5. Non-recognition of the Assets of PlaceIn many of the examples noted above, the assets described are overlooked. This often happens, in part, because official systems for detecting and tracking activity are focused on change and not on stability or on enhancement of existing capacities. In Part I above, I cited the benefit of concentrated workforce. Typical reporting of job opportunities is on the growth in new jobs in low-density areas located far from where people who need work live. This kind of reporting would be more accurate if it observed that the majority of job opportunities are replacement jobs at or near the traditional locations for employment. The debates over the future of transportation regularly make much of the demand for larger cars and houses and of the growing number of households with 3 or more cars each, but fail to track either the large numbers of Americans who enjoy mass transit and get by with either 1 car or no cars in their households, or the majority of households who seem to "get by" with dwelling units of considerably less than the 2300 square feet of living space on a footprint of 1 or 2 acres. The same statistical challenge confounds the debates over natural resource utilization. The official reporting system for mineral resource availability tracks untouched resources only, and the reports of available supply, whether the subject is iron or gold, are in terms of "years remaining." The same sources do report the fantastic growth in demand for recycled or scrap materials, but do not, for example, pick up the extent of the cumulative "mine" of available used materials in scrap piles, buildings and equipment. Two-thirds of the weight of new materials entering the economy is for construction and less than 10% of this total comes from scrap, even though the majority of materials ever mined reside in our existing buildings and infrastructure. America's cities are its largest mine, yet used materials are officially labeled "speculative or sub-economic resources.84 One estimate is that the amount of steel and iron sitting in scrap piles is eight times annual ferrous metal consumption. Federal subsidies paid from local taxes continue to underwrite truly sub-economic and capital intensive mining, mostly in Western states and internationally, preventing the mobilization of resources for further growth in more labor-intensive and community supportive local land and materials recycling. 85And since the stock of used and reusable materials is distributed in the very places where people are settled, the potential supply market for materials from recycling exists in a ubiquitous (that is, everywhere equally available) geographic pattern. An additional failure in community asset appreciation is in the realm of what is increasingly called "social capital." Social capital refers to the norms and networks of civil society that lubricate cooperative action among both citizens and their institutions: without adequate supplies of social capital-that is, without civic engagement, healthy community institutions, norms of reciprocity, and trust-social institutions fail. 86There are no mainstream, officially recognized "censuses" of organizations and networks, and so there is controversy over whether social capital is stable, increasing or eroding.87 At its most formal, social capital is represented by government, and at its most informal, by very intangible interpersonal relationships. In efforts to describe the elements of "what works" in addressing economic and ecological challenges, it is critical to remember that there are people in the picture we're trying to paint. So it is unlikely that our efforts to maximize community assets can be effective without the continued reinvestment in our social assets. Whether the assets we are concerned with are economic, ecological or social in nature, the problem that we need to come to grips with is the need to recognize our stocks of capital. Ecologists regularly who regularly analyze the relationships of human and non-human communities distinguish between stocks and flows of natural and non-natural capital. Economists who are struggling to imbue a sense of importance to assets such as knowledge and ownership are turning to ecological metaphors to similarly distinguish the stocks of these assets (i.e., how much of the asset is there) from their flows (how quickly and in what ways are these stocks changing). Social scientists, civic leaders, community organizers and journalists are all beginning to use asset-oriented language and concepts to reinforce the importance of organizational stocks. Why is this concept so critically important? First, an orientation toward assets and stocks carries the sense of accomplishment in the past, and can therefore aid in the equally critical task of goal setting and orientation toward the future. Second, an asset is something that can be invested in, borrowed from, and improved. Third, using assets and stocks as opposed to just flows to depict status is a truer picture: much as a business entity must augment a profit-and-loss statement with a balance sheet showing assets, liabilities and equity, communities can better firm up their understanding of what they are worth by constructing a balance sheet reflective of their full range of assets. Overall, by focusing on community assets a more complete picture of collective motivations for change can be created, increasing the likelihood that strategies for change can both enjoy widespread support and succeed. What are some examples of how this orientation could help us not only detect and appreciate our assets, but put them to use? Some good examples are in the work to increase the efficiency of natural resources (materials, water and energy) including reduction of emissions and pollutants. The current fleet of cars and trucks use only 1% of their fuel energy to move the driver. An incandescent light bulb converts only 3% of power plant energy to light, and only 1% of the materials we mine or reuse are actually put into and remain in the average product more than six weeks after sale. 88We are still wasting at least $250 Billion per year worth of energy, enough to increase personal wealth by more than $3,000 per family per year. 89The extra car-per-household that is necessary in less accessible communities is a major reason why transportation is the "number two" household expenditure after housing. This expenditure is more even than is spent on food and up to three times what is spent on medical care) represents a similar family economic drain worth another $3,000 to $5,000 per household.90 In regions such as Chicago, the ability exists to reuse the carrying capacity of existing serviced land (land with infrastructure largely in place). This opportunity is exists in both the central city and an in its suburbs. The asset is large enough to accommodate the next million households. Over a thirty-year period this more sensible land use pattern would avoid at least $50 Billion in unnecessary new infrastructure investment (some $15,000 per resultant household) and capture new tax base for schools and basic services worth tens of billions of dollars more. 91 In a sense, the failure to use resources as efficiently as is theoretically possible at the local level translates into a burden, numerically the equivalent of a $20,000 to $25,000 hidden mortgage on every household in the greater Chicagoland region. These amounts are in addition to the social costs associated with continued decentralization and abandonment of existing communities and the opportunity costs associated with not reinvesting and capturing their potential efficiencies. Another way of considering the potential benefits of recognizing existing communities is at the aggregate levels of the region, the nation, and the world. The World Bank recently estimated the value of existing infrastructure stock in the cities of developing countries-including water, sanitation, roads, bridges, public lighting, and traffic signals-to be on the order of U.S. $3 Trillion. The annual investment in these sectors, that is, the flow, is on the order of $150 Billion. An increase in the benefits coming out of this investment by only 5 percent per year would be equal to the entire flow. 92The annual transportation expenditure in 1992 in the United States was approximately $1 Trillion. Of that total, only $160 Billion was from federal, state and local government, and of that amount, approximately $30 Billion was the federal contribution. An increase of 3% in the "transportation efficiency" of the economy would equal the entire federal investment. The job creation effects of rising to this challenge in a coordinated fashion could bring every community in each major urban region to full employment. Reaching full employment in this manner, where the conservation of existing communities and resources drives collective investment, is also the most likely way to actually reach attainment of environmental and climate change goals. For example, some of the best news in the economy is that environmental industries (ranging from manufacturing of energy efficiency products to cleanup services to "green services") are growing more quickly than the economy at large (4% per annum). This is already a significant part of the economy: there are 34,000 jobs in the Chicagoland area with wage levels typically starting at $15 per hour. 93The impressive jobs figures for local environmental industries are part of a larger national trend: a growth from $20 Billion in 1972 to $171 Billion in revenues in 1996. 94During roughly the same period, energy savings have cut America's energy bill by at least $150 billion and carbon emissions by one-fourth.95 OECD in 1991 estimated that, per capita expenditures in environmental goods and services were $313 in the U.S., $214 in all OECD countries, and only $8 in the rest of the world. 96 The personal asset development effects of rising to this challenge are equally significant. Creating standing for communities in the markets which improve the environment and that counter sprawl and disinvestment also creates a venue within which value can be captured directly to the benefit of individuals and families. This is an area where the work to create individual asset accounts (IDA's) becomes vitally important. Several contending proposals for reform of Medicare and Social Security financing are also based on this same logic.97 If we can identify an appropriate method of transferring the tangible benefits of capturing the intangible assets identified above (both the benefits of reuse and community and the avoided costs of excessive resource use) as an outcome of our market development experiments, then it should be possible to craft a value-capture strategy for families and individuals directly as a result.
|
|||||
|
Contents
|
||||