Economies of Wellbeing
From Critical Practice Chelsea
This text was prepared for our second annual publication hence the references to page numbers.
Connecting projects and looking forward
..or something to that effect
"We want to begin to redefine "wealth" and "progress": to judge our systems and economies on how much they create the world we actually want, rather than how much money they generate." - Centre for Well-being, New Economics Foundation (NEF).
Since the Between[1] ethics and issues of value have continued to inform and antagonize our work.
Our engagement with these themes has proved exciting, providing a critical basis from which to resist the cold logic of finance. It has enabled us to begin to tease money apart from the transactions embedded in our FLOSS-inspired approach to cultural production.
Economics has its root in 'household management'. Through the current environmental discourse we might recover its use from finance and shift our reading from an insular (or protectionist) 'care of the home' to a relational or interdependent 'care of the self' (see p.18).
Here our work seems to overlap with NEF's address to the ethics of capitalism and market economics. They are a think-and-do tank focused on political and economic changes that engage with the needs of people as communities and by implication the welfare of the planet[2]. They contend that orthodox economics measures the wrong things.
As Critical Practice has explored through recent projects such as ResourceCamp (see p.20) and the Market of Ideas (see p.13), measuring the right things is not easy. The qualitative value of a good, service, experience, or mode of participation is difficult to quantify. Accounting for money fails to reflect the true cost and full benefit and misses important elements to individual and organisational wellbeing, such as happiness, security, personal development and freedom.
This spirit of ecological accounting is relevant to cultural economies such as ours, but we are wary, for fear of expanding the reach of capital. At the Between, it was observed that when something is measured it is absorbed into the logic of capital. So perhaps identifying but not necessarily quantifying the multiplicity of intangible resources is the way to proceed.
As philosopher Bernard Stiegler states[3], to pay attention is to take care, psychic and social care of the object of attention. This paying of attention, as investing without interest, bridges a personal economy and links to an ethic of social and political agency.
Wellbeing is an umbrella for much of what we feel to be essential in sustaining self-organised activity. In fact it has evolved into something of a preoccupation for Critical Practice, a common thread throughout our activity of the last year, and the ground from which to build over the next.
1 - In April of 2007 Critical Practice worked with O+I (formerly the Artists Placement Group (APG) and Kit Hammonds to stage a Between (a downtime event between exhibitions) at the South London Gallery. See Critical Practice: Issue 1.
2 - See http://www.pluggingtheleaks.org, an action-planning tool which enables people to explore together how their local economy works and to develop ideas for improving it.
3 - In the opening lecture of the London Festival of Europe 2008, philosopher Bernard Stiegler explored what it is to pay attention. He suggested that there is a war being fought over attention by neo-liberal commercial interests and a civil society.
Economies of Wellbeing
In April of 2007 Critical Practice worked with O+I (formerly the Artists Placement Group (APG) and Kit Hammonds to stage a Between (a downtime event between exhibitions) at the South London Gallery. The event was focused on issues of value and enabled us to begin to tease money apart from the transactions embedded in cultural production. (see issue 1 of the Critical Practice publication)
For Critical Practice the engagement with value and ethics has been quite exciting, since it has provided a critical basis from which to mount resistance to the cold logic of finance. Here our work seems to overlap with that of the New Economics Foundation (NEF).
- "We want to begin to redefine "wealth" and "progress": to judge our systems and economies on how much they create the world we actually want, rather than how much money they generate." - Centre for Well-being, New Economics Foundation.
NEF challenge the ethics and the assumptions of market capitalism, using the discourse of economics – they suggest that orthodox economics measures the wrong values. Accounting for money misses important elements like happiness, health and well-being. As a 'think-and-do tank', they are focused on political and economic changes that engage with the needs of people as communities and by implication the welfare of the planet. As Critical Practice has explored, through recent projects such as the Between, ResourceCamp (see p.xxx) and the Market of Ideas (see p.xxx), it’s not easy to account for the qualitative value of a good, service, experience, or mode of participation. These are bound by values which are ultimately oriented toward our aspirations and sense of wellbeing. The term is an umbrella for much of what we feel to be essential in sustaining Critical Practice. In fact it has evolved into something of a preoccupation, a common thread throughout our activity of the last year, and a ground from which to build over the next.
Wellbeing and the production of 'us'
Wellbeing extends the reach of what we consider to be our health to a 'care of the self', as economics might extend its account of 'care of the home' to incorporate positive and negative externalities, and encourage us to nurture that which sustains us in what we do. If happiness is our goal economic prosperity and wealth are seen to have a limited impact. The UK economy, measured as Gross Domestic Product (GDP), has increased for several decades in comparison to other economies, yet levels of life satisfaction are said to be constant, if not falling. NEF's proposition that growth doesn't work resonates with the rationale of the commons that informs much of what Critical Practice do. Economic prosperity is a distraction to...
There are however wider implications to the political value of economics to power and international relations. As much as James Heartfield accuses Green Capitalism of liberal fascism it does offer a balance between value and values (painful remedies in a declining economy).
NEF ultimately recognises as our wellbeing the integrity of life satisfaction. With their Happy Planet Calculator, levels of happiness are mapped against wealth and environmental cost - 'as if people and planet matter'. By comparison, 'satisfaction' in Critical Practice is in the negotiation of values and the struggle to reflect those in practice. Wellbeing is a concern among others, and it may be our own internal account of profit and loss.
To 'pay' attention = to give credit.
In the opening lecture of the London Festival of Europe 2008, philosopher Bernard Stiegler explored what it is to pay attention. He suggested that there is a war being fought over attention by neo-liberal commercial interests and a civil society. Stiegler states that to pay attention is to take care, psychic and social care of the object of attention, which of course could be another person. This paying of attention, as investing without interest, bridges a personal economy and links to an ethic of social and political agency.
To be interested without an interested return.
Following the Market of Ideas Christopher Houghton-Budd of the Centre for Associative Economics made an effective connection between altruism and credit. To 'give credit', he explained, is to invest in possibility, to allow an idea to prosper. As with other transactions credit need not be financial. The gesture can be made outwards or internally toward ones own well-being. That’s not to say that it will be without cost.
Reading through Bruno Latour ‘s performance of Actor Network Theory (ANT) (see p.xxx) a socialised - i.e. shared - experience of wellbeing is inevitable. This is why we initiated the budget guidelines for Open-organizations (see p.xxx). Self-organised activity is greatly dependent upon the free and willing contributions of individuals. Here, personal and organisational well-being is more pertinent as a component of sustainability than finances. The economies of such activities rely upon, and therefore benefit from 'measuring' more than money (accounting or recognising or appreciating may serve just as well). Attention paid to other mediums of cost and benefit will make activities resistant to finance. Our budget guidelines suggest 'invest for future gain' - speculate on social gain, on profit to the commons.
Resistant and sustainable economies
Critical Practice is interested in this spirit of ecological accounting, but also wary, for fear of expanding the reach of capital. At the Between, it was said that when something is measured it is absorbed into the logic of capital. So perhaps identifying but not necessarily quantifying the multiplicity of resources is the way to proceed.
Being a porous organization gives us strengths and vulnerabilities. Functioning on generosity and enthusiasm carries a risk of exhausting the reserves of other resources each one of us invests in Critical Practice. The health of the cluster is maintained when new fresh members replenish the collective 'pot' of resources. This means that the wellbeing of the cluster is sometimes at the expense of individual wellbeing. Working on the the budget guidelines for Open-organizations is part of our strategies to improve Critical Practice ecology and sustainability.
Return to publication Content.
Return to Publication.
