Stuck between a lake and a green place
I live near Lake Ontario, about 350 metres (or 400 yards). Almost 30 kilometres north (or 19 miles), my colleague lives in Stouffville and her backyard borders the southern side of what is called The Greenbelt[1], a vast expanse of protected land around Lake Ontario. When visiting her one day and looking over the fence of the backyard, it was evident that something profound was happening.
The government had taken a decisive step to protect this pristine land and established The Greenbelt. But what was the driving force behind this decision, and what lessons could we glean from it about the complex interplay between economics, society, and government interventions?
The Greenbelt policy in Ontario was intentional; it was a strategic move by the government to preserve farmland and safeguard natural heritage. The idea was simple but powerful: halt rampant development and protect the environment. However, as is often the case with well-intentioned policies, unintended consequences ensued.
As land values within The Greenbelt and along Lake Ontario’s shores skyrocketed[2], it sparked a heated debate both at societal levels and within the chambers of parliament. What was remarkable was that the very people who had once called the area between Lake Ontario and The Greenbelt home found themselves advocating for the protection of the very land they could no longer afford to inhabit. The push and pull were palpable, and it was clear that this was a microcosm of a much broader phenomenon.
This scenario resonated with me as I delved into the writings of Karl Polanyi, particularly his seminal work, The Great Transformation. Polanyi explores the intricate relationship between economics, society, and the natural environment. He introduces the concept of the “double movement,”[3] which is essential to understanding the dynamics at play in situations like the Greenbelt policy in Toronto.
Polanyi’s “double movement” concept encapsulates the tension between market-driven capitalism and society’s counter-movement to protect itself from the negative consequences of unchecked market forces. In the case of the Greenbelt, the government’s decision to intervene and restrict development exemplifies the societal counter-movement. It reflects a collective effort to shield valuable resources and the interests of local communities from the relentless march of market capitalism.
However, the story doesn’t end there. As land prices surged within the Greenbelt, a mirror image of Polanyi’s “double movement” emerged. This time, it was the economic consequences of the policy that came to the forefront. Rising land values ignited debates and tensions that echoed the broader themes Polanyi discusses in his work.
Looking closer at at Dr. Jason Clark’s paper, Evangelicalism and Capitalism: A Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship. Dr. Clark provides a compelling analysis of the intricate relationship between evangelicalism and capitalism[4], shedding light on the complexities within this partnership.
Dr. Clark’s paper reminds us that the Greenbelt policy scenario is not unique; it reflects the ongoing struggle between societal values and economic forces. Evangelicalism, as Dr. Clark argues, plays a significant role in shaping individual and collective attitudes toward capitalism[5]. Much like the Greenbelt’s inhabitants who found themselves advocating for land preservation, evangelical communities are often entangled in this complex relationship.
What’s fascinating is that Polanyi’s insights resonate with Dr. Clark’s analysis. Just as the Greenbelt policy represented a societal counter-movement against unregulated development, evangelicalism can be seen as a moral counter-movement within the world of capitalism. Evangelical values often emphasize community, compassion, and ethical considerations, which may clash with the profit-driven nature of capitalism.
Yet, as we’ve witnessed in the Greenbelt scenario, the economic consequences of societal interventions can create tensions and debates. Dr. Clark’s paper highlights that evangelicals, despite their moral counter-movement, are not immune to the economic forces that shape our world[6]. The lure of material success, consumerism, and individualism can blur the lines between evangelical values and the pursuit of wealth.
The story of the Greenbelt, the insights from Karl Polanyi’s The Great Transformation” and Dr. Jason Clark’s paper remind us of the perpetual dance between economics, society, and moral values. The Greenbelt policy reflects the tension of the “double movement,” and it serves as a tangible example of how government interventions to protect societal values can have unintended economic consequences.
Ultimately, these insights urge us to consider the questions raised by Polanyi and Dr. Clark: How can societies balance the pursuit of economic prosperity with the preservation of moral values? How do communities navigate the ever-shifting landscape of capitalism without losing sight of their core principles? The Greenbelt, Polanyi’s “double movement,” and Dr. Clark’s analysis encourage us to explore these questions and seek a harmonious coexistence between economics and ethics in our ever-evolving world.
[1] https://www.greenbelt.ca/test_map_page
[3] Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation (Beacon Press), page 79
[4] Clark, Jason Paul, “Evangelicalism and Capitalism: A Reparative Account and Diagnosis of Pathogeneses in the Relationship” (2018). Faculty Publications – Portland Seminary. 132. https://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/gfes/132 page 142
[5] Clark, page 148
[6] Clark, page 150
About the Author
Mathieu Yuill
While raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens may be a few of Julia Andrews' favourite things, here are a few of mine: Talking to strangers, Learning about what you do for fun, Conversation over coffee. I own a marketing and communications company in Toronto, Canada called Leading With Nice. There are a lot of names I could have given the company but a trusted friend encouraged me to name it that because I really value the humanness in us all. Bah - this is starting to sound like a horrible LinkedIn post. So whatever, let's have coffee. I'd love to hear about what you do for fun!9 responses to “Stuck between a lake and a green place”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Hi Mathieu,
I really appreciate that you used a real-life example to explain concepts I find challenging to grasp. You said, “Greenbelt policy represented a societal counter-movement against unregulated development, evangelicalism can be seen as a moral counter-movement within the world of capitalism. Evangelical values often emphasize community, compassion, and ethical considerations, which may clash with the profit-driven nature of capitalism.” Your statement about moral counter-movement was very helpful to me. There are certain aspects of our capitalistic and consumer-driven society that I really don’t like, all while I benefit from it. I will always be living with that tension. I have both choice and voice! Not everything in life is about profit. Loss can be beneficial too. Thank you for a great post!
I often struggle with buying things from Amazon.
Ditto! I try to keep my Amazon purchases to books. 🙂
Matthieu,
How would you answer your own question; “How do communities navigate the ever-shifting landscape of capitalism without losing sight of their core principles?” What do you think would be helpful for communities as they balance these things?
Economic principles in their pure forms are often unrealistic (from my non-economic trained self). When I read about socialism or capitalism – heck even when I read Atlas Shrugged – I see the benefit of these principles if only we weren’t human.
I prefaced my response with this caveat because I don’t know that there is truly anything that will allow a community to retain core principles. When Puritans came to the United States and controlled local governments they were able to institutionalize their core principles. But as new people joined communities and the generations passed they eventually lost hold of their ability to “keep their eye on the prize.”
I’m not suggesting Puritans had it right – only as an example of a dominant community value that wasn’t able to survive.
So – I don’t know the answer and I suspect there may not be one.
Hey Sir Matthieu, I have an easy question for you. How does “Leading With Nice’ navigate the ever-shifting landscape of capitalism without losing sight of its core principles?
This is actually what I’ve been working on with my NPO. So far we approach it by publishing our mission, vision and values: https://leadingwithnice.com/mission-vision-and-values/
Everything we do is done through these lenses. For example, we had a client who simply wanted to make things complicated and were always speaking to us with great contempt. So we fired them. It was a hit on our bottom line to the tune of about $35,000/year but the energy we saved by not expending so much catering to a client who simply did not align with our shared mandate was amazing. It helped us serve our other clients well and allowed us to attract even better clients.
Hi Matthew,
I loved this…”The story of the Greenbelt, the insights from Karl Polanyi’s The Great Transformation” and Dr. Jason Clark’s paper remind us of the perpetual dance between economics, society, and moral values.”
Which begs the question, how do separate the dancer from the dance?
For an outside perspective, I spoke with the Vice President of Client services (automotive) for Epsilon (subsidiary of Publicis – a French company) Rhonda Kai, I asked the question is “capitalism sustainable.” She asked how I defined capitalism and then proceeded to say that perhaps the question is “how is capitalism changing now.” Kai stated that, Capitalism will survive in some form or another, however, there are new forces in today’s world that can help reshape capitalism.
Enter the Generation Y (30 somethings) and Z (20’s) . These generations, said Kai, consume global information at a “staggering” pace. The consumer power they wield is tremendous and through the power of social media than can expose “industry dirty laundry” to millions of other consumers globally. Kai added that these and future generations are intensely aware of climate change, work force conditions and other socially conscious issues which impact their purchasing choices – one power. The power of “cancellation” is the other power. An example comes to mind of the “transgender” blunder of Bud Light. Through the power of social media, Budweiser has taken a major financial hit as mainstream males disengaged from the cheap (and arguably bland) beer.
Capitalism, says Kai, will have to “Grow, Learn and give back to society.
Shalom…
Russel, thank you for always leaving such thought-provoking comments on my posts.
Your reflections on the intertwining of economics, society, and moral values are indeed thought-provoking. Rhonda Kai’s insights add a fascinating layer to this discussion, particularly regarding the evolution of capitalism in response to new societal forces.
The point about Generation Y and Z’s impact on capitalism is especially pertinent. Their rapid consumption of global information and their influence through social media represent a significant shift in consumer power dynamics. This ability to highlight ethical concerns and drive social change is a notable force in reshaping capitalism.
Kai’s observation that capitalism must ‘Grow, Learn, and give back to society’ captures the essence of this transformation. It suggests a move towards a more conscious and socially responsible form of capitalism, influenced by the values and actions of younger generations. It’s a reminder that while the fundamental principles of capitalism may endure, its expression and impact are subject to change, driven by evolving societal values and technological advancements.
This conversation underscores the importance of being adaptive and responsive in our economic systems, ensuring they align with broader social and ethical considerations. Shalom, and thank you for sharing these compelling insights.