If individual income were to be based on improving resilience, with an emphasis on self-organization within open systems, it would fundamentally reshape how society functions, especially when it comes to income distribution and sustainability.
Resilience and Open Systems: Shifting the Value of Work
- Resilience refers to a system's ability to maintain functionality in the face of disturbances. In an open system, resilience isn't confined to one isolated part but flows throughout, affecting the entire system. For example, improvements in local ecosystems can contribute to broader environmental stability, enhancing regional and even global resilience.
- Impact on Income: In this model, individuals are paid not based on traditional productivity metrics (such as speed or quantity of output) but on how much their work improves the resilience of interconnected systems—be they environmental, social, or economic. For instance, a farmer improving soil health or a community leader building social interconnection would both see their income increase as they enhance long-term stability.
This would reward system-level thinking and encourage actions that benefit society at large, such as regenerative agriculture, community building, and environmental restoration. The economy would shift from extraction and short-term profit to sustainability and system-wide resilience.
Self-Organization and Decentralized Decision-Making
- In open systems, self-organization is a key feature. Nature self-organizes through decentralized feedback loops, allowing systems to adapt and evolve without centralized control. Applying this concept to human society would mean that decisions about how to improve resilience would be made at a local level, based on direct feedback from the environment or community.
- Impact on Income: Individuals would be incentivized to make adaptive decisions that improve resilience within their local context. Income would reflect their ability to respond to local needs—whether ecological, economic, or social—and to foster long-term sustainability in their environment. For example, someone improving water management in a drought-prone region might earn more than the current corporate CEO, reflecting the systemic importance of their work.
Outcome: Society would move away from rigid, top-down economic models. Local actors would have more control over their environments and economies, leading to greater adaptability and collaboration within and between communities. This approach would foster innovation and a stronger connection between people and the systems they live in.
Cultural Shift: Valuing Contribution to Systemic Resilience Over Material Wealth
- A resilience-based income system would fundamentally alter societal values. Today, income is often tied to individual productivity, profit maximization, and consumption, driving overexploitation and short-term thinking. In contrast, a system that values resilience would shift focus to long-term, system-wide stability.
- Impact on Society: Success and status would be redefined. Instead of being admired for accumulating wealth, individuals and organizations would be recognized for enhancing resilience—whether through environmental restoration, community well-being, or social equity. There would be less emphasis on material wealth, leading to a decline in consumerism. Instead, people might gain satisfaction from their role in improving interconnected systems, be they ecosystems, social structures, or the economy.
This cultural shift could reduce inequality and resource overuse. Income would be more equitably distributed, as contributions to resilience can come from diverse areas of society—farmers, educators, community leaders, and engineers alike. The goal of building long-lasting, self-sustaining systems would take precedence over short-term profit.
Flattening Economic Inequality
- Today’s economic system often rewards those who can extract and accumulate resources the fastest, leading to stark income inequality. A resilience-based model, especially one integrated into an open system, would change this dynamic.
- Impact on Income: Since resilience can be built across various sectors (from environmental work to social resilience), income opportunities would be more diverse and widely distributed. This means that jobs typically undervalued in today’s economy—such as caregiving, community organizing, or environmental stewardship—would become highly valued, leading to a more equitable distribution of wealth.
Income would no longer be concentrated at the top of the economic hierarchy. Instead, those contributing to systemic health—whether environmental, social, or economic—would earn a fair wage. This would likely reduce poverty and income disparities, while also addressing issues of social and environmental justice.
Environmental Stewardship and Long-Term Thinking
- Environmental health would become a direct economic priority. The current focus on GDP growth and material output often leads to environmental degradation. By shifting to a resilience-based model within an open system, income would be directly tied to efforts that enhance ecological resilience, such as sustainable farming, biodiversity conservation, and clean energy development.
- Impact on the Environment: Individuals and businesses would be financially incentivized to operate within sustainable limits. Activities that deplete natural resources without replenishing them would not only become less profitable but also less socially acceptable. Self-organizing systems would reward practices that ensure the long-term health of ecosystems, aligning human economic activities with natural processes.
This could lead to widespread environmental restoration. Degraded ecosystems would recover, and economic activities would shift from extraction to regeneration, leading to a healthier planet and more stable climate. The economy would move from growth for growth’s sake to a focus on maintaining and enhancing the health of the biosphere.
The integration of resilience, self-organization, and open systems would lead to a more adaptive, equitable, and sustainable society. Rather than being driven by short-term output and competition, societies would organize around long-term systemic health. Income would reflect an individual’s contribution to improving resilience, encouraging collaboration, environmental stewardship, and social equity. This transformation could help address many of the most pressing challenges of the modern world, from income inequality to climate change, fostering a society that is more in tune with the principles of natural systems.
If individual income were tied to resilience, the inclusion of a basic income and a societal safety net would amplify the impact of these transformative principles on society. Let's see how this would unfold when combined with self-organization and open systems:
Basic Income as a Foundation for Resilience Work
- Current Model: In many economies today, individuals must take on jobs driven by survival needs rather than passion or societal benefit. This frequently leads to exploitative labor conditions and limits people's ability to contribute to long-term societal well-being. Economic insecurity, concentrated wealth, and the pressure to maximize output often leave many unable to pursue resilience-focused work that might yield slower but more sustainable results.
- New Model with Basic Income: A guaranteed basic income would provide financial stability to everyone, allowing them to focus on contributing to resilience-building efforts rather than being forced into jobs purely for survival. Basic income would serve as the foundation upon which individuals can pursue work that enhances ecological and social resilience, whether that be in local environmental restoration, community-building, or social welfare efforts.For example, an individual who might have been limited to low-wage, high-exploitation jobs in today’s economy could now focus on improving local ecosystems, designing sustainable energy solutions, or working on community mental health initiatives—all of which improve resilience within open systems.
Societal Safety Net and Decentralized Support Systems
- Resilience Through Local Networks: A basic income also reduces the dependency on centralized aid and promotes local systems of mutual support. Communities would become self-organizing, with individuals working together to meet the needs of the group while improving local ecological and social resilience. This decentralized, self-organizing safety net would allow for more adaptability and responsiveness to local conditions, aligning with the principles of open systems, where feedback and resource flows adapt to the needs of the entire system. For instance, communities might establish local food systems, energy solutions, or social support networks that are more resilient because they are attuned to local feedback loops—the same principles that drive natural ecosystems.
Outcome: Freedom to Contribute to Long-Term Resilience
- Poverty Reduction: A basic income would alleviate economic insecurity, giving people the freedom to pursue work that aligns with societal resilience goals. This could reduce poverty, lower healthcare costs, and foster a more equitable society where everyone has the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to the larger system. It is known that freedom of need is the greatest improvement of innovative output.
- Environmental and Social Health: As more people focus on resilience improvement, society would experience a decrease in exploitative labor and an increase in environmental stewardship and social equity. People would invest their efforts in regenerative agriculture, community cohesion, and mental health initiatives, building not just individual livelihoods but community-wide resilience.
By combining basic income with a resilience-based economy, the societal safety net would become more robust, flexible, and locally adaptive. Economic security would be guaranteed, allowing individuals to contribute to long-term stability and well-being without the fear of poverty or unemployment. As a result, stress and healthcare costs related to economic pressures would decrease, and individuals would have more freedom to innovate and collaborate on resilience-enhancing projects.
Interplay with Open Systems and Self-Organization
- Open Systems Thinking: With resilience as a central metric, and the security of a basic income, individuals would operate within open systems where their contributions to resilience flows—such as sustainable energy, biodiversity, and community well-being—improve the health of the broader system.
- Self-Organization: Self-organizing principles would flourish in this context, with local communities adapting their resilience efforts based on real-time feedback from the environment, economy, and society. Decentralized decision-making would encourage more flexibility, collaboration, and innovation in resilience strategies.
The integration of basic income into a resilience-based, open-system economy would lead to a more equitable, sustainable, and adaptive society. People would have the financial security to focus on improving resilience, promoting social equity, environmental restoration, and community well-being. This shift would reduce overconsumption, poverty, and the environmental degradation linked to short-term profit motives, creating a system where human economies mirror the self-organizing, interconnected, and sustainable processes found in nature.
As the current system is created by the minds of humans, what is stoping us from changing it?
