Abstract
Recognising the prevalence of radical uncertainty and complexity, in a world populated by billions of individuals pursuing improvements in their very diverse valued lives, has a fundamental impact on the policy setting. There needs to be no change in the objective of improving individual and community wellbeing on a sustained basis. The main impact is on the focus of public policy, as well as the choice of policy instruments and implementation mechanisms. The search for solutions to optimisation problems is replaced by a focus on investing in resilience – characterised by adaptability of the environment, society, and economy – to emerging situations that cannot be predicted or controlled. At the system level, resilience rests on two foundations: protecting comprehensive wealth from catastrophes, while at the same time nourishing human inventiveness – natural inquiry through experimentation (see Mokyr 2016). At the centre of the enquiry are the ecosystems within which individuals and communities live and operate, including the institutions that shape their incentives. This revised policy framework embraces localism, experimentation, small steps in implementation, reversibility and fast failures, and planning on surprises. It is built around the benefits of decentralisation and emergence. Collective wellbeing is pursued not by searching for investment levers that will enhance well-defined social outcomes, but rather by making it easier for people to pursue the varied lives they value, with no pre-defined desired aggregate social outcomes. “What works” is defined by communities, not by public servants, although the latter can play a constructive and critical role in helping communities achieve the outcomes they value.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
The type of complexity we are referring to here is often distinguished by the term “adaptive complexity” or similar terms (see e.g., Haldane 2013; Von Hayek 1989).
- 2.
See Broadberry and Wallis (2017) and Haldane (2018) on the critical influence of resilience-building economic and social institutions on the progress of human prosperity since the Industrial Revolution.
- 3.
For an overview of modern evolutionary economics, see Nelson (2017).
- 4.
This broadly also corresponds to Markovian policies, derived in feedback form via dynamic programming, as opposed to open-loop optimal policies derived from the maximum principle (see e.g., Haurie et al. 2012).
- 5.
Needless to say, this would be contested on the grounds that it is too narrow. There appears to be a broader consensus around the nine interlinked planetary boundaries identified by Rockström et al. (2009). This is not critical for our purposes.
- 6.
This is not to deny that, for example, an overfished fishery can possibly return to its pristine state, or at least become productive again.
- 7.
The way we will express this in Chap. 6 is that none of the economic state variables should leave the viability kernel.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd., part of Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Karacaoglu, G., Krawczyk, J.B., King, A. (2019). Wellbeing-Enhancing Public Policy - Extensions. In: Intergenerational Wellbeing and Public Policy. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6104-3_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6104-3_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-6103-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-6104-3
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)