadly speaking, depending on how we cal-culate the value of the world around us, approximately half of the Gross National Product on earth is pro-duced by nature for ‘free’, so nature and ecosystems are worth a lot. The question is whether we recognize it and act upon it.”

We have DO Deal WITh The UNkNOWN “Sometimes we scientists are told that we are producing doomsday predic-tions, but we are just like everyone else. When we get the results, we look at them and think ‘Oh my God, that cannot be true,’ and we do a lot

of careful looking into the details to find out whether there is something wrong, because we want to be sure about the dramatic results.”

“As humans, we are brought up with the mental state of preserving and maintaining, but we probably need to change the way we think and we need to be able to think more in terms of how we can deal with the unknown – how we can actually do strategy planning for a future where biophysi-cal conditions are perhaps drastically different? We like to produce short-term plans over a few years with spe-cific targets, and we simply start from where we are now, basically assuming that the world is not changing. That is how we do our plans and policies. Right now politicians have a tremen-dous challenge. I think they are doing a very good job trying to encompass the fact that scientists are telling them that normal planning is not going to work, because the world is changing much more dramatically than we have yet realized. You have to start to pro-duce policies that are reasonable for a world that is going to change dramati-cally in 50 to 100 years’ time – and we cannot tell you exactly what is going to happen.”

We NeeD hUmaNITY aND arTIsTs“Our relationship with nature in the long run depends on the level of information, the debates and the discussions we have about nature and sustainability as a society. Whether we will continue to focus on material wealth or whether we are going to have a broader perspective on life. I think we are the masters of own fate. We have choices to make.

There are scientists pointing out problems, but that will not solve the problems. If you don’t have culture and arts – musicians, painters, writers etc. – to influence and enlighten people into thinking about our problems, you won’t have decisions that go in the right direction. I think that Denmark used to have a strong tradition of authors and thinkers focusing on nature and the relationship between humans and nature, but we kind of lost it in the past 15 years – so this is a challenge in Den-mark as well as many other societies.”

carsten rahbek has also been a

member of the core group of ‘in-

100years’. contact carsten rahbek at

[email protected] and steen svend-

sen at [email protected]

“roughly speaking, depending on how we calculate the value of the world around us, approximately half of the gross

national Product on earth consumed by humans is produced by nature for ‘free’ so nature and ecosystems are worth a

lot,” says carsten rahbek.



125issues #2: this way, Please!124 biology towards 2112biology towards 2112

martin manthorpe travelling with ‘future

mind tours’ at the in100y-seminars. from

the top left: listening besides joseph

bragdon (seminar 2), talking in the break

(seminar 1), visiting ‘Power of nature’

(seminar 2, sailing on the ‘the imaginary

tour’ (seminar 1) and visiting ‘the deliv-

ery room’ (seminar 4).

TIme wITh TIme

interview with martin manthorPe on his ParticiPation in the

seminar series “in100years”. martin manthorPe is director of

strategy and business develoPment in the construction com-

Pany ncc construction denmark.

by flemming wisler, nxt / house

of futures

Martin, what did you think when you received the invitation to participate in the project ‘In100Years’? - It was more about just doing it. To attend, even though it was not obvious what the outcome would be. Invitations of this kind are usually filtered out - but because this was stamped with all the right stamps, I turned up. Can you elaborate? What do you mean by “the right stamps?” - There was the right weightiness over the event and I was invited by people that I normally listen to. Would you not have come, otherwise? - Probably not, even though I am curious and work with strategy. But I prioritize how I use my time very strictly. And that would have been rather an ironic contradiction when the project was specifically about time. We like using time in the short term. But we often neglect the long term - and at the end of the day, that is what is most important.

We also speak a lot about downtime today. When we invited you to the seminars, we asked you to set aside many hours just to listen and talk to others. You were thrown into the meeting with peo-ple from disciplines other than business and entrepreneurs. Was there downtime? - Yes, there was a lot of wasted time, and I enjoyed it! It dawned on me that we have too little downtime in everyday life. We are almost always

inside a structured time which moves towards a higher order. This means that we constantly, consciously and unconsciously, filter disorder out; everything that is not immediately transparent to us. We are harmonizing our network and knowledge gather-ing and everything else we classify as wasted time. The danger is that we are continually confirmed in what we already believe.

In my own experience, that which one perceives to be a waste of time - or rather time-stress when you are in the middle of it - is often remembered afterwards as something else entirely; something that has left some strong impressions. You were asked to take a couple of days and half days off during the seminars – what was your experience? - I heartily agree. I think back on it as a bit of a sensory bombardment - not least, because I was challenged both emotionally and intellectually simultaneously. This was reinforced by the fact that it took place over two days for those of us who were in the workshop sessions. In fact, it became a time for reflection. Day one gave me lots of impressions and emotional input, not least from the performance section. There was time to sleep on it and then respond to it on the action-oriented day two.

Is the seminar format something you can use in other contexts? - Yes, we’ve actually taken up the idea in NCC on quite a large scale. Last year we introduced the idea of transforming our own headquarters to a campus for small businesses and

students. We introduced a platform for knowledge sharing in the industry across the board, which we call Co-Create Construction. Can you tell me more about it? - The idea is to bring people together across the fields of expertise that they are immersed in daily and which, to some extent, help to stop develop-ment. I come from an industry that has some important keys when it comes to solving the major sustain-ability challenges of the future. More than 40 percent of our energy goes towards the heating or cooling of buildings! At the same time it is also from our industry that many of the current climatic problems will have to be solved. We have to build large construction and drainage projects to deter and prevent the consequences of extreme rain and stronger winds and flooding.

How does it work in practice? - We have invited people to a number of conferences and seminars where we have combined lectures with workshops, and subsequently organ-ized networks via a web community. Next step is to build a large group of students that we assign to the project. We challenge the network with new interdisciplinary innovation projects which include collaboration with the local knowledge network Gate21. In April we will be holding the Danish finals in the global competition for top students - Global Management Challenge which is the world’s larg-est case competition in Strategy & Management.

Do you think that the “Project in-100Years” can become an active network in the same way as Co-create Construc-tion? - There is no doubt that the kind of reflection and concrete working network that this project is a demon-stration of can continue its work, if the participants are brought together regularly. Personally, I have already arranged a meeting with three of the participants from the seminar with whom I will discuss futures. In addition to this, my own strategy work has entered into a much wider perspective.

Have you actually gained a different relationship to time? - I have certainly realized that the time that lies ahead of us is some-thing one can relate to far more actively than I might have been used to. It’s been incredibly exciting to work with Futures research. The sce-nario work and, not least, the idea of backcasting was quite an eye opener. It is as if we have a tendency to drift with time, rather than actively trying

to manage our own development in a desired direction. In each case, we have trouble thinking further ahead than a couple of years, at the most.

What has made the greatest impression on you? How can you use this knowledge in your work as a strategist for a private company? - It has gotten me to think about sus-tainability in a new way. If it takes na-ture 10,000 years to form a landscape that we can change in a few months, it sets things in perspective. There has to be a self-policing amongst those of us who have the responsibility. It is one thing to work out of ignorance or sheer survival. It is quite another thing if you are aware of the conse-quences for future generations. I have been given a perspective of the finite-ness of the earth with regard to space and resources and this, therefore, compels great respect for what we are working with on a daily basis.

Has it left a mark on NCC in practice? - We are a large group and we work with corporate governance on many

levels within the company. Every-thing, therefore, formed a synthesis for me when our Swedish CEO in-dependently of my own journey with ‘In100Years’ last year defined NCC as a community based system based on responsibility and sustainability. Now I have gained some tools that work specifically with regard to this vision.

Thank you for the interview and your commitment to the project, Martin! - It was my pleasure. I’m looking forward to continuing the journey!

Flemming Wisler is director of the

communications company Nxt and

partner in House of Futures. flemming@

houseoffutures.dk



127issues #2: this way, Please!126 time with timetime with time

ole jensen, dr.theol, former Professor at university of

copenhagen and member of the danish ethical coun-

cil. author of several books, most recently På kant med

klodens klima. Om behovet for et ændret natursyn (2011).

a respecTful vIew of naTure

Everyone wants to speed up growth. Very few take into con-sideration the fact that this will not work in the long term. It is simple logic that exponential growth cannot continue indefinitely. With a modest 2.1 % annual growth in GDP, which was the Danish average for a period of several years, production and consumption would multiply eight-fold over the period of a century (and already be 1.5 times what it is now in 20 years time – in 500 years, 32.574 times)! That is precisely why growth must be made sustainable, some may say. But this comes with a price tag. Globally, we are using 1/3 more of the planet than is sustainable. If this is to be reduced with a continued growth of 2.1%, then the environmental burden of production and consumption in 100 years must only be 8% of what it would otherwise be (in 20 years 44% and in 500 years 0.002%)! Sustain-ability must – viewed in the perspective of a century – be disconnected from the notion of continued macroeconomic exponential growth. My suggestion is: Let’s talk about the transition to sustainable development instead! This, in con-trast, cannot be given too much attention or go too quickly. But are we ready? Ready to adapt? Not at all. One very important thing prevents this: The view of nature that created our modern development! It reads: Nature is here for the sake of mankind, and we are allowed to use it in whatever way we can get away with. It is our property. And it is all about get-ting it under our control. This underlies pretty much every-thing that societies and individuals undertake, even though very few people are conscious of it. It is accepted wisdom. Even fewer can see that this is actually brutal. Just one exam-ple: Species extermination is currently happening between 100 to 1000 times as quickly as “natural species extinction”! Prior to industrialization, the man-nature relationship was hugely in nature’s favor, and man’s brutality had only limited, local adverse effects. But this has changed sud-denly. We have become so powerful that we can disrupt the basic elements – the biosphere, the climate and species diversity. This is something that we have only just realized and we have not yet drawn any conclusions from it – in-cluding the need to adjust our view of nature.

Yes, but is sustainable development not precisely this kind of adjustment? No, not according to the way that sustain-ability has been defined up until now. Certainly, it does imply a consideration for what nature can bear, but only because humans will suffer otherwise. The motive is species-selfish. It is a bit like the wise slave-owner. He does not whip the slave because it will make him unable to work for two days, but he still regards him as his property. With regard to nature, we are still only thinking in terms of mastery when we discuss sustainability. We must establish a respect for nature for its own sake within the concept of sustainability. Why? Because this pure self-interest, this pure species-selfishness, is not motivation enough to adapt sufficiently. Otherwise we would have done this a long time ago because we are, after all, busy digging our own graves. But egotism and self-interest can only encourage conquest and the exercise of power. And somewhere deep inside each of us we know that if there is nothing more to life than that, then it is empty, so why bother? More is needed - feelings. Feelings have their own particular objectivity. Only feelings, not reason, are able to grasp the preciousness and irreplaceability of the spe-cies. They possess a uniqueness of their own. Or the rain forests! Or the biosphere around “the blue planet”, unique amongst billions. “An almighty series of tangible miracles is the world, a fountain of joy” - according to Danish poet Johannes V. Jensen. Aesthetic perception contains it. Our religious tradition used the term “the work of creation”. The conquest of nature must be balanced by a sense of the vulnerable and fragile – of the shameful irreversible destruction, which our little handful of arrogant genera-tions has inflicted on life forms that have taken billions of years to develop. Only feelings will motivate gentleness, compassion, shame in life – respect. We must rediscover a respect-ful view of nature, in our way of life and in ethics, and we must invent an economy which includes this kind of respect. Otherwise the battle will be lost in 100 years.

sensIng The fuTure

at the four in100y-seminars, ParticiPants were invited to exPlore and engage in a holistic form

of visioning and knowledge Production through tailor-made Performance installations. meet

three of the ParticiPants in these selected interviews and read about their exPeriences with the

Playful and exPerimental seminar designs.

by inga gerner nielsen,


The journey of ‘In 100 Years – Start-ing Now’ took the Reisende on time travels through the canals of Copen-hagen year 2112, down sensuous walks through future scenarios as perfor-mance installations, into mysterious explorations of imaginary cities and laboratories in the Future Mind Tours Headquarters.

What was going through the minds of these participants as they moved? Which reflections were acti-vated along the way? Two of the most important findings extracted from the performance action research of In100Y, is that travelling with Future Mind Tours establishes a common ground for any group of people, and requires and strengthens an open mind, something everyone agrees on, is vital when travelling far into the inner landscape of the future.

We now invite you dear reader, to become a Reisende by exploring some of these moments through the eyes and reflections of chosen semi-nar participants, their descriptions condensed and transformed into small

travelogues, becoming vessels to carry you into the otherwise unknown ter-ritories of In100Years.

mIChael – aN exPerIeNCeD reIseNDeThe journeys of ‘In 100 Years – Start-ing Now’ began on a Wednesday morning at a dock on the outskirts of Copenhagen. The location was unfa-miliar to many of the seminar partici-pants, and some had trouble finding it. Arriving at last, they were met by creature-like people dressed in black organza, silvery veils and tagged with black ink signaling their imaginary origin. The participants would soon get to know these people as the agents of Future Mind Tours. Boarding the boat, the participants or ‘Reisende’, started their journey. Together we sailed into the grey waters and foggy air of that spring morning in June 2011 on an Imaginary Tour of Copenhagen trans-formed into sites of year 2112.

The Reisende, Michael Stubberup, was pleased. When he had first been invited to participate in the seminar project, he imagined that the scale would be expansive, something which was confirmed right away. Look-

ing around at his fellow Reisende, Michael suspected that a lot of them were thinking, ‘When are we going to do what we’re actually here for?’ The obvious opening of a seminar would have been to find ones seat on loca-tion, listen to lectures, take notes, meet up with colleagues and make new acquaintances during the breaks. However, Michael felt that this first journey was exactly what was needed - Human beings getting together, leaping into new landscapes, where fresh approaches could be fostered.

Having worked with similar pro-cesses for many years, Michael would advise other Reisende to activate a form of self-awareness which would allow them to notice and welcome their own resistance during the journey – a posi-tion from which they could challenge their preconceptions and potentially evolve. The agents were presenting simi-lar guidelines, pointing the Reisende to the purpose of the journey: “In order for our agents to take you on an intense tour into your mind, we need to get rid of the barriers standing in the way of your visions … Do not get fixated on just one future. We are now approaching the first image of 2112 ...”

action & Performance research

action research refers to experimental qualitative research,

which started within the field of educational studies and the

social sciences. at its simplest, it is a form of self-reflective

inquiry undertaken by the participants to improve their un-

derstanding of a certain practice and the situation in which

the practice is carried out.

as part of the action research of the project ‘in100years’,

we have developed methods specifically designed to docu-

ment the subjective experience of the performance. we build

in striking points during the journeys where the participants are

invited to give different kinds of poetic statements representing

their experience in the moment. we also conduct follow-up

interviews, guiding former participants into revisiting their

memory of the seminar, going back in time and telling the

story of their journey. conducting these qualitative interviews

in our action research is part of reopening the space in which

we can explore the future landscapes opened between par-

ticipants, performers and the different rooms and places the

journeys take us into.



129issues #2: this way, Please!128 sensing the futurecomment

michael stubberuP, ceo synergaia and member of the board of vækstcenteret. Peder agger (with his glasses in the middle and his cap to the right), Prof.em. biology, former head of the danish coun-

cil of ethics and danish nature council, chairman of Planning committee in the danish society for nature conservation.

And so, the Reisende sailed through five institutional milestones transformed into new sites of the future: the milestones of politics, religion, economy, art and the social, before they entered their next destina-tion: the check-in gates. Here, they were given a passport and were now prepared to enter ‘The Red Room’, the heart of the seminar, where the lectures, that some had so anxiously been waiting for, were presented.

The second time Michael heard the voice of Future Mind Tours, was on the second seminar of ‘In 100 Years – Starting Now’, sitting in an older auditorium, his eyes were following the silhouette of an agent walking into a landscape of limestone, clear blue water and white clay. This was the slot in the seminar program, which Michael was looking forward to the most; he was interested in experiencing the dynamics between the academic and the artistic process in the workshops. Immers-ing himself into the dreamlike cosmic atmosphere of the instruction video, he sensed the universe of Future Mind Tours to be slightly threatening; yet becoming more tangible, as he con-nected the film instructions to the two white pavilions he had passed in the yard earlier that morning. It was only when he entered the second of the two installations called ‘Two Sensed Futures’ that he realized how different the two scenarios were at their core.

Upon entering the first pavilion, a future scenario transformed into a performance-installation, he was

shown to his seat. He had entered ‘Man-made World’. Two groups of Reisende were sitting opposite each other. A visual web of wires drawing lines and sculpting the room drew his attention to the geometric structure of the social performance design. It reminded Michael of a sort of a green-house. Almost a flying saucer. There was a pen hanging right in front him, functionally marking each individual’s responsibility to practice their citizen-ship and contribute with sensible solu-tions to a Man-Made World.

A bell of three clear tones rang and the voice of an agent of Future Mind Tours said: ”If this is your first Sensed Future, take a moment. Breathe. Listen to the sounds of a Man-Made World.” To his own surprise, he found himself en-tering into a completely different state of mind just minutes after he had en-tered the live scenario. It became very easy for him to follow the instructions. Instead of expecting to see a theater performance played out in front of him, he focused and listened to what was going on within himself. Sitting there in the middle of all the sounds of mumbling voices coming from distant democratic assemblies and codes being typed into the invisible hollow, yet soft sound of a machine, Michael noticed a heightened alertness, a kind of ac-celeration of emotion.

Entering his second sensed future, ‘Power of Nature’, he felt a different kind of intensity. The room was intru-sive. He found himself amongst split mechanical parts, green plants, insects

and fur. Images of the temples he had once visited in Mexico came to mind. Ruins of a culture, which plants had crept around and inside of. Two women were crawling on the floor. Looking into the eyes of one of the women, Mi-chael found himself mesmerized, deeply touched by the reflection of the part of himself that sometimes wondered what it would be like if he actually let everything go – if he gave in to a self-organizing life-system like the one created in this atmosphere?

Entering into the subsequent dialogues, the experiences of the two sensed futures led to lively conversa-tions about the barriers of change, which Michael believes to be our mindset. In his opinion, staging the reality of an event like ‘In100Years’ in which the senses are valued as much as the intellectual content, is a key element in removing the barriers of the current mindset.

PeDer – a reIseNDe revIsITINg OlD DreamsAt the third In100Y-seminar, we moved out into the forest, into the Mystery of Acorn Falls. Moving the Reisende north of the city into a universe, in which they could start exploring their personal desires and ideas, opening a space where a seem-ingly strange and poetic imagery could find its way into the seminar dialogues at any time.

The beginning of the story of their journey in Acorn Falls had already been written before they arrived: “On

a misty day in autumn, a group gathered to solve a mystery. The Mystery of Acorn Falls. On this day, the wind stroked the trees in such a way that most of them knew that this would be a significant event. The wind seemed to enlarge the dimension of the area, and questions circled repeatedly in the air: “Why are we here? What brought you here?”

Listening to the metallic noises from the soundscape of the Future Mind Tours instruction video, Peder Agger thought of the associations with the world of ‘Stalker’, a film by the Russian director Andrei Tarkovsky. Many years had passed since he had last seen the film, but he remembered the image of a man wandering through a world of empty sewage pools, look-ing for fragments of the old life that had almost vanished completely under moss and ferns. Peder welcomed what he felt to be a dystopian atmosphere. To him, it was the right place to start looking for new futures. He feels that far too many visions of the future are generally like the graphic illustrations of new architecture, picturing places where the sun never retreats behind the grey of stormy clouds. Places, where chronically happy people walk in scenery of un-natural nature. In Acorn Falls, he would soon unlock the lost memories and visions that had truly fueled his actions in life. Imagery that had been powerful, inspiring and anything but pleasant.

At the threshold of entering deeper into Acorn Falls, Peder was handed a transparent map, making visible

the invisible sights of the place. He thought it best to walk alone. On his way to see what the map designated as ’The Machinery’ he saw a woman in an indigo jacket balancing on a tree trunk singing old love songs to other Reisende. To her left was an open field for lumber work. Around the field, Peder noticed small hourglasses lying around in the mud, and in the middle was an old door with a freshly carved poem by William Blake: ‘Eternity is in love with the productions of time’. Peder looked up when he heard a knocking from the inside of a window. A woman with a white hat waved at him, signaling to him to come into ’The Hour Glass Inn’ – a place Peder recognized to be a traditional bar for lumberjacks. The woman introduced herself as Pam and told him that she collected and studied significant events. “This is what we do in Acorn Falls; opening up into the mystery of what makes an acorn fall”, she said. It didn’t take long before she let him to share a childhood memory. Peder saw himself walking in the forest with his father, stopping to watch a bird hunt-ing for a mouse. Then, an old dream suddenly came to mind. A dream, that had made him realize he had to make a difficult, but necessary change to his love life. He was there again in his dream, dancing in a circle of fire.

Pam smiled as she wrote down his story and the notes, she intended to connect with her newest findings. On the fifth page of her book, it read: ‘A specific moment in time and space

where everything changes. Where the life path of that character is turned upside down. A moment of clarity. A striking point. A significant event. So prior to this day, life has passed like sand running through an hourglass, such are the days of our lives, but then it happens, that moment that changes everything’. Walking out of the Hour Glass Inn, Peder was astonished and thrilled that meeting a stranger in a place like Acorn Falls had made him recall such specific memories and per-sonal dreams. He hoped that his fellow Reisende had had similar experiences in the other parts of Acorn Falls which were still unknown to him.

On the last part of his journey through the woods, he passed by another open field where two agents were conducting an unusual method of inquiry, once discovered in a dream by a fellow special agent. Peder liked this playful method. He thought that in times of great uncertainty, we need alternative measures like asking the hand throwing a rock to give us an answer to a question, or finding other ways of working with the dynamics of the mind in the gaps between con-scious and unconscious states. During difficult times, Peder had occasionally felt he was left with no other option than to trust his intuition. This is also why he appreciates the approaches employed in ‘In100Years’ – and how these types of journeys and experi-ments dissolve boundaries and cat-egories, a necessary process if we are to anticipate the future.



131issues #2: this way, Please!130 sensing the future sensing the future

kareN – a BalaNCINg reIseNDeThe fourth and final In100Y-seminar took place in January 2012. As agents of Future Mind Tours, we had de-cided to invite the participants into our headquarters at Carlsberg Academy, former residence of Nobel Prize winner Niels Bohr, who had held the scientific ‘Copenhagen Conferences,’ which had no programs and included theater per-formances, at this location back in 1929.

Finding her way to the hidden mansion of the headquarters, Karen Blincoe recognized the gratifying feeling of disorientation that she had felt when coming to the docks on the first journey into ‘In100Years’. It had made her summon up her intuition and sharpened her senses, and Karen suggests that new Reisende come with an open mind. They should be ready to enjoy and to contribute. Listen-ing to a Future Mind Tour lecture on rituals and root-metaphors in a mind shift, Karen recognized many of the points made about the potential power of rituals. She has had a lot of experi-ence with different kinds of rituals and recognized the ritual structures and states they created on the journeys of the In100Y-seminars. From journey to journey she has observed how other Reisende have become more and more accustomed to and excited about the different modes of knowledge produc-tion. The more experienced Reisende took pleasure in the thrill of knowing that they would never know what to expect… Even sitting and thinking about all the things that might happen

at any moment, was one of the things that opened her mind.

After the lecture, Karen went into the office of Future Mind Tours, where books were lying on the floor. “Be careful not to fall out of poetry”, an agent said, and Karen followed the instructions, stepping lightly onto the books. She got totally absorbed in the game and found a sort of symmetry, balancing and aligning her steps ac-cording to the movements of the other people in the room. She was with the others and at the same time in her own world. She was walking on water. Floating.

Curious to see the rest of the rooms in the headquarters, she walked on down the halls into ‘The Delivery’. In the old living room, people were now sitting in smaller groups engaged in discussions. In the middle of a room, an agent in white fur was consulting an oracle. Putting her hand into the heart of the oracle, Karen felt as if she was being submerged into a deep ocean. Her question related to her new field of research in sustainability utopias.

Afterwards, she was standing in front of an integral cross of inner and outer, top-down and bottom-up fields of work (see p. xx), where Reisende were invited to place a black dot in the quadrant, they thought their work was, and a red dot where they thought the focus of future of sustainability should be. She put her black dot on top of her red and thought: ‘This is the mind shift! Instead of longing to be somewhere else, we should be working where we

want to be and belief will contribute to the creation of a sustainable future’.

Karen soon followed the sound of a sort of Indian fusion of electronic music into the ‘Conscious Construc-tion Site.’ The sound came from DJ Hvad’s Indian drone machines and other sound devices on a set placed between ancient statues and new movable pillars of black, white and red boxes. At each pillar stood Future Mind Tour agents ready to use differ-ent art forms to shape spaces in which the Reisende could see and shape their own ideas about future mindsets transformed and expressed in gestures of sound, imagery and movements.

The music was loud, but Karen felt drawn to it. After listening intensely to music for a while, she felt inspired to create a collage. Another Reisende switched the boxes around constantly. Karen did not feel disturbed by it, but played along, cutting out pictures of nature and putting them onto other Reisende’s collages on the boxes, which were now becoming a collec-tive, moving image. Again, Karen found a sort of balance between her inner desire and the presence of other people. Perhaps because there were so many people around her, she did not paste any people into the collage. She was drawn to images of trees, faunas, colors, skies and animals. Elements of nature she could not live without. Without nature, people’s existence would be very fragile. Karen felt and saw her love for nature in her imagery. Felt how it gave her strength and

karen blincoe (to the left and the right) is director of icis and chairman of danish designers. she has also

been a member of the core group of in100y (see p. 31-32)

knowledge and connected her with her intui-tion and her spirituality.

Agent Armstrong had come from a pillar of movement, absorbed the nature of Karen’s col-lages and then transformed them into a dance of living, circular, spiral movement, reflecting her work. Feeling the movement together, the agent and Karen then talked about how nothing in nature is static, how everything is circular and never ends anywhere. It is a constant change that never comes back to the same point, but always moves into something new, and in these movements, always finds its balance.

Later, when Karen walked back into the Conscious Construction Site for a moment, she felt terrified when she saw that many of the boxes with her images had been moved around. But then she realized that this was in fact exactly what her work, imagery and choreogra-phy in the headquarters had been all about; the fluid, ever-changing flow. Experiencing how ideas may change all the time, and that you cannot expect them or anything else to stay the same forever. You have to become fluid yourself. Embodying the fluidity in a liminal space like this, once again connected Karen with her strong sense of actually anticipating a more bal-anced future – in many respects.

TrIBUTeStaging the qualitative interviews with partici-pants as stories of In100 Years is inspired by the work of performance artist and scholar in Per-formance Studies, Anna Deavera Smith, who turns interview texts into scripts and analyzes them by performing them on stage. Smith in-troduced herself to the people she interviewed as follows: “If you give me an hour of your time, I’ll invite you to see your self performed” And thank you, dear Reisende, for open-ing your minds and taking this ride into the unknown with us. It has been very inspiring for us to see what was in there, and perhaps we will meet again? Please keep your hearts open and ready to create more journeys with us in the Future.

Inga Gerner Nielsen is a partner in the perfor-

mance agency Fiction Pimps and House of Fu-

tures and is currently completing her Masters

in Cultural Studies. [email protected]

To me “In100years” Is....

... a wonderful beginning.

... mind blowing.

... a very important brick in the wall leading to future sustainability for the planet.

... very chaotic to think about.

... thought provocating,

stimulating and inspiring.

... an ambitious, necessary project that should be continued.

... the group of people we have waited for.

at every seminar the participants have been asked to fin-

ish the sentence: to me “in100y” is ... this is a selection

of the full sentences from the four in100y-seminars.



133issues #2: this way, Please!132 sensing the future

IT’s our fuTure, love!

all of us are fuelled by the desire to change

for the better, but also held back by the

agenda of today; survive and keep business

as usual going. our common future is literally

on fire. come together and ‘be beautiful in

spirit’!

Pictures from the fourth In100Y-seminar:

‘Flames’, ‘The Office’, ‘Conscious Construc-

tion Site’, ‘Roundtable of Fire and Commit-

ment’, view to the Winter Garden, ‘Round-

table of Fire and Commitment’, Carlsberg

Academy, 18-19 January, 2012.

mInds on fIre!

our laboratory. we have travelled through time over

water, explored the future images and visited the good

people of ‘acorn falls’. this time we bid you a flaming

welcome into the ignited halls and rooms of our labora-

tory, the future mind tours copenhagen head quarters.

Please prepare your whole being, hold your minds fire, as

we will be shaping new futures. this is a time of alchemy,

and in this intersection of different modes of knowledge

production, we hope to offer a process in which you

will contribute and sense your own visions and styles of

thought in the flames of their expression. it’s our future.

love – minds on fire!

Eternity is in love with the productions of times.

– william blake

TasTe The new mIndseT

how can cultural events helP to shaPe sustainable societies of tomorrow?

do we see signs indicating a new mindset? meet some of the cultural en-

trePreneurs of the urban scene of coPenhagen.

by madeleine kate mcgowan,


It is in the way he places himself in the room, it is in the way the roads are drawn. It is in the way the lights are located, it is in the way the coffee is served. It is in the tiniest detail and in the grandest pattern – our mindset, that inner place we spring from, the color which shapes our world. A mindset, also known as a para-digm, a set of assumptions, methods or systems held by one person or a group of people which is so es-tablished that it creates a powerful incentive to continue to implement or accept prior actions, choices or methods. So sometimes we have to stop for a moment, look at ourselves in the world, and look at the world working on us. What is our mindset? How does our mindset manifest itself in our everyday lives? To actually start transforming this world into a sustainable world of tomorrow, we need to truly understand the mindset we are a part of and thereby start re-articulating it into the mindset of the new. The mindset we work from can be difficult to be conscious of, as it often consists of qualities that we take for granted and uphold as the only way of being and acting in the world. At every stage of life, the collective mindset unfolds itself every day, as a grand pattern, it is sown and blooms in each of us. So how do we go about this? How do we start shaping, acting and recognizing this new mindset?

reaChINg OUTDuring the In100Y-seminars, it became clear that there was a strong

sense of need for a shift of mindset in the world. But as easy as it is to articulate a need for a shift, it is just as difficult to articulate the specific qualities of the new mindset. We took the first steps on the journey of ‘In100 Years’, but the journey has only just begun. As a part of the journey onward, I felt inspired to start asking questions, researching and motivat-ing one of my local communities, the music and cultural scene of Copenha-gen, to reflect upon the new mind-set. Just as we in House of Futures designed the In100Y-seminars to be intertwined with the arts, I find it interesting to cast light on how cultural events can help to shape the sustainable societies of tomorrow. I started calling people who seemed to me to be some of the key shapers, players and visionaries of the urban scene, all representing different ways of shaping the city through culture. The main questions in my heart and on my mind were: Do we see signs indicating a new mindset? How will musicians, venues, artists and creatives manifest the new mindset? How is this mindset facilitated and how is it maintained? I wasn’t really expecting any clear answers, only pointers to-wards the shadows of what is to come. And at the same time, hoping to move the reflections from ‘In100Years’ onto the streets of my city.

The CUlTUral eNTrePreNeUrsThrough the chilly but sunny streets, I found my way to home-cooked In-dian food, milk in a glass and strong incense at Esben Weile Kjær’s secret hiding place on Nørrebro. To me, Esben represents a new generation

of spirited youth with a strong light to manifest, so I was eager to let him share his thoughts. As we dived into the reflections about a new mindset, he underlined that: “Over the last couple of years, I’ve picked up a stronger sense and need in my environment, for a deeper reflection about the way we deal with cultural events in general. I believe that we, as cultural entrepreneurs, have a huge responsibility, because we are shapers of other peoples’ future movements. We must be vi-sionaries on behalf of the city we are a part of. In the past, it wasn’t cool to be a visionary with an attitude. People were sort of ‘Could you cool it down a bit’, but I think its chang-ing now. We must dare to do things that seem impossible, and I think reflection on a deeper level should replace consumer culture.” At the beginning of 2012, Esben released a text on the blog ‘I Do Art’, which inspired many people to start polishing their sense of where they were going: “I hope that all entre-preneurs, large as well as small and across boundaries, will be capable of elevating themselves above the at times assertive urban environment, and view cultural events and the world in general in a larger perspec-tive. Where do we want to go? And how do we get there? Not only as single individuals or organizations but also as a unified movement.“ As a part of the new mindset, Esben acknowledges the importance of the courage to take social responsi-bility: “When you are an entrepreneur creating cultural events, you are also a creator of social communities, which

esben weile kjær, founder of mejlgade for mangfoldighed. ‘at a very young age i chose to take responsibility and by

doing so, created the city of my dreams through cultural events. i choose to believe instead of fearing. i believe in diy and

learning by doing with all of my heart!’, says esben.

carla cammilla hjort, ceo art rebels. “i´ve always been a dreamer and i´ve been blessed with the ability to turn my

dreams into reality. i overcome fears and challenge myself every day. the unknown inspires me. the known comforts me.

every day is a new beginning full of potential and possibilities. when i stay present i see these! says carla.

Pho

to: m

atias jen

senPh

oto

: søren

m. o

sgo

od



143issues #2: this way, Please!142 taste the new mindsettaste the new mindset

come to have their own sets of moral codes. If you create events where the whole focus is on drinking and sense-less techno, then that will manifest in the movements in the community you create. Instead, we need to raise the level of reflection and start ex-perimenting with new event designs. When you have reached a point where you have a strong influence and voice, then it’s extremely important that you are conscious of the place you act from in the world. If you are not conscious of this, then what you activate has no clear direction and you have no control over the outcome. “ Carla Camilla Hjort, CEO at Art Rebels, agrees: ”If we can get more and more artists to take a position and use the abilities that they have to communicate and get people to reflect and interact, then it will legitimize culture in relation to the mindshift and the responsibility that culture ought to take. The pace today and consumer culture means that art and cultural events have become more and more superficial.”

QUalITIes OF The NeW mINDseT On a street corner in the old French quarter of the city, over a coffee and several cigarettes, I ask Carla, which qualities she holds important as part of the new mindset. ‘It is important that we start to truly acknowledge spirituality in our approach to business. We are all intertwined, so even though I believe in the power of the individual, I am conscious at the same that we are a part of each other and the fact that we constant-ly affect one another. This is impor-tant to acknowledge. We are so used to experiencing ourselves as separate from everything else, because we know our bodies are separate enti-ties, but truly we are all just a part of this mass of energy – one big bowl of energy soup.’ When I push her to be even more specific, she points me down a new al-ley: “Empathy. Willpower. You could

also say your inner warrior. The ability to live in an era of extreme change requires your inner warrior, and it requires you to take full responsibility for your life. In today’s society there’s a pill for every ill, but we need to put this mentality behind us and take full responsibility for ourselves and each other. We don’t have the clarity to take responsibility for others before we do it for ourselves.” Carla is very focused on how to get cultural creatives to think in sus-tainable business. “I know how chal-lenging it is. To me, sustainability is about creating products and services, which make sense for value in the world, at the same time as generat-ing an economy that you can live off. You just have to use your capital to do good in the world! I believe that capi-talism and particularly in the creative branches and environments, is seen as something ugly and frightening – as something that we need to get as far away as possible from. This mentality has meant that creatives are generally really bad businessmen, and I think there needs to be quantum leap in this thought process. One should not be worried about selling out or being the bad guy just because one starts to earn money – as long as one does not accumulate money, but passes it on, so that it can continue to create value in the world.” “There is a tendency for us to identify with what we are, what we do, who we are married to, who our family is etc. This is dangerous, because you cannot always make decisions based on our own inner truth. Instead, we need to accept that even if you lose everything, you will still be a happy and satisfied human being because you are alive. All too often, we gather in groups that we feel share our values or tastes, but it is conceivable that we may be able to group ourselves more in relation to some new rituals. Cultural events can support a mindshift if we think the interdisciplinary in. Putting people

with different qualities and compe-tencies together makes a difference in relation to innovative concept development. Taking people who do not obviously match each other and gathering them into concept development groups will, I believe, become more and more relevant.” Jakob Fuglsang from CO2 E-Race and The Danish Cultural Institute – and also a participant of the In100Y-seminars – is sure about the need for a mind shift. He describes the specific qualities of the new mindset as follows: “Essentially, it is about awareness and believing that you create your own reality. This reality we are in, we have chosen what we are experiencing, so if we choose to have a mindshift we will have it, if we choose to have a posi-tive mind-shift we will have that. All the projections we are seeing are dis-asters. If we start projecting the posi-tive, then the world will be positive, and if we show solutions there will be solutions. It’s a shift of believing that this is possible, we have to move away from believing that we can’t make a difference. Individuals have a hard time making the shift, because people need positive messages and positive leaders. Right now what we are being told is that there is no future, everything is going down, so we need new and positive visions.”

Madeleine Kate McGowan is a per-

formance artist, musician and partner

in Fiction Pimps and House of Futures.

She also has a BA in visual communi-

cation. Contact her at madeleinekate@

houseoffutures.dk

camilla bjerre, cand.scient. landscape management

and member of the core group of the project in 100

years – starting now.

be The change!

We all use the Earth’s resources. We start the day with a bath, eat a variety of foods both from local and global sources, sit on chairs made of wood and use electronic equipment. This high consumption of resources affects our nature, ecosystems, biodiversity and the environ-ment. Not just locally, but worldwide. The immediate effect is a reduction in species and resources. Long term, the consequences are far more serious: the biodiversity of the planet and its ecosystems could be so strained that it may not recover in the foreseeable future and we may lose irreplaceable resources - and thus the lifestyle that we enjoy today. The goal is a sustainable society. The means to achiev-ing this goal lies in all of us, as a society. It is crucial that we know and understand that it is we who must decide how we want to use the planet’s resources in the future. It is important that each and every person and family understands what a big difference their daily choices really make, directly as well as indirectly. We must understand that we directly affect the planet’s resources every time we use, for example, water or fabric conditioner. We also affect the resources of the planet indirectly because we consume goods that are produced by others. In natu-ral and environmental terms, it means that we, via our consumption, actually dictate how the world is managed. Through our daily consumption and behavior, we have an opportunity to change our actions, and in the long term it is our only chance for creating a mindshift and thereby better conditions for the planet that we all live on. The sustainable society requires a long-term sustain-able approach to our use of the planet’s resources and a protection of biodiversity and ecosystems. That is why a sustainable use of resources needs to start with changes

in attitudes and behavior. Awareness is what takes us from knowledge to action, and awareness can be created through different kinds of networks, education and com-munications which create debate and understanding. In this way, a new agenda is created where we not only iden-tify problems, but also contribute towards changing the causes of them. In this way, we not only change ourselves and the current situation, but also the coming generations’ understanding and use of the planet. Let us start right here and now. Let your sustainable attitude and not least your actions have an affect on your surroundings. Show others that you are living sustainably, with environmentally friendly transport, recycling and sorting, a productive kitchen garden, renewable energy and sustainable food consumption. Spread the good word by your own good example, and let us all be proud participants in a generation which will change the strained current circumstances of nature, the ecosystem, and the environment.



145issues #2: this way, Please!144 taste the new mindset comment

renewal Through “commonalITy communITIes”

The community is on its way back onto the agenda. After decades of increasing self-sufficiency and selfishness, we have once again become aware that it pays to stand together to deal with life’s tasks. That is why all the energy resources on the Danish island of Samsø are also owned by the islanders. Our vision is that we can live 100 percent self-sufficiently based exclusively on renewable energy. A ‘commonality community’ is a community of people who manage something shared together, i.e. a common resource such as wind energy. In ‘commonalities’ people share the responsibility for each other and our common planet.

CreaTe YOUr OWN sUsTaINaBle BUsINessI, Malene, moved to the island a long time ago because I longed for a community and to know where my food came from. Thus, at the age of 21 I dropped the traditional educa-tional system even though my parents were shocked, to say the least. I created a creative plan and platform for myself. The first output was a beautiful little book where I described what I thought education was. Today I call it ‘inducation.’ I dreamed of learning about the new and the old in one and the same movement; and in the big city I could not survive. I lost my concentration and passion because the pace, the sounds and the images were fleeting. It felt as if I was expe-riencing much the same thing over and over again - without a break. I knew that by moving to an island my comfort zone would be challenged on many crucial levels and I also knew that the stimuli from the country instead of the city would do me good and make sense to me. I needed to learn to survive and be in control of my own household. What could I learn from people out in the countryside with regard to ‘housekeeping’? Nothing! They knew noth-

ing about ecology, i.e. housekeeping and thus I was just a total burden on nature - even in the countryside. Because I was looking for renewal, a thought struck me: How does one summon up the courage to admit that one knows nothing? That question became a point of reference for me and one of my most important ‘drivers’ in co-creating a more ecological way of life. And new questions came to me: How can you live sustainably? Perhaps I can do it by creating my own sustainable business? I personally invested nearly 100,000 Euros in the proj-ect ‘Samsø as Denmark’s renewable energy island’. I have 30 shares in the local rural windmills and I have solar pan-els and a “stoker” boiler, which have resulted in an annual saving of 1000 Euros in a 270 m2 house. Another of my major investments was to write the book ‘Vingesus’ which is about the transition to renewable energy on Samsø. The book focuses on ‘Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft‘ (com-munity and society) in balance and tension. The good story was put together by all the courage the local people showed in order to transform the community on the island. The people of the island wanted to survive and save money at the same time. The power belongs to those who can move and want to be moved. We succeeded! Today Samsø is more than self sufficient with renewable energy. Today I represent, amongst others, Energy Camps at Samsø Energy Academy. “This is what you are!” was the response when I shook hands and had my one-liner “Be the change!” ready for Jackie and three other students. Jackie came from Australia and I hosted a circle meet-ing set up with the students from MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who were on a European Tour and had the Energy Academy as their first priority. At the

camp, we work with issues such as: What is sustainability? How do we involve (young) people in the serious issue of sustainability? How can we focus on sustainability still being fun? How does one learn about sustainability if our parents have no knowledge or experience? This is the question we ask approximately 2,000 stu-dents each year, and try and guess their answer? They say leadership, ownership, community and fellowship, and this helps me find the courage to keep an eye open for renewal. It has thus become crucial to my teaching on sustainabil-ity to set personal insights alongside the professional. An insight into one’s own perception is pivotal to our ability to develop sustainable communities. At least that is how it is for me, and every day I am delighted that my local busi-ness is both rural and sustainable. It gives me pleasure and comfort to know that I can ‘keep house’.

a NeW relaTIONshIP BeTWeeN UrBaN aND rUralI, Søren, was born on Samsø Island in 1960. My father was a farmer and so was I until it dawned on me that the island had no future in the long term unless we decided to develop the island radically. Today, one of my burning questions is how the difference between the urban and the rural can be transformed into knowledge about sustain-ability and new business. In rural areas there is not only peace, but also a deeper understanding of innovation and enterprise. In rural culture work is such an integral part of life that it is not compartmentalized into contracts and wage agreements, but driven by independent thinking and efforts that are consistent with necessity rather than fairness. Contrary to urban culture, rural culture is slow and reflective. The ability to work has to last a long time and it leads to an understanding that work is necessary, but not necessarily a matter of life and death. Here, the social aspect of life is also prioritized and, when appropriate, drinking coffee together and socializing when ever there is an occasion. We can smell it when the neighbor puts manure out in the field and we rush to take the laundry indoors, so that it doesn’t get smelly, but we understand to certain degree that a sensible bit of work is in progress. We drink coffee with the farmer and talk about the animals and the plants. We understand the smell. It is work and it is resources. It stinks, but we understand! Food comes from the countryside and materials come from the city, and with a greater knowledge of sustain-ability one could create a different and more intelligent relationship between country and city. When food is sent to the city, it is sent in the form of carbon, minerals and a host of other valuable elements. Then, when these valu-able resources have been used for the primary purpose - food for people in cities - the valuable ‘waste’ ends up

in the drainage system and, eventually, it is regarded as an environmental problem. An innovative handling of this problem would be to arrange conditions in a different way. You can think about sustainability as a circuit and pre-plan how to collect the substances which need to go back to source, to the earth to become food and building blocks for microorganisms and plants, so that it may once again become food for humans and animals. If this is not already happening, what is the reason? My personal opinion is that it is due to laziness and our deep desire to clean up. I know it sounds contradictory but, actually, it isn’t. Laziness is a trait that I possess and enjoy, but when things get too dirty, I am forced to clean up and throw out. I think this is the main and also the worst reason why we have produced ‘vanish-technology’, which removes everything with a bad odor and which exposes us as disgust-ing slobs. We want to be chic and sexy, to be noticed and desired by others. In the meantime, we seem to have forgot-ten that we are not alone on this planet. Consider those poor bacteria and microorganisms who think that biological substances like shit and waste are great food and are a vital necessity for all living things they know. When the sewer smells, we call to the municipality, because something has to be done here! It smells and we do not understand that these are resources and tomorrow’s food. It stinks and we get furious! If we understood the value of these elements and carbons in a constructive and innovative way, we could save on the purchase of fertilizers from distant countries. We could save on expensive treatment plants and perhaps build a fertilizer factory that could remove the water from the excrement, so it could be returned to the farmer with the message that it has permission to become new carrots.It smells, and we understand!

about the energy academy. it took 10 years to get

the island ‘samsø’ to where it is today, producing 100% of

its wind energy and even exporting renewable energy to

the mainland. samsø has amassed a great deal of practical

experience with the implementation of a broad variety of lo-

cal renewable energy projects, from wind turbines to co2

neutral district heating plants, rapeseed oil tractors and

solar energy panels. the next goal for the island is to be

independent of fossil fuels by 2050. read more at www.

energiakademiet.dk

See the video with Søren Hermansen’s presentation from the

third In100Y-seminar in November 2011, where he tells the

story about how he and a few others got the green energy

going at the small island Samsø at www.in100y.dk/vid-

eos/video-seminar-3/

malene annikki lundén and søren hermansen,

the energy academy.



147issues #2: this way, Please!146 commentcomment

a new lIfesTyle

On January 30 this year, I was invited into Europa House in Copenhagen to meet Connie Hedegaard. She is a member of the UN High Level Panel on Sustainable Development which brought out its report on the same day. The report provides a foundation for the agenda of the sustainability Summit Rio +20, which will be held this summer. She stated that in 2030 the world will need 50% more food, 45% more energy and 30% more water. She stressed that there is not much time left until 2030. A child, born in 2012, will only just have come of age in 2030. The child will be 18 then. She also said that the population will grow from 7 billion today to 9 billion by 2040 - and that the middle-class alone, with its high consumption, will increase by more than 3 billion over the next 20 years. At the same time, the International Climate Panel, the IPCC, tells us that global emissions of greenhouse gases must be halved by 2050 from their current levels. This is absolutely necessary, if we are to have even a slight chance of avoiding the Earth entering into a self-reinforcing spiral of global warming outside our control: if the per-mafrost areas in Siberia and Canada melt, they will release large amounts of methane which in itself will warm up the planet even more. If the North Pole melts, the surface of the sea will become dark and this will attract more of the sun’s heat. If the oceans get warmer, they may at some point, be unable to absorb CO2, but begin to release it into the atmosphere - which will increase global warming. These climate changes may culminate with sea levels rising above 60 meters in combination with massive changes to global climate systems. To avoid this, the reduction in the emis-sion of greenhouse gases must have commenced before 2020. Up until now, it has only increased. Even during the financial crisis.

Assuming that we are approximately 10 billion people by 2050, that we all have equal rights to emit greenhouse gases and that we follow the IPCC recommendations, then there is room for every human on the planet to emit 2 tons of CO2 equivalents in 2050. Today, every Dane emits 19 tons measured on our consumption. Our diet alone emits 3 tons because we are one of the world’s big-gest consumers of meat. Thus, we have just 40 years to reduce our global foot-print by a factor of 10. This is a challenge. On the other hand, the challenges are linked: If we solve the climate crisis, then we will also have solved the energy crisis and the food crisis and, if we think about it carefully, we will be able to handle the water shortage at the same time. The code word is sustainable development: to create a lifestyle that is, at once attractive to us as human beings and at the same time does not put too much of a strain on our fundamental basis of life. Personally, I believe that part of the answer is that we should use each other’s labour much more than we do today. In return, we must reduce material consumption. There is something sick about a society where it is not viable to pay a man to repair your mobile phone if it breaks because it is cheaper to buy a new one. This is not good enough. Big changes in our lifestyle are required. In return, we may end up with a lifestyle that is more attractive than the one we have today; where there is less stress and more time, more time for each other, for our children, for nature - and for ourselves. Humans have previously carried out major revolutions - now the time has come for a new major change. Denmark can lead the way - it is our own choice.

thomas færgeman, director, concito

- a danish green and independent think tank.

member of the core group of the project

in 100 years – starting now.

by dominic balmforth, susturb / house of futures

3.5 billion people live in cities today and the numbers are rising. Urban population is the dominant portion, both in terms of number and impact. That is why we need to design new forms of living. First, we can start to address big cities as systems which we can change and not only systems which are self-generating. Second, we can make serious changes in the way we currently conceive and manage urban density, ur-ban organization and urban culture. We need more people living in less space than before, we need a new system to govern a more effective flow of all resources and we need the mass of human will to be part of ‘system-us’ instead of a ‘system-me-and-mine’. To do this, we must regain our lost confidence in making radical but realistic visions of how our future cities can work. As Lord Anthony Giddens suggests, we can make ‘utopian realities’.

jUsT aDD PeOPleWe are making some attempts to prototype what future cities could look like, but these often exclude the primary driving force to sustain urban life; people. We are only making proposals for density without inspiring new hu-man activity. We are drawing up fancy new structures to house more of the same. These are the images, visions, and I would argue, illusions of urban (and sometimes so-called eco-) utopias. Examples are Dongtan eco-city in China, Masdar in Abu Dhabi and Seasteads proposed for oceans across the globe. Engineers are piecing together the nuts and bolts of these new places and architects are making them look good. These are technological and visual images of the future, and they are designing a new form of city, but then import an old (and outmoded) form of urban life. We are not invited to create and define these places via a different, in-novative way of life. We are simply invited to move in and

live with the finished product once it is complete. This is not to say that these cities won’t turn out to be examples of sustainable cities, but if they do, this will be the result of a new form of urban living progressively changing the city’s form and not the opposite. Other issues of the eco-city are those of re-location and autonomy. Why aren’t eco-city schemes embedded within existing cities? Surely the challenge is not to cre-ate new green enclaves removed from the existing city or the rest of the world, but to rethink the urban world we already have and, in particular, rethink the relationship and interdependency between the urban and the rural. Even if the eco-city manages to be completely off-grid and autonomous with regard to energy provision and internal mobility, will it ever really be self-sufficient with regards to food, clean water, household products or clothing brands? Will there be new laws to forbid the exchange of resources across city boundaries?

a NeW UrBaN CUlTUreCreating mini-parallel worlds shut off from one other doesn’t help the wider context, on the contrary it under-mines the wider context by saying, “if we can’t fix here, we relocate somewhere else”. The big question is not how one city can provide for itself, but how a global network of cities and the network of productive landscapes in between can provide for each other. We need to reach a new system and a new agenda for resource trading which is both local and global at the same time. For now, the Masdar and Dongtan models can most usefully serve as showcases for how far we have come with innovating production. Focus areas for this innovation are energy and mobility. These places can both house new technologies and synergize these new technologies. In doing so, they can show how less (non-renewable) energy and smarter mobility can provide for more. They begin to propose adequate solutions for density, make an attempt on

urban mInds. design new forms of living, not new forms of city.

meeting the needs of a rising urban PoPulation with a diminishing

stock of global resources is a great challenge, but not an imPos-

sibility. the big question is not how one city can Provide for itself,

but how a global network of cities and the network of Produc-

tive landscaPes in between can Provide for each other. we need to

reach a new system and a new agenda for resource trading which

is both local and global.



149issues #2: this way, Please!148 comment urban minds

narcI-cITy or TheaTrum mundI? The urban sTage of The fuTure

with 75% of the global PoPulation living in cities by 2050, we should be in-

tensely PreoccuPied by the Possibilities of creating new sPaces for manifold

co-oPerations in the Public realm. staging a vibrant urban life in the future

is what architect andrew todd and sociologist richard sennett are doing

with the Project ‘theatrum mundi’. discover the Potential and the alternative.

by andrew todd, architect

Architects and urbanists are bent out of shape. We suffer from being trapped in an ever-tightening vice formed by budgetary constraints on the one hand and strident regula-tions on the other. At the same time, we are expected to provide a spark of originality, to be ‘creative’ in our pur-suits. Many of my professional colleagues can be observed presenting a very hard, exhibitionistic form of this ‘creativ-ity’ which may in part be an understandable railing against restriction, but also something like the call of an exotic bird performing a mating dance. ‘Look at ME,’ they holler, ‘I am better, brighter, prettier and more colourful than the others!’ It doesn’t help matters that this disease has an official name, the ‘Bilbao effect’, and is in fact considered a worthwhile pathology in certain quarters. Surprisingly, even fifteen years after the fact, one still hears talk of the ‘Bilbao effect’ named after the attention-grabbing, tourist-luring success of Frank Gehry’s extraordinary museum in the eponymous Basque city. Many a minor mayor yearns for a similar splash through the erection of cavorting forms, conjuring the mythical ‘wow’-factor, although many pretenders fall short for want of sufficiently appealing plumage. Gehry is a great architect who earned his stripes slowly through a series of modest commissions. He has consistently been interested in how things are crafted and put together and has extended this patient research into the digital era, using and developing cutting edge cad-cam technology both for his own creative process and for the construction of buildings. As often before, genius is a bad example: there are legions of wannabes (including, disturbingly, many of the students I have taught over the last ten years) who wish to short-circuit actual apprenticeship and experience and go straight to having Brad Pitt as an intern (as Gehry did). I find it worrying that this culture is producing genera-tions of architects who do not think it is necessary (or even interesting or desirable) to listen. They would rather shout as loud as possible, and the civic context such a situation produces is a reflection of this strident narcis-sism: it is all foreground, whereas city life requires a subtle

range of characters –as in any play- which extends from protagonists to minor players to crowds, the polis. We have to be able to situate ourselves, to find our own level in the human performance: how can we do this if the city is not porous in any way, has no depth or background, but is just a wall of bellowing prima donnas?

‘hmmm’ versUs ‘WOW!’The bodacious charms of such prima donna buildings are strangely unsatisfying in the long run. One might say they are not sustainable in every sense of this slippery word: they are made for instantaneous effect rather than affec-tionate long-term use. For all that they titillate the retina, they are often cold to the touch, cleverly made-up but not profoundly sensual, like a fashion model whose authentic existence is on glossy paper rather than in real life. For-tunately, there are other ways of doing things. A different feminine paradigm is presented in the work of Swiss ar-chitect Peter Zumthor: his buildings are not cute, not easy to photograph on the outside, but enveloping, warm and overwhelming in terms of the atmosphere and materiality they present in their interiors. I am thinking in particular of the thermal baths in Vals and the extraordinary Kolum-ba Museum in Cologne. These buildings reward concen-trated occupation, and leave a very long-lasting impression on the whole body. Zumthor shuns publicity, but people will cross the world to experience his spaces. We could say that they replace the ‘wow’- factor with a much more engaging ‘hmmm’-factor. Zumthor’s architecture – although beautiful and craft-ed with immense intelligence – is much more background than foreground. It is quiet and leaves room for the user’s own experience to bloom. During a recent visit to the Kolumba Museum I failed to realise that four hours had passed and I had missed lunch, so strong was the hypnotic strength of the museum and the artworks it put in con-text. This was not because of modesty on the part of the architect: there is actually a very intentional mise-en-scene and sequence, but the building somehow – like a loving parent – left room for the unfolding of my own experience and interpretation. Such architecture is revelatory because

infrastructure and organization, but are still far away from rethinking mass human culture. They innovate how we can produce and fit together, but not how we use or consume. To paraphrase Lord Anthony Giddens, speaking at the World Climate Solutions Conference 2010: “We need to innovate, not only production but also consumption.” This supports a move towards a new urban culture in which today’s pattern of consumption is completely redefined. This is not only about cutting back on what we consume, but rather changing how we consume. Recycling is our current answer to reprocessing waste (and even the recycling industry is vastly underdeveloped). But when we realize that consumption and use are two different things, we will stop making waste out of products and compo-nents that can instead be re-circulated and used again many times over. In an intelligent future, there is no such thing as waste. Since resources are scarce, our currency of the future is our material. This makes major business sense, when we learn to buy and sell the use of the same products many times over, instead of buying, owning and wasting many products (read the article ‘Release our resources, make more use’ on p. 36). We can gradu-ally mobilize the global consumer into releasing all the material which they have bought and used. This material can never be allowed to become waste. Organic material such as surplus foods can be redirected to feed agricul-ture, pharmaceutical and bio-energy industries with vital biological nutrients. Man-made material such as plastics and metals can be redirected back to the product devel-opment industries which rely on them as source material.

leT Us ...So, let’s stop talking about how to decrease human impact on nature and start to support innovation which increases the positive impact on both nature and our own anthro-sphere. The place to start this innovation is in our cities since these are where we are most and where we are closest together. Let us make cities the hub of innovation. Let us design in the present urban context instead of construct-ing new ones. Let us stop only designing new forms of city and start designing new forms of urban living.

Dominic Balmforth, architect and partner in House of Fu-

tures. He is also director in Susturb ApS. Contact Dominic

via mail [email protected] or mobile +45 6130

6974.

notes: the economist and sociologist, lord anthony gid-

dens speaking at the world climate solutions conference

2010 in copenhagen, denmark. Dongtan City plan by brit-

ish engineers, arup is a plan for a new eco-city on the island

of chongming in shanghai, china. Masdar in abu dhabi is a

new city designed by foster and Partners and claims to be a

zero carbon and zero waste city. Seasteads are communi-

ties or entire cities on the ocean built on ships, floating

platforms or piled and fixed platforms similar to oil rigs. see

the seasteading institute on http://seasteading.org/ and

the ecomonist, december 2011 under section; technology

quarterly.

at the third in100y-seminar in november 2011 the ‘urban minds’ workshop, introduced by architect dominic balmforth,

had to name up to 3 new initiatives/projects that are advancing the sustainability agenda of urban minds in important

ways applying science and technology. here is the list the participants came up with: bornholm congress center (dk), Po-

litical “technology”, bike-train-bike (btb), urban farming, new technologies for self-sustaining cities, public initiative (light

rail in aarhus), totnes transition town, ‘distortion copenhagen’ (social technology), industrial symbiosis – waste manage-

ment (kalundborg, dk), building regulation (in 2020 all buildings has to be energy+, carbon Pricing (private people can

sell c-waste), Public Purchase should be sustainable. Pictures: dominic balmforth and flemming wisler (to the left), erik

hagelskjær (in the middle) and christian ege, karen blincoe and ulf boström (to the rigth).



151issues #2: this way, Please!150 urban minds narci-city or theatrum mundi?

it makes the ingredients of architecture (time, light, matter, measure, place, history and human purpose) appear clearly as they are; they are not hijacked or diminished; the build-ing is a catalyst rather than a fetish. It would be unreasonable to expect every architect to work in the painstaking, ascetic manner of Zumthor. Part of his identity depends on remoteness – of himself and also of his buildings. One could scarcely imagine him de-signing a shopping centre in Basildon, though Basildonites have as much right to beautiful architecture as the haughty mountain cows of Vals. So how can we bring his principles down to earth, as it were, and create a new way of crafting the everyday spaces of our cities?

mIrrOr Or mUTUal gaZe?I would like to return to the question of narcissism as one key to staging the urban life of the future. Social philoso-phers such as Christopher Lasch and Richard Sennett have identified this psychological disorder as one of the most debilitating ills of our age. Lasch describes in his book ‘The Culture of Narcissism’ how ‘advanced’ socie-ties (particularly America) suffer from a disregard for the other which is rooted in disorders of self-perception. Narcissism does not mean merely egotism; rather, it re-fers to a hardened, hollowed-out sense of self which gives rise to the grandiose preening and posturing we see – as a direct correlative – in the architecture of cities such as Dubai. It also implies the failure to listen: the other is of interest only inasmuch as they provide supply to fill the narcissist’s empty self, as long as they are looking, ap-proving, applauding. Sennett relates narcissism to the city in his book ‘The Fall of Public Man’, which describes the disappearance of a shared code of civility – of knowing how to engage with strangers – in the face of emerging individualism. He describes how the apparent distance given by the ‘mask’ of formal public behaviours in 18th Century Paris actually favoured exchange, creating a middle ground whose occupa-tion could be negotiated without anxiety about social status or individual psychology and emotional ‘needs.’ In his book ‘The Uses of Disorder’ he also employs psychological terms to advocate the city as a place where one becomes whole through open encounter with difference. In his latest book ‘Together: The Rituals, Pleasures and Politics of Coopera-tion,’ he describes the difficulties we face in creating a shared world, and offers some positive structures for doing so. I am currently engaged with Sennett (and others) in trying to do just this through an ambitious project which he directs and has named ‘Theatrum Mundi’. Its aim is, in his words ‘no more – but no less – than an effort to translate ‘lively’, ‘arousing’ and ‘engaging’ into pavement,

glass and steel’. The name Theatrum Mundi dates from the Renaissance, when architects such as Sebastiano Serlio drew a parallel between the stage and the street, between everyday encounter and performance artifice. We will attempt to use the energies of urban culture – ranging from social behaviours and beliefs to developed artistic practices – as a way of making the physical existence of the city more fulfilling. Part of this attempt will involve inviting architects to change the way they do business, to stop behaving defensively and narcissistically, and to engage directly with the people – from ordinary citizens to choreographers, scenographers, theatre directors, lighting designers, sound and visual artists, musicians and fashion designers – who create the heartbeat of cultural buildings and the street itself, which we in turn define, contain (and sometimes constrain) in ‘glass and steel’. The aim is to make the dialogue between the container and its contents more rich, dynamic, relevant, real and sustainable as a worthy by-product, and perhaps also to change the way the ‘container’ is commissioned, conceived and used. Theatrum Mundi will operate through a network of leading academic and cultural institutions in Frank-furt, London and New York, and will sponsor workshops, publications and commission projects over a multi-year period, launching in June of this year. We are initiating partnerships with the Venice Biennale and the Edinburgh Festival, and intend to look further afield to Asia and Latin America in coming years. Theatrum Mundi will not have a fixed institutional identity, it will act as a network of like-minded people rather than a hierarchical commissioning body; it will be light-footed enough to sponsor immediate experiments, and will not be dedicated to the creation of polished outcome – of ‘cultural product’. It will embrace failure and incompleteness as essential and undervalued aspects of artistic and urban life, asking the future-facing question ‘what if ?’ rather than stating the ‘here’s how.’ The theatre director Peter Brook ended his seminal 1968 text ‘The Empty Space’ with these words: ‘In every-day life, ‘if ’ is a fiction, in the theatre ‘if ’ is an experiment. In everyday life, ‘if ’ is an evasion, in the theatre ‘if ’ is the truth. When we are persuaded to believe in this truth, then the theatre and life are one.’ Andrew Todd is an architect, writer and musician and

senior fellow and member of the Executive Committee of

Theatrum Mundi. Founder of his own firm in 2003, he was

named one of Europe’s leading architects under 40. He

is Chevalier des Arts et Lettres of the French government.

Theatrum Mundi will launch a web presence in May 2012.

www.studioandrewtodd.com

robert costanza, distinguished university Professor

of sustainability, institute for sustainable solutions (iss),

Portland state university, and editor in chief, solutions,

www.thesolutionsjournal.org

The soluTIons generaTIon

The Arab Spring and now the “Occupy” movement are indications of growing unhappiness with the state of the world, especially among the younger generation. As Paul Krugman has pointed out, Americans are finally getting angry at the right people – the financial and corporate elites who currently govern the United States and have caused the ongoing crisis. Anger and protests can be effec-tive at bringing the current system into question. But they do little, by themselves, to lead the way to a better future. For that we need a compelling shared vision and a focus on solutions.

In 2012, our fundamental problems include the vast gap in incomes within and between nations, the ecological limits we are exceeding or approaching (climate change, biodiversity loss, etc.), the peaking of global oil produc-tion, the deterioration of natural and social capital, and the consequent threats to human well-being and sustainability that all of these imply. What we need now is a new vision and a generational commitment to finding real solutions. The “Solutions Generation” needs to think outside the box to create a vision of a better, more sustainable world for themselves and their children. They will have to design new technologies, new institutions, and new societal norms in order to get there, including new political and economic systems that can create shared prosperity with-out increasing demands on a finite environment. This cannot be a top-down corporate or government vision. It must be built and it must be shared. If anything, it will be “bottom-down” decision making – an approach that reflects the needs of the vast majority of the people, not just the economic elites. Probably the most important element of this new vision will be a refocus on the goal of sustainable human well-being instead of maximizing con-ventional economic production and consumption (GDP). As many have noted, including Tim Jackson and the Sarkozy Commission headed by Joseph Stiglitz, GDP is

fatally flawed as a measure of progress, and we desperately need new measures of well-being. We know from both the latest psychological research and from ancient wisdom that well-being and happiness depend on the appropriate balance of assets and opportunities. It is clear that natu-ral capital provides a range of ecosystem services that are hugely important but largely unrecognized contributors to sustainable human well-being. These services include everything from maintaining a stable climate to producing soil and water to providing spectacular and inspiring views. We will have to create a new vision of societal goals and the technical and institutional solutions necessary to achieve them. This vision will involve a better understand-ing of what actually contributes to human well-being and sustainability. It is a huge challenge that will require a generation to accomplish – the Solutions Generation. Many groups and communities around the world are already involved in building this vision and developing real solutions. There are far too many to list, but here are a few: Transition town movement, www.transitionnetwork.org, Great Transition Initiative, www.gtinitiative.org, Solutions journal, www.thesolutionsjournal.org, and our sponsors and partners, www.thesolutionsjournal.com/SponsorsPart-ners, Wiser Earth, www.wiserearth.org and Center for a New American Dream, www.newdream.org. It might be worth pointing out, that nature operates with a subtle dynamic between competition and coop-eration. In “empty world” times of resource abundance, competition is favored. The great acceleration powered by abundant fossil fuels favored individualism, competition, and greed-based capitalism. The coming “full world” will favor cooperation and networking. We can now, as a global society, communicate, network, and cooperate as never be-fore in the history of the planet. It will be the great work of the Solutions Generation – Gen S – to use this new capac-ity to envision and build a better, more sustainable, just, and prosperous society within the planetary boundaries of earth.



153issues #2: this way, Please!152 narci-city or theatrum mundi? comment

wIsdom councIl recommendaTIons

easT: creation intelligencePerspective keywords: freedom, creativity, imagination, innovation, inspiration, outrageousness, provocative.

1. we must be free to choose a sustainable life, which is a

balanced life.

2. to be free is to access your creative force and empower-

ment, to liberate yourself.

3. find your own method. frame a conscious space/ritual

(walk, climb, meditate).

souTheasT: PercePtual intelligencePerspective keywords: Present condition, appriciation, present moment, awareness, current needs, openness, receptive viewpoint, expanded consciousness.

1. to move the focus from a financial bottom line to a holis-

tic value based 5 year prospect.

2. to decide taht thought, feeling and will can work fully to

build the new paradigm.

3. to change the backbone of society into a new which is

focused on the well-being of future generations.

souTh: emotional intelligencePerspective keywords: Power, danger, responsibility, alertness, conflict, readiness, confidence, trust.

1. remember the power of relationships.

2. remember the power of consciousness.

3. beware: your defence wall will never be high enough!

4. beware: the limits of certainty!

souThwesT: Pathfinding intelligencePerspective keywords: Purpose, direction, learnings from the past, his-tory, identity, intention, clear goals, focus.

1. change our brutal view of nature to a caring view by

education on many fronts (the danish folk high school as

inspiration).

2. we give one working day a month to discuss and create

the new society - we can afford it, and nature needs it!

3. create new movements inspired by previous social

experiments and innovations.

wesT: sustaining intelligencePerspective keywords: maintainance, balance, seven generational thinking, healing, nurturing, structure, stability, environment.

1. we should access the impacts of proposed actions for 7

generations ahead and not discount either future value

or costs.

2. as we become more ecological, we wish to maintain

human rights and preserve democracy.

3. to keep a balance between human activity and the

biosphere, we wish to grant legal rights to the whole

evolutionary planetary inheritage.

wIsdom councIl

how can we choose a sustainable life? this was the question

of the wisdom council guided by earth wisdom guide sascha

amarasinha at the fourth in100y-seminar.

by gitte larsen, house of futures

’The tribe thing was great’, ’the old wise people’s session made a significant impression on me’, ’my high expecta-tions were not disappointed’, ’excellent’ and ’great to see an ancient tradition working for the future’. These are some of the participants comments to the Wisdom Council ce-remony which was the final working session at the fourth ’In100Years’-seminar.

As rituals and spirituality have played a significant role in the ’In100Years’ process, we wanted to end the journey with a special ceremony or ritual. I was pretty excited about what would come out it. We invited Sascha, a good friend of House of Futures, to do the Wisdom Council for the 20 participants, as she has done it succesfully before. “Speak, listen, and get wiser. Share your inner knowing and make sustainable decisions.That’s what a Wisdom Council is about.”, says Sascha Amarasinha, Earth Wisdom Guide, Director Respond, and recently appointed the Director of CSR and Communication in COOP Denmark.

When the group of participants was gathered in the circle of intelligent perspectives after lunch at the 19th January, they were a bit full, not only from the lovely food at Carlsberg Academy, but also from all the experiences and dialogues from the morning sessions and the day before. Sascha asked me if I would explain to the participants why we had choosen to do a Wisdom Council, and I said that she should just go ahead and do it – and so she did. With

personal integrity and a deep understanding of the pos-sible impact of a ceremony like this in a modern setting, she guided us all through from the beginning to the end. It became a beautiful session where the wise elders of the council raised the energy in the room and came up with clear and heartfelt recommendations for a sustainable future for people on planet Earth.

After a short introduction to the ancient indian cer-emony based on the wholeness of the medicine wheel, Sascha revealed the question to be looked at from the eight perspectives of the council: How can we choose a sustain-able life? The eight groups then had one hour to discuss and agree on up to four recommendations from their perspec-tive. Even though nobody was instructed to reply ”Ho!” (you have been heard, ed.), when a wise elder had spoken to the council, it quickly became the whole group’s reply after each group of wise elders had spoken.

“Since Wisdom Coucil was (re)introduced by the Founders of Ehama Institute, RainbowHawk and Wind-Eagle Kinny-Linton, leaders and boards from companies and organizations all over the world, such as BMW, Mattel and Volkswagen, have taken important issues to a Wisdom Council to ensure a holistic analysis before taking a deci-sion”, explains Sascha.

read more about this wisdom council in the article ‘the

words of the wise elders’ at www.in100y.dk

norThwesT: Predictive intelligencePerspective keywords: interrelatedness, timing, learning, cause, effect, relationship, cycles, future, forecast.

1. education should enable us to start answering the ques-

tions: who am i? how shall we live?

2. enable us to pass beyond respect into meeting the self

as the other in creative unity.

3. the common good: the balancing point between au-

tonomy and univocality.

norTh: decisive intelligencePerspective keywords: clarity, action, resource, strategy, planning, ef-fectiveness, courage.

1. clarity on the need for action

2. clarity is knowing you are lost and that you can ask for

assistance/guidance, trusting that there is someone there

for you.

3. trying everyday.

4. celebrating frontrunners.

norTheasT: energia intelligencePerspective keywords: integrity, vitality, enthusiasm, alignment, continu-ance of life, all perspectives, involvement.

1. choose love instead of fear. expressing our innermost

and not what others want to hear. inclusion to create

integrity and expansion.

2. we should start looking both at other people and the

world as integral beings instead of being picky and

filtering according to our comfort zones.

3. we need to create an atmosphere of inclusion. if i’m

needed as an integral part, i feel vital and empowered

and ready to act towards long term values and a sustain-

able life.

4. once we get to this point of inner integrity, we have the

responsibility to inspire others, include them and support

their vitality and wholeness, which is also about living

and learning from the weaknesses and confusion cause



155issues #2: this way, Please!154 wisdom councilwisdom council

… earth… air… water… fire… She was floating north through mist and fog. Only the trees and bushes next to the road were visible; everything beyond was shifting haze and shadow. The line where earth met sky obscured, all distinction lost in suspended water vapour. Her T-pod1 had run out of friends to play road games with – like pearls dropping from a necklace, ten thousand T-pods heading out of Copenhagen in the evening rush flung apart to the east and west until only she was still floating north in twi-light to Acorn Falls. Not far to go, and even in the overcast dark the road2 still fed back the day’s sun to the pod. The LED fire of its lights glimmered softly against the trees…bushes…grass…bushes…fields fading out of sight. Morning. The Inn’s kitchen offers tea and a buffet of dishes both local and exotic, the chef combining her garden’s seasonal produce with supplies from local farm-ers – and more distantly sourced foods contributed by the guests themselves.3 Last night’s fog has lifted, leaving only silver mists of the dawn, rising from the grass. Walking through Acorn Falls is walking through a dream where nothing is what it seems at first and every-thing offers a second face, a third meaning. Is it a town? Is it a forest? Are those cliffs? Is this a meadow or a commu-nity garden or a piazza? Are those birches merely wind-sculpted into bizarre forms – or are they the children’s playground, the park’s benches, a tiny cabin – an exercise in artful pooktre4? Looking up into the tree canopy, she can see elevated houses and restaurants and inns.5 But today she cannot linger; this visit is not for pleas-ure: she has a cloud of biosensors to tutor. Her business meeting lies beyond the Canopy District. She continues down the path, and finds herself briefly amid children chasing AR dinosaurs through the underbrush as part of experiential paleo-biology lessons.6 Her route takes her through the city orchard with its bustling market7, and beyond to the Cliff District. The Cliff District also eludes distinct perception. Is that a cloud tethered to a garden,8 or glass curtain walls revealing the mist cycle of an aeroponic vertical farm9? Through the glass she can see a teacher and students elbow-deep in rows upon rows of plants – no

doubt a class in applied biochemistry. Beyond the multi-story farm, leaves flutter across a cliff-face – or is that her destination, an office and conference center coated in anti-pollutant living surfaces10 and kinetic solar ivy11? Her business today will give every part of Acorn Falls a voice. Scientists, artists, and community members are collaborating to redesign the interface between the Acorn Falls’ biosensor swarm12, the community computing cloud, and the environmental, epidemiological, and educational datanets. The ambient intelligence of Acorn Falls has evolved over the last fifty or so years and the community wanted to refresh and update the graphics and the vocal characterisations. Trees, rivers, the soil, the air, houses, buildings, medical biosensorware – if you’re going to con-verse with everything, you might as well enjoy the conver-sations. She laughed, remembering her children complain-ing that the refrigerator and their healthware13 ‘ganged up’ and denied them snacks. Challenge and design, addressed collaboratively – she could have accomplished it all without the visit. But tele-presence14 doesn’t let her smell the air, see her own footprints in the dew-laden grass, or clasp hands with her colleagues. Visiting Acorn Falls even for work is like walk-ing zen: mindful appreciation of each moment, each detail. Not all communities managed the transition so well. It took early awareness of the severity of challenges facing the world’s climate, environment, and people. Nor was building the vision merely about reacting to those chal-lenges, or even creating a new model for human com-munities based on the innovations of the day. The ongo-ing creation of Acorn Falls required something more. It required acknowledging the emergent nature of living systems, including humans themselves. It required, and still requires, an open-ended design, leaving spaces within which the creativity and insights of future generations can continuously emerge to nurture new communities of hu-man spirit evolving in a thriving biosphere.

dr. wendy l. schultz, Ph.d. in alternative

futures, futurist and director of infinite futures,

www.infinitefutures.com. wendy participated

in the first and the third in100y-seminar.

a vIsIon of lIfe In 100 years ... In The cITy of ‘acorn falls’

endnotes

1 future of individual transport: transport pods - at-

nmbl, mike and maike: http://www.mikeandmaaike.

com/#p_atnmbl; driverless smart cars – google:

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/d3613984-d45c-

11df-b230-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1pyql2lrh;

consumer acceptance - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/

magazine-11513316.

2 roads as electricity generators / re-chargers: so-

lar roadways - http://solarroadways.com/intro.

shtml; induction charging - http://news.stanford.edu/

news/2012/february/wireless-vehicle-charge-020112.

html.

3 forage – an la restaurant whose dishes are made

from the contributions of its guests: http://www.

dailycandy.com/los-angeles/article/80005/

forage-restaurant-opens; and http://www.foragela.

com/?view=foragers.

4 arborsculpture and pooktre: pooktre chair: http://

inhabitat.com/pooktre%e2%80%99s-living-growing-

tree-chair/; pooktre playground: http://www.popsci.

com/jaya-jiwatram/article/2008-08/were-going-

live-trees; houses – mitchell joachim: http://blog.ted.

com/2010/07/02/dont_build_your/.

5 for treehouses, offices, hotels and a stunning restau-

rant: http://www.thecoolist.com/treehouse-designs-

10-treehouse-masterworks/ and http://www.cnbc.

com/id/44610148/treehouse_homes?slide=6.

6 see a vision of immersive, experiential education via

augmented reality presented in this corning glass im-

age of the future: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j

zkhpnnxlb0&feature=youtu.be.

7 orchards don’t need countryside – see the union street

urban orchard Project: http://www.unionstreetorchard.

org.uk/.

8 designer clouds – the blur building by diller and sco-

fidio: http://www.designboom.com/eng/funclub/dill-

erscofidio.html; and the cloud art of berndnaut smilde:

http://io9.com/5892356/artist-suspends-real-clouds-

in-the-middle-of-the-room.

9 aeroponics – aerogreen farm in singapore: http://

www.usp.nus.edu.sg/global_programme/studentwork/

sungei/aero.htm; and Plantagon vertical farm in swe-

den: http://inhabitat.com/plantagon-breaks-ground-on-

its-first-plantscraper-vertical-farm-in-sweden/.

10 living architecture – rachel armstrong: http://

edition.cnn.com/2011/10/14/tech/innovation/

living-buildings-carbon/index.html; and http://www.

speakerscorner.co.uk/file/b35e497cc1908cba-

6b6420339e5667a4/rachel-armstrong-talks-living-

buildings.html.

11 solar ivy and grow, by sustainably minded interac-

tive technology (smit): http://www.dwell.com/

articles/the-future-of-solar.html; and http://www.s-m-i-t.

com/#grow_target.

12 biosensors and smartdust: http://articles.cnn.

com/2010-05-03/tech/smart.dust.sensors_1_smart-

dust-sensors-kris-pister?_s=Pm:tech; and http://www.

nanotech-now.com/smartdust.htm.

13 see nike’s ‘fuelband’: http://www.nike.com/fuel-

band/.

14 for existing telepresence robotics: see willow garage:

http://singularityhub.com/2010/02/04/willow-

garage-creates-awesome-open-source-telepresence-

robots-video/; anybots: http://spectrum.ieee.org/

automaton/robotics/industrial-robots/051810-anybots-

qb-new-telepresence-robot; and mantarobot: http://

www.mantarobot.com/.



157issues #2: this way, Please!156 comment

The sIgnIfIcanT evenT. establishing universes, creating movements

zooming in on the relationshiP between the event, a universe and a movement and

how to create significant and sustainable events. with the event culture as a buzz in

the exPerience economy there is a danger that the significance of the event disaPPears.

by gry worre hallberg, fiction PimPs/

house of futures

The event is a moment in time and space, in which life itself unfolds between us. The significant event allows this to happen and thus holds the potential to change the course of history on the individual level as well as on the organiza-tional, societal or universal level. Much of the event culture that we see today, consumerizes and commercializes the life lived as the significant event that it is. The experience economy associates itself with what has become known as the cultural economy and suggests a dissolution of the dichotomy between the economic and the aesthetic spheres. In this respect, the experience economy provides space for an alternative existential and experiential mode in everyday life, a mode that can be desire, sensory or emotions based rather than being based on the economic basis of terms such as effectivity, discipline, delayed gratification and ra-tionality, which otherwise dominate our everyday lives.

Working towards framing or creating a setting for the significant event to take place within has become an in-

dustry in the experience economy. The experience economy has given rise to an event culture, where the secrecy and unpredictability of any event has been put aside in order to fulfill the expectations of the event buyer or participants. When the event becomes a pre-planned product or piece of merchandise which you can order or consume and of which you have specific expectations, it rarely creates significance.

The significant event fails at precisely the moment at which expectations become too specific. This happens, be-cause part of the potential for a significant event to take place is that one meets it openly. When you are open to an event, you also allow it to influence you and in your meetings with others. It is especially in the meeting with the other partici-pants at an event that significant potential can unfold.

When the setting of an event provides space for the unexpected, the unexpected might happen. On the con-trary, if the event is ‘closed’ from the beginning, it is much harder to create significance. This openness remains absent with the specific expectation. The event can easily become a cliche, without a deep and meaningful impact, and many of the people involved will be more concerned with assess-

Pictures and text from the Parallel universe of acorn falls at the third in100y-seminar: “hi, my name is

Pamela, or rather, i’m better known as Pam here in acorn falls. i study fictions. yes, really - it’s what i do. right here in the

hourglass inn. i just love them. why? i’ll tell you. you see, i’ve found that what makes a great narrative is a significant event

in the life of the main character. a specific moment in time and space where everything changes. where the life path of that

person is turned upside down. a u-turn. a moment of clarity. a striking point. a significant event. so before this day, life has

passed, hour after hour, day after day, year after year ‘like sand through the hourglass, such are the days of our lives’. but it

happens, that moment. and life no longer goes on as before. something has changed. now, one of the great mysteries of

our lives is that we all know that something needs to be done, but no-one does anything about it. and i’ve also learned that

all of you reisende are here because you actually do something in this great world of ours. now, that gets me curious. curi-

ous to learn something about that point in time where you decided to act. that significant event of yours. now, do you have

a moment in time like that, that you would like to share with me?”



159issues #2: this way, Please!158 the significant event

ing whether the event lives up to their expectations than to opening up to its potential significance.

There is a risk of consumerizing the experience itself - the heart of the event - and thereby an essentially phenom-enological basis for people. This danger is connected with the risks that are involved in the event culture. You want to consume the experience and the event without bearing in mind what your own contribution should be to making the experience accessible. Over the past few decades there has been a shift on the arts scene from sender dominated works to works that occur in the meeting between the sender, who to a greater extent, establishes a framework for the event, and those who step in as co-participants in the situation. It is a journey for the co-participants to open up to the even and contribute to providing significance. A way to frame a potential significant event is to establish a universe, where the event can unfold.

esTaBlIshINg UNIversesIn the performance agency Fiction Pimps, which I co-founded, we work with establishing universes by inviting people to join in within a fictional framework. We create Universes in the form of imaginary rooms or spaces. These consist of fictional narratives, images, soundscapes and virtual interventions. Our work is based on a participatory design and meetings are framed in alternative or balanc-ing modes of being. Modes opposed to the mindset of the consumer capitalist society, which governs our everyday life in almost every respect. We aim to challenge any fixed idea about how we should be together (for example the seminar) and/or balance the dominating paradigms. Our contribu-tion lies in manifesting ‘cracks’ in everyday life – sensory fictive parallel universes, which aim to activate the aesthetic and poetic dimension of experience and modes of being and to enrich the given situation and the persons involved in it.

Framing and creating universes for the significant event to take place, is about addressing people’s expecta-tions, but not about trying to fulfill them. Our ‘universe-creation’ often invites people to sense with the whole of their mind and to navigate in unknown or unfamiliar settings. This kind of universe never serves, it only exists as a physical room or space of opportunities. Participants or co-creators must want and have the courage to step into the universe and live out the new logics of this particular universe. Trust that you will be able to navigate just as when you are a traveller in a foreign country. How do you react or respond in such a situation? What do you think and feel? What moves inside you and why? Traveling in a remote, foreign country gives you the opportunity to open up to new experiences, the meetings with a different cul-ture, mindset, system or narrative and your open position might allow for a transformation of your inner landscape. It is the difference between a strategic relation and the

relationship – that you are actually willing to be part of the event, and to let it change your mind or heart! You and the event are in a relationship based on the give and take principle. This creates a much more powerful impact than the traditional experience economy event.

An example of a universe is Future Mind Tours, which was created to resonate together with In100Y, and which is described several times in this number of ISSUES. The travel agency was manifested at the four In100Y-seminars from June 2011 to January 2012, and it still resonates as you read this text right now. A universe is not limited to the event that it plays out. The universe lives for as long as it moves itself a little in someone’s consciousness. And if it has resonated there first, then it can continue its resonance for a very long time. It has the potential to make room for a series of significant events. The vibration that the universe can start to spread, is akin to circles in water and changes the circumstances. That is why its imaginary space and the fact that the universe moves around, is of crucial importance. Because when this cause, the quasi universe, vibrates enough times, you have a movement.

The CaUse OF The mOvemeNTThus, the common cause is at the root of the movement. In contrast to a network, one gathers in a movement around a cause. The cause is shared by those who meet, as ultimate participants to support and further the cause. A sustainable cause will not disappear, but will continue to draw new life into its system. It is a cause that keeps itself open, does not stagnate with specific expectations and spreads because its own vibrations have created value. When you have a cause and create a vibration centered in a universe and manifested in events that inspire others, the world will move in an assured and desired direction. The motivation to work with and perhaps even live and breathe for a cause, creates a deep inner motivation. The universes, that we create, offer land-scapes, where new dreams can be projected and transformed into actual manifestations of the desired future. And to me, the project ‘In100Years’ is a step on the way to a new and more sustainable era in the history of mankind. It has the potential to become a movement. Please feel free to join in!

Gry Worre Hallberg is a partner in Fiction Pimps and

House of Futures. She has a Master’s degree in Theatre and

Performance Studies from the University of Copenhagen

with subsidiary subject in Business and Cultural Economy

from the Copenhagen Business School as well as Commu-

nication from the Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro.

Gry is passionate about the idea of ‘fiction pimping’ the

stages of everyday life, and in addition to doing this in Fic-

tion Pimps and House of Futures, she also co-founded Club

de la Faye, Sisters Hope and Theatre-in-Business. gry@

houseoffutures.dk

a TrIbuTe To The evenT. we are the victims of time

by ole fogh kirkeby

in us, the event is living, just as much as we are participating

in the event. we are “evented”. in fact, we are incorporated

into a complex system of events forming a variable and unpre-

dictable system of matryoshka dolls. every event is a result of

former actions and surroundings, and thus just a particle in the

enormous waves of history, where the past permanently battles

with the present over the fate of the future. and events might

appear with a force, intensity and an precision, which forces

memory to adapt to new modes of becoming.

consequently, even if the event both constitutes the container

of self-reflection and its conditions, as well as the subject of

the theoretical and practical reason employed in every specif-

ic action and in every particular discipline, it is also the space

of creation ‘par excellence’. at least it looks like that from the

perspective of the individual subject of the event. however,

since we are seldom alone in the event, the will, power, plan-

ning and actions of other people interfere in every event. it is

always tempting to try to reconcile contingency and necessity,

the inherent forces of the event, by using narratives. also,

narratives usually delimit the contextual infinity of the event, fix-

ing its horizon and hence, reducing ambiguity. however, this

might be a betrayal of the openness of the event, and a way

of making it the hostage of the audience, binding it to its most

spectacular effects. we must honor the event by guiding its

secret. only very able narrators are able to accomplish this.

the event is the point at which contingency and necessity

meet, it is the battlefield of restoration and revolution, of

utopia and evolution. the event is cosmological abundance,

presenting everything in one moment – an organic being mir-

roring the universe from its particular perspective. this is pos-

sible, because the event incorporates a process of universe-

creation. this process cannot be controlled by any individual.

we can challenge the event and compete with it by creating

universes, even if this, unfortunately can never be anything

other than just another way in which the event appears.

the real sense of the event is the feeling of significance. such

significance can be experienced as expectations, hopes and

plans, however, the more they are elaborated and empha-

sized, anticipated and pre-moulded, the more we betray the

soul of the event, its inherent force of transformation. to stay

true to the event, to be worthy of it, is to locate oneself within

very place of transformation.

if there is an ethic to the event, it is generosity in the form of

hospitality: to invite to the eventing of the event. let the event

be a surprise party, a moveable feast, and let the force of

surprising be the unexpected power of your own capacity to

imagine. the genuine event creates the observer perceiving it,

and the universe it gives birth to is always the echo, the fata

morgana, and the brilliant phantasm of the way it verbalizes

the invisible.

it is correct to say that the event has been forever, but also that

it never was, because it has no particular beginning and no

definite event. like the light from a star, it emits almost infinite

beams of light, and to every beam there is a new, correspond-

ing reflection, an alternative perspective of it. it can never

be finished, never be properly defined, and it can never be

caught in our desire to transform every verb into a substantive.

it breaks the fetters of the conquerors, the ones who usurp the

right to give names. it is the quintessence of freedom.

the generosity of the event is always to give at least one new

perspective of what is happening, could happen or should

happen. it is the task of every human being to make the event

last forever. the event must be both – what the philosophers of

the middle ages called “nunc permanens” and “nunc stans”,

the eternal moment covering eternity and an eternity pressed

into one moment of an unimaginably compact intensity,

respectively.

Ole Fogh Kirkeby, Professor Leadership & Philosophy, Co-

penhagen Business School. Read the article “A new Reason

of Becoming” (including the six ethical modes of being in an

event) based on his lecture at the second In100Y-seminar at

www.in100y.dk

agent Pam in conversation with a visitor in ‘acorn falls’, and agent armstrong looking for more visitors interested in visiting

the hourglass inn.



161issues #2: this way, Please!160 the significant event the significant event

To me “In100years” Is....

... an interesting meetingplace.

... food for thought, inspiration, new ideas and hope.

... a daring project with a holistic approach which challenges mind sets and belief systems.

... an extension of our professional comfort zone.

... extremely important as a stimulus of sustainability knowledge, intention and action.

... a common feeling of ‘we are one but not the same’.

... a promise that there will be a future.

at every seminar the participants have been asked to finish the

sentence: to me “in100y” is ... this is a selection of the full

sentences from the four in100y-seminars.

how can we help you?

‘in100years’ visits you – if you want us to?

we do ‘mindshifting operations’, policy and business visions and strategies, scenario processes

and sensed futures, conferences and seminars, and talks and lectures. we might be flying high

and travelling far, but we always stick to the ground. living the future now!

contact: gitte larsen, director and partner, house of futures,

at mail [email protected] or mobile +45 2021 1147

house of futureswww.houseoffutures.dk


163issues #2: this way, Please!

oTher arTIcles – onlIne

find them online at wwwin100y.dk

measUrINg grOWTh. Economic growth as a concept is deeply riddled with problems. The word growth implies that there is a thing getting bigger, but the economy is not a thing – it’s a complex network, untold numbers of products and services, some of which will expand while others decline, some emerge and some fade. By Søren Steen Olsen.

FrOm malThUs TO BrUNDTlaND aND BeYOND.Can growth continue? 200 years ago, Malthus answer was a resounding no. With limited land to sustain the popula-tion growth brought about by higher living standards, Malthus predicted that growth would stall as larger populations would result in in a lowering ofss. Since then population growth has not only continued, but also been surpassed by the economic growth. By Søren Steen Olsen.

eCONOmIC grOWTh: gOOD, BaD Or UglY?Economic activity is a question of attaining outputs by means of input. What is regarded as input and output is not only a technical consideration, but also a moral one. However, the way that input is transformed to output can be classified in four categories, some of which are more compatible with sustainability than others. This classifica-tion divides growth into extensive versus intensive growth and material versus immaterial growth. By Søren Steen Olsen.

arT aND CONsIOUsNess. Consciousness is an elusive concept, and as such, most attempts to define it do so in relation to something else. In this article the object in relation to which consciousness is defined is Arts and cultural history, and so this article will present art in a baseline scenario from 1812 to 2112 in order to extract an understanding of the changes in consciousness underly-ing or entwined in the cultural evolution. By Gry Worre Hallberg.

aPPrOaChes aND meThODOlOgY. How we use Futures Studies methods in the project ‘In100years’. By Steen Svendsen.

a NeW reasON OF BeCOmINg. Highlights from the speach, Ole Fogh Kirkeby gave at the second ‘In100Y’-seminar, including the six ethical modes of being in an event. By Gitte Larsen (ed.)

skeTChINg OUT TWO sCeNarIOs. House of Futures’ first draft of the two preferred future scenarios towards 2112 and the background for pointing to these. By Søren Steen Olsen and Steen Svendsen.

PreFerreD FUTUre sCeNarIOs FOr sUsTaINaBle sOCIeTIes 2112. At seminar 3 we presented the scenari-os sketces and made them the object of group and plenum discussions. By Søren Steen Olsen and Steen Svendsen.

mIND OF NaTUre. Opening remarks by Peder Agger to the workshop session ’Mind of nature’ at the second ‘In100Y’-seminar. By Peder Agger.

ParaDIgm-shIFTINg. The Transformative Impact of Future Mind Tours and the Intervention into the Art- and Capital System. By Gry Worre Hallberg (in Danish).

arTICles FrOm The FOUr ‘IN100Y’-semINars:

semINar #1: vIsION, INTegraTION OF kNOW-leDge aND mIND shIFT. Includes a number of articles about this ‘In100Y’-seminar. By Gitte Larsen (ed.)

semINar #2: a seNse OF PreFerreD FUTUres. In-cludes a number of articles about this ‘In100Y’- seminar. By Gitte Larsen (ed.)

semINar #3: sTarTINg NOW. Includes a number of articles about this ‘In100Y’- seminar. By Gitte Larsen (ed.)

semINar #4: mIND ON FIre. Includes a number of ar-ticles about this ‘In100Y’- seminar. By Gitte Larsen (ed.)

I begyndelsen var ordet – kommunikationens verdenshistorie er en bog i feltet mellem kunst, kommunikation, filosofi og fremtid. bag-grunden er kunstmaler jørn bies 64 kvadratmeter store vægmaleri i begyndelsen var ordet, som omhandler 30.000 års kommunikati-onshistorie – før og efter elektriciteten. bogen er en hybrid mellem en kunstbog og en antologi og indeholder både en lang række udsnit med kunstnerens kommentarer og 13 unikke historier om kommunikation. mød bl.a. professor ole fogh kirkeby, stunt- og alt-mulig-mand martin spang olsen, kommunikationsrådgiver og storyteller sascha amarasinha, højskoleforstander ole lauth og landskabsarkitekt hans-ole hansen. udover et indblik i vægmaleriets indhold – og dermed også kunstnerens syn på menneskets kommunikationsbestræbelser gen-nem tiderne – får du også et indblik i kunstnerens liv og tanke-gang. jørn bie er overbevist om, at alting hænger sammen, og han har en klar holdning til menneskehedens nuværende tilstand, vores relation til planeten jorden og vores fremtidsudsigter. bogen tager dig med bag om maleriet og giver dig personli-ge og tankevækkende perspektiver på menneskers og organisatio-ners evner og lyst til at kommunikere – og ikke mindst vores behov for at stille spørgsmål og få svar.

”jørn bies maleri I Begyndelsen Var Ordet er en gave til menneske-heden. det er stort på alle mulige måder, og med bogen kan du dykke ned i det og blive klogere.” – Erland Kolding Nielsen, direktør Det Kongelige Bibliotek

”I Begyndelsen Var Ordet er et kraftfuldt magisk værk, der fascinerer og forundrer. det giver en instinktiv, visuel oplevelse af menneskehedens kommunikation og historie. og får én til at tænke, om tiden mon ikke er inde til at lytte til verden for at forstå hinanden bedre og skabe en endnu mere magisk historie fremover? jeg tror, at vi er mere parat end nogensinde før til at gøre præcis det!” – Emilia van Hauen, forfatter, foredragsholder og trendspotter

Pris DKK 250,-. Bogen kan bestilles

på [email protected] eller

købes hos Saxo.




164 other articles

The oracle of delphI

at the fourth in100y-seminar the participants had a unique opportunity

to ask the oracle of delphi any question regarding sustainability in a

100 year perspective. here are some of the questions:

- where are humanities in a 100 years?

- where should we start?

- what important message is mother nature giving us right now?

- where did we find the power to make the transition in 2012?

- are we still here?

- what do we need to burn to get to a sustainable world?

- how to move from “shareholder value” consciousness to global sus-

tainable accountability?

- man or machine in 2112?

- who should we ask about what the future should be?

- how can we live without greed?

- what is the one most significant action i could take to make the

planet sustainable?

- how is art and culture related to the climate in 100 years?

- will it be possible for humans to moderate needs?

- how can we release the inner source at people?

- what future do we prefer – and how can we be sure that everyone

agrees on this?

what was the key driver to a shift towards sustainability? (assuming the

work is now sustainable)

what future is it that we prefer?

what does sustainable cities; countries, world etc. consist of? and how

can we be sure that everyone agrees on this – and is included in this?


This ISSUES is supported by the VELUX FOUNDATION

he said to the room clerk,

‘where can i buy a ticket for a planetary tour?’

‘right here.’

[...]

the room clerk said, ‘good weather. come to think

of it, i do believe it’s the dry season now.’ he added,

conversationally, ‘i don’t bother with the outside myself.

the last time i was in the open was three years ago.

you see it once, you know, and that’s all there is to

it – here’s your ticket. special elevator in the rear. it’s

marked “to the tower”. just take it.’

Isaac Asimov, “Foundation”, 1951

www.in100y.dk

Documents

ISSUES 2 : THIS WAY, PLEASE!