Download As PDF

The industrial and consumerist era was built upon one overriding condition – abundant surplus energy.

Coal, oil and gas provided such vast quantities of concentrated energy that societies could undertake a wide range of activities far beyond simple survival.

Once food, shelter, transport and basic industry had been secured, enormous additional sectors could emerge. Tourism, advertising, financial services, mass commuting, global retailing, endless entertainment, international supply chains, consumer electronics, consultancy industries, luxury goods and countless other discretionary activities all became possible because the energy surplus was so large.

This surplus energy shaped not only the economy but also the psychology of modern civilisation.

Industrial society increasingly came to believe that human progress consisted of quantitative expansion.

• More production meant success.
• More consumption meant prosperity.
• More movement meant development.
• More choice meant freedom.
• More wealth meant happiness.

And because industrial civilisation was fundamentally expansionary, it increasingly measured itself in numerical terms. Growth required measurement. Expanding systems could only be coordinated through statistics, accounts, targets and calculations.

Thus, modern society became a gigantic measuring machine.

• Governments measure GDP growth.
• Businesses measured productivity.
• Banks measured financial returns.
• Transport planners measured traffic flows.
• Retailers measured sales volumes.
• Schools measured test scores.
• Hospitals measured targets.
• Individuals measured income, house values, pensions and possessions.

The modern world increasingly trusts numbers more than lived experience.

At the centre of this system stood Gross Domestic Product, or GDP. GDP measures the total monetary value of goods and services produced within a country during a given period. If more money flows through the economy, GDP rises. If less money flows, GDP falls.

But GDP does not really measure well-being.

It measures activity.

Indeed, many activities which increase GDP may actually reduce human happiness and social stability.

• If families stop caring for elderly relatives and instead pay for commercial care, providers.
• If people stop repairing possessions and constantly replace them, GDP rises.
• If communities become fragmented and individuals purchase more services separately, GDP rises.
• If stress, anxiety and overwork generate larger pharmaceutical industries, counselling industries and entertainment industries, GDP rises.

The industrial system, therefore, rewarded quantity over quality.

The assumption was that if measurable activity increased continuously, society itself must be improving.

But this increasingly produced a strange contradiction.

Material quantity expanded enormously while unhappiness, anxiety, loneliness and social fragmentation often expanded alongside it.

• People possessed more goods yet frequently felt less secure.
• Consumer choice expanded while communities weakened.
• Economic growth increased while trust declined.

The industrial era became extraordinarily successful at producing quantity but much less successful at producing contentment.

This occurred because industrial consumerism encouraged perpetual dissatisfaction. Economies dependent on continuous consumption require people to never feel they have enough. Advertising, fashion, status competition and planned obsolescence all depended upon maintaining permanent dissatisfaction.

A happy, contented and materially sufficient population is economically problematic for a growth-based system because contented people consume less.

Thus, industrial civilisation subtly encouraged endless striving rather than sufficiency.

But this entire system depended upon abundant surplus energy.

The critical issue is not simply the price of energy, but the rising cost of obtaining it.

In the early industrial period, huge quantities of surplus energy could be extracted relatively easily. A small amount of energy invested in oil extraction yielded enormous returns. The surplus remaining after extraction powered the rest of civilisation.

But over time, the easiest resources are depleted first. Oil fields become harder to exploit. Minerals require more processing. Infrastructure becomes more complex. More energy must be invested simply to maintain the energy system itself.

As a result, the net surplus energy available to society gradually declines.

Industrial civilisation can mask this process for some time through debt, financial expansion and technological efficiencies. But eventually the effects spread throughout the economy.

And they appear first in discretionary activities.

This is crucial because a large proportion of modern economic activity is discretionary rather than essential. A vast number of jobs and industries exist only because abundant surplus energy once allowed them to emerge.

As surplus energy declines, societies naturally begin reducing these discretionary activities.

• People eat out less.
• They travel less.
• They postpone purchases.
• They repair rather than replace.
• They reduce luxury spending.
• Businesses contract.
• Hospitality weakens.
• Retail declines.
• Large office sectors shrink.
• Long-distance commuting becomes less attractive.

Some estimates suggest that perhaps nearly half of modern economic activity may ultimately prove to be discretionary – dependent not upon necessity, but upon temporary conditions of high surplus energy.

As these sectors weaken, formal employment also weakens.

This is not merely a temporary recession. It is part of an evolutionary adjustment.

Industrial society required millions of specialised formal jobs because large-scale systems required central coordination. But as discretionary sectors decline, increasing numbers of people have to move towards informal, practical and localised forms of activity.

• Some grow food.
• Some repair equipment.
• Some provide local services.
• Some care informally for others.
• Some combine several small activities together.
• The formal industrial labour market slowly fragments.

Governments often interpret this as economic failure because they continue to view society through industrial metrics such as GDP, tax receipts, and employment statistics.

But underneath the measurements, another process may be occurring.

People begin adapting individually to a world with less surplus energy.

And this adaptation naturally encourages localism.

The important point is that localism is not primarily an ideology imposed politically from above. It is an evolutionary response to changing material conditions.

As large systems become more expensive, fragile and impersonal, individuals increasingly turn towards what feels immediate, practical and dependable.

• They rediscover locality.
• They value nearby food production.
• They reduce dependency upon long supply chains.
• They rely more upon personal relationships.
• They seek practical security rather than abstract financial growth.

And most importantly, the emphasis slowly shifts from quantity towards quality.

This is the profound civilisational change taking place underneath the economic statistics.

Industrial civilisation assumed that more quantity created more happiness.

Localism will discover that quality creates happiness.

A locality with fewer possessions but stronger trust may feel happier than an affluent but fragmented suburb.

• A slower life with secure relationships may produce greater well-being than a high-income life dominated by stress and commuting.
• Repairing and maintaining valued possessions may create greater satisfaction than endless replacement.
• Knowing neighbours may matter more than access to vast anonymous systems.
• Fresh local food may provide more contentment than unlimited supermarket choice.
• Security, familiarity and usefulness begin replacing accumulation as measures of success.
• Importantly, many of these improvements barely register in industrial statistics.
• A neighbour helping another neighbour creates little GDP.
• Home-grown vegetables barely appear economically.
• Shared tools reduce measurable consumption.
• Repairing old equipment lowers retail sales.
• Informal care reduces service-sector activity.

From the viewpoint of industrial economics, these may appear negative because the measurable quantity of transactions declines.

Yet qualitatively, life may improve.

This is why the transition towards localism is so difficult for industrial institutions to recognise. Governments and economists continue to observe declines in measurable indicators while often failing to recognise the emergence of qualitative resilience beneath the surface.

Indeed, localism may initially appear economically poorer but ultimately become socially richer.

• GDP may decline while trust increases.
• Retail spending may fall while practical competence grows.
• Formal employment may weaken while informal usefulness expands.
• Consumer choice may narrow while life satisfaction improves.

The industrial era measured society because it believed reality could be understood numerically.

The emerging localist era may increasingly understand reality through lived experience.

People may gradually judge society less by how much it possesses and more by how well it lives.

And the driving force behind this transition is not primarily political theory, but the decline of surplus energy available to support the enormous quantitative complexity of industrial consumer civilisation. As quantity becomes harder to sustain, society naturally discovers quality