Issues 2. : This way, please!

(1)

Issues 2

: ThIs way,

please!

Preferred futures 2112

future Politics, business, art, and joy Published by house of futures, aPril 2012

Price: 169,- dkkr issn

1904-3414

: 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

(2)

issues is Published by house of futures (hof), nybrogade 26a, 1.-2., dk – 1203 coPenhagen k. web: www.houseoffutures.dk

e-mail: [email protected] telePhone: +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: 1904-3414 circulation: 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.dk

www.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!

(3)

Photo: rolando diaz ole fogh kirkeby, at the first ‘in100y’-seminar.

(4)

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 wandcov-ered 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 Tale

No 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.

(5)

112

90

(6)

(7)

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

85 to me “in100years” is …

98 in100years: Productions and findings. 133 to me “in100 years” is …

159 to me “in100years” 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

COmmeNTs

35 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 content content

(8)

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 PersPeCTIve

Sustainable 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 NOW

This 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.

ThaNks

We 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 buildremember-ing 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

13 issues #2: this way, Please!

(9)

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 Tales

This 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 sUrvIvOrs

We 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 errOr

It 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 learnongo-ing that entailed numerous setbacks, large and small. Cultivation methods and technologies frequently failed until more stable solutions were ultimate-ly found. These, in turn, invariabultimate-ly 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.

(10)

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 sUsTaINaBIlITY

These 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 legislaconserva-tion 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 TraNsFOrmaTIONs

Global 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.

(11)

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 atwww.in100y.dk/videos/

(12)

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.

(13)

(14)

(15)

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.

(16)

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, kPmg anders buhl, head of climate and culture, seas-nve anders thingmand henriksen, Psychologist working in the field

between philosophy, psychotherapy and buddhism

andrew todd, ma in architecture and english literature, founder of studio andrew todd (fra)

ane hendriksen, deputy director, villum and velux foundation anita Pirc velkavrh, Project manager, strategic futures, european

environment agency

annette hastrup, cradle to cradle denmark

anna lise mortensen grandjean, head of secretariat danish coun-cil for sustainable development

anne 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 row

anne louise carstens, global Platform facilitator, mellemfolkeligt samvirke/actionaid denmark

anne grethe holmsgaard, former member of the danish parliament (sf) and chairman gate21

aske tybirk kvist, intern, concito

astrid kann-rasmussen, member of the board vkr foundation/us aziz fall, csr director iss, former adviser at the danish institute for

human rights and founder of citizen21 bo lidegaard, editor in chief, Politiken

bo normander, director, world watch institute europe, and chair-man the ecological council

birgitte escherich, director, kostkompagniet aps

bjørg ilsø klinkby, suitable for business, copenhagen business school

camilla bjerre, ma landscape management, university of copen-hagen

carsten 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 mdi

christian ege, director, the ecological council christian have, creative director, have communication christian Poll, blogger about green lifestyle, danmarks

naturfred-ningsforening

christina blak, copy and strategy, we love People cindy frewen wuellner, futurist and architecht (us)

claus homann, head of department, operations and maintenance, aarhus vand a/s

claus 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 managedepart-ment, Politics and Philosophy, copenhagen business school

ditlev nissen, chairman, danish association of eco-societies dominic balmforth, director, susturb aps (uk/dk)

dorthe steenberg, Paqo, owner of Power spirit

eli dollerup nielsen, assistant manager, biosa danmark aps ellen k. hansen, maa, dac

emilia van hauen, sociologist, author and trendadvisor erik 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 sciences esben strandsgaard, msc in innovation management, chairman,

network and corporate Partners, aarhus sustainability network finn arler, department of Planning, division of technology,

environ-ment and society aalborg university

frank 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 university

hans henrik samuelsen, climaforum09 and 10, mutual knowledge hans kann rasmussen, chairman velux foundation

hans Peter jensen, member of the board velux foundation hardin tibbs, futurist, synthesys strategic consulting ltd (uk) henrik hassing, head of cleantech, force

henrik hermansen, department manager, department of manage-ment, Politics and Philosophy, copenhagen business school henrik larsen, vice President maersk Procurement

henrik tronier, head of humanities and social science Program, velux foundations

helene bjerre jordans, head of environment Program, villum foundation and velux foundation

helene kimø, senior manager – international hr relations, People & development dong energy

inge 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 copenhagen jan 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 copenhagen

jes lind bejer, Project manager, the business innovation fund / the danish enterprise authority

jessica carragher wallner, futurist, kairos future (swe)

josephine dumont, advisor and idea director, j. rydberg-dumont ab (swe)

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

jørgen steen nielsen, journalist, information

karen 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 People karsten bruun hansen, Post doc, Ph.d. aalborg university,

copen-hagen

kathrine 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/s kjeld juel Petersen, villum and velux foundation

klavs birkholm, editor-at-large

kristian stubkjær, vice-chairman villum foundation klaus olsen, head of development at rysensteen gymnasium kurt emil eriksen, active house, vkr holding a/s

lea schick, Ph.d. fellow, it university of copenhagen lars e. kann-rasmussen, chairman villum foundation lars lundbye, future designer and business angel, blu sky lars Pehrsson, ceo, merkur, den almennyttige andelskasse lars 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 publisher

lene skrumsager møller, partner, csi consulting

leonardo lacerda, environment Program director, oak foundation (sui)

lilli sander jensen, Phd, cluster biofuels denmark lone feifer, Project director, velux a/s

malene annikki lundén, samsoe energy academy

marianne zibrandtsen, member of the board velux foundation martin fluri, director cradle to cradle denmark

martin manthorpe, director of strategy and business development, ncc

martin lidegaard, danish minister for climate and energy martin spang olsen, ma and polyhistor

mette termansen, Professor in environmental economics, department of environmental science, aarhus university

mette thyssen. merkur andelskasse mervyn kurlansky, designer

mia rahunen, senior adviser, nordic council of ministers

michael eigtved, associate Professor, Ph.d., department of art and cultural studies, university of copenhagen

michael minter, head of communication, concito

mikkel stenbæk hansen, senior consultant, copenhagen resource institute

michael stubberup, ceo synergaia and member of the board of vækstcenteret

michael wolffhechel, Project manager, co2 e - race/the danish cultural institute

michael zwicky hauschild, Professor, section manager, dtu man-agement engineering department of manman-agement 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 danmark

nis 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 morgen Pouline middleton, blogger, zebra Productions

rasmus adser larsen, suitable for business, copenhagen business school

rasmus ejrnæs, Ph.d. in biology, section leader for biodiversity & conservation, aarhus university

rené karottki, sustainable development Partners

robert 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/s roxana kia, trainer in personal excellence

sangay Penjor, head of gnh commission bhutan (bhu) saamdu chetri, dr.,director of gnh centre bhutan (bhu) sarah louise balle, visionary leadership facilitator and consultant sascha amarasinha, director respond – center for communication

and evocative leadership

steen 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 copenhagen

susanne bøgh, brand strategy, velux a/s

søren hermansen, leader of samsoe energy academy søren lyngsgaard, director and business developer, cradle to

cradle denmark

søren mark jensen, Project manager, nature agency, ministry of environment

søren winther lundby, chief executive officer, globalcitizen tania ellis, advisor and author, the social business company tanja larsen, ministry for climate and energy

teresa ribeiro, head of foresight, european environmental agency thomas hessellund, chairman, aarhus sustainability network thomas færgeman, director concito

thomas trøst hansen, head of section, center for globalization, ministry for science, innovation and higher education tina monberg, lawyer, Psychotherapist and founder of

mediation-center

trine 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, concito tove enggrob boon, senior researcher, forest & landscape, life,

university of copenhagen

ulf 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)

(17)

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.

hOW

the 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

(18)

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.

To me “In100years” Is …

... 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.