Supporting social innovation in Uzbekistan

Friday the 13th promised to be kind and meaningful ...

On this beautiful September evening, curious city dwellers and guests of the capital gathered in its center, in a cozy cafe (although the place for this was absolutely unexpected).

Wait for the "third call"

Book Cafe is located in the building of the National Library. From time to time the book cafe turns into a scientific Café Scientifique, where interesting meetings and conversations on various topics are held. Judging by the name of the cafe, these are mostly scientific topics, but are often influenced by social and socio-economic aspects. Such a popular cafe is a joint effort of the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Democratic Governance Program and UNDP's Social Innovation and Volunteerism Project. Topics for the meetings will be selected by the project team and announced in advance on social media, inviting participants to participate and share their views on a given topic.

This time the choice fell on the PMG, more precisely on its leader Alexei Volkov.

As the organizers invited the invited person to hold a meeting and make a presentation on the topic, he went out to introduce the guests to the cafe and thus open the evening - Social Innovation and Volunteer Project Manager - a key innovator of the community and a co-founder for the community. English - Bahodir Ayupov. The theme of the night was unusual and caused a resonance after it was announced. And by addressing the main innovator audience and looking at what promotions and comments we received after posting the topic, we realized that, as a rule, we have “stuck” you in the right place.

Bahodir Ayupov, the main innovator of the society and a volunteer for the society, inspires the audience.

All that remains is to discuss all this with our own eyes, over a cup of coffee. Expecting an interesting discussion and resonance on the topic, he left the speaker to the audience and asked him, "Where are we going?" joined the audience by rubbing his hands, asking a provocative question.

And here is the topic itself:

"Can Western civilization develop further and to what extent? Where will we be tomorrow?"

The chosen topic is really controversial. And many often have conflicting views and sometimes hard arguments. Later, there will be an example of this. Meanwhile, in the evening, all those gathered under the leadership of the main “sitting speaker” had to deal with civilizations, all humanity (with their own morals) and “stand up” to all of this, trying to look to the near future. think about the future - in the future.

Alexey began his performances with his usual passion and eyes shining.

Started ...

At first, he said, Peter Russell's article, "Who Are We Cheating On? Is there sustainable development and is it compatible with Western civilization?" Inspired him to start a discussion on the subject. In addition to his views, he wanted to talk about the views of many economists in the field of environmental management, ie. economists advancing the theory of “zero development”. The purpose of Alexei's speech is not only to try to open the curtain of this "burning pot", but also to somehow "make provocative statements" to provoke the audience to different opinions, the established views of the audience on the system of social development aimed at shaking. in general, where do we live, how and why do we live like this, where are we going at all, or are we already “turning around”?

To begin, the speaker decided to include a few concepts that will be useful during the discussion. The game theory of the American mathematician John Nash's "Prisoner's Dilemma" was adopted as the main tool for discussion. This theory, according to Alexei, is very much in line with the theory of natural resource management. This can be said to be basic. The concept of game theory shows how useful it is to reach a mutually binding agreement. The name of the theory is related to the parable of the two prisoners, each of whom must decide whether to confess to the crime if he does not know what the other will do; but he knows that whoever confesses will be punished less if the other does not confess. The prisoner’s dilemma is literally one of the classic problems of game theory; a game where it is more rewarding for players to cooperate than to cheat on each other, despite the fact that there is an incentive to cheat.

To imagine the application of this situation to the use of natural resources, Alexei has repeatedly referred to it in many books on environmental management. cited a well-known example.

We are talking about a natural resource - fish. Two fishermen work on the lake. They are fishing. There are fewer fish each year. One fine day, one of them gets a rebellious thought. He thinks he needs to fish as much as he can to make as much money as possible and thus get ahead of his neighbor. And he starts fishing intensively and thereby pursues personal interests. The neighbor thinks the same and starts fishing. It turns out that both are trying to catch as much as possible, pursuing personal interests, and the situation leads to the point that the fish do not have time to reproduce and eventually it will not stay. So they both lose. And if they agreed to fish a certain amount (collaborated) and parity was observed, then the fish would always be found, enough for both, and both could benefit from this deal. If both sides win, only a “win-win” situation is possible with cooperation.

According to Alexei, this “dilemma” is the basis of our theory of further development. As an example of putting this theory into practice, two mobile service providers were cited for being fined for cooperation and tariff agreements for sustainable profits. In this case, if one of the companies starts a price struggle, then in this situation one company wins and the other loses. And if both companies start a price fight, they will both lose. This game theory applies to all aspects and areas of life.

After reviewing examples of game theory, it’s time to start talking about the environment.

Before we begin, we had to decide on the questions:

What is development?

What is needed for development?

What is sustainable development?

This question received an interesting answer from the audience. There is an example of the ancient American Indians, which said: - Before making any decision, think about how it will affect your seventh generation. In other words, the ancient Indians called for living on the principle of the "seventh generation." Many different answers and explanations were given to the issue of sustainable development. And the concept of sustainable development had to be expressed in the concept of environmental protection. Alexei asked Rustam Murzakhanov, a great friend of nature and an active advocate for its protection, to clarify the issue, and he gave a clear and concise answer: - Sustainable development is not about the future, but about meeting the needs of the current generation. generations. These are. The parable of the "seventh generation principle" correctly expresses the meaning of the concept of sustainable development. In other words, we can say that everything we use is not something that our ancestors left us, but something we have inherited from future generations.

Discuss the principles of sustainable development

Many are now talking about sustainable development. The whole world community was excited by this idea and it started in the 70s of the last century. At that time, scientists began to say that in order not to harm or threaten the development of future generations, humanity must consume exactly the resources produced by the planet.

Another question arose from the above. What is the difference between sustainable development and normal development? Many definitions of sustainable development are given. Among them, the concept of sustainable development was expressed in one phrase - do no harm. Another interesting definition of the concept of sustainable development, expressed by one of the guests, sounded like this: - There should be monotonous and sustainable development of the economy, constant economic growth. As the population grows, resource consumption increases, and if there is no economic growth, there will be a shortage of resources, and then there will be stagnation and decline. Many agreed that sustainable development presupposes the long-term socio-economic development of a society, and perhaps future generations will focus on the state of the environment, taking into account its needs and requirements (added). . "

During the presentation, Alexei frequently addressed the audience. Asked questions and the audience was fully involved.

The question of ancient civilizations, what civilizations they were, where they flourished, why they are actually called ancient and the past, and what caused their collapse have been hotly debated. Gatherers began to speculate as to why these civilizations had disappeared, and there was indeed room for fantasy and imagination. One of the participants exemplifies the Easter Island civilization brought about. It is known that the civilization of Easter Island was naturally destroyed. Because the islanders did not have a stable economy and were isolated, once all the resources were exhausted, their civilization simply disintegrated and perished.

From this pictorial story, everyone seemed to understand what sustainable development is and what needs to be done for it. Modern human society has felt the shell of the cause of the problem, but has rushed to look for ways to solve the problem. It was decided that it is necessary to preserve nature and save resources for future generations, to live not only with the present, but also with sustainable development. But it is important to do the right thing here. Make an informed and correct decision based on the right assumptions. It’s important to start thinking “out of the box,” acknowledging unusual decisions, opinions, and arguments. Our world and many things are much wider than we think and they only need to be considered in two-dimensional space.

"We are on the brink of the worst crisis in human history," he said. There was no such thing before the village and we don’t have ready-made solutions. Furthermore, the future of humanity will depend on how we treat it now. That’s why it’s so important to figure out where and how we’re going, without rushing to the first idea that comes to mind about a possible solution to the problem, ”the scientists shout.

In addition, the following questions were raised:

• Can development be sustainable at all?

• Why is there no fair distribution of natural resources and how should they be properly distributed?

• Is zero growth possible?

• How to get rid of the "economic needle" - to give up "growth and consumption drugs"?

• Does consumption make us happy?

• Is the current system of world order stable?

• Stability of refinancing rate?

• Sustainability of democracy?

• How does personal freedom lead to stability?

Of course, these are very serious questions that need to be addressed and answered.

Nowadays, for most people, states, companies at different levels, some units, the issue of public interest comes last. Self-interest comes first everywhere, which, unfortunately, leads to a “lose-lose” situation for all parties. It turns out that we live in a time and society where "vegetarianism is discussed in the meat forum." Everyone says how to live, but no one is ready for it, more precisely, no one wants to change and change the situation. No one is willing to give up benefits, sacrifice economic development, or go the other way. And the world thinks, "If I don't do it like everyone else, if I create images and dreams, no one will notice and nothing terrible will happen." Of course, no one has overturned the presumption of innocence. But no, saints. It is from this perspective that the whole congestion lies, where there is a congested street. And here I want to emphasize the statement of the Dalai Lama. "Everyone has to change," he said. Changes in the world depend on changes in people.

After concluding his speech, Alexey addressed the audience, introduced and opened the real discussion.

A meeting and an hour and a half is not enough for such an interesting and topical topic, and as usual, the allotted time flew by imperceptibly. There was not much time left until the end, but many participants were ready for the discussion by this time and tried to share their thoughts with everyone and answer questions raised around the world.

For example, population growth issues immediately made many think about ways to stop population growth or its natural and deliberate decline. But instead, as suggested by one of the listeners, you need to raise people’s awareness, and that should be more beneficial. In other words, a healthy spirit of selfishness must be formed in society. Thus, man thinks of his own needs, takes into account the rights of others to his own needs, and accepts all of this as natural. In this case, harmony is achieved and the ideal world dominates. Unfortunately, the human nature of infinite consumption and power prevents this. Man, though he is a social being and realizes that he is “not a warrior in the field,” has a keen sense of personal comfort and all-round security. Once you own something, it’s hard to come to the conclusion that everything that belongs to it can be distributed fairly among everyone and that all of its benefits can benefit and satisfy someone else, other people. If no agreement is reached, there is no cooperation between the parties, k the same will happen to what we have now, that is. - short-sighted policy, unfair distribution of resources and rights to these resources.

Another view partially supported the above, and literally sounded like this:

- If everyone thinks about their own thing to feel good, everything will be fine. That’s true, but the problem with our society is that the notion of “what’s good” has changed in society. Our society, our whole advertising, our whole industry, the whole world, it has loaded us with the concept of ‘good’ - it’s consumption, it’s possession. Going back 100-150 years, for example, if we look at the lives of those aristocrats (that is, the wealthy), we see how many rich people aspired to own their property, their property. spent a lot of time in their country houses, home to nature and family. They had an understanding - I have the means, which means I am able to live in nature, that is. in environmentally friendly conditions. At that time, people had some passion. Now the reverse process is underway. All are leaving their villages, leaving their lands, and rushing to the cities. Consumption is growing, vital values are changing. In this regard, the same popular notion of “good” is changing. Everything has to do with the human mind. One must understand one's actions, return to true values, and realize that happiness, health, and a fulfilling life are not where everyone aspires, but where they are - at home, in their own land, in their garden, in their garden, and so on. .d. Human development must move forward and man must go through a stage of mental evolution, not technocratic evolution. We need to go the other way of development.

One of the young participants noticed the need to stop overproduction and that there are so many things in modern life that are not really needed. Design engineers, such as home appliances, predetermine the failure or breakdown of a device, i.e.. planned destruction of goods in order to purchase a new one later. But on the other hand, if you approach the Minister of Economy or Finance and tell him that we should stop overproduction, he will at least smile or think he is inadequate about you. The world needs a new idea. When society needs to deliberately limit production, it must come up with a new concept of development or survival in modern conditions.

Then another speech was delivered, which brought a greater resonance to the discussion. The topic was unusual and the discussion seemed to end because the ideas were sometimes unexpected.

One of the guests, a fan of Marxism, affirmed that selfishness is not bad (no one has argued with that) and that a person who has become rich only for his own benefit can be a philanthropist and help or assist others. the development of something. On the issue of population, he gave an example with the theory of Sergei Kapitsa, which explains that nothing should be done with the issues of population growth in the world. Mankind itself has certain mechanisms that allow it to control the population. There will be no infinite growth, population growth is already slowing down and will soon reach a certain level, it will be 7, 8 or 9 billion, but still the problem will be partially solved. These mechanisms that stop infinite growth are already working and will soon stop growing. You can even calculate which year it will be. There were questions about production: - whether production should be expanded or not, and about this Ma RKS stressed the need to expand production, and if production is not expanded, it will shrink and lead to a crisis. These are. the question of whether or not to expand production is not even worth it. "It's a pity you didn't all go through Marxism-Leninism." Everything is clearly described there and cleans the brain well in general, ”the speaker said. At the end of his speech, he said that he was optimistic that the population would eventually settle down.

But if we return to the growth of production and sustainable consumption, how should the dominant social paradigm be changed if the priority is consumption, consumption and consumption? How to avoid a crisis? Many scientists are now working on this. In fact, the crisis is the point at which these dominant social paradigms change most easily. We will have the next crisis. It will definitely happen and whether it is a war or something or that ecological crisis, it will all change.

Thus, it can be said that development always needs a crisis. And then one of the viewers mentions the “golden billion” theory, which reflects the existing imbalance in living standards and consumption levels between the population of developed and developing countries of the world in the context of limited global resources in. According to this theory, as many people can live in the biosphere without destroying it.

This is not encouraging ...

But overall, everything ended well and it became clear that something had to be done for everyone.

And what to do is not so difficult. You just have to start with yourself. Finally, I would like to recall the orders of the Dalai Lama, who called:

Start with yourself!

- Download the presentation (only 1 MB) LINK

A small video clip of the meeting is currently being edited.

When the video is ready, it will be posted on our website and we will definitely let you know about it.