The Nature Positive Agenda is a work in progress. It is a sector by sector roadmap for the state of NH to completely transition. I am composing it in real time, right here on the site. If you'd like to help out with the Nature Positive Agenda, please contact me.
Introduction
Why we need a nature positive economy now.
What is nature? For the purposes of this document we will define it as all living organisms that exist on our planet, outside of Homo sapiens. Of course, we are also nature, but, through a combination of greed, curiousity, inventiveness, and arrogance, we have spent the last two centuries gradually extricating ourselves. During this time, our technological and geographical footprint, and all the wealth it created has been accruing a massive debt to nature (need citations). It is now time to pay up.
There are two main reasons to pay this debt. The first is ethics. Nature does not exist for us, it exists with us. There is nothing beyond the biased stories we tell ourselves that gives humans any intrinsic right to sacrifice nature in order for our species to prosper. Even if we could find a way, through innovation, to survive on this planet without the many free services that nature provides, we would still have to live with the knowledge that our survival came at the deliberate and unnecessary slaughter of millions of other species. The second, is practical. It is unlikely that we can survive easily without these free services (need citations). The most logical course of action is to preserve the system we already have by removing those elements of the economy that are nature negative, and adding elements that are nature positive. If this document were written fifty years ago, I might've added the word "gradually", but since we are now at the breaking point, our economy requires radical change (need citations).
Modern industrial life, cannot continue with business as usual because it has evolved to become inherently anti-nature. Atempts to compensate, through conservation efforts, anti-pollution laws, regulations and other means, have merely slowed the destruction down, and trapped environmentalists in an endless loop of opposition.. In our government bodies, nature is always on the chopping block when the economy demands it., and all our established protections are in danger of being snatched away at any moment, based on the whims of individuals who prioritize wealth. We might win a battle or two, but where nature positive practices are outnumbered by nature negative practices 30:1 (need citation), there is no chance we will win the war.
This document is about how we win the war.
The heart of "nature positive" is a shift in attitude
A nature positive society does not demand "sacrifice", it demands a change in priorities. For a new economy to take shape in any meaningful way, society must rethink its singular focus on maximizing material wealth as the goal or the measure of success. To be "rich" or "wealthy" must be seen as maximizing happiness and well-being for all animals, human and non-human alike. Starting with that principle, a new economy can be built, even a capitalist economy. Products and services can still be bought and sold by individuals driven by the need to make a living, but these products and services must be proven not to be damaging to the commons.
There are two ways in which a product will not be damaging to the commons: products must be completely biodegradable, or infinitely recyclable (NC). Waste is unacceptable, and a product's disposal is simply included in its design. Just as a company spends a lot of money designing a package to be attractive, it must also spend time designing it to be harmless. If it is impossible to make it harmless, then it must be taken back by the company when it is no longer useful, and recycled. If it cannot be recycled, it cannot be brought to market.
The nature positive economy should use education first, then incentives, then mandates.
What would be really nice, is if humans, perhaps with a little persuasion, would simply volunteer to change their behavior. But I think it is safe to say that we are not going to transition quickly to a nature positive economy on good will alone. Education is an important part of the transition, but incentives will be at the heart of it. Mandates can be selectively instituted when incentives fail or are not practical.
Education
Some people argue that economic literacy should be introduced at a very early age. Some people argue that civics should be introduced at a very early age. For the same reasons, ecology and an appreciation for nature should be introduced at a very early age. The difference is that while understanding civics or economics depends on a body of knowledge that must be acquired, biophilia (a love of nature) is present at birth (NC). It is the early education that determines whether or not it remains.
For this reason, an ecological education, supplemented by nature immersion, must be part of all school curriculums and introduced at an early age. We can do the same for adults, though over time this will not be necessary as values that are embraced early in life tend to stay in place throughout life (NC). In the mean time, we can educate adults by using incentives. For example, perhaps ecology courses (accompanied by nature immersion) can be offered for free, and, for certain professions, may be an asset for increasing pay. Though I do understand that, due to advancements in artificial intelligence and robotics, the nature of work is likely to change, there still may be creative ways to incentivize a nature based education that is adapted to the new reality.
Incentives
Where education is not enough, we must incentivize. Though mandates are sometimes a necessary evil, they should be avoided if a desired result can be achieved without them. Huge incentives will be necessary at the beginning of the nature positive transition, but may become less important over time. A happy, healthy life is its own incentive, after all, and, in time, maintaing it will become as obvious and automatic to people as owing a swimming pool is now.
This document is a road map, not a manifesto, and there may be many ways to incentivize a nature positive economy. As an example, I will make one blanket suggestion: that we move subsidies away from nature destroying practices and redirect them to reward nature positive ones. After that, an autonomous system of punishments and rewards can be set up, one where polluters pay in, and non-polluters take out. This would require the establisment of an objective rating system and an appointed board of citizens who assess, apply, and manage funds. For example, if the board determined that a certain business is nature negative, than that business would have to pay into the fund at a certain rate. If a business is determined to be nature positive, or implementing practices that move them in that direction they would be rewarded from the fund.
This system is fair. For far too long, we have rewarded the destruction of nature. Companies have externalized pollution of various kinds to the commons, thus obtaining generational wealth at the expense of the taxpayer, and at the expense of nature and human health. Since these industries have reaped the benefits of a nature negative economy, they must be the ones to pay for a nature positive future. It is not the responsibility of the taxpaying individual who, arguably, has also benefitted, but can be regarded more as a victim of an economy in that they have been forced into operating under.
Mandates (with support)
Some practices are so nature negative that they must be stopped immediately with bans. Examples include overtly toxic substances and other other forms of pollution. Light pollution, for example, has dramatically impacted noctural biodiverisity, and therefore night lighting that is unnecessary should be banned. All pesticides should also be banned.
That being said, to help people acclimate to these extreme bans, support must be provided. Farmers, for example, would require free training in regenerative agriculture and would perhaps need an equipment buy back system to assist them for a few years while the benefits of regenerative techniques take form. SImilarly, a system could be implemented where free motion lighting is provided to individuals who turn in their old lighting. This system could exist under the purview of the prementiioned incentives plan. In other words, turning in your outdoor lighting is a nature positive practive and will help a business to make their case that they are moving in the right direction.
Some practices may be penalized out of existence. Strict penalties, for example, should be applied for the destruction of wildlife, endangered, threatened or common. The idea that some species deserve more protection than others should be replaced by the principle that nature, itself is endangered. That being said, the knowledge of the status of various species is still important, since nature promotion, which moves us beyond conservation, might need to be applied more heavily to support species that are particularly in danger of extinction.
Once again, the implementation of mandates whether they are in the form of bans or fines, should be used sparingly and always be accompanied by training or financial support.
A. Why we need to do this now
B. What the roadmap is and what it isn't.
C The role of government
D. The role of education
E. The Role of industry
Industries that will need to transition
Industries that will need to form (innovations we will need to make the transition possible)
F. Extended consumer responsibility is at the heart of our nature positive future.
II. Sector by Sector roadmap
A. Government
Fish and Game, Forestry, DOT, etc.
Energy/utilities
Construction/development
Agriculture
Mining, extraction
Manufactoring
Tech
Banking/finance
Healthcare
Hospitality
Education
Research and development
Landscapers, Greenhouses, Pest Control companies
Other retail businesses
Consumers/Individuals