Martin Luther King did not say, "I have a nightmare," when he inspired the civil rights movements. He said, "I have a dream." And I have a dream. I have a dream that we can stop thinking that the future will be a nightmare, and this is going to be a challenge, because, if you think of every major blockbusting film of recent times, nearly all of its visions for humanity are apocalyptic. I think this film is one of the hardest watches of modern times, "The Road." It's a beautiful piece of filmmaking, but everything is desolate, everything is dead. And just a father and son trying to survive, walking along the road. And I think the environmental movement of which I am a part of has been complicit in creating this vision of the future.
馬丁•路德•金恩 從沒說: 「我有一個夢魘」 當他鼓舞美國民權運動時 他說:「我有一個夢。」 我也有一個夢 我夢想有一天 我們不再想著 未來是個夢魘 這是一項挑戰 因為,如果你想想 近來每部賣座電影 它們對人類的看法 多半具有末世意味 我認為《末路浩劫》(The Road) 是當代最艱難的電影之一 它是一部很美的電影作品 然而一片荒涼 所有一切都死了 只剩一個父親和兒子 試圖求生,孤獨走在路上 而我認為,我所參與的 環保運動 一起參與謀劃了 製造這般未來圖景
For too long, we have peddled a nightmarish vision of what's going to happen. We have focused on the worst-case scenario. We have focused on the problems. And we have not thought enough about the solutions. We've used fear, if you like, to grab people's attention. And any psychologist will tell you that fear in the organism is linked to flight mechanism. It's part of the fight and flight mechanism, that when an animal is frightened -- think of a deer. A deer freezes very, very still, poised to run away. And I think that's what we're doing when we're asking people to engage with our agenda around environmental degradation and climate change. People are freezing and running away because we're using fear. And I think the environmental movement has to grow up and start to think about what progress is.
長久以來 我們兜售噩夢般的憧憬 警告世人即將發生的事 我們把心思放在最糟糕的情況 我們關注於"問題" 卻沒有想出足夠的 解決方案 我們使用恐懼 攫取人們的注意力 任何心理學家都會告訴你 生物體內的恐懼 連結著逃跑機制 它是掙脫與逃跑機制的一部份 當動物受到驚嚇時 -- 想想鹿就知道 一隻鹿僵直不動 準備逃跑 我想那正是我們在做的 當我們要求人們參與 有關環境惡化和氣候變遷的議程時 人們戰慄、逃跑 因為我們使用恐懼 而我認為,環保運動應該成長 開始思考 何謂進步?
What would it be like to be improving the human lot? And one of the problems that we face, I think, is that the only people that have cornered the market in terms of progress is a financial definition of what progress is, an economic definition of what progress is -- that somehow, if we get the right numbers to go up, we're going to be better off, whether that's on the stock market, whether that's with GDP and economic growth, that somehow life is going to get better. This is somehow appealing to human greed instead of fear -- that more is better. Come on. In the Western world, we have enough. Maybe some parts of the world don't, but we have enough. And we've know for a long time that this is not a good measure of the welfare of nations. In fact, the architect of our national accounting system, Simon Kuznets, in the 1930s, said that, "A nation's welfare can scarcely be inferred from their national income." But we've created a national accounting system which is firmly based on production and producing stuff. And indeed, this is probably historical, and it had its time. In the second World War, we needed to produce a lot of stuff. And indeed, we were so successful at producing certain types of stuff that we destroyed a lot of Europe, and we had to rebuild it afterwards. And so our national accounting system became fixated on what we can produce.
思考改善人類的廣泛處境會是怎麼一回事? 我想,我們面對的一個問題是 人們只關注於 在市場上取得進步 這是金融上的定義 一個經濟上的進步意謂著 -- 基於某種未知的原因 如果我們有個不斷上升的正確數字 我們的生活就變得更好 無論是關於股市 或國內生產毛額 只要經濟成長 不管怎樣,生活必定更好 某種意義上,它訴諸的是人類貪婪 而非恐懼 -- 擁有愈多,即愈好 拜託,在西方世界裡,我們有的已經夠多了 也許世上有些地方不是,但我們的生活已經夠好了 而且長久以來,我們已知,這並不是個用來衡量 國家福利的良好指標 事實上,我們國家會計系統的設計 Simon Kuznets,在1930年間 曾說:「國家的福利 幾乎能夠以其國民收入推斷。」 但我們創造了一個國家會計系統 是完全建基於生產、 與生產物品之上的 的確,這也許是歷史所造成,過去曾是如此 第二次世界大戰時,我們必須生產大量物品 的確,我們也如此成功地,生產出某些產品 我們摧毀歐洲許多地區,之後也必須加以重建 因此,我們的國家會計系統變得 關注、著迷於我們可以生產的物品之上
But as early as 1968, this visionary man, Robert Kennedy, at the start of his ill-fated presidential campaign, gave the most eloquent deconstruction of gross national product that ever has been. And he finished his talk with the phrase, that, "The gross national product measures everything except that which makes life worthwhile." How crazy is that? That our measure of progress, our dominant measure of progress in society, is measuring everything except that which makes life worthwhile? I believe, if Kennedy was alive today, he would be asking statisticians such as myself to go out and find out what makes life worthwhile. He'd be asking us to redesign our national accounting system to be based upon such important things as social justice, sustainability and people's well-being.
但到了1968年 這個有遠見的人 -- Robert Kennedy 在他不幸的總統競選初期 給予了國民生產毛額(GNP) 一次前所未見的 最具說服力的重擊 他以這句話作為演說結尾: 「國民生產毛額可以衡量 生活一切事物,但它無法衡量 你生命的價值。」 多麼瘋狂?我們用來衡量進步的指標 我們主要用來衡量社會進步的工具 可以測量所有一切事物 除了 那使你生活變得值得的東西? 我相信,假使 Kennedy 今天仍健在 他會要求像我這樣的統計學家 去發現尋找 那使生命具有意義的東西 他也許會要求我們重新設計 國家會計系統 使它根據於 一些重要的事,好比社會正義、 永續發展、 和人民福利
And actually, social scientists have already gone out and asked these questions around the world. This is from a global survey. It's asking people, what do they want. And unsurprisingly, people all around the world say that what they want is happiness, for themselves, for their families, their children, their communities. Okay, they think money is slightly important. It's there, but it's not nearly as important as happiness, and it's not nearly as important as love. We all need to love and be loved in life. It's not nearly as important as health. We want to be healthy and live a full life. These seem to be natural human aspirations. Why are statisticians not measuring these? Why are we not thinking of the progress of nations in these terms, instead of just how much stuff we have? And really, this is what I've done with my adult life -- is think about how do we measure happiness, how do we measure well-being, how can we do that within environmental limits.
事實上,社會科學家已經開始 在世界各地詢問這些問題了 這是從一個全球性調查中得來的資料 它詢問人們,他們想要什麽? 當然,世界各地的人們 說他們所要的 是快樂,爲了他們、 爲了他們的家人、孩子、 以及社區 好吧,他們覺得錢有點重要 它存在,但不如快樂重要 也不如愛來得重要 在生命中,我們都需要愛與被愛 它不若健康一般重要 我們想要一個健康完滿的人生 這些似乎是人類的自然願望 爲什麽統計學家不衡量這些東西? 為什麼我們不以這些事物思考國家的進步? 反而僅僅衡量我們擁有多少東西? 真的,這是我在長大後所做的事 -- 思考如何測量快樂、 我們如何衡量幸福、 在環境的限制之下,如何才能做到這一點
And we created, at the organization that I work for, the New Economics Foundation, something we call the Happy Planet Index, because we think people should be happy and the planet should be happy. Why don't we create a measure of progress that shows that? And what we do, is we say that the ultimate outcome of a nation is how successful is it at creating happy and healthy lives for its citizens. That should be the goal of every nation on the planet. But we have to remember that there's a fundamental input to that, and that is how many of the planet's resources we use. We all have one planet. We all have to share it. It is the ultimate scarce resource, the one planet that we share. And economics is very interested in scarcity. When it has a scarce resource that it wants to turn into a desirable outcome, it thinks in terms of efficiency. It thinks in terms of how much bang do we get for our buck. And this is a measure of how much well-being we get for our planetary resource use. It is an efficiency measure. And probably the easiest way to show you that, is to show you this graph.
於是,在我工作的組織 -- 新經濟基金會(New Economics Foundation) 我們創造了一個叫「快樂星球指數」的東西 因為我們認為,人們應該感到快樂,這個星球應該是快樂的 為何我們不創造一個衡量此項發展的工具呢? 而我們所做的 我們說,一個國家的最終成果 取決於她如何成功地 為她的公民創造快樂和健康的生活 那應當才是這個星球上 每個國家的目標所在 但我們必須記得 這裡有個基本的投入 意即,我們使用多少地球資源 我們只有一個地球,我們必須共享 這是我們所共享的 一個資源終究會枯竭的地球 經濟學對稀少性非常感興趣 當擁有一種稀少性資源時 人們希望把它轉變為 一個理想的工業成果 經濟學思考效益 它思考我們需要付出多少力,才能獲得多少錢 而這可以作為一個衡量工具: 我們使用多少地球資源,以獲得多少幸福 它是一個有關效率的測量工具 最簡單的呈現方式,也許就是 向各位展示這個圖表
Running horizontally along the graph, is "ecological footprint," which is a measure of how much resources we use and how much pressure we put on the planet. More is bad. Running vertically upwards, is a measure called "happy life years." It's about the well-being of nations. It's like a happiness adjusted life-expectancy. It's like quality and quantity of life in nations. And the yellow dot there you see, is the global average. Now, there's a huge array of nations around that global average. To the top right of the graph, are countries which are doing reasonably well and producing well-being, but they're using a lot of planet to get there. They are the U.S.A., other Western countries going across in those triangles and a few Gulf states in there actually. Conversely, at the bottom left of the graph, are countries that are not producing much well-being -- typically, sub-Saharan Africa. In Hobbesian terms, life is short and brutish there. The average life expectancy in many of these countries is only 40 years. Malaria, HIV/AIDS are killing a lot of people in these regions of the world.
圖表的水平方向 是「生態足跡 (ecological footprint)」 它度量我們使用了多少資源 以及我們在地球上施加了多少壓力 愈多即是壞 垂直向上的一側 是一個我們稱之為「快樂生活年份(happy life years)」的指標 它與國家福利有關 它就像一個經過快樂調整的預期壽命 如同國家的生活質量和數量 你們所看到的黃點,是全球平均水平 現在,有一批數量龐大的國家 大約介於這個全球平均值左右 圖表的右上方 是那些做得還不錯、福利甚佳的國家 但透過消耗許多地球資源,才到達的 它們是美國、 和其他西方國家形成這些三角 以及一小部份的海灣國家夾雜其中 相反地,圖的左下角 這些國家並沒有產出多少福利 -- 它們通常是撒哈拉以南非洲 以霍布斯的話來說: 在那裡,生命是短暫與殘酷的存在 許多這些國家裡的平均壽命 只有四十年 瘧疾、愛滋 在這些區域裡 奪走許多人的生命
But now for the good news! There are some countries up there, yellow triangles, that are doing better than global average, that are heading up towards the top left of the graph. This is an aspirational graph. We want to be top left, where good lives don't cost the earth. They're Latin American. The country on its own up at the top is a place I haven't been to. Maybe some of you have. Costa Rica. Costa Rica -- average life expectancy is 78-and-a-half years. That is longer than in the USA. They are, according to the latest Gallup world poll, the happiest nation on the planet -- than anybody; more than Switzerland and Denmark. They are the happiest place. They are doing that on a quarter of the resources that are used typically in [the] Western world -- a quarter of the resources.
但現在有個好消息! 上面有些國家,黃色三角這裡 比全球平均值還高 它們正朝著圖表的右上方前進 這是一個理想的圖形 我們想要處於左上方,在那裡好生活並不消耗地球 它們是拉丁美洲 位於最上方的國家 是一個我從沒去過的地方 也許你們之中有人去過 哥斯大黎加 哥斯大黎加 -- 平均預期壽命為 78.5 歲 比美國人活的要久 根據蓋洛普最新的調查, 在這星球上,最幸福的國家 -- 比任何地方都幸福,比瑞士、丹麥還快樂 是最幸福的地方 他們只消耗 西方國家所用掉的 四分之一資源 -- 四分之一的資源
What's going on there? What's happening in Costa Rica? We can look at some of the data. 99 percent of their electricity comes from renewable resources. Their government is one of the first to commit to be carbon neutral by 2021. They abolished the army in 1949 -- 1949. And they invested in social programs -- health and education. They have one of the highest literacy rates in Latin America and in the world. And they have that Latin vibe, don't they. They have the social connectedness. (Laughter) The challenge is, that possibly -- and the thing we might have to think about -- is that the future might not be North American, might not be Western European. It might be Latin American. And the challenge, really, is to pull the global average up here. That's what we need to do. And if we're going to do that, we need to pull countries from the bottom, and we need to pull countries from the right of the graph. And then we're starting to create a happy planet. That's one way of looking at it.
那裡發生了什麽事? 在哥斯大黎加發生了什麽事? 我們可以看看一些數據 99%的電力來自可再生能源 他們的政府是率先承諾 在2021年達到碳中和的國家 他們1949年 就廢除了軍隊 1949年 接著,他們投資於社會計劃 -- 健康與教育 他們是拉丁美洲國家中,識字率最高的國家之一 也是世界數一數二高識字率的國家 他們也充滿拉丁活力,可不是? 他們重視社會連結 (笑聲) 挑戰在於,很有可能 -- 我們必須思考一下 -- 未來 可能不見得屬於北美 不見得是歐洲 未來很可能就是拉丁美洲。 這項挑戰,的確, 是要把全球平均值移到了這裡 那就是我們應當做的事 倘若我們要做這件事 我們必須拉動底層的國家 把國家從圖表的右側拉出 接著,我們才能開始創造一個快樂星球 那是看待它的一個方式
Another way of looking at it is looking at time trends. We don't have good data going back for every country in the world, but for some of the richest countries, the OECD group, we do. And this is the trend in well-being over that time, a small increase, but this is the trend in ecological footprint. And so in strict happy-planet methodology, we've become less efficient at turning our ultimate scarce resource into the outcome we want to. And the point really is, is that I think, probably everybody in this room would like society to get to 2050 without an apocalyptic something happening. It's actually not very long away. It's half a human lifetime away. A child entering school today will be my age in 2050. This is not the very distant future. This is what the U.K. government target on carbon and greenhouse emissions looks like. And I put it to you, that is not business as usual. That is changing our business. That is changing the way we create our organizations, we do our government policy and we live our lives. And the point is, we need to carry on increasing well-being. No one can go to the polls and say that quality of life is going to reduce. None of us, I think, want human progress to stop. I think we want it to carry on. I think we want the lot of humanity to keep on increasing. And I think this is where climate change skeptics and deniers come in. I think this is what they want. They want quality of life to keep increasing. They want to hold on to what they've got. And if we're going to engage them, I think that's what we've got to do. And that means we have to really increase efficiency even more.
另一個方式,是看看時間趨勢 我們沒有足夠數據,讓我們研究世上每個國家 只有些最富有的國家、經濟合作開發組織(OECD)的數據 這是一條關於那段時間的福利趨勢 一個小小的成長 卻是一個反應生態足跡的趨勢 因此,在嚴格意義的快樂星球方法學上 當我們轉變最終稀有資源 到我們所要的結果時, 我們變得較無效率。 我想,真正的問題在於 大概這房間裡的每個人 都不希望2050年時的社會 有什麽末世論 的東西會發生 實際上,它距離我們並不遠 大約只是人類壽命的一半 一個孩子今天進入學校 到了2050年時,就是我現在的年紀了 這並不是一個遙遠的未來 這是英國政府設定 減碳目標的大抵狀況 我要對你們說,這不是尋常的事 那正在改變我們的商業 正改變著我們成立組織、 我們制定政府政策、以及我們參與生活的方式 而重點在於 我們必須增進幸福 沒有人會跑去投票 然後說生活品質正在降低 我想,我們之中沒有任何人 希望人類的進步停滯 我認為我們希望它能夠繼續 我認為我們想要人類持續進步 而我認為,這就是懷疑、否定氣候變遷論的人出現的時候 這就是他們要的,他們希望生活品質持續提升 他們希望維持已經擁有的 如果我們要讓他們一起參與 我想,這就是我們必須要做的事 這意謂著,我們必須真正地增進效率
Now that's all very easy to draw graphs and things like that, but the point is we need to turn those curves. And this is where I think we can take a leaf out of systems theory, systems engineers, where they create feedback loops, put the right information at the right point of time. Human beings are very motivated by the "now." You put a smart meter in your home, and you see how much electricity you're using right now, how much it's costing you, your kids go around and turn the lights off pretty quickly. What would that look like for society? Why is it, on the radio news every evening, I hear the FTSE 100, the Dow Jones, the dollar pound ratio -- I don't even know which way the dollar pound ratio should go to be good news. And why do I hear that? Why don't I hear how much energy Britain used yesterday, or American used yesterday? Did we meet our three percent annual target on reducing carbon emissions? That's how you create a collective goal. You put it out there into the media and start thinking about it. And we need positive feedback loops for increasing well-being At a government level, they might create national accounts of well-being. At a business level, you might look at the well-being of your employees, which we know is really linked to creativity, which is linked to innovation, and we're going to need a lot of innovation to deal with those environmental issues. At a personal level, we need these nudges too. Maybe we don't quite need the data, but we need reminders. In the U.K., we have a strong public health message on five fruit and vegetables a day and how much exercise we should do -- never my best thing. What are these for happiness? What are the five things that you should do every day to be happier?
現在要繪出圖表是很簡單的 但問題是,我們必須轉變這些曲線 我想,這也是我們可以從 系統理論、系統工程、 以及他們從創造反饋迴路汲取榜樣的地方 把正確的資訊放置於正確的地方 人類是非常易於受「現在」鼓舞 你放一個聰明儀錶在家中 你就知道你現在使用了多少電量 你花多少電費 你的孩子會隨手關燈,非常勤快 對社會來說,那看來會是怎一回事呢? 爲什麽每晚在新聞廣播中 當我聽倫敦富時100指數、道瓊指數、英鎊對美元的匯率時 -- 我甚至不知道英鎊對美元時,怎樣算是好消息 我為什麽要聽那些? 我們為何不聽聽: 昨天英國消耗了多少能源? 不聽聽: 美國昨天用了多少能源? 不聽聽: 我們是否達到了年度6% 的減碳目標? 集體目標應該這樣建立才對 把議題放到媒體上,開始思考 我們也需要正面的回饋迴路 以增進福利 在政府的層級,他們或許可以成立國民福利核算機制 在商業的層級,你或許可以看看你的員工福利 我們都知道員工福利關聯著創造力 也與創新能力息息相關 我們也需要有許多創新,作為處理環境議題之用 在個人的層次上,我們也需要這些刺激 也許我們不需要數據,但我們需要被提醒 在英國,我們有個強壯的健康訊息 一天五種蔬菜水果、 應當做多少運動 -- 從來都不是我的強項 這些對快樂有何意義? 哪五件事可以每天做 就會幸福快樂?
We did a project for the Government Office of Science a couple of years ago, a big program called the Foresight program -- lots and lots of people -- involved lots of experts -- everything evidence based -- a huge tome. But a piece of work we did was on: what five positive actions can you do to improve well-being in your life? And the point of these is they are, not quite, the secrets of happiness, but they are things that I think happiness will flow out the side from.
幾年前,我們為英國政府科學辦公室(Government Office for Science)做了一項計劃 一個稱為「展望」計劃的大議題 -- 有許多人 -- 涉及許多專家 -- 涉及每一個證據 -- 一部大型卷宗 但我們做的工作是: 你可以從事哪五種積極的行為 來增進自己的生活福利? 而這些癥結在於 它們並不是什麽幸福的奧秘, 反而是那些使幸福流溢你周身的東西
And the first of these is to connect, is that your social relationships are the most important cornerstones of your life. Do you invest the time with your loved ones that you could do, and energy? Keep building them. The second one is be active. The fastest way out of a bad mood: step outside, go for a walk, turn the radio on and dance. Being active is great for our positive mood. The third one is take notice. How aware are you of things going on around the world, the seasons changing, people around you? Do you notice what's bubbling up for you and trying to emerge? Based on a lot of evidence for mindfulness, cognitive behavioral therapy, [very] strong for our well being. The fourth is keep learning and keep is important -- learning throughout the whole life course. Older people who keep learning and are curious, they have much better health outcomes than those who start to close down. But it doesn't have to be formal learning; it's not knowledge based. It's more curiosity. It can be learning to cook a new dish, picking up an instrument you forgot as a child. Keep learning. And the final one is that most anti-economic of activities, but give. Our generosity, our altruism, our compassion, are all hardwired to the reward mechanism in our brain. We feel good if we give. You can do an experiment where you give two groups of people a hundred dollars in the morning. You tell one of them to spend it on themselves and one on other people. You measure their happiness at the end of the day, those that have gone and spent on other people are much happier that those that spent it on themselves.
第一件事: 連結 你的社會關係 是你生命中最重要的基石 你是否投注時間與精神 在所愛的對象之上? 繼續建造它們 第二件事: 積極 擺脫壞情緒的最快方法是: 走出去,散步去,打開收音機跳舞去 積極 對我們正面的情緒有益 第三件事是: 關注 你對發生於周遭世界的事物有多少關注? 四季變遷、生活周遭的人 你是否察覺,有什麽蠢蠢欲動、即將要浮現的事物? 根據許多關注的證據、 認知行為治療 對我們的幸福是非常有益的 第四項是: 持續學習 持續是非常重要的 -- 在一生中不斷學習 那些持續不斷學習、以及保有好奇心的長輩 比起那些停止學習的人還要健康 不一定得是正式的學習,不需以知識為基礎 保有好奇心最重要 可以是學習烹飪一道新料理 可以是重拾你的兒時樂器 持續學習 最後一個 是最反經濟的活動: 給予。 我們的慷慨、我們的利他主義、 我們的同理心 都已深值於 我們腦內的獎勵機制裡 當我們給予時,我們感覺良好 你可以做個實驗, 在早晨,你給予兩組人100美元 你告訴其中一組,把錢花在自己身上 告訴另一組,把錢花在其他人身上 在這天結束時,你測量他們的快樂程度 那些把錢用於其它人身上的人 會比用於自己身上的人感覺快樂許多
And these five ways, which we put onto these handy postcards, I would say, don't have to cost the earth. They don't have any carbon content. They don't need a lot of material goods to be satisfied. And so I think it's really quite feasible that happiness does not cost the earth. Now, Martin Luther King, on the eve of his death, gave an incredible speech. He said, "I know there are challenges ahead, there may be trouble ahead, but I fear no one. I don't care. I have been to the mountain top, and I have seen the Promised Land." Now, he was a preacher, but I believe the environmental movement and, in fact, the business community, government, needs to go to the top of the mountain top, and it needs to look out, and it needs to see the Promised Land, or the land of promise, and it needs to have a vision of a world that we all want. And not only that, we need to create a Great Transition to get there, and we need to pave that great transition with good things.
這五項 我們把它印成方便靈巧的明信片 它們並不消耗地球一分一毫 它們不含任何碳內容物 它們無須用物質達到滿足 所以,我想這是可行的 幸福無須消耗地球 現在,馬丁•路德•金恩 在他過世的前一晚 作了一場撼動人心的演說 他說:「我知道前路有荊棘, 前路或有艱難困厄 但我不畏懼,我不在乎; 我曾攀上山之巔, 我亦見過那應許之地。」 他是個牧師 但我相信環保運動 事實上,政府、商業社群 都必須攀上那山巔 必須去看看 去見那應許之地 或那承諾的地土 它需要有個 我們都渴望的世界願景 不只如此,我們需要創造一個「大轉變」 才能抵達那裡 我們必須鋪下美好事物,通往大轉變
Human beings want to be happy. Pave them with the five ways. And we need to have signposts gathering people together and pointing them -- something like the Happy Planet Index. And then I believe that we can all create a world we all want, where happiness does not cost the earth.
人類都想要幸福 以五種方式打造它 我們也需要指示 聚集人們在一起,向他們指出 -- 一些比如「快樂星球指數」的東西 我相信 我們能創造出大家都想要的世界, 在那,快樂無須消耗地球
(Applause)
(掌聲)