philosophy – Stephen Hinton Consulting

Beyond Growth and Degrowth: The Compelling Vision of Capital Maturity

For decades, our economic discourse has been trapped in a false choice between two unsatisfying futures. On one side stands the familiar model of endless economic growth. This path that relentlessly consumes natural resources and risks environmental devastation. On the other is the alternative of degrowth, a concept often perceived as a narrative of reduction, scarcity, and diminished quality of life. This document introduces a third, more inspiring path forward: the pursuit of Real Capital Maturity. This vision reframes our ultimate economic goal not as perpetual expansion, but as the achievement of a stable, high-quality, and regenerative state where the fundamental needs of everyone are met with sufficiency and efficiency.

How to use the Real Capital framework on national budgets

Most national budgets tell us how much money governments plan to spend and collect. But they rarely say anything about whether the nation’s forests are thriving, its infrastructure is decaying, or whether citizens are healthy and capable of sustaining the next generation’s wellbeing.

In other words, the budget tracks the money — but not the real foundations of value that the money is meant to mobilize.

That missing link is what the Real Capital Framework was created to address.

Economists see humans as homo economicus? Still?

I really recommend listening to this Youtube with Richard Murphy, Emeritus Professor of Accounting Practice and John Christensen, co-founder of the Tax Justice Network.

The subject was the idea of homo economicus – the supposed rational economic actor at the heart of mainstream economics – and its critics.

John traces the origins of the concept back to the late nineteenth century, when economics shifted from being a branch of moral philosophy into the mathematically-driven neoclassical framework most of us were taught at university.

One of the key figures was Francis Ysidro Edgeworth, a mathematician and economist at Oxford. Edgeworth drew on Jeremy Bentham’s utilitarian philosophy – the idea that human beings are rational calculators of pleasure and pain – Edgeworth sought to create a perfectly tidy model of human behaviour. We were, he argued, calculating machines engaged in constant cost-benefit analysis, each of us pursuing our own utility.

Modern models of the economy, like – the DSGE models used by the Bank of England and the UK Office for Budget Responsibility – still rest on the fiction of a single rational agent – or homo economicus – who knows everything and always restores balance.

And these models continue to shape policy. They produce neat forecasts that always return to equilibrium, because the assumptions guarantee that outcome. They are sadly blind to the lived reality of power, inequality, exploitation and environmental breakdown.

Investors in peace, one of my projects, something else. We don’t see homo economicus, we see homo pax. Our true nature is peace and as long as we don’t realise and get to enjoy and appreciate that, we will continue to be homo errorum leading to homo insatisfactus (man of error, unsatisfied man).

This is where Investing in peace and political economy overlap: as long as economics and business continue to model their art on misguided views of what it is to be human, they will continue to guide policy in the wrong direction.

If you are working with economic policy we urge you to look closer at yourself: what is it you really want, what is driving you? Can it be that is something you share with the rest of the people on the planet?

Latest on the Real Capital Framework

The Real Capital framework bridges the gap between scientific insights and policy-making. It critiques traditional economic models for undervaluing non-monetary assets (e.g., ecosystems, social systems) and proposes a methodology to quantify and manage Natural, Built, Human, and Social Capital for sustainable decision-making.

Where to Download the Methodology Briefing- applying the Real Capital Framework to influence policy

Communicating science to policy makers in a way they will understand and action science-based insights requires more than just presenting figures. The process is multi-layered, multi-dimensional and multi-discipline.

Our methodology briefing brings together all the tools needed to develop your abilities in this area.

To talk science to policy you need to speak normative.

Are you a scientist who wants to influence policy? Or are you a consultant charged with writing reports as a basis for policy decisions? If so, we need to talk about normatives. If we, as scientists, want our work to actually influence policy or help guide practical decisions, then normatives are essential. This article breaks down what they are, why they matter, and how we can put them to good use in our work.

What are normative statements?

How to use normative statements, so science can speak to policy in terms they understand.

In the context of scientists communicating with policymakers, normatives are statements or guidelines that express how things should be, based on values or standards. They are used to frame recommended actions or standards by considering established values and desired outcomes. Essentially, normatives translate scientific findings into actionable recommendations aligned with societal values.

We need to first understand our culture before we can change it

To be part of developing our culture towards peace, it is vital we all gain an awareness of what our culture is. And why we need to be actively involved with its evolution. This article presents culture as a group’s way of living that emerges and adapts over time. We will seek to explore, in coming articles, how we as individuals can influence our culture towards peace. For now, let us explore this concept of culture. It has many dimensions that interact with each other. We may find places we as individuals, or as the groups we are involved in, where we can intervene to orient our way of life more towards peace.