Symbiotic Economy
How can we cooperate with all living beings on an equal base?
Godelieve Spaas, professor new economy
We have to realise that humans can’t solve everything alone. Other animals are working hard to save the world, like bees. If we stop to notice that, perhaps we can learn to cooperate more. (Lydia Baan Hofman)
Are we able to view ourselves as part of nature instead of being its director? Can we as, Donna Harraway1 suggests, ‘stay with the trouble’ when cooperating with other species on an equal basis? If we want to prevent or cope with problems such as climate change, decreasing biodiversity, soil exhaustion and pollution, then we have no choice but to work with dolphins, whales, elephants, goats, ants or viruses. We have no choice other than that of rethinking our economy into one that operates in symbiosis with other species.
Symbiosis is a phenomenon that is both one of the most powerful and the most subtle of all life mechanisms. A loop of sources and resources born out of synergies, it is the intimate connection that nourishes all parts, while belonging to neither one or the other, and to all at the same time. (Delannoy)
We are part of Mother Earth. We are the Earth, literally; people who practice shamanism knew about the hidden unity of nature long before it was confirmed by genomics and molecular biology. Surprisingly (or not), we are made of the same fabric as the vegetal world. The idea that all earthly beings2 are made of the same fabric unites us as one interdependent collection of ecosystems. This inextricable interconnectedness with one another sprouts the idea of an economy based on symbiosis. Isabelle Delannoy coined the term ‘symbiotic economy’ to mean ‘an economy that assembles three spheres of economic activity—those using natural ecosystems, social and collaborative innovation, and efficient technology—into a symbiotic relationship’.
Mycelium and algae
The symbiotic economy is hinted at by the work a group of communication and media design students at Avans who conducted creative research on collaborative economies. They immersed themselves in the idea of identity and asked the following questions: How do people express themselves through appearance and clothing? How could a collaboration with nature play a role in this? They designed clothes made of mycelium that protected against external factors and at the same time served as a breeding ground for edible mushrooms. Such a garment requires care. You have to water it and let it take nutrients from your skin while wearing it. In the long term they envisioned that it might also become possible to create garments that convert carbon dioxide into oxygen through photosynthesis.
Film.: Ambigo by Naïsa Weismann, Fleur Van Hout, Evial Rosen, Zain Fraenk, Rens Van Den Ende https://youtu.be/j_HiBzRznew
In this example we can shape the material to our liking as we allow it to make use of our bodies. Materials can also influence us; as Elvina Karana says
Material is a medium: it communicates ideas, beliefs, approaches; compels us to think, feel and act in certain ways; enables and enhances functionality and utility. They are like words in a writer’s vocabulary. The designer needs to be sensitised to working with the material, in order to fully consider ‘what materials can do’, as well as we say in the lab ‘what materials want to be’.
Algae. Photo: Solen Feyissa
For living materials like algae, plants, bacteria and mycelium this is even more important. Imagine what would happen if, instead of killing living organisms at the end of the design process, we kept them alive? In other words, what if they were allowed to flourish as part of everyday products? How would they influence us? How would these living materials guide us when wearing or working with them?
In the Living Textiles project, researchers developed a photosynthetic living textile with microalgae. The lifecycle of the living textile directly depended on how it was cared for. Just like a plant, the textile had to be watered in order to keep it alive. The fact that we may actually live with bacteria as products or packaging requires new ways of interacting with materials. Karana believes that such an approach would lead to the designing of everyday products with novel responsive behaviours and functions. Using living materials will suggest new ways of thinking and doing in terms of design and in terms of working together with nature.
People at the helm
In all these examples human beings are still seen as the directors of materials and resources. We see the same in new economic theories. Despite the fact that Delannoy’s symbiotic economy refers to an ecological phenomenon (symbiosis), she elaborates on it in a human context. As a species, Delannoy says, we are characterised by our capacity to think, organise things, and act. In other words, we have a brain and hands. We can therefore accelerate symbiosis by combining organisms that can work together but may otherwise have taken a long time to meet, hence putting us in charge of nature again. Although Delannoy brings a radically different perspective to our economic thinking and acting, inclusivity with other earthly beings is lacking. The same applies to the donut economy of Kate Raworth, who describes an economy that ensures that the Earth can recover. She, too, does not give nature a voice in the design of the economy. Christian Felber, who developed a balance sheet that measures the true profit of a company, defines true profit from a human perspective only.
Enlarging the economic space
We need to try harder to enlarge the economic space and include nature as a co-creator of our economy. Perhaps, as pointed out in the Rights of Mother Earth, we need to recognise that ‘the capitalist system and all forms of depredation, exploitation, abuse and contamination have caused great destruction, degradation and disruption3 ‘ and rethink our economic system beyond capitalism. This is what Bollier and Helfrich (2019) suggest in their book Free, Fair, and Alive, which focuses on commoning practices. Commoning is primarily about creating and maintaining relationships among people in large and small communities, between humans and the nonhuman world, and between us and future generations. Bollier and Helfrich argue that ‘commoning represents a profound challenge to capitalism because it is based on a very different ontology, or meaning framework, based on a deep relationality of everything. It is a world of dense interpersonal connections and interdependencies’.
Redefining ‘we’
My purpose as stated at the beginning (‘We have no choice other than that of rethinking our economy into one that operates in symbiosis with other species’) needs rephrasing. The trouble lies in the word ‘we’. Who does ‘we’ refer to? ‘We’ as in humans or ‘we’ as in all living beings?
It is about human beings being transformed by the world in which we find ourselves—or, to put this in more reciprocal terms, it is about the Earth’s future being transformed through a living process of inter-being. (Gibson-Graham and Roelvink 2009)
It appears problematic to consider ourselves as humans to be the sole designers of a future economy and to be the only ones at the table. How can we start seeing ourselves as the equals of ants, zebras, cows or oak trees? What does it mean to be an earthly being (Bruno Latour, 2018) cooperating with all other earthly beings on an equal basis to fulfil our mutual beautiful needs through exchange, reciprocity and care? Is it possible to communicate with rivers, forests, rocks, trees, animals or viruses? Can we stop othering each other and move towards more inclusive ways of being and becoming? How can we build meaningful relationships with all earthly beings? How can we listen to and converse with each other?
How to be affected
Silence and slowness are openings for the body to shift its stance and to fuse a little more with its surroundings. We need to learn, not in the sense of increasing a store of knowledge, but in the sense of becoming other. We need to learn how to be affected by earth others (Roelvink 2015) by creating connections and encountering possibilities that render us newly constituted beings in a newly constituted world. This requires an open stance and allowing oneself not to know. It requires a reparative attitude (Graham-Gibson and Roelvink, 2009), a longing to heal, a desire to transform and desire to belong. We need to invite the unknown in with an open mind, allowing us to give expression to how it feels to be alive. At the core lies relatability, be it through fine arts, music education, design for transition or any other orientation (Jan van Boeckel, 2021).
Kelly Sikkens
How to relate
Are we able to relate? In our highly individualised world (in which we put human beings at the top of the pyramid and denote the biosphere as subservient to us) relating is not our strength. We even have difficulties relating to other human beings. I remember a talk: ‘Declaration. The universal one and. The struggle for human values’ that TINKEBELL gave during the Economia 2020 in which she wondered why human rights do not seem to apply to everyone. You would think we want them to serve all people, because if even one person in the world is denied their rights, this sets a precedent for us all. The reason TINKEBELL gave for this is that we reduce people to numbers. We refer to them as thousands of refugees instead of as a community of people (each with their own history, stories, family, friends, feelings and gifts). Relating to people requires de-numbering and de-stereotyping.
Our current economy is based on similar principles. Talking about markets shares, consumers, and workers (human resources) places us in the same category as trees, rocks and animals. We have become inanimate pawns in the economic playing field. How can we revive our souls and those of all earthly beings so that we can relate again?
In her podcast series Wasted Tales, Kim Poldner4 gives a voice to things. She talks to Tess the Tomato, Walter the Wastebin and Fiona the Facemask among others. By making inanimate objects key protagonists in this podcast, she aims to provide an alternative perspective to the circular economy discourse. What do these materials and artefacts experience? How do they view humans during processes of recycling, repair and repurpose? What can we learn from them? How do they affect us?
Ahmad Odeh
Talking to trees
In the field of Indigenous science it is common to talk to trees, rocks and rivers. This brings to mind a story David Peat, a quantum physicist who worked with Native American scientists, told me when we were having dinner in the local bar in Pari, Tuscany:
The Indigenous people of Micronesia are able to navigate with accuracy far out of sight of land; the Naskapi of Labrador can find last year’s trails under many feet of snow. The Naskapi, the Blackfoot, the Cree and many other Indigenous American groups all have maps in their heads, while the Australian aborigines know the dreaming tracks of their remote ancestors. Thanks to these maps, groups are able to carry out a variety of practical tasks such as locating game, returning to the site of an earlier camp or even travelling to a traditional trail that no member of the group has visited in his or her lifetime. But it seems to me that this map in the head is far more than this—far more than any average travel guide to game tracks—for it involves the whole relationship between the land and the people. The Indigenous map is learned in childhood. It is absorbed while sitting at the feet of elders and hearing their stories and songs. The map grows out of dance and ritual, out of the movements of the seasons and the ceremonies of the group. This map in the head is not simply a plan involving contours, vegetation and trails, for it expresses the group’s place of being and their sense of harmony within the landscape. It goes beyond the practical into the sacred, yet makes no sharp distinction between either, for every act of the Indigenous person has a sacramental quality. The map is the meaning of the group; it is what holds them together, what binds them to their land. It is an expression of the music of their language. It is a map in which each aspect and each landmark has an associated value and meaning, it is a map dealing not only with the external but also the internal. When the map is used along the trail, it acts not only as a guide to location but expresses a whole tradition of relationships to each part of the land. The Naskapi speaker may not have been totally accurate when referring to the map as being in his head, for this map is read with the eye of the heart and the wisdom of the bones as well as with the eye of the mind. It is enfolded within the rhythm of walking, dancing and sitting; it is found in the sound of the language and the pattern of the entire culture. And so the map binds together, as does religion; it nurtures knowledge, as does science, it expresses the joy and celebration of nature, as does art. (David Peat, 1989)
Jr Korpa
The new ‘we’
Our Western economy considers landscapes, seas, rivers and soil as inanimate matter. The landscape is therefore seen as a resource for economic activities rather than being seen as a stakeholder. In this view, ‘we either come out on top of the Earth, and we disappear with her; or we lose against the Earth, and she manages to shudder us out of existence. In other words, whether we should defeat or be defeated by Earth, we lose’ (Line Marie Thorsten, 2017).
If we want to overcome and prevent climate change, decrease biodiversity, and halt soil exhaustion and pollution, then we have to share our economic playing field with other species and with nature. We have to co-create rules and principles underlying our joint living space (or in economic terms: our joint household) and make sure the needs of all parties involved (both animate and inanimate) are included in our considerations.
Our biggest challenge is to open up, to learn how to be affected, and to find our way to an economy that holds meaning, that includes all earthly beings and that emerges from a shared space that includes our bodies and metaphysics. We have to rethink our economy, not just as symbiotic economy but as a symbiotic co-creative process coming from an intrinsic symbiotic worldview. We have to rethink our Western, human-centred ‘we’ into a ‘we’ that includes all humans, all living beings and all of nature.
We make podcasts, films, articles, masterclasses, lectures, performances, workshops and more. Everything we make we share as a Creative Commons. Our work is freely available for legal use, sharing, repurposing, and remixing as long as you make reference to its source.
Meedoen aan een nieuwe economie
De economie is van ons allemaal. Dat lijken we soms te vergeten, alsof het iets is wat als vanzelfsprekend wordt geregeld door economen, overheid of bedrijven. Terwijl we best vraagtekens kunnen zetten bij de uitgangspunten van de huidige economie - Oneindige groei? Focus op geld? De exploitatie van mensen en aarde?