Home Sociology Understanding Society and Natural Resources
Civilizational neo-Malthusianism is perhaps the most original modified Malthusian theory. It states that a civilization's problem solving capacity is depleted as social and technological complexity rises to unsustainable levels.
The classical statement is Joseph Tainter's theory of the emergence, survival, and collapse of complex societies (1988). According to this theory, the fate of societies depends on their ability to adapt to emerging challenges either by an upgrade or by a voluntary downgrade of their systemic complexity. In general, upgrades are obviously the preferred option. They are particularly rewarding at the early stages of civilizational development, when the marginal cost of higher complexity is still low. Later on, the growing marginal cost of complexification makes comparable upgrades gradually more expensive. The strategy of problem solving through complexification becomes entirely punitive at the final stages, when the return on investment in further complexity is negative. Tragically, however, the alternative option of voluntary simplification is hardly available because advanced civilizations are not “downward compatible”. They are incapable of a planned reduction of their level of complexity because the existing complexity represents indispensable solutions to real problems. Consequently, involuntary collapse is often the only way for the fragments of the system to reach a new equilibrium.
The fundamental underlying point is that societies are always driven to respond to emerging problems (Wilkinson 1973). These problems can be either exogenous to the society in question, or they can be externalities produced by it. Either way, the logical answer is additional layers of complexity. Tragically, however, complexification has diminishing returns because the easy fixes are implemented first. Moreover, increasing complexity implies increasing costs for the maintenance of
Fig. 4.10 The ancient Near East, 11000–1000 BC
that complexity (Homer-Dixon 2006). When the capacity for problem solving has been depleted due to the declining returns on complexification and the escalating cost for the maintenance of the existing level of complexity, only collapse remains because voluntary simplification is not a feasible option.
The framework has sometimes been applied to the rise and fall of civilizations in history. For example, archaeologists such as Weiss (2000) and Ur (2010) have explained the rise and fall of ancient civilizations in Mesopotamia by the initial ability of these civilizations to respond to climatic stresses with more complexity, followed by a later inability to avoid collapse in the face of otherwise similar stresses (Fig. 4.10, from Friedrichs 2013, 62). The theory can be adapted for the diagnosis of current predicaments such as anthropogenic climate change, energy scarcity, or financial instability (Friedrichs 2013, Ch. 3; Korowicz 2010, 2012).
|< Prev||CONTENTS||Next >|