The cost of a wisdom-centric world.

What will widespread, long-term social welfare ask of us?

In part 3 of this series, The Human Pickle, we presented the case for a wisdom-centric world. We painted a vision for business, technology, education, health, media, politics and our personal lives— taking cues from those who are already embodying this value and philosophy.

It would be incomplete, though, to leave out the cost-benefit comparison. This moral and sustainable future sounds wonderful in theory, but is it even practical? Here, we consider what a wisdom-based way of living might ask of us, including how we get there (process) and what we may have to give up (opportunity cost).

Then, after assessing the outcomes and strategies for taking action, we look at world leaders’ stances and what we’re currently doing, as a global society. Who’s in favour? Who’s not? What do they suggest? And beneath it all: what’s their agenda?

With a global economic system entrenched in the pursuit of information, and an evolutionary history defined by this since humans first existed, any shift will undoubtedly incur resistance. In particular, generations who make sacrifices now may not see the pay-off of their efforts within their lifetime. Is that something we’re willing to accept?

Let’s consider the costs of switching from a knowledge economy to a wisdom-centric world, with some tangible examples that illustrate the day-to-day changes we’ll need to accept, as part of our decision.

Major disruptions in the move to a new model of reality.

Time.

In a wisdom-centric world, the most significant thing we give up is time. Quick fixes and immediate results take a backseat to long-term plans that yield more sustainable outcomes. Governments, businesses and individuals will have to make significant upfront investments, including time, before benefits are realised.

For instance, to meet 2050 international climate goals, we’ll need to invest USD $131 trillion globally, and that’s only a partial transition to renewable energy. Such an investment will fund the phasing out of fossil fuel dependence, upgrading of energy infrastructure and implementation of energy efficiency measures across sectors. The results of this will be incremental and subtle. Day-to-day, we won’t see any noticeable difference in the climate, but we will experience higher energy prices and inconvenient changes to infrastructure.

• Are we willing to give up our patience, our wallets and our convenience for something we won’t see the impact of? For our children’s insurance?

Resource allocation.

Prioritising long-term social welfare involves a major reallocation of resources. In particular, investing in sustainable initiatives means healthcare, education and environmental protection are likely to take precedence over more immediately lucrative projects. Taxpayers will pay more and government budgets will be stretched.

For example, the idea of universal healthcare in the U.S. has long been debated. Proponents argue it would ensure care as a right for all, reduce overall spending and improve health outcomes. Opponents cite price, increased wait times and reduced choice as reasons against it. Such a move is estimated to cost USD $32 trillion over 10 years (Mercatus Center). To fund it, the government would have to consider redirecting current spending on health, increasing or introducing new taxes, ways to reduce overhead costs, negotiating new drug prices, asking for contributions from the public (e.g. premiums) and issuing financial bonds. Every one of these changes is likely to upset some part of the population, which could reduce their popularity and put them out of government.

• Are we, as the public, willing to see beyond the short-term costs some of us will have to pay? Can we back our government’s visions and intentions over 4-year promises?

Cultural shifts.

Perhaps the most uncomfortable (yet necessary) shift is one of values. Society might need to redefine success, moving away from individualistic material gains towards more holistic, community-oriented achievements. Such a shift challenges the very essence of Western culture, which favours (individual) freedom and (material) possessions.

Beyond lost revenue and job displacement, as markets rise and fall, such a shift is likely to lead to identity crises, uncertainty and self-worth struggles on an unprecedented scale. If 1 in 5 people already experience poor mental health, how will the system support an entire society undergoing psychological stress? If the average cost of a therapy session is USD $100 and the average consultation period involves 20 sessions, can we expect people to fork out $2,000 for this? And, beyond the cost and availability of treatment, what will be the result of reduced productivity and heightened social unrest? The most frightening consequence of all is the unpredictability of both nature and magnitude.

• Are we willing to challenge our own beliefs and everything we know to be true? Can we normalise confusion and support one another during times of pain, as we rediscover who we are and relearn what’s truly important?

Educational reform.

As explained in part 2 and part 3, many of our school systems have been designed to reward students for academic excellence over critical thinking, ethical reasoning, emotional intelligence, including the ability to apply that knowledge in real-world scenarios. Not only are these variables harder to measure, incorporating them would require major curriculum changes, re-skilling of teachers and new assessment criteria; a complex, arduous and resource-intensive process.

When Finland moved to an egalitarian model in the 1970s and 80s, it had to raise spending on education significantly to pay for teacher education, new infrastructure and resources, special education services, student support, as well as course development. To maintain its position as a world-leader—with the highest averages in reading, maths and science, plus minimal performance gaps in students from different backgrounds—Finland spends about 6.6% of its GDP on education, far above the OECD average of 5%.

• Are those of us who already have school certificates and university degrees willing to invest in the children of tomorrow? Can we help fund the reformation of our education systems, even if we don’t experience any direct benefit?

Economic adjustments.

In the business world, transitioning to more sustainable and ethical practices might initially impact profitability and require new ways of measuring success, which is likely to be inconvenient at first. Companies may need to invest in sustainable technologies, fair labour practices and ethical supply chains—without any promise of a direct pay-off. Considering their data obsession, as discussed in part 2, such a decision is likely to garner resistance when business owners aren’t able to predict money-in versus money-out.

The cost of change, including who wins and who loses, will depend on a business’ industry, market and relative response. For example, for manufacturers switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy, the price of installing new solar panels could range from USD $100,000 to USD $500,000. On top of this, they must train new staff, pay for ongoing maintenance and accept limits to their income during transitions or downtimes. But, while the initial investment seems significant, payback is estimated to take only 3 to 7 years. After this, companies can benefit from reduced energy costs, ongoing.

• Will we each pay the price, when it is asked of us? How will we support one another—through grants, scholarships and loans—to ease the initial burden, especially where it’s unfeasible or concerns a business’ survival?

Policy and governance changes.

Embracing long-term social welfare demands comprehensive policy changes at all levels of governmental, including new legislation and ongoing development. Implementing these policies requires strong political will, not to mention public support, which poses the greatest threat to reinstatement.

When Sweden introduced its carbon tax in 1991 at a rate of approximately USD $37 per ton of CO2 emissions, many businesses and consumers were affected by the increase in prices of fossil fuels. But, despite concerns over economic damage, Sweden’s economy grew by 44% over the next 15 years, while carbon emissions decreased by 9%. Sweden proved it is possible to implement environmental policy without harming the economy. Consequently, many who were initially resistant adapted over time, especially as environmental benefits became evident, the growth of renewables led to new business opportunities and the government used the revenue to offset other taxes.

• Can we trust our governments to make the right decisions on our behalf? Will we reserve our initial judgments until their strategies and actions have had a reasonable chance to work?

Personal lifestyle changes.

On an individual level, adopting a wisdom-centric lifestyle might mean making more conscious choices about what we consume, how and where we work, plus how we live our daily lives. We may have to pay more for organic or sustainable products, especially initially, before economies-of-scale are present and become mainstream.

On average, organic foods cost 10-30% more. If a typical grocery basket costs USD $50, the organic equivalent may be between USD $55 and USD $65. Over a month, if a family spends USD $200 on conventional produce, switching entirely to organic would increase their monthly spending by USD $20 to USD $60. While such a price difference might seem manageable on a single purchase, it can add up significantly over time. Annually, the extra cost could range from a few hundred to over a thousand dollars, depending on the family’s overall food budget and consumption patterns. But, as more people switch to organic, the cost goes down over time.

• Again, will we each pay the price? How will we support one another to ease the initial burden? And how can governments support low-income earners, who are most affected?

Conflict resolution.

Naturally, all these changes are likely to lead to significant and ongoing conflict. The redistribution of resources, coupled with cultural shifts and changes to individuals’ lifestyles are a recipe for heated arguments. Navigating these—whether in communities, businesses or politics—requires skilful communication, compassion and compromise.

One common example is the conflict that arises when new energy infrastructure affects land use, environmental impact and community aesthetics. Developers might need to invest in extensive community engagement efforts to address the concerns of locals, conservationists and other stakeholders. A wind farm project may allocate a portion of its budget, say 5-10%, toward financial compensation, where an impact assessment for a medium-sized wind farm costs anywhere between USD $200,000 and USD $500,000. On top of this, if there are legal disputes, the fees could run into hundreds of thousands of dollars. Plus, a one-year delay in a wind farm project could result in indirect fees like loss of potential revenue, ranging up to several million dollars. This introduces social, environmental, legal and financial risk for the parties involved.

• Finally, can we accept that the road to a wisdom-centric world won’t be perfect? If we are caught in a conflict, can we see past the disagreement, consider the greater good and problem solve together? Can we all practice more empathy, understanding and collective decision making?

The move to a wisdom-centric world.

A roadmap for optimising social and financial cost-benefit.

As we contemplate the journey ahead, acknowledging and managing the above costs is paramount. They must be taken into account as we design strategies and actions for the evolution we’re being prompted to undertake.

A slow approach that prioritises balance will limit disruption, give people time to adapt and ensure the costs are shared. Before we dive into the specific recommendations of world leaders, here are the basic principles I suggest.

Gradual implementation.

A phased approach, particularly in implementing policies around environmental regulation and educational reform, will facilitate smoother adjustments, resulting in less economic upheaval and community conflict.

Future education.

Quality decision making is at the heart of this shift. Investments into education and training will foster the critical thinking, ethical reasoning and sustainability skills necessary to nurture wise leaders of the future, preparing them for even more complex challenges ahead.

Workforce training.

Re-skilling and up-skilling will help the current workforce move with the times. By minimising job displacement and economic strain, we can reduce resistance to the emerging industries and technologies that are necessary.

Supportive monetary policies.

Economic incentives are instrumental in encouraging sustainable practices and ethical business operations. Subsidies or tax breaks can make the transition feasible for businesses and consumers, even kickstarting the creation of new markets.

Public-private partnerships.

Business collaborations, in particular the coming together of the public and private sectors, allow for pooling resources and expertise. This lowers costs and leads to more efficient solutions, particularly in environmental conservation, infrastructure development and community projects.

Investments into technology.

Conscious innovation can also play a pivotal role in optimising efficiency and effectiveness. Investing in new tools has the power to revolutionise every sector, especially with the advancement of AI. Better data collection, smarter decisions, optimal resource allocation, automated distribution.

Community engagement.

Public participation in the decision-making process ensures that changes are more inclusive and aligned with the needs and values of those affected. Communities should be incentivised, encouraged and empowered to take part in the changes, increasing overall acceptance and the accuracy of representation.

Social support systems.

The importance of mental health facilities, and access to them, cannot be understated. Policies must prioritise intellectual, emotional and spiritual well-being, as well as robust social safety nets like unemployment programs, healthcare / educational assistance, disability / aged care benefits plus family / housing support.

Additional considerations.

For a smooth and successful journey.

Despite rigorous planning, unforeseen changes are unavoidable. Continuous monitoring and adaptation are key, including regular assessments of impacts to individuals, families, communities, businesses and governments. We must all enter this period with an open mind and open heart, anticipating strategic adjustments and practising flexibility with one another.

Above all, clear communication and transparency are among the top priorities. This is a collective vision we’re creating, based on shared values, goals and processes. Articulating the long-term benefits and including a solid rationale for all changes will foster buy-in and broader support.

Our trust will be tested.

At the end of the day, success relies on our degree of empathy, including our willingness and ability to understand one another. To value unity over individuality. To practice emotional intelligence, perhaps even more than logic or reason.

The path to a wisdom-centric world is complex, but it is achievable. In fact, we are already on our way, with many of these changes being implemented on a variety of levels.

Where are we doing, currently? What are our strategies and actions? Who is spearheading the movement? To where? And can we trust them?

These are the questions we answer in part 5 of The Human Pickle. We consider what our behaviour says about our values, as a species. Because that’s the only way we can determine whether our vision, strategies and actions align with where we want evolution to take us.

An invitation to use your voice.

Prove me wrong, share your perspective.

Meaningful change rests on healthy challenges. So, I invite you to form your own argument. Let’s make this a safe space for critical thinking and questioning. The more diverse a conversation, the stronger our species representation, and the better we can design a future we all love.