1We have examined several issues related to the central ideas in this book, which have to do with finding the way to reach the Welfare State in the twenty-first century. Several topics have been discussed: a) the definition of wealth and how it is measured; b) the links between wealth regarded as annual flow and as stock; c) the effect of the progressive transformation of production functions on the creation of jobs, as activities that were important for the creation of wealth as annual flow become less so whereas others partially replace such loss of dynamics; d) the fact that, in that constant transition, certain activities may be inadequate to create similar or larger amounts of value; e) that those activities introduce a bias towards capital remuneration in supply price formation without increasing the rate of return (for instance, if there is not a decrease in the capital/output ratio).

2Regarding this last issue, however, the opposite is also true, though with identical consequences. For example, many service industries – which use few exhaustible resources or do not have an important environmental impact – are characterized by a low capital/output ratio and are intensive in certain types of knowledge, but they do not create jobs or new flows of annual wealth. The most paradigmatic example is that of the cultural (or entertainment) industry. Reaching a market size only equivalent to 10% of the urban households on a global scale, one firm may, for instance, bill around 12 billion dollars a year, with equipment accounting for only a very small fraction of that amount, very low capital/output ratio and operating costs – for they work with their own technical informatics, but with infrastructure produced by third parties. In this case, the job creation rate is hardly significant, and the experts in the areas in question get such high earnings that no surplus value theory really makes any sense: indeed, such experts produce values which are several times higher than those of an industrial worker or a bank employee. If no rules mandate the investment of such surplus in the creation of cultural contents – at least proportionally to the number of users in each country – it adds to the savings which already exceed investment. That is, the surplus adds to the non-converging trend (global and social) and to the creation of savings exceeding investment, which, through the financial system, creates a truly extractive class on a world scale. The reason for such situation is, ultimately, that other countries whose middle classes are going through a high consumption stage – an amount of consumption that cannot be catered for by the creation of annual wealth in their own territories – must get into debt in order to maintain their standards of living at a certain stage in their development if their societies are not to become ungovernable.

3In turn, the potential markets which are insolvent as a consequence of the shortage of jobs, employment and insufficient incomes do not have domestic or foreign financing mechanisms, but their demand is distributed across a vast number of activities. This only produces more inequality and wider (instead of narrowing) gaps in the dual society.

4The evolutionary process would then be determined – according to some simplistic interpretations of Charles Darwin’s theory – by the survival of the fittest, of the better adapted, of the strongest. Yet, were this to be the case, a critique could also be written of the distortions that have been created while interpreting some social phenomena. And this has been so as a consequence of an unacceptable reductionism caused by the extrapolation of concepts deriving from the field of biology to that of society. Indeed, as from interpretations of this type, such as social Darwinism, the cultural values making humankind something more than a mere animal species would also be suppressed. In fact, cultural contents have migrated from humanism to crude individualism, and even in some theoretical interpretations, values such as goodness and empathy would only reflect a response deriving from a certain weakness (and even inherent to it), which the strong should do without (Neri Castañeda, 1990).

5Directly related to the above is, as has been stated in this book, the fact that these phenomena have been linked to urbanization, considered from an evolutionary perspective and as was recorded between 1950 and 2012 or 2014. Also, that such phenomena have affected the processes of (non)convergence of average magnitudes in the creation of new wealth between developed (or very rich) countries and those where over 83% of the world population lives. Here, urbanization – driven by a series of historical events – has constituted an important proportion of the creation of annual wealth, thus contributing to better standards of living for many people along a rising stage of the urbanization cycle. This trend declined later, though, as the installed capacities of many industries and activities entered structural overcapacity stages which are practically irreversible. That is, such capacity somehow becomes destroyed or is partially reabsorbed by means of mergers which also generate the loss of job positions. Similarly, we have explained the way in which this dynamic, specific and quantifiable process has also affected income distribution and the destruction of human capital, and how reconverting such process cannot catch up with the fast speed of technological innovation1.

6Current formal educational systems have not yet dealt with the question the uneven amount of time needed to reconvert and form human capital, and that needed to introduce new technologies, even when this is a central aspect in an open society, particularly in developing countries with their diversity of levels of wealth and productive structures. There is literature on this topic, but it is generally biased towards competitiveness and in general refers to developed nations. Though not along the line of our arguments, some authors have approached other aspects considered relevant for sustainability (e.g., Šlaus & Garry Jacobs)2, as is the case with the gap between the abilities that the educational system actually promotes, and the need to carry out important individual and collective transformations in order to build a sustainable future.

7On the other hand, some basic facts have amply been studied and shown here regarding the links between urbanization and growth. But it has also become evident that there is an international division of installed capacities in research and development, human capital and productive capacity across innovative cities, across cities which are producers and consumers, and others which are predominantly consumers. Apart from being a complex historical product, this indicates that for a growing proportion of people in the world, no convergence policy seems possible unless there is a global agenda explicitly suggesting it.

8In this respect, the emphasis on material and structural imbalances shows that the inflexibility of the real world is much greater than that suggested by the economic theory. Indeed the latter keeps theorizing about microeconomic imbalances – which, according to the neoclassical trend, may or may not coincide with macroeconomic ones. In turn, current approaches on macroeconomic policies mean to find ways of keeping balanced fiscal accounts, foreign equilibrium levels and objectives such as full employment, distribution improvements, efficient allocation of resources, social inclusion, an optimal mix between public and private participation. Baumol’s question of the anatomy of urban crises has also been dealt with as regards the uneven productivity across public services such as education, health and others, and other economic activities, and what that implies regarding the different value of public and private goods, tax policies, social inequality and quality of life.

9Issues related to the sustainability of development, new industrial and environmental policies, and ways of becoming part of global value chains have been added to those old economic problems. This has given rise to a vast body of literature, recipes and ideas about allegedly correct policies which, deliberately or not, have, for at least four decades, ignored the evident problem of how to achieve productive social inclusion, a central aspect in the Welfare State. It has also been shown here that the current approach to sustainable development has mainly emphasized aspects such as climate change, energy, use of water and other resources. It has also focused on polices meant to mitigate the effect of greenhouse gases and on adaptation measures in view of the vulnerability caused by climate change.

10Most of these complex views of the world have been proposed by the institutions which took shape after the Bretton Woods agreements in 1944, and by the later and far-reaching influence of the United Nations institutions. It is then easy to perceive a mainstream discourse which, though with different shades, advocates the need for sustainability, more equality and the fight against poverty. Ultimately, however, this consolidates the developed nations and chains the rest of the world by forcing it to adopt policies that serve the former through financing tools and an enormous number of programs that developing nations must adopt if they do not want to be left unguided, just drifting along the real world.

11In the case of developed nations, the discussion precisely focuses on the advantages and disadvantages of maintaining certain structures of the Welfare State which are typical of European countries, and of introducing competition in contestable markets that could be wildly deregulated. Some other aspects also need consideration: the control of international labor mobility, which becomes harsher over time, retirement age, the challenges posed by Chinese production of sophisticated products, and the new technological revolutions which are labor force expulsive, predicting the era of total automation. The type of institutional and wealth-distribution structures needed in an automated world is kind of a taboo and – to the best of my knowledge – there are no theoretical developments about it.

12On the other hand, sporadic attempts by developing and very poor nations to become autonomous are severely punished, for they imply some kind of State intervention, and the reputation of such institution has notably declined. In turn, the discourse regarding the virtues of market mechanisms and the dangers of interventionism lead to extreme measures, such as proposals to reduce public spending at all costs, to reduce taxes or to boost private investment with generic mechanisms ignoring too many specific aspects of very diverse realities.

13Limiting the problem of why some nations or certain individuals are rich and others are poor to an analysis of trendy literature such as has been quoted here, whether with pro-market views or with standpoints related to the vast number of branches stemming from Marxism, sometimes darkens rather than clarifies the debate. The same happens with views only considering the gap between the richest one percent and the rest, predicting the return to pre-democratic societies if financial income and heritage are not taxed, as suggested by Pikkety.

14Keynesian counter-cyclical policies to prevent the fall in aggregate demand are more complex in a world where the goods and services have grown significantly and the use of industrial capacities is diverse. On the other hand, it is easier to implement them in order to rescue the financial sector or support the continuity of the military-industrial complex, and they guarantee returns above those of other riskier markets. Such risks are nowadays transferred to an ever growing number of individuals all around the world.

15No wonder, then, so much talk in favor of poverty alleviation, of more equality and policies leading to full employment is still part of a discourse meant to pretend that societies have not given up on humanism, while there is growing de-humanization, whether implicit or even explicit, all around. It is a painful setback after the condemnation of totalitarian regimes and ideologies promoting racial supremacy, which was probably the most valuable achievement of the twentieth century.

16The struggle to preserve the Welfare State in the twenty-first century supposes many aspects, but apart from the tools that will lead to the implementation of proposals, it implies the need to recover humanist values. Regarding the human species as invasive and the cause of the destruction of the planet, and the set of the values advocated by the large cultural traditions as responsible for environmental degradation is equivalent to stating, both explicitly or implicitly, that there are too many people. And the question of who we can do without is clear: those that the market no longer needs, so that the exterminator is now nature itself, or impersonal mechanisms, and not necessarily hateful dictators, as was the case with Adolf Hitler, Iósif Stalin and others. Humanitarian help in case of natural or anthropogenic hazards covers up those responsible for such phenomena, while at the same time new forms of charity are recreated to substitute for those that have been locked within museum display cabinets as proof that they have existed, as if they were exotic and pre-historic species or old vessels.

17Yet this book is not meant to deal with this important issue, but to try to explain how we have reached this situation and how it could be partially reverted in order to achieve the Welfare State in the twenty-first century, so that, once the urbanization process – one of the main driving forces of wealth creation – becomes exhausted on a world scale in a few decades, the prophecy of growing inequality undermining the very foundation of modern democracies can be prevented. Such proposal certainly implies dispelling the myth of the identification of democracy and market, but also that of full material equality achieved by an almighty state led by an elite group that knows exactly what, how, how much, what for and for whom each thing is produced.

18Although sustainable development – which has been amply criticized here – can be approached from many different perspectives, it is also possible to make its different dimensions converge if ideological interpretations can be left aside, since they originated in periods when there were other crucial problems at stake. This idea will be sketched below.

Sustainable re-urbanization as a source of job creation and innovation

19The first ideas regarding the importance of sustainable cities probably originated towards 1975, when the ecocity expression was coined (Roseland, 1997). A group of Berkeley University researchers focused on topics such as forestation of urban areas with fruit trees, alternatives to the use of cars, such as pedestrian pathways and bike lanes, houses and buildings using solar power, different forms of urban transport, regulating energy consumption, slow ways after the Australian model, as opposed to the high-speed streets of the large industrial cities in the United States. According to Roseland, this concept became mature with Register’s work in 1987 and its subsequent development, which has made some cities, the concept and its author, famous through the organization known as “Ecocity Builders”.

20The central topics of such proposal are not too different from what has already been discussed: access and accessibility, energy, water, land, clean air, food, materials, culture. The initiative is framed within the UNEP perspective, but it establishes a methodology for the conceptual construction of the meaning and form of sustainable cities that implies the participation of all involved on the basis of public-private agreements. The cases of Medellin and the construction adviser from Tianjin Ecocity in China are usually mentioned – together with other actions carried out by the organization – as concrete steps towards the building of sustainable cities. There is not so much emphasis on the creation of employment, but it cannot be said that the topic is completely excluded from the project.

21Actually, it may seem paradoxical to consider sustainable cities the core of a proposal for a world agenda of new things to do, as we have called the new products and services capable of promoting a type of economic growth that will enable productive social inclusion and a sustainable world. As has been pointed out in work written in the mid nineteen nineties (Rees & Wackernagel, 1996; Bithas & Christofakis, 2006), cities and urban life styles have the strongest impact on ecosystems – or ecospheres, as the authors call them. Moreover, they state that the second half of the twentieth century marks a nontrivial turning point in the ecological history of human civilization. Their argument is that the ecological footprints of large and spread human settlements in cities may affect the availability of raw materials, vast land areas, rivers, oceans, and could also modify the climate. But on the other hand, those urban spaces, which are a small portion of the surface of the planet, can promote policies meant to modify habits and new technologies and institutions that will change the conditions of world-scale degradation. This is precisely because cities concentrate population, so that what happens there impacts on the rest of the vast land ecosystem.

22It is obvious that such efforts require global political and economic cooperation and an individual and collective internalization of new values (Caldwell, 1992). The capacity of the planet is not so much a question of the number of people in it, but of how high their level of consumption of materials and of non-renewable fuels is, and how intensive in materials and fuels the productive processes catering for their needs and ambitions are. Therefore, the creation of value chains related to urban environmental services may result in a global improvement on the ecological footprint.

23So if the problem started with large-scale urbanization over the last sixty years, could it be solved by means of the same process as from a reformulation that would complete the evolutionary cycle, understanding it as a mature state of the urban civilization? It is truly a possibility, and as such, only one out of many others, in as much as for some evolution advocates, all species will eventually disappear.

24Yet, in our context, the reason to consider sustainable re-urbanization as the driver of activities that might decline in the future can only be understood clearly within the theoretical and conceptual framework developed in the previous chapters. The idea is to be able to create a stable horizon of long-term investment which, in turn, will involve a more intensive use of labor force with fewer formal educational requirements, and to create a foreseeable context for private investment and for the massive spread of some research and development output related to sustainable urbanization and cities.

25As shown in Figure 50, the trend in a modern economy implies that the bulk of new things to do (that is, goods and services) increases in such a way that there is a growing need to create new job positions, even in the context of an economy that grows at very moderate rates after the decline in the natural dynamics of the urbanization process. In many societies, these new things to do could be related to research and development, to exports or to other activities within the domestic market. But there are no universal recipes, as has been said, for the asymmetries are too marked, as is the case with power relations across nations, or within each trade bloc.

26For developed nations with huge R&D advantages, given their previous backgrounds, this problem is not so difficult to solve, for their transnational companies export both products and technology on a global scale, whereas the world financial system and, ultimately, also military supremacy impose the rules of the game for global growth. In other cases, the level of training of the labor force will attract capital and technology so that the countries can export goods and fill the gap to create enough job positions, or at least to prevent large masses of people from falling into poverty and indigence situations.

27But in many cases, growth as a whole depends on the capacity to generate domestic activities related to the export of different natural resources. In these cases, periods of prosperity are associated to the need to increase prior thresholds of productive capacity on a world scale, whether in the field of mining, energy, agriculture, food or any others, during which prices increase. Historically, opportunity windows have opened along those booms so that domestic consumption increased. In turn, such domestic consumption may be catered for by products coming from the domestic market or not, depending on their competitiveness, protectionist policies, and other factors. But it has been said that those historical moments are related to large urbanization processes on a world scale, as has been the case recently, or along the two- or three-decade period after the Second World War.

Figure 50. Process of creation of annual flows of wealth by activities related to the urbanization process and other economic activities over a certain period

28As has been said, in this intergenerational process, a large number of people are pushed out of the labor market when activities requiring unskilled workforce decline. These are, in general, related to the first stages of the urbanization process. This is why associating future growth paths to the concept of sustainable cities and urbanization could be a way of absorbing in a productive way – and coherently with better standards of living – many people who could not migrate, in a reasonably short period, from rudimentary activities to other more complex ones.

29Figure 51 shows how this idea of relating sustainability to the employment dimension could work so as to ease the pressure imposed by the belief that each territory must formulate successful and sufficient innovation policies. The argument becomes clearer when considering those human beings who have had to resort to alternatives such as street vending, washing car windscreens at the traffic lights, dumpster diving, begging, living on charity or joining gangs that might switch to organized crime structures.

Figure 51. Process of creation of new annual flows of wealth by activities related to the sustainable urbanization process

30The possibility of employing labor force with lower levels of schooling aims to create a labor context that will permit productive social inclusion to outstrip programs granting unemployment subsidies and economic help to sectors with low economic resources. It will also create the conditions for brief training courses leading to an orderly transition in the process of formation of more skilled human capital in developing nations, where the possibility of wealth creation through R&D policies devoted to exports is much lower. This proposal considers that work educates and that, in this context, there are better perspectives of forming human capital in a shorter term, for even in the case of simple and routine activities, the new technologies may require and facilitate new types of knowledge. Summing up, then, this path would be an improvement on the present situation, which implies waiting for the new generations coming from very diverse socio-economic and cultural backgrounds to reach a context of equal opportunities some time. On the other hand, the creation of sustainable habitats and cities is a goal in itself in terms of the quality of life, and a context for R&D activities to develop on a global and local scale without needing to dominate the frontier of knowledge for a large number of services and activities.

31Another positive aspect is the possibility of avoiding too rapid changes in the domestic composition of annual flows of wealth creation, and therefore, of reaching more orderly transitions in production functions associated to the different sectoral activities in order to get to a better equilibrium across primary, industrial and service activities. Likewise, the concepts of urban sustainability and sustainable cities suppose the need to integrate also food production within the geographical areas in each case, when natural, climate, economic and technological conditions permit. (Deelstra & Girardet, 1999; Bakker et al, 1999).

32But this approach to sustainability, which also emphasizes the creation of jobs and activities generating them, does not coincide with the dominating trends that have given rise to the promotion of sustainable cities. Adriana Allen (2009) points out:

The apparent consensus on the urgent need to promote sustainable cities has been underlined by significant differences with regards to the questions of what urban sustainability means, why and how to promote it and for whose benefit (p. 2).

33The concepts displayed in Figure 52 are roughly the same as what is usually presented by the approach to sustainable development: social, economic, ecological, physical and political sustainability. That is, they are the dimensions guiding investment decisions on condition that, when all of them converge, none will be affected.

Figure 52. Sketch of the promotion of sustainable cities

34It is easy to perceive that these are general concepts and that no indicator suggests whether a certain project is more sustainable than another, unless a list of conditions is specified for each of those dimensions, and then their implementation is checked, and also if a certain value is agreed upon and regulated for each of them. Otherwise, a certain project might entail low risk and a high internal rate of return, but not fulfill a series of conditions with respect to other dimensions, and then the economic side of the project might end up dominating the result. On the contrary, if some other project is socially, ecologically and politically advantageous, but its net present value is negative in terms of private investment (or positive, but still lower than some other alternative project), it will require the contribution of the tax-payers to be economically feasible or acceptable, unless global financial surpluses are used as part of the mechanism, or the rest of the dimensions are economically valued. Yet, in an economy ruled only by the quest for profit or more sophisticated consumption, supporting such projects with public investment might be politically disadvantageous, unless the individuals were really ready to pay for that, and unless the pressure groups – who symbolically represent middle-class tax-payers – or the international financial system did not boycott the proposal.

35The alternative to living in a sustainable city in the mid or long term might compete with that of living in a sustainable exclusive neighborhood or house, even if the city where it is located is not sustainable enough, or if only a part of the city is sustainable, while the rest is overcrowded, with no access to services, that is, with all the characteristics of extreme poverty. The same can be said to happen on a global scale when comparing rich nations and the rest.

36At the same time, sustainable urbanization processes cannot be equivalent to the mere conversion of unsustainable cities into sustainable ones. It should be considered that around 50% or more of the world population lives in cities, which in turn occupy something like 2% of the earth’s surface, consume 75% of the resources, between 60 and 80% of the energy total and are responsible for 75% of GHG emissions (Gabarrell et al., 2015). Such statement reinforces the arguments presented here, but at the same time suggests an opportunity to plan – together with the life cycles of the infrastructure that would lead to sustainable cities – rudimentary activities to be carried out by human resources (and, therefore, compatible with productive social inclusion).

37Dealing with the realities of the urban system historically conformed on the basis of the factors described in Chapter 2 (such as economies of agglomeration, productive specialization traditions, separation of research and development activities from production ones, and others) implies planning a transition framework in which intercity population mobility is guided by a long-term sustainability rationale. That is, it would be necessary to decrease diseconomies of over-agglomeration in favor of strengthening intermediate-size and small cities. This would call for a series of incentives requiring financing which, in turn, should be guided, somehow, by the prior structure of specializations and activities so that the system does not face undesired and disruptive effects on human capital. Interestingly, though, when trying to implement the transformation of scarcely sustainable cities into sustainable ones, those in most need of remodeling (or reconfiguring) are the ones that most strongly resist transformation (Portney, 2001).

38It is precisely here that the discussion may become biased in favor of certain values and ideologies. Indeed, what we are trying to point out in this book is that economics as a science cannot solve the question of sustainability without exclusion, or without inclusion achieved only through incomes or subsidies, but not through work.

39Many might properly ask: What is new about this? Has the deep-rooted discussion between Keynesians and extreme liberals not been precisely around this redistribution core? What is the difference between this proposal and the old recipes promoting inclusion through scarcely productive public employment at the expense of a fiscal pressure that would reduce the purchasing power of the middle class and investors’ returns? Would this not mean the suspicious implementation of a socialist economic system, with the dangers that would entail?3

40It is certainly not easy to persuade someone that there is a bit of all that in the proposal. But the reason why it looks like that is, at least partly, based on some false beliefs, namely: a) that labor markets are flexible in terms of the necessary abilities, which are embodied in each of the activities conforming the creation of wealth; b) that individual initiative and creativity are enough drivers of growth; c) that some people do not have jobs because of their lack of talent or effort, without considering that those attributes are also unequally distributed from the beginning of each new life and not only as a consequence of natural causes; d) that sustainable urbanization and development can be implemented only through mere market mechanisms, without considering that there will always be some cross impact opposing the interests of some actors and, therefore, impacting on some indicator so that, under the present mode of wealth creation and distribution, the net result may be uncertain or even negative4.

41If this problem has not been correctly considered, it is mainly because of the language that has been used and the treatment of the intervening variables. These have been regarded as homogeneous and invariable aggregates through time, without taking into account the high level of internal heterogeneity of such aggregates, or the fact that within them, structural mutations occur when activities involved in a significant part of the creation of wealth as annual flow tend to stagnate at the same pace as urbanization processes.

42This scenario is not yet evident because the world potential for urbanization is still not exhausted. As has been said, the rural-urban migration potential in the coming decades will be gradually smaller, and the process of migration within nations or on a global scale will necessarily increase. This latter process is already in progress nowadays.

43But the desire for a better quality of life is very difficult to frustrate as a consequence of the growing flows of information transported through the telecommunications networks and the mass media. These create a world-wide awareness of the styles of consumption and standards of living of vast ranges of the urban global middle class.

44However, at the same time, and until there is some explicit regulation about it, the cities will be populated by people with low qualifications looking for activities requiring superior abilities. But such capabilities can hardly be reached within reasonably short terms no matter the effort made through formal education.

45These processes are still in progress, and have been a great concern for some years now in developed nations receiving flows of people they cannot absorb. And neither can other developing countries. Surely enough, it is not necessary to insist on this: the so-called walls of shame are clear evidence of a phenomenon that is only beginning, as is also the case with the growth of informal and marginal sectors in all the countries, particularly the less developed ones. That this gives rise to informal and illegal economies is something that the media show us every day: trafficking of people, particularly children and women, organ trade, criminal organizations devoted to illegal drugs trade, and a degradation of the human condition affecting at least around a million people in urban areas, including those we call “the included”. All of which is certainly going too far away from democracy, from its expected results and from development promises. Yet these promises feature in the political discourse all around the planet and in the programs and initiatives of all the international bodies.

46On the other hand, the idea of promoting sustainable cities (and of course, sustainable urbanization processes) is not only related to physical infrastructure, the design of houses and buildings, ways of generating and consuming energy, but also to many other activities in the form of public goods. These public goods might consist, for instance, in urban maintenance, reconversion of infrastructure, creation and maintenance of green areas, decoration, flower-growing, drip irrigation works, street cleaning, waste sorting. These activities could be carried out using modern methods considered costly value added chains because they are labor force-intensive, which is certainly not the same as generating income through unemployment subsidies or passively accepting that informal activities, such as those related to recycling, be formed through market mechanisms, with all that this implies. Each of them may require new technologies and the use of existing ones, and may include an important creation of educational and cultural contents. Just by designing parks and decorating poor neighborhoods or slums, a very different perception would be created of what it means to have been born poor, something no one can choose. Installing and maintaining drip irrigation systems and other automated works in poor neighborhoods, upgrading homes and enhancing their curb appeal can not only absorb unemployed people but, as time goes by, also become green value chains, even greener than many industrial products sold as such.

47An employment policy such as is being proposed here, however, would probably not be accepted by the prevailing thought in developed countries. Table 13 sketches four different paradigmatic situations as if they could be generalized to the whole set of sectoral and specific activities, when actually such situations are always associated to the productive structure in each nation, or even in a small region within a nation.

48The left lower quadrant depicts a labor demand situation not requiring complex skills. If the labor force is not highly trained, the market may reach its balance, but this will happen only if there is enough demand for such posts. The left upper quadrant presents a situation in which there is a strong demand for high-level skills but low-skilled labor force, very much what happens in many developing countries. In these cases, the possibilities of growth for organizations and productive units are limited by the imbalances between labor force supply and demand. Breaking out of this scenario requires time and very good human resources with the desired skills. The right lower quadrant presents the opposite case, that is, a situation with highly skilled labor force for which there is no demand in the labor market. This could probably be the case of individual or group emigration, but it is certainly not a generalized situation for, in a world where firms want to expand their competitiveness, they would surely localize some of their activities wherever they came across well trained labor force to make good use of such resources. Finally, the right upper quadrant depicts a scenario in which the demand for and supply of high-level skills would have positive impacts on the creation of value chains and the desire for high labor mobility.

49The underlying idea here is that products and services are poor because the workers’ skills are poor and cannot produce better ones, and also because a market used to such poor quality of products and services does not demand for better ones. And this is so because the labor market has imposed rules preventing the demand for better skills. In developed nations, this leads to low wages associated to low productivity, which in turn reinforces the low demand for more highly specified and sophisticated products. It is thus stated that the firms may remain in business and return profits even when the total output may be sub-optimal. Now how could such a general line of thought be dissociated from a set of specific activities required by a society and which, in terms of a pure market ideology, do not coincide with consumers’ preferences?

50There is not a single answer to this. Such reasoning could probably be valid for developed economies where an important number of basic needs have already been fulfilled and which only need to create larger flows of annual wealth. Yet considering this a universal recipe for countries with lower levels of development may be not only dangerous but false as well. The labor market situations depicted in Table 13 may actually apply on a series of sectors, subsectors and activities with the different productive functions associated to each of them.

51The idea that a likely transition to recreate flows of annual wealth leading to productive social inclusion is related to sustainable re-urbanization must therefore start off from theoretical definitions, but must result in sets of specific activities. Each of these must, in turn, be linked to a supply and demand matrix so as to define what type of training is necessary in each case. Though not incompatible with the current proposals for sustainable urbanization, implementing an approach of this type requires going beyond the present way of dealing with it.

52The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), for instance, wonders about the meaning of sustainability and sustainable, resource-efficient cities, and suggests two different ways of defining them: in a broader sense, in terms of social, economic and environmental sustainability for present and future generations; and also as material sustainability, which means leading growth towards a progressive decoupling from resource exploitation. Improvements on such decoupling would be clear indicators of successful material sustainability or efficient use of resources. Such resource efficiency would then be the key to reach the desired material sustainability (UNEP, 2012).

53Even from a narrower perspective, based on the upgrading of equipment and regulations, the problem of sustainable cities – and of the literature about them – would still be deeply flawed. And this is so because of a certain oversimplification of the discourse regarding central aspects, and a clear lack of precision about complex ones such as governance (Bulkeley & Betsill, 2005).

54As in almost all cases, the focus seems to be on the link between energy and climate change, but also on other issues such as food, slums, waste, water, transport, use of materials and ecosystem degradation. Though it is explicitly admitted that the urban divide between formal and informal sectors currently affects developing countries – and also developed ones, though the phenomenon is not quantified –, with over one thousand two hundred million people affected, no specific mechanism is suggested in relation to the creation of jobs. Yet the job creation issue might be implied in the acknowledgement of the need to link sustainability agendas to the problem of the urban divide as a critical requirement for greening and urban sustainability programs and projects (UNEP, 2012, p. 14).

55The idea is that the new paradigm that the UNEP calls ecocities5, whether at the city-scale, or the sub-region scale within cities (eco-blocks, eco-corridors or eco-regions), should no longer depend on former-style infrastructures but on others granting food and energy self-sufficiency, recycling of water and even waste and some materials, as basic ways of reducing the depletion of natural resources. Though the UNEP proposal does not put forward a comprehensive plan to make this happen in economic, technological or fiscal terms, it does suggest the creation of iconic projects of this new urbanization style, as is the case with Curitiba, in Brazil, and others in different countries.

56The proposal responds to what is presented in Table 14 below, which takes into account already existing and new cities.

57It is central here to design a transition program to reduce overcrowding in unsustainable cities and promote migration to other mid-sized or small ones with a sustainable population growth rate. The building and re-building dynamics is a source of considerable employment which does not immediately require a fast reconversion of unemployed human resources.

58Specific approaches to this issue may be influenced again by the prevailing perspective typical of developed nations, where the role of technology suppliers favors them. For instance, a WWF report (Booz & Company, 2010) concludes, after analyzing the question of sustainable cities and urbanization:

The three prerequisites highlighted in this report—urban planning, investment, and technology—are essential in the drive to achieve zero-carbon lifestyles. In addition to increasing our chances to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius, aggressively addressing emissions in urban infrastructures can provide high economic returns and enhanced energy security. In contrast, BAU and less substantial efficiency improvements in our urban infrastructures over the next 30 years will not be enough to achieve those results. Urban planning and the modern tools that support it will help cities make the right choices to maximize their long-term results. Investments must be carefully targeted and leveraged to reduce greenhouse gases and lower the costs of more sustainable lifestyles for everyone on the planet. Finally, technological advances will support and enable the drive for low-carbon cities. The challenge is clear: Our cities must present holistic, inspiring, aggressive, and credible urban plans for reaching zero or very low emissions within the next few decades, finding innovative ways to finance them and utilizing every technological advance at their disposal. The need is urgent: If our cities do not meet this challenge, all of our futures are at risk. (p. 9)

59Now this firm-based proposal, which is along the lines of the catastrophe style of the Sierra Club, the Club of Rome, and even some UNEP and IPCC reports, is very far from the inclusive sustainable city model promoting the creation of employment, as suggested in Figure 51 above. For these approaches, the problem would be solved by simply incorporating aggressive technology promotion policies to infrastructure, something developing nations cannot afford. Besides, it would not solve the problem of the structurally unemployed.

60Even in the case of proposals on topics such as waste recycling, the approaches in developed nations are not easily replicable in developing ones (Wilson, Velis & Cheeseman, 2006). Formalizing activities in these informal sectors should be a gradual process, also considering that those tasks are carried out under very questionable health conditions and imply child labor and crude exploitation.

61According to another line of thought – also intellectually influenced by the developed north –, environmental services are seen as possibilities to reduce poverty. Examples of this are services related to the protection of ecosystems in rural areas in very poor countries such as Rwanda (Andrew & Masozera, 2010), which are normally within the framework of UNEP proposals and of some universities in developed nations. But when attempts are made to extrapolate these ideas to urban areas, initiatives meant to create employment and reduce poverty do not appear explicitly or as a priority.

62This is precisely why, from the point of view of the global south, with its diversity and opportunities, it seems necessary to link the agendas of the IPCC, UNEP and other institutions to these new ideas about the creation of value chains for highly labor force-intensive services. This would be appropriate for employment not to be informal or poorly remunerated, and for the concepts of sustainability and care for the ecosystems to include human beings as another species in need of care. No doubt this requires valuing all human life and not regarding some lives more valuable than others as a central concept of any global thought and the basis for any non-discrimination policy. This had been an achievement after the Holocaust, but is now receding before new and unobtrusive ideas and ways of justifying racial, religious and class supremacies.

63We will now go back to the IPCC 2014 Report in order to understand how developing nations could set up regulatory frameworks – if the global proposal were to be integrated to a coherent World Agenda with explicit and attainable financial tools – to promote the creation of sustainable employment in the context of sustainable economic, social, political and environmental development. In the Human Development item, improved access to education, nutrition, health, energy, safe housing and settlement structures, and social support structures, reduced gender inequality and marginalization in other forms should go hand in hand with educational programs implemented in already existing workplaces or in new productive structures. For, as has been said, mere access to education cannot guarantee equal opportunities if the young people with low levels of training are not qualified, at the same time, for specific activities.

64Also, according to the IPCC, livelihood security and poverty alleviation depend on income and asset diversification, improved infrastructure, access to technology and participatory decision-making forms, increased decision-making power, changed cropping, livestock and aquaculture practices, reliance on social networks, improved access to and control of local resources, land tenure, disaster risk reduction, social safety nets and social protection, insurance schemes, among others. But without a direct link to sectoral policies also including a clear description of specific activities and of the allocation of financial, human and technological resources, all that is a mere statement of desires or good intentions.

65The core of the argument should, then, be that the sustainability paradigm is also the great opportunity to generate employment for a wide range of people who are unemployed as a consequence of the mismatch between labor supply and demand. Tasks related to the management of ecosystems, such as those suggested by the IPCC 2014 Report, are precisely labor force-intensive activities: maintenance of urban green spaces, coastal afforestation, watershed and reservoir management, reduction of other stressors on ecosystems and of habitat fragmentation, maintenance of genetic diversity, manipulation of disturbance regimes, community-based natural resource management.

66On the other hand, the proposal permits a wide range of technological innovation that is easier to implement in areas such as early warning systems, hazard and vulnerability mapping, diversifying water resources, improved drainage, flood and cyclone shelters, building codes and practices, storm and wastewater management, improved transport and road infrastructure, all of which is within the “Disaster risk management” item. The “Spatial or land-use planning” item, in turn, comprises the provision of adequate housing, infrastructure and services, managing development in flood prone and other high risk areas, urban planning and upgrading programs, land zoning laws, easements, protected areas. All this is naturally related to the structural/physical dimension, involving engineered and built-environment options, technological options and ecosystem-based options. On the other hand, within the same dimension, the “Services” item comprises social safety nets and social protection, food banks and distribution of food surplus, municipal services including water and sanitation, vaccination programs, essential public health services, enhanced emergency medical services.

67Now the reader who has got this far is surely willing to know how all this is to be paid for and by whom. The economic options suggested by the IPCC in the same Report are too general. They include financial incentives, insurance, catastrophe bonds, payments for ecosystem services, pricing water to encourage universal provision and careful use, microfinance, disaster contingency funds, cash transfers, public-private partnerships.

68But the truth is that, as long as there is not a collective and individual awareness of the need for public financing – whether the rendering of labor force-intensive services be public or private – social sustainability with employment will keep on being a mere illusion or, in the best of cases, an expression of desire. It is curious that no one in the literature about the social dimension of sustainability has ever taken the trouble to estimate what the cost of productive social inclusion would be. Such a simple exercise would permit a discussion on how to alleviate poverty by means of useful employment related, as has been said, to the sustainable transformation of urban life.

69Considering: a) a range between 800 million and 2 billion people; b) an average daily income of US$ 13 of 2014 (US$ 390/month), or c) an average daily income of US$ 8 of 2014 (US$ 240/month), increases in fiscal pressure would account for a minimum 3 percentage points of GDP, or a maximum of 12 of the world GDP.

70True, the exercise is static, artificial and merely didactic. But it shows that even supposing earnings 7.5 to 5 times above the current value of the poverty line according to the World Bank criteria (stuck in two dollars a day despite the fact that the estimated world value of the dollar depreciated by 60% between 2000 and 2012), and covering as wide a range as between 800 to 2 billion people included in productive or service processes, the total value with respect to the world GDP is not impossible to afford (cf. Figure 53).

Figure 53. Simulation of the global fiscal impact of a productive social inclusion mass program integrating urban development and sustainable cities, meant to increase the daily minimum income by 8-13 dollars

71Some will undoubtedly say that this is a utopia, that such average salary could cause an increase in the salaries of other activities, that it could lead to a higher level of production, thus promoting greater consumption, which in turn would impact on the exhaustion of resources, the environment and global warming. All this, however, should be provided for by the rest of the dimensions of sustainability, and in any case, it should also be approached by means of new ways of production and consumption. The obstacles seem to be more of a cultural nature and focused on the spheres of change rather than on others only having to do with policies or institutions. The IPCC Report refers to these spheres in terms of social and technical innovations, behavioral shifts, institutional and managerial changes that produce substantial shifts in outcomes, and also of political, social, cultural and ecological decisions, together with individual and collective assumptions, beliefs, values and worldviews influencing climate-change responses and, we add here, sustainable development not excluding people and future generations.

72It is also curious that the weak discourse on sustainability, only based on climate change and renewable fuel parameters, ignores, for instance, that energy transitions, as would be the case of covering 100% of energy needs by means of alternative fuels (solar, for instance), suppose a strong increase in the use of commodity materials such as concrete, steel and others depending on intensive mining (MIT, 2015). Yet such impact is usually underestimated with respect to that implied in a context of more people having access to better standards of living and consumption.

73Is it, then, too much to grant 3, 8, 10 or even 14 percentage points of GDP to eradicate a type of poverty resulting from a logic that can only come up with new things to do in the field of large R&D innovations or a successful insertion in the global market? My answer is certainly negative, and if this is not considered feasible, then it is a real and quantifiable challenge requiring responses and explicit evidence. Or else it is necessary to do away with some terms in the political discourse, such as equality, zero poverty, or even – if the world political effort is zero – with the Millennium Development Goals, which are actually self-fulfilling if rural-urban migration continues, as has been the case in the last decades.

74In the first place, as has been said, R&D activities do not necessarily lead to a larger absorption of labor force in global terms. It is generally considered that technological progress – oriented, for instance, towards automation – destroys more jobs that it creates. A higher level of international trade on a global scale could at first have a multiplier effect deriving from both its impacts on urbanization and an increase in the necessary infrastructure to transport goods, but by definition, exports and imports are always equal on a world scale. In both cases there are displacements of labor force leading to a so-called oblique trajectory (cf. Figure 49), which seems to be the least successful at making labor demands coincide with the formation of human capital in order to avoid its destruction, with the undesirable inter-generational consequences this is known to have. The scarce impact that green economy, as proposed by the developed nations, has on the creation of jobs has also been studied.

75Yet it is not possible to be naïve here. Three or four points of GDP are more than the world spends on weapons, and approximately the same as it spends on education6. This education spending increases by a maximum of about 7% of GDP in OECD countries, whereas according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), annual spending on weapons is about 2.3% of the world GDP (between 3.5 and 5% in the case of the United States). Many underdeveloped nations spend between 2 and 5% of their GDP, which is lower, only on education, and that may bring about macroeconomic balance problems. In certain cases, increasing education spending from 3 to 4% of GDP and R&D spending by 0.5% is seen as a move towards Socialism, if together with those policies, social improvement measures are implemented, as would be the case when increasing the earnings of vulnerable groups by about 4 points of GDP, for instance. Since this social and transformational financing is paid for by other individuals, there are no other chances: it is either implemented at a time of marked growth in some country (or countries) in particular, as is the case with those exporting commodities in times of high international prices (for instance during the 2003-2007 boom), or it implies reducing incomes of other social groups who will feel the high tax pressure and investment will thus be discouraged. The problem is the perception of what is fair and what is not, and of the extent to which it is licit for a supra-individual body like the State to intervene in favor of equality and sustainability in all its dimensions.

76Discussions on the suppression of individual freedom will not take long to come to the fore, because the bondage of poverty in open societies is usually attributed to lack of initiatives and skills by the individuals undergoing such situation. In fact, the city itself is a social construction that presupposes, in the absence of violence, the existence of free individuals (Arendt, 2013). This is why, though materially feasible, the political and cultural conditions for the implementation of a proposal such as this are very far from becoming universally accepted, whereas misery, poverty and slums are accepted as something natural, and this is reinforced by a discourse that has imposed individual success and its emulation as the dominant paradigm.

77Therefore, suggesting productive social inclusion as a solution by incorporating unemployed and low-skilled labor force is a challenge that humankind and the present institutions are not used to. It would, no doubt, require the implementation of a tax reform and of consistent public policies that would certainly not be popular, for the willingness to pay for what is public and in favor of the common good is not internalized in our culture, unless the State intervenes as a central institution in each country, even in a globalized world.

78It is really within this precise approach that the discussion between Keynesians and neoliberals makes sense, for otherwise it would be trapped within heterogeneous aggregates and too general concepts to define specific public policies. In turn, this discussion cannot be limited within each Nation-State nowadays, for the global world supposes and comprises highly complex international relations from the physical, material, technological, financial, trade, social, ideological and political points of view.

79Now if it is not the creation of jobs in labor force-intensive activities related to sustainable urbanization, as has been described here, what would the solution be but the exclusion and destruction of people, of what we call human capital? Surely for some, extreme inequality and urban – and sometimes also rural – misery would be definitive evidence that the planet is overpopulated. Such argument has been explored here, and we have concluded that it does not explain the question. For others, these phenomena would simply be the natural result of a world in which only the fittest survive, in an evolutionary dynamics following – as nature itself – its own rules. It might be so, but we have created institutions precisely under the assumption that we can transform nature and societies, which we have actually done. Moreover, the post-war concept of development has not been but an attempt to cater for our needs, to achieve greater equality and prolong our life on earth. I do not believe that these ideals have been futile, or that progress has brought about more and more misery, as is sometimes stated from alarmist positions or by the so called eco-terrorists.

80If the planet and the life it shelters are to be saved from destruction, it is not possible to exclude some human beings but at the cost of a terrible defeat of the ideas of democracy, freedom, progress and humankind. And even without causing real exterminations, submitting people to conditions that prevent them from getting a job in a society that promotes employment as one of its explicit goals – since it is perceived that it is not possible to achieve such a goal through individual initiatives only – is a form of extermination under conditions of slow agony. It is indeed a form of destruction that some human beings impose on others, whether deliberately or not, when conditions are not created so that there are enough opportunities permitting their dignified inclusion in meaningful, useful and beneficial activities.

81In many societies, paying for what is public to the detriment of the free use of individual wealth (whether as annual flow or income per capita, or as stock of individual wealth) is seen to resemble a certain form of Communism, and would necessarily be seen to limit objectively the freedom of some individuals regarding their desired consumption, in order to benefit others. It may certainly sound – and be – like that. Yet trying to reach equality as an integral part of the sustainable development concept requires this, if the real scope of the concept, which comprises complex and contradictory dimensions, is to be taken seriously.

82It is in this context that approaches such as Piketty’s (and his weaknesses thereof) may be understood, as well as those by Daron Acemoğlu and James A. Robinson, quoted above, according to whom rich countries are developed because their institutions are inclusive, and poor countries are poor because theirs are extractive. Of course my own approach does not ignore the quality of the institutions, for there is always the risk that funds devoted to the creation of massive employment be mismanaged by bureaucracies guided by concentrated and corrupt political powers. But this deserves an analysis of its own, and cannot be solved from the point of view of a cynical ideological dispute in which extractive societies coincide with the enemies of power, and private corporate power is supposedly not extractive or corrupt.

83The proposal of massively including low-skilled labor force as the core of the creation of sustainable urbanization and sustainable cities responds to the need to increase flows of wealth and gradually stabilize them, to increase consumption up to a level that caters for basic needs and to improve the standards of living of human beings on a global scale. It also responds to a way of perceiving feasible solutions in order to stimulate investment at reasonable rates of return, since these are nowadays threatened by the impossibility of maintaining the creation of flows of wealth (global economic sustainability). Contrary to what is normally believed, the results of this proposal may easily improve the standards of living of all the individuals and create a friendlier context to plan investment, introduce technological innovations and move towards a situation in which exhaustible materials and resources are less intensively used once the urban growth plateau is reached. In such a context, forced migration processes, which nowadays have overwhelming effects in rich nations – and also in the rest – would also decrease.

84Some two to five decades may be necessary to achieve this, and it is also clear that this approach entails that improved standards of living go hand in hand with a natural and sustainable rate of population growth. In fact, in urban societies with better standards of living, the size of the families is decreasing, but not to the point of creating lack of sustainability for the opposite reasons, that is, because of the consequences of ageing as recorded by age pyramids.

85The main barrier to understand this theoretical-conceptual proposal and its political implementation is that the idea contradicts, in a certain way, the notion of freedom of consumption, central to the free market. However, like any proposal meant to make life on the planet more sustainable, it appeals to the need for a change of behaviors and motivations, which could well be internalized globally, just as is happening with the question of climate change today.

86Other authors have also expressed similar views in a very precise way, agreeing that all approximations to sustainability must necessarily fall back on the question of motivational and behavioral changes, on the thorny issue of whether changes are implemented through some level of suppression of individual liberties or through some other impersonal means (such as through the market). David Pierce (1992) analyzes different approximations to what he calls green economics, and says:

At the risk of oversimplification, there are two broad reasons in green economics as to why people should be less greedy. First, people should be less greedy because other people matter and greed imposes costs on these other people. Particular reference groups in this respect are the world’s poor and future generations to come. I take this view to include those who adopt ‘stewardship’ motives for care of the planet, where the stewardship is on behalf of future generations. I also take it to encompass any view that speaks of fairness between generations, i.e. intergenerational equity. Second, people should be less greedy because other living things matter and greed imposes costs on these other beings. […] Typically, however, ‘concern for others’ characterizes green economics. (pp. 4-5)

87Another interesting aspect of Pierce’s discussion is that it revises other views on green economics, which include: a) the zero growth school of thought (which means zero economic and population growth); b) a radical view arguing for a drastic decrease in population and in economic activity; c) the view known as “cornucopian technocentrism”7.

88All the arguments held by green economics focus on three main aspects: a) the need to restrict human greed and insatiability; b) sustainability, and c) decoupling the economic system from any form of environmental impact. In different ways, each approach emphasizes the need to combine these factors of the problem. In turn, we have tried to show the reasons why the massive creation of green employment – that is, jobs meant to maintain and transform unsustainable cities into sustainable ones – may be an interesting way to achieve the balance that sustainable development argues for.

89This supposes, no doubt, a radical change in conceptual terms with respect to what is currently at stake in international agendas, namely all types of measures meant to prevent the temperature in the planet from increasing more than two degrees centigrade. Our view intends to find a solution for most of the countries comprising what we have called the global south, but not necessarily confronting the rich north. The life cycles of many industrial activities may be extended at the same time as a transformation takes place regarding the ways in which materials, inputs and resources are consumed and produced sustainably. Insisting on these arguments aims to reinforce the fact that it is short-sighted views that prevent considering things from a different perspective.

90No doubt, a world thus conceived also permits applying the mathematical models and scenarios that have been recurrent in the literature over the last five decades. But what would be the point of modeling it but to confirm what has been expressed? Certainly the models used by the Club of Rome, the IPCC, the World Energy Council and others, also presuppose those parameters that ensure from the beginning the desired results. On the basis of my experience as a researcher, I can state with all certainty that the results will not say anything different from what is determined from the beginning by the way in which equations, systemic links between them and data have been defined. This does not mean that the exercises are pointless. On the contrary, they create our awareness of the interrelations, they draw our attention to the material and cultural conditions under which certain hypotheses might work and they keep leading us to greater rigor in our thought.

91Yet, we can only express what we know, and this still in quite an imperfect manner. The conceptual view of a problem requires prior steps, and this book has, precisely, dealt with them in the most comprehensive way I have been able to. If I have thus contributed to clarifying to some extent the debate on development and have managed to reveal mechanisms that had so far remained unnoticed, the effort has not been in vain.