Social Visions of Future Sustainable Societies 403on ecological disruption is primarily devoted to denouncing technology, while the
discussion of social disruption is limited to northern social pathologies such as
crime, drug abuse and suicide. Similarly, the Second Club of Rome model includes
‘group’ and ‘individual’ strata in each regional model but the model results are
concerned with the usual issues – population, food, energy and income. [Nor does
this change in the more optimistic second-generation treatment; see Meadows et
al (1992)].
A preliminary examination forces acknowledgement of the non-social nature
of these models. The reports are dominated by a concern with material and readily
quantifiable issues. Although the models are, in some sense, views of the future,
their anchors in current data, extrapolations therefrom, and moral or political
judgement about the result leave the reports with the distinct flavour of the present.
In so far as they have social concerns, these seem to centre around an exploration
of limits or material and economic breaking points, rather than an exploration of
the nature and qualities of human institutions, values or experiences. They ask
what limits of stress this society can endure and what will make this society col-
lapse; they do not ask about intrinsic cultural and individual qualities, about
human experiences or about that which is valued. As such, they provide little or
no guidance to the central directions by which people can create dignity, libera-
tion or fulfilment or how these may be possible in different nature–society set-
tings.
Evaluating the Models
As mentioned earlier, we formulated a set of criteria for social visions to character-
ize the essential features of a social vision and to provide a basis for comparing and
evaluating the models. We agreed that the overall social vision created by an author
or research group could be characterized in terms of scope, bias, scale, tone and
vantage point, among other qualities. Within the vision, major spheres of con-
cern – human/nature relationships, material concerns, social organization and
value systems – could then be analysed. The specific variables we selected include
the following: view of nature, view of human nature, view of time, valid modes of
understanding, view of society and social goals, agent of change, population,
equity, relative rights and responsibilities of individual and society, political organ-
ization and authority, institutions, economic system and exchange, technology,
lifestyle, spatial linkages and security. These categories may be loosely grouped as
philosophical assumptions, social organization and material arrangements (see
Table 20.1).