Policy course module 4.3 What kind of case for a wellbeing economy do you think works best for policymakers in your local context?

This discussion space is part of the Wellbeing Economy Policy Design course, Module 4.3

Discussion question: Module 4.3 of the course described that there are different ways to make a case for a wellbeing economy, such as: a values-based case, an existential case, a democratic case, a fiscal case, an early investment or economic resilience case, or a visionary case.

What kind of case for a wellbeing economy do you think works best for policymakers in your local context?

Share your thoughts by clicking on the Reply button below.

If you can, please share the country or region that you work in, this helps provide context for other course participants.

Haven’t done the course yet? You can still join the conversation - or take the free Wellbeing Economy Policy Design Course here: https://wellbeingeconomycourse.org/

Region: Southeast Michigan, USA

I went a little off course because it was hard to choose just one which those local to me would see the most benefit from. So… I did them all.

Values-based case: Treating households as a commodity to be traded and sold for profit has limited the available housing supply due to short-term rentals and corporate ownership of single-family homes. The increased costs of housing have caused housing costs to skyrocket and ownership amongst younger generations to fall. Changing how we view, own, and utilize housing by putting people’s wellbeing first can offer families and the following generations the ability to see homeownership not as a dream but as a reality.

Existential case: Extreme climate events such as drought followed by excessive rain has caused many staple crops to fail not only impacting food supply but farmer livelihoods. Implementing regenerative or sustainable farming practices have been shown to make crops more resilient to climate related events.

Democratic case: Polls have shown that citizens are becoming increasingly dissatisfied and untrustworthy of government. Educating people on how they can participate in local politics, introducing feedback mechanisms, and encouraging community involvement in decision making can bring the government back into alignment with the citizens.

Fiscal case: Destruction of natural ecosystems has forced wildlife into suburban and urban areas, upsetting businesses and homeowners. The government response to curb wildlife entry into human occupied areas has not only failed to solve the issue but also comes with a hefty cost. We can begin to address the source of the problem by considering the impact of the destruction of woodlands, marshes, swaps, and other natural ecosystems during decision-making processes.

Economic resiliency: Community gardens, natural lawns, and wildflower gardens are all expanding features within this region. Community gardens build food resiliency during times of financial hardship and taking stress off food production and supply chains. Natural lawns and wildflower gardens reduce water use, protect lawns against drought, provide food chains for local wildlife, and improve soil health and are efficient carbon capture devices.

Visionary case: Communities that engage with each other are often the happiest and are thriving. Wellbeing economy approaches which emphasize local supply chains provide a deep sense of community amongst its businesses, inhabitants, and suppliers. Building a world that’s more connected starts with bringing communities together through economic changes which benefit the wellbeing of the community and its people first and foremost. From farmers markets to breweries using local supplies.

1 Like

That’s fantastic, Acrissm. Such strong cases for why we need this transition. Thanks so much for sharing!

1 Like