演講MP3+雙語(yǔ)文稿:增長(zhǎng)的經(jīng)濟(jì)一定是健康的嗎？

聽(tīng)力課堂TED音頻欄目主要包括TED演講的音頻MP3及中英雙語(yǔ)文稿，供各位英語(yǔ)愛(ài)好者學(xué)習(xí)使用。本文主要內(nèi)容為演講MP3+雙語(yǔ)文稿:增長(zhǎng)的經(jīng)濟(jì)一定是健康的嗎？，希望你會(huì)喜歡！

【演講者及介紹】Kate Raworth

凱特?拉沃斯，經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家。凱特?拉沃斯熱衷于讓經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)適應(yīng)21世紀(jì)。

【演講主題】健康的經(jīng)濟(jì)應(yīng)該是繁榮的，而不是增長(zhǎng)的

【中英文字幕】

翻譯者 Yan Gao 校對(duì)者 Yolanda Zhang

00:13

Have you ever watched a baby learning to crawl? Because as any parent knows, it's gripping. First, they wriggle about on the floor, usually backwards, but then they drag themselves forwards, and then they pull themselves up to stand, and we all clap. And that simple motion of forwards and upwards, it's the most basic direction of progress we humans recognize.

你看過(guò)嬰兒學(xué)習(xí)爬行嗎？ 就像每個(gè)父母都知道的，它扣人心弦。開(kāi)始，他們?cè)诘匕迳吓?lái)扭去，通常是向后挪動(dòng)，然后他們把自己往前拖，再用力向上拉，讓自己站起來(lái)，大家一起鼓掌。這種向前、向上的簡(jiǎn)單運(yùn)動(dòng)，是我們?nèi)祟?lèi)認(rèn)識(shí)到的 最基本的進(jìn)步方向。

00:39

We tell it in our story of evolution as well, from our lolloping ancestors to Homo erectus, finally upright, to Homo sapiens, depicted, always a man, always mid-stride.

我們的進(jìn)化理論也這么說(shuō)，從我們搖晃前行的祖先到 終于站立行走的直立人，到智人，我們一直被稱(chēng)為人類(lèi)，一直在前進(jìn)。

00:52

So no wonder we so readily believe that economic progress will take this very same shape, this ever-rising line of growth. It's time to think again, to reimagine the shape of progress, because today, we have economies that need to grow, whether or not they make us thrive, and what we need, especially in the richest countries, are economies that make us thrive whether or not they grow. Yes, it's a little flippant word hiding a profound shift in mindset, but I believe this is the shift we need to make if we, humanity, are going to thrive here together this century.

因此，難怪我們很容易相信，經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展將呈現(xiàn)同樣的形態(tài)，這種不斷上升的增長(zhǎng)趨勢(shì)?，F(xiàn)在是時(shí)候重新想一想了，重新構(gòu)想進(jìn)步的形態(tài)，因?yàn)榻裉欤覀儞碛械慕?jīng)濟(jì) 是需要增長(zhǎng)的經(jīng)濟(jì)，而不管它能否讓我們繁榮，而我們需要的，尤其是 在最富裕的國(guó)家，是那種能讓我們繁榮的經(jīng)濟(jì)，而無(wú)論它們是否增長(zhǎng)。是的，這話(huà)說(shuō)著輕巧，它隱藏了心態(tài)的深刻轉(zhuǎn)變，但我相信，如果我們?nèi)祟?lèi) 想在本世紀(jì)共同繁榮起來(lái)，就需要這個(gè)轉(zhuǎn)變。

01:39

So where did this obsession with growth come from? Well, GDP, gross domestic product, it's just the total cost of goods and services sold in an economy in a year. It was invented in the 1930s, but it very soon became the overriding goal of policymaking, so much so that even today, in the richest of countries, governments think that the solution to their economic problems lies in more growth.

那么，這種對(duì)增長(zhǎng)的 迷戀到底從何而來(lái)? GDP，國(guó)內(nèi)生產(chǎn)總值，它只是一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)體在一年內(nèi) 銷(xiāo)售的商品和服務(wù)的總成本。它誕生于20世紀(jì)30年代，但很快就成為 制定政策的首要目標(biāo)，以至于直到今天，在最富裕的國(guó)家，政府仍然認(rèn)為解決 經(jīng)濟(jì)問(wèn)題的辦法在于 更多的增長(zhǎng)。

02:04

Just how that happened is best told through the 1960 classic by W.W. Rostow. I love it so much, I have a first-edition copy. "The Stages of Economic Growth: A Non-Communist Manifesto."

之所以這樣，在1960年W.W.羅斯托的 經(jīng)典中做出了最好的說(shuō)明。太喜歡它了，我有一本首發(fā)版的?！督?jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)的階段：非共產(chǎn)主義宣言》

02:22

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

02:23

You can just smell the politics, huh?

能聞到政治的味道，是不是?

02:26

And Rostow tells us that all economies need to pass through five stages of growth: first, traditional society, where a nation's output is limited by its technology, its institutions and mindset; but then the preconditions for takeoff, where we get the beginnings of a banking industry, the mechanization of work and the belief that growth is necessary for something beyond itself, like national dignity or a better life for the children; then takeoff, where compound interest is built into the economy's institutions and growth becomes the normal condition; fourth is the drive to maturity where you can have any industry you want, no matter your natural resource base; and the fifth and final stage, the age of high-mass consumption where people can buy all the consumer goods they want, like bicycles and sewing machines -- this was 1960, remember.

羅斯托告訴我們，所有的經(jīng)濟(jì)體 都需要經(jīng)歷五個(gè)增長(zhǎng)階段： 首先，傳統(tǒng)社會(huì)階段，一個(gè)國(guó)家的產(chǎn)出 受到其技術(shù)、制度和 思維方式的限制； 然后，在起飛準(zhǔn)備階段，出現(xiàn)了新興的銀行業(yè)、 勞動(dòng)的機(jī)械化、 以及一個(gè)信念—— 增長(zhǎng)的必要已超越增長(zhǎng)本身，比如增長(zhǎng)是為了國(guó)家尊嚴(yán)，為了下一代的生活更美好，之后是起飛階段，此時(shí)復(fù)利深入經(jīng)濟(jì)體制，增長(zhǎng)成為常態(tài)； 第四是趨于成熟階段，你可以擁有任何你想要的行業(yè)，不管你的自然資源基礎(chǔ)如何； 第五個(gè)也是最后一個(gè)階段，大規(guī)模消費(fèi)的時(shí)代，人們可以買(mǎi)到想要的所有消費(fèi)品，比如自行車(chē)和縫紉機(jī)—— 別忘了，那是1960年。

03:18

Well, you can hear the implicit airplane metaphor in this story, but this plane is like no other, because it can never be allowed to land. Rostow left us flying into the sunset of mass consumerism, and he knew it. As he wrote, "And then the question beyond, where history offers us only fragments. What to do when the increase in real income itself loses its charm?" He asked that question, but he never answered it, and here's why. The year was 1960, he was an advisor to the presidential candidate John F. Kennedy, who was running for election on the promise of five-percent growth, so Rostow's job was to keep that plane flying, not to ask if, how, or when it could ever be allowed to land.

你能在這里聽(tīng)出隱含的飛機(jī)比喻，但是這架飛機(jī)是獨(dú)一無(wú)二的，因?yàn)樗肋h(yuǎn)不可以著陸。羅斯托任我們飛向 大規(guī)模消費(fèi)主義的落日，而且他知道這一點(diǎn)。正如他所寫(xiě)的，“然后，有一個(gè)問(wèn)題，歷史沒(méi)有給我們提供多少信息。當(dāng)實(shí)際收入增長(zhǎng)本身失去 吸引力時(shí)，該怎么辦?” 這是他問(wèn)的問(wèn)題，但他從來(lái) 沒(méi)回答過(guò)，原因如下。那一年是1960年，他是總統(tǒng)候選人約翰·肯尼迪的顧問(wèn)，肯尼迪在競(jìng)選時(shí)承諾了5%的增長(zhǎng)，所以羅斯托的工作是讓 那架飛機(jī)一直飛，而不要問(wèn)是否可以著陸、 如何著陸、何時(shí)著陸。

04:17

So here we are, flying into the sunset of mass consumerism over half a century on, with economies that have come to expect, demand and depend upon unending growth, because we're financially, politically and socially addicted to it. We're financially addicted to growth, because today's financial system is designed to pursue the highest rate of monetary return, putting publicly traded companies under constant pressure to deliver growing sales, growing market share and growing profits, and because banks create money as debt bearing interest, which must be repaid with more. We're politically addicted to growth because politicians want to raise tax revenue without raising taxes and a growing GDP seems a sure way to do that. And no politician wants to lose their place in the G-20 family photo.

因此，半個(gè)多世紀(jì)以來(lái)，我們一路飛向大規(guī)模 消費(fèi)主義的夕陽(yáng)，經(jīng)濟(jì)已經(jīng)變成期待、 要求，并依賴(lài)于 無(wú)止境的增長(zhǎng)，因?yàn)槲覀冊(cè)诮?jīng)濟(jì)上、政治上和 社會(huì)上都沉迷于這種增長(zhǎng)。我們?cè)诮?jīng)濟(jì)上沉迷于增長(zhǎng)，因?yàn)榻裉斓慕鹑隗w系 旨在追求最高的貨幣回報(bào)率，使上市公司承受持續(xù)的壓力，去實(shí)現(xiàn)銷(xiāo)售增長(zhǎng)、 市場(chǎng)份額增長(zhǎng)和利潤(rùn)增長(zhǎng)，并且因?yàn)殂y行創(chuàng)造資金 用作有利息的債務(wù)，而債務(wù)必須用更多的錢(qián)去償還。我們?cè)谡紊铣撩杂诮?jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)，因?yàn)檎蛡兿Ｍ?在不漲稅率的情況下 增加稅收，而GDP增長(zhǎng)似乎是實(shí)現(xiàn) 這一目標(biāo)的可靠途徑。沒(méi)有哪個(gè)政客愿意在20國(guó)集團(tuán)的 全家福中失去自己的位置。

05:07

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

05:08

But if their economy stops growing while the rest keep going, well, they'll be booted out by the next emerging powerhouse. And we are socially addicted to growth, because thanks to a century of consumer propaganda, which fascinatingly was created by Edward Bernays, the nephew of Sigmund Freud, who realized that his uncle's psychotherapy could be turned into very lucrative retail therapy if we could be convinced to believe that we transform ourselves every time we buy something more.

如果他們的經(jīng)濟(jì)停止增長(zhǎng)而 其他國(guó)家繼續(xù)前進(jìn)，那么他們將被下一個(gè) 新興的經(jīng)濟(jì)強(qiáng)國(guó)淘汰。我們還在社會(huì)上迷戀經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)，這是因?yàn)樯习倌甑南M(fèi)者宣傳，神奇的是，它是由 西格蒙德 · 弗洛伊德的侄子 愛(ài)德華 · 伯奈斯發(fā)明的，他意識(shí)到他叔叔的心理治療 可以變成非常 有利可圖的購(gòu)物療法，只要能說(shuō)服我們相信，每次購(gòu)買(mǎi)更多的東西時(shí)，我們都在轉(zhuǎn)化自己。

05:41

None of these addictions are insurmountable, but they all deserve far more attention than they currently get, because look where this journey has been taking us. Global GDP is 10 times bigger than it was in 1950 and that increase has brought prosperity to billions of people, but the global economy has also become incredibly divisive, with the vast share of returns to wealth now accruing to a fraction of the global one percent. And the economy has become incredibly degenerative, rapidly destabilizing this delicately balanced planet on which all of our lives depend. Our politicians know it, and so they offer new destinations for growth. You can have green growth, inclusive growth, smart, resilient, balanced growth. Choose any future you want so long as you choose growth.

這些沉迷都不是無(wú)法克服的，但它們都應(yīng)該得到 比現(xiàn)在更多的關(guān)注，因?yàn)榭纯催@段旅程將 帶我們走向何方吧。全球GDP是1950年的10倍，這一增長(zhǎng)給數(shù)十億人帶來(lái)了發(fā)展，但全球經(jīng)濟(jì)也變得 令人難以置信地分裂，現(xiàn)在財(cái)富回報(bào)的巨大份額 累積到全球1%的一小部分上。并且經(jīng)濟(jì)已經(jīng)惡化到了 令人難以置信的程度，迅速破壞著我們所有人 賴(lài)以生存的這個(gè)微妙平衡著的 星球的穩(wěn)定。政客們知道這一點(diǎn)，因此 他們?yōu)榻?jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)設(shè)定了新目標(biāo)。你可以實(shí)現(xiàn)綠色增長(zhǎng)、包容性增長(zhǎng)、 智能、彈性、均衡的增長(zhǎng)。只要你選擇增長(zhǎng)，就可以選擇 任何你想要的未來(lái)。

06:36

I think it's time to choose a higher ambition, a far bigger one, because humanity's 21st century challenge is clear: to meet the needs of all people within the means of this extraordinary, unique, living planet so that we and the rest of nature can thrive.

我認(rèn)為，是時(shí)候選擇一個(gè) 更高、更大的目標(biāo)了，因?yàn)槿祟?lèi)在21世紀(jì)的 挑戰(zhàn)是明確的： 在這個(gè)非凡的、獨(dú)特的、 鮮活的星球上，滿(mǎn)足每一個(gè)人的需要，這樣我們和自然界的 其他部分才能共同繁榮。

06:56

Progress on this goal isn't going to be measured with the metric of money. We need a dashboard of indicators. And when I sat down to try and draw a picture of what that might look like, strange though this is going to sound, it came out looking like a doughnut. I know, I'm sorry, but let me introduce you to the one doughnut that might actually turn out to be good for us. So imagine humanity's resource use radiating out from the middle. That hole in the middle is a place where people are falling short on life's essentials. They don't have the food, health care, education, political voice, housing that every person needs for a life of dignity and opportunity. We want to get everybody out of the hole, over the social foundation and into that green doughnut itself. But, and it's a big but, we cannot let our collective resource use overshoot that outer circle, the ecological ceiling, because there we put so much pressure on this extraordinary planet that we begin to kick it out of kilter. We cause climate breakdown, we acidify the oceans, a hole in the ozone layer, pushing ourselves beyond the planetary boundaries of the life-supporting systems that have for the last 11,000 years made earth such a benevolent home to humanity.

這一目標(biāo)的進(jìn)展不會(huì)用 金錢(qián)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來(lái)衡量。我們需要一個(gè)指示板。當(dāng)我坐下來(lái)試著畫(huà)出它的樣子時(shí)，雖然聽(tīng)起來(lái)很奇怪，但它看起來(lái)很像甜甜圈。我知道（這是個(gè)不太嚴(yán)肅的描述），抱歉，但是讓我來(lái)介紹一下這個(gè) 可能會(huì)對(duì)我們有好處的甜甜圈。想象一下人類(lèi)的資源利用 從中間向外加大。中間的那個(gè)洞是 人們?nèi)狈ι畋匦杵返牡胤?。他們沒(méi)有食物、醫(yī)療、教育、 政治話(huà)語(yǔ)權(quán)、住房，這些為了有尊嚴(yán)有機(jī)會(huì)的生存，每個(gè)人都需要的東西。我們想讓每個(gè)人都從這個(gè)洞中 走出來(lái)，邁過(guò)社會(huì)基礎(chǔ)線(xiàn)，進(jìn)入綠色甜甜圈里面。但是，這是個(gè)很?chē)?yán)肅的但是，不能讓總的資源利用超出外圈，即生態(tài)上限，因?yàn)樯舷薇硎荆覀兘o這個(gè) 非凡的星球施加了太多壓力，以至于開(kāi)始破壞它的平衡了。我們?cè)斐闪藲夂虻钠茐模覀兪购Ｑ笏峄?，臭氧層上出現(xiàn)了一個(gè)洞，把我們自己推出了 生命維持系統(tǒng)的星球邊界之外，而正是這個(gè)系統(tǒng)，用過(guò)去的11000年，讓地球成為了人類(lèi)的美好家園。

08:13

So this double-sided challenge to meet the needs of all within the means of the planet, it invites a new shape of progress, no longer this ever-rising line of growth, but a sweet spot for humanity, thriving in dynamic balance between the foundation and the ceiling. And I was really struck once I'd drawn this picture to realize that the symbol of well-being in many ancient cultures reflects this very same sense of dynamic balance, from the Maori Takarangi to the Taoist Yin Yang, the Buddhist endless knot, the Celtic double spiral.

因此，要在星球所能承受的范圍內(nèi) 滿(mǎn)足地球上所有人的需要，這一雙重挑戰(zhàn)，要求出現(xiàn)一種新的發(fā)展形態(tài)，不再是這種持續(xù)上升的增長(zhǎng)線(xiàn)，而是人類(lèi)生存的最佳點(diǎn)，在基礎(chǔ)線(xiàn)與上限之間的 動(dòng)態(tài)平衡中蓬勃發(fā)展。我一畫(huà)出這幅畫(huà)就恍然大悟，因?yàn)樵谠S多古代文化中，幸福的象征符號(hào) 反映了同樣的動(dòng)態(tài)平衡感，從毛利人的高蘭吉 到道教的陰陽(yáng)、佛教的無(wú)止盡結(jié)，凱爾特人的雙螺旋。

08:48

So can we find this dynamic balance in the 21st century? Well, that's a key question, because as these red wedges show, right now we are far from balanced, falling short and overshooting at the same time. Look in that hole, you can see that millions or billions of people worldwide still fall short on their most basic of needs. And yet, we've already overshot at least four of these planetary boundaries, risking irreversible impact of climate breakdown and ecosystem collapse. This is the state of humanity and our planetary home. We, the people of the early 21st century, this is our selfie.

那么，我們能否在21世紀(jì) 找到這種動(dòng)態(tài)平衡呢? 這是個(gè)關(guān)鍵問(wèn)題，因?yàn)檎邕@些紅色楔形所示，我們現(xiàn)在遠(yuǎn)沒(méi)有達(dá)到平衡，同時(shí)存在短缺和過(guò)量?？纯催@個(gè)洞，你會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)世界上 數(shù)百萬(wàn)或數(shù)十億人 仍然在最基本需求方面存在短缺。然而，星球邊界中的至少 四個(gè)方面已經(jīng)出現(xiàn)了過(guò)量，導(dǎo)致面臨不可逆轉(zhuǎn)的影響，包括氣候失調(diào)和 生態(tài)系統(tǒng)崩潰。這就是人類(lèi)以及我們的 星球家園的現(xiàn)狀。作為21世紀(jì)初的人類(lèi)，這是我們的自拍照。

09:32

No economist from last century saw this picture, so why would we imagine that their theories would be up for taking on its challenges? We need ideas of our own, because we are the first generation to see this and probably the last with a real chance of turning this story around. You see, 20th century economics assured us that if growth creates inequality, don't try to redistribute, because more growth will even things up again. If growth creates pollution, don't try to regulate, because more growth will clean things up again.

上個(gè)世紀(jì)的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家 都沒(méi)見(jiàn)過(guò)這幅圖，那么為什么要假設(shè) 他們的理論能應(yīng)對(duì)挑戰(zhàn)呢? 我們需要自己的想法，因?yàn)槲覀兪强吹剿牡谝淮?，可能也是最后一代有機(jī)會(huì) 扭轉(zhuǎn)這一局面的人。你看，20世紀(jì)的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)向我們 保證，如果增長(zhǎng)造成了不平等，不要試圖重新分配，因?yàn)楦嗟脑鲩L(zhǎng) 將會(huì)讓一切恢復(fù)平衡。如果增長(zhǎng)造成了污染，不要試圖進(jìn)行監(jiān)管，也因?yàn)?更多的增長(zhǎng)將把一切清理干凈。

10:01

Except, it turns out, it doesn't, and it won't. We need to create economies that tackle this shortfall and overshoot together, by design. We need economies that are regenerative and distributive by design. You see, we've inherited degenerative industries. We take earth's materials, make them into stuff we want, use it for a while, often only once, and then throw it away, and that is pushing us over planetary boundaries, so we need to bend those arrows around, create economies that work with and within the cycles of the living world, so that resources are never used up but used again and again, economies that run on sunlight, where waste from one process is food for the next.

只是，事實(shí)證明，這一斷言并沒(méi)有發(fā)生，也不會(huì)發(fā)生。我們需要?jiǎng)?chuàng)造一個(gè)能同時(shí) 解決短缺和過(guò)量問(wèn)題的經(jīng)濟(jì)，要通過(guò)設(shè)計(jì)來(lái)實(shí)現(xiàn)。我們需要設(shè)計(jì)出 可再生和分配的經(jīng)濟(jì)。我們已經(jīng)接手了衰退中的工業(yè)。我們拿走地球的原材料，把它變成我們想要的東西，使用一段時(shí)間，常常 只用一次，然后扔掉，這種行為正推動(dòng)我們 超出星球界限，所以我們要讓那些箭頭拐回來(lái), 創(chuàng)造出在生存環(huán)境內(nèi) 有效且不出界的經(jīng)濟(jì)，讓資源永遠(yuǎn)不會(huì)耗盡，而是一次又一次地被反復(fù)使用，用陽(yáng)光做動(dòng)力運(yùn)行的經(jīng)濟(jì), 一個(gè)過(guò)程的廢料就是 下一個(gè)過(guò)程的原料。

10:44

And this kind of regenerative design is popping up everywhere. Over a hundred cities worldwide, from Quito to Oslo, from Harare to Hobart, already generate more than 70 percent of their electricity from sun, wind and waves. Cities like London, Glasgow, Amsterdam are pioneering circular city design, finding ways to turn the waste from one urban process into food for the next. And from Tigray, Ethiopia to Queensland, Australia, farmers and foresters are regenerating once-barren landscapes so that it teems with life again.

這種可再生設(shè)計(jì) 正如雨后春筍般在各處涌現(xiàn)。從基多到奧斯陸，從哈拉雷到霍巴特，全球一百多個(gè)城市 已經(jīng)有70%以上的電力 來(lái)自太陽(yáng)、風(fēng)和海浪。像倫敦、格拉斯哥、阿姆斯特丹 這樣的城市都是循環(huán)城市設(shè)計(jì)的先驅(qū)，他們想辦法把一個(gè)過(guò)程的城市廢料 變成下一個(gè)過(guò)程的原料。從埃塞俄比亞的提格雷，到澳大利亞的昆士蘭，農(nóng)民和林業(yè)工人正在恢復(fù) 曾經(jīng)貧瘠的土地，讓它再次充滿(mǎn)生機(jī)。

11:21

But as well as being regenerative by design, our economies must be distributive by design, and we've got unprecedented opportunities for making that happen, because 20th-century centralized technologies, institutions, concentrated wealth, knowledge and power in few hands. This century, we can design our technologies and institutions to distribute wealth, knowledge and empowerment to many. Instead of fossil fuel energy and large-scale manufacturing, we've got renewable energy networks, digital platforms and 3D printing. 200 years of corporate control of intellectual property is being upended by the bottom-up, open-source, peer-to-peer knowledge commons. And corporations that still pursue maximum rate of return for their shareholders, well they suddenly look rather out of date next to social enterprises that are designed to generate multiple forms of value and share it with those throughout their networks. If we can harness today's technologies, from AI to blockchain to the Internet of Things to material science, if we can harness these in service of distributive design, we can ensure that health care, education, finance, energy, political voice reaches and empowers those people who need it most. You see, regenerative and distributive design create extraordinary opportunities for the 21st-century economy.

但是，除了有意實(shí)現(xiàn)再生之外，我們的經(jīng)濟(jì)也必須有意實(shí)現(xiàn)分配，我們已具備前所未有的機(jī)會(huì) 去實(shí)現(xiàn)這一目標(biāo)，因?yàn)?0世紀(jì)的中心化技術(shù)、 制度，把財(cái)富、知識(shí)和權(quán)力 集中在了少數(shù)人手中。本世紀(jì)，我們可以 設(shè)計(jì)我們的技術(shù)和制度，將財(cái)富、知識(shí)和權(quán)力分配給許多人。不需要化石燃料能源和大規(guī)模制造，我們有可再生能源網(wǎng)絡(luò)、 數(shù)字平臺(tái)和3D打印。200年來(lái)，企業(yè)對(duì)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的控制 正被自下而上的、開(kāi)源的、 端對(duì)端知識(shí)共享所顛覆。而那些仍在為股東追求 回報(bào)率最大化的公司，他們突然之間就顯得有些過(guò)時(shí)了，新的社會(huì)企業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)成能夠 產(chǎn)生多種形式的價(jià)值，被并將其與整個(gè)網(wǎng)絡(luò)共享。如果我們能夠利用今天的技術(shù)，從人工智能到區(qū)塊鏈，到物聯(lián)網(wǎng)，再到材料科學(xué)，如果我們能夠利用這些服務(wù) 進(jìn)行可分配設(shè)計(jì)，就能確保醫(yī)療、教育、金融、 能源、政治話(huà)語(yǔ)權(quán)，能被給予那些最需要它們的人。顯然，可再生且可分配的設(shè)計(jì) 為21世紀(jì)的經(jīng)濟(jì) 創(chuàng)造了非凡的機(jī)會(huì)。

12:52

So where does this leave Rostow's airplane ride? Well, for some it still carries the hope of endless green growth, the idea that thanks to dematerialization, exponential GDP growth can go on forever while resource use keeps falling. But look at the data. This is a flight of fancy. Yes, we need to dematerialize our economies, but this dependency on unending growth cannot be decoupled from resource use on anything like the scale required to bring us safely back within planetary boundaries.

那么這對(duì)羅斯托的 飛機(jī)之旅有什么影響呢? 對(duì)一些人來(lái)說(shuō)，它仍然承載著 無(wú)限的綠色增長(zhǎng)的希望，這種想法認(rèn)為，由于非物質(zhì)化，GDP的指數(shù)級(jí)增長(zhǎng)可以永遠(yuǎn) 持續(xù)下去，資源消耗可以不斷減少。但是對(duì)比一下數(shù)據(jù)。這只是異想天開(kāi)罷了。是的，我們需要讓經(jīng)濟(jì)去物質(zhì)化，但是，對(duì)無(wú)止境增長(zhǎng)的依賴(lài) 離不開(kāi)對(duì)資源的利用，這種資源利用與把我們 安全帶回地球邊界內(nèi) 所需要的規(guī)模一樣。

13:24

I know this way of thinking about growth is unfamiliar, because growth is good, no? We want our children to grow, our gardens to grow. Yes, look to nature and growth is a wonderful, healthy source of life. It's a phase, but many economies like Ethiopia and Nepal today may be in that phase. Their economies are growing at seven percent a year. But look again to nature, because from your children's feet to the Amazon forest, nothing in nature grows forever. Things grow, and they grow up and they mature, and it's only by doing so that they can thrive for a very long time. We already know this. If I told you my friend went to the doctor who told her she had a growth that feels very different, because we intuitively understand that when something tries to grow forever within a healthy, living, thriving system, it's a threat to the health of the whole. So why would we imagine that our economies would be the one system that could buck this trend and succeed by growing forever? We urgently need financial, political and social innovations that enable us to overcome this structural dependency on growth, so that we can instead focus on thriving and balance within the social and the ecological boundaries of the doughnut.

我知道這種思考增長(zhǎng)的 方式聽(tīng)起來(lái)很陌生，因?yàn)樵鲩L(zhǎng)是好事，不是嗎? 我們希望我們的孩子成長(zhǎng)，我們的花園成長(zhǎng)。是的，在大自然中，成長(zhǎng)是 美妙、健康的生命源泉。它是一個(gè)階段，但許多經(jīng)濟(jì)體，比如今天的埃塞俄比亞和尼泊爾，可能正處于這個(gè)階段。他們的經(jīng)濟(jì)正在 以每年7%的速度增長(zhǎng)。但是再看看大自然，因?yàn)閺哪愫⒆拥男∧_丫。腳到亞馬遜的森林，自然界中沒(méi)有什么東西 是永遠(yuǎn)生長(zhǎng)下去的。事物生長(zhǎng)，長(zhǎng)大，然后成熟，只有這樣，它們才能繁榮很長(zhǎng)一段時(shí)間。我們還知道一點(diǎn)。如果我告訴你，我的朋友去看醫(yī)生，醫(yī)生告訴她，身體里長(zhǎng)了東西，那就是完全另一回事了，因?yàn)槲覀儜{直覺(jué)就知道，當(dāng)某種東西 試圖在健康、活潑、旺盛的 體系中永遠(yuǎn)生長(zhǎng)時(shí)，它就會(huì)威脅到整個(gè)體系的健康。那么，我們?yōu)槭裁磿?huì)認(rèn)為，我們的經(jīng)濟(jì)將是 一個(gè)能夠改變這一規(guī)律 并永遠(yuǎn)增長(zhǎng)的系統(tǒng)呢? 我們迫切需要金融、政治和社會(huì)創(chuàng)新，使我們能夠克服對(duì)增長(zhǎng)的結(jié)構(gòu)性依賴(lài)，以便我們能夠把重點(diǎn)放在甜甜圈的 社會(huì)和生態(tài)邊界內(nèi)的繁榮與平衡上。

14:54

And if the mere idea of boundaries makes you feel, well, bounded, think again. Because the world's most ingenious people turn boundaries into the source of their creativity. From Mozart on his five-octave piano Jimi Hendrix on his six-string guitar, Serena Williams on a tennis court, it's boundaries that unleash our potential. And the doughnut's boundaries unleash the potential for humanity to thrive with boundless creativity, participation, belonging and meaning.

如果僅僅是邊界的概念 就讓你覺(jué)得受到限制，再仔細(xì)想一想。因?yàn)槭澜缟献盥斆鞯娜?都把界限變成了他們創(chuàng)造力的源泉。從莫扎特的五音鋼琴，吉米 · 亨德里克斯的六弦吉他，到塞雷娜 · 威廉姆斯的網(wǎng)球場(chǎng)，是邊界激發(fā)了我們的潛能。甜甜圈的邊界釋放了人類(lèi)的潛力，讓人類(lèi)在無(wú)限的創(chuàng)造力、參與、 歸屬感和意義下茁壯成長(zhǎng)。

15:33

It's going to take all the ingenuity that we have got to get there, so bring it on.

它需要我們投入 全部的聰明才智去實(shí)現(xiàn)，所以，全力以赴吧。

15:39

Thank you.

謝謝。

15:40

(Applause)

（掌聲）