Link here to the full briefing on Research Gate
The table above gives an example of how to use Real Capital accounting to clarify policy. Policy is an asset, liability is shortfall and equity is performance against policy. Find more explanations in the video and briefing.
Is it possible to present information in a rational way, to policy makers, that does not need financial information to be useful to policy makers? Could scientists do this without becoming economists? In an era where scientific advancements shape our understanding of the world, the gap between science and politics remains a significant challenge. This divide often results in politicians struggling to effectively process scientific information and translate it into sound policy decisions – leaving it to economists.
One primary reason for the gap between science and politics is the inherent differences in their respective frameworks and objectives. Science operates on empirical evidence, rigorous experimentation, and peer-reviewed research to uncover truths about the natural world. In contrast, politics is driven by various factors such as ideology, public opinion, and electoral considerations. These differing priorities can lead to conflicts when scientific findings challenge political agendas or established beliefs.
Moreover, the pace of scientific discovery often outstrips the ability of political systems to adapt and respond. Scientific research progresses incrementally, with new evidence frequently reshaping our understanding of complex issues. However, political decision-making tends to be slow and bureaucratic, constrained by legislative processes, competing interests, and short electoral cycles. This misalignment can hinder the integration of the latest scientific knowledge into policy formulation and implementation.
Policy makers often rely on economists to provide their decision bases. However, one of the failings of standard economics when preparing decision bases for policy makers, is that anything that cannot be valued in money is seen to have no value or little value. The Earth does not send a bill for the use of its atoms, so the stewardship of the material world is left out. Without a comprehensive valuation framework, policy makers and strategists are likely to miss the full picture by just relying on monetary values and make decisions that could be detrimental to society, counter to the intentions of the policy.
To bridge the gap between science and politics where scientists communicate succinctly and directly, concerted efforts are needed from both the scientific and political communities. Scientists must engage more actively in public discourse, effectively communicating their findings to policymakers and the general public in accessible language. Additionally, interdisciplinary collaborations between scientists, policymakers, and other stakeholders can facilitate the integration of scientific evidence into policy development processes.
We believe Multi-Capital, or Real Capital, offers a sound communication framework for scientists to better clarify their insights to policy makers as well as providing a better basis for dialogue between disciplines. Several thinkers (including,for example, Boyd 2020 and Hazel Henderson) have suggested that the concept of real capital – or multi-capital – be introduced into the political economy to aid decision-making at policy level. This may overcome one of the failings of standard economics: when preparing decision bases for policy makers, anything that cannot be valued in money is seen to have no value or little value.
This briefing gives a general explanation of real capital and how to use its valuation in preparing decision bases based on scientific insight. We aim to demonstrate that the Real Capital approach gives a more robust decision basis, helping identify long term investment needs and policy that steers investment and activities to avoid capital degeneration and promotes capital regeneration.
Download the full report from Researchgate.
Stephen Hinton Consulting 