Resource Sustainability

and Innovation

Joseph A. Tainter

Utah State University

 Scientific Optimism

Advances in science willbring higher standards of

living, will lead to the prevention or cure of
diseases, will promote conservation of our limited
national resources, and will assure means of
defense against aggression.
Vannevar Bush, Science, the Endless Frontier (1945)
 Concepts of the Future I
No society can escape the general limits of its resources, but no
innovative society need accept Malthusian diminishing returns
(Barnett and Morse 1963: 139)

By allocation of resources to R&D, we may deny the Malthusian

hypothesis and prevent the conclusion of the doomsday models
(Sato and Suzawa 1983: 81)
 Concepts of the Future II

A modern societal collapse would be triggered

ultimately by scarcity of environmental
resources
Jared Diamond, Collapse
Commodity Prices (Doyne Farmer)
 Perspective of
Some Economists

Principle of Infinite Substitutability.

Resources are never scarce, just priced wrong.
As resources become scarce and rise in price, the
market signals that there are rewards to
innovation. New resources or technologies
emerge.
Sustainability is therefore not an issue.
 The Fundamental Question
of Sustainability

Will we always be able to offset resource

depletion by innovation and increasing
technological efficiency?
 Objectives

Explorethe origins of our system of

innovation, and why it is possible.

Address how long it might continue.

 Innovation and Complexity

Technologies and other cultural elements do get

retired, but innovation overall increases the
complexity of human cultures, especially in the
modern era. We keep adding more parts,
processes, and types of information.

Therefore complexity is an outcome of

innovation, and a topic we must address.
 Our Biases
Since we live in a period of institutionalized
innovation, we assume unconsciously that high-
frequency innovation is normal.

We assume unconsciously that complexity is

desirable and intentional.

We have developed ideologies to legitimize our

current way of life, exemplified in terms like
progress and opportunity.
 Main Points
1. Complexity is rare in human societies, and high
complexity is recent.
 Main Points
1. Complexity is rare in human societies, and high
complexity is recent.
2. Human history has not been characterized by
high rates of innovation.
 Main Points
1. Complexity is rare in human societies, and high
complexity is recent.
2. Human history has not been characterized by
high rates of innovation.
3. Todays high complexity and institutionalized
innovation are controlled by specific external
conditions.
 Main Points
1. Complexity is rare in human societies, and high
complexity is recent.
2. Human history has not been characterized by
high rates of innovation.
3. Todays high complexity and institutionalized
innovation are controlled by specific external
conditions.
4. Our system of innovation is self-perpetuating
under those conditions.
 Main Points
1. Complexity is rare in human societies, and high
complexity is recent.
2. Human history has not been characterized by high
rates of innovation.
3. Todays high complexity and institutionalized
innovation are controlled by specific external
conditions.
4. Our system of innovation is self-perpetuating
under those conditions.
5. The continuity of todays system depends on the
continuity of those conditions.
1. Complexity Recent and Rare
Evolution of Cultural Complexity
From this:
Evolution of Cultural Complexity
To this:
Evolution of Cultural Complexity
Diversification and specialization in structure and
function/behavior.
Increasing integration and control of behavior.
 Common Misconceptions
About Human Complexity
Complexity evolves
simply because people
invent things.
Complex society (i.e.,
civilization) is an
accomplishmentthe
accumulation of many
things that over millennia
our ancestors invented.
 Complexity Costs
Every increase in complexity carries a metabolic cost.
In human systems, metabolic costs are often translated to
surrogate accounting systems such as time, money, taxes,
annoyance, etc.
Before the development of fossil fuels, increasing the
complexity of a society meant that people worked harder.
 Why Does Complexity Grow?
Complexity grows because it
has great utility in solving
problems.
Problems are often solved
by developing more
complex technologies,
adding new positions and
social roles, processing more
information, or conducting
new kinds of activities.
 Complexity Solves Problems
Problem: Terrorism.
Solution: Establish new government agencies,
reorganize others, monitor activities, increase
control over behavior at vulnerable places (e.g.,
airports). (I.e., differentiate structure and
increase organization.)

Problem: Vehicle fuel consumption, pollution.

Solution: Develop automobiles that have two
means of propulsion rather than one.
 Implications
Innovations increase complexity.
When complexity relies on solar energy and
human labor, the cost of complexity inhibits
innovation.
The fact that we have institutionalized
innovation today indicates that there has been a
fundamental change in the historical context of
innovation.
2. History Not Characterized by
High Rates of Innovation
 Innovation Frequency
Human ancestors: 4
million years.
Periods of hundreds of
thousands of years of
little technological
change.
Homo sapiens: 200,000
years.
Periods of tens of
thousands of years of
little technological
change.
 Recent History

Periods of hundreds to
thousands of years with
little technological
change in many areas of
life.
 Why?
90% of subsistence economies involved production
of energy, mainly agriculture. There was little wealth
to support innovators, or for education.
Land transport costs high.
Peasants had little money to buy manufactured items.
Exception: Salient innovations in the military sphere.
Innovation increases complexity. People had found
technological solutions that worked.
Under conditions of low population and much land,
there was little need to innovate. Ancient states
encouraged cultivation and population growth.
High-Frequency Innovation Recent
(chart by Roger Fouquet)
 Conclusions

1. High-frequency innovation is not an

innate characteristic of human societies.

2. Such an unusual characteristic can exist

only in specific historical circumstances.
 3. TodaySpecific Conditions
of Innovation

1. Inexpensive energy, permitting high complexity

and discretionary consumption.

2. Profit seeking.

3. Competition forcing continual innovation.

Inexpensive Energy
(chart by Roger Fouquet)
Energy a Smaller Part of Economy
(chart by Roger Fouquet)
 4. System Self-Perpetuating

Profit seeking unlikely to disappear.

Competition spurs innovation.

Increasing complexity affordable with

inexpensive energy.
 The Energy-Complexity Spiral
Inexpensive energy
(rare in human history)
stimulates growth in
complexity.
Growing complexity
requires more energy.
Inevitable problem
solving causes
complexity and energy
consumption to grow.
For example, electrification in rural
India produces:

--positive feedback

--growth in economic scale

--growth in economic complexity.

5. Self-Perpetuating Forever?
 Continuity of Our System
of Innovation Requires:

1. Continued inexpensive energyenergy a small

part of economy, allowing for discretionary
spending and high complexity in our way of
life.
2. Constant or increasing returns to innovation.
1. Energy Returned on Energy Invested

kcal of fuel extracted

EROI = --------------------------------------------
kcal of direct and indirect energy
required to locate, extract, and
refine that fuel
(Hall, Cleveland, and Kaufmann 1992)

EROI is the key to our future energy.

 U.S. Petroleum: EROI
Oil and Gas:
1940s: 100:1
1970s: 23:1
Today: 15:1

Tar Sands: 3:2

As easiest reserves depleted, trend is irreversible.

Low EROI petroleum requires complex and
costly technology, and large amounts of capital.
The Energy Cliff
 2. Evolution of Innovation
From lone-wolf genius

to complex,
interdisciplinary teams.
(Google search on
research team returned
>61,000 images.)
Productivity of Innovation Declining
(Strumsky, Lobo, and Tainter 2010)
 0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85

1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987

Surgery & Medical Instruments

1988
1989
1990
1991
1992

Metalworking
1993
1994
1995
Optics

1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
0.80

Drugs
0.75 Chemicals - Crystals
Chemical-General Compound & Compositions
Chemical-Physical Processes
Combinatorial Chemistry

0.70

0.65

0.60

0.55

0.50

0.45

0.40

0.35

0.30
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
 0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90

1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
Gas

1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
Power Systems

1993
1994
1995
Solar

1996
1997
Wind

1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Transportation

2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
 0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
Data Processing
Communications

1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
Comp. Hardware
Information Storage

1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
Semiconductros

2002
Comp. Software

2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
 0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

Biotechnology
1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

Nanotechnology
1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008
Increasing Complexity
 Diminishing Returns to Innovation:
One Example

[S]ince 9/11, a near-doubling of the Pentagons modernization

accounts more than $700 billion over 10 years in new spending
on procurement, research and development has resulted in
relatively modest gains in actual military capability.[M]ore and
more money is consumed by fewer and fewer platforms that
take longer and longer to build.
800 Sec. of Defense Robert Gates
700

600 24 May 2011

500
Number Produced
400

300

200

100

0
B-52 B-1 B-2
 The Future of Innovation
Inscience we are involved in a technological arms
race: with every victory over nature the difficulty of
achieving the breakthroughs that lie ahead is
increased.
Nicholas Rescher (1980)

It is clear that [science] cannot go up another two orders

of magnitude as [it has] climbed the last
five.Scientific doomsday is therefore less than a
century away.
Derek de Solla Price (1963)
 Implications
Barring unforeseen developments, our system of
innovation is heading in the direction of becoming
either unproductive or unaffordable.
We have plucked much of the low-lying fruit in the area
of knowledge production. Fundamental discoveries like
electricity and penicillin no longer wait to be made.
As research problems grow increasingly intractable, the
complexity of the research enterprise increases, leading
to diminishing returns to research investments.
We have the impression of continued progress because
the scale of the research enterprise has grown so
largeand it has been proposed to grow larger still.
 Implications
Barring unforeseen developments, our system of
innovation is heading in the direction of becoming
either unproductive or unaffordable.
We have plucked much of the low-lying fruit in the area
of knowledge production. Fundamental discoveries like
electricity and penicillin no longer wait to be made.
As research problems grow increasingly intractable, the
complexity of the research enterprise increases, leading
to diminishing returns to research investments.
We have the impression of continued progress because
the scale of the research enterprise has grown so
largeand it has been proposed to grow larger still.
 Implications
Barring unforeseen developments, our system of
innovation is heading in the direction of becoming
either unproductive or unaffordable.
We have plucked much of the low-lying fruit in the area
of knowledge production. Fundamental discoveries like
electricity and penicillin no longer wait to be made.
As research problems grow increasingly intractable, the
complexity of the research enterprise increases, leading
to diminishing returns to research investments.
We have the impression of continued progress because
the scale of the research enterprise has grown so
largeand it has been proposed to grow larger still.
 Implications
Barring unforeseen developments, our system of
innovation is heading in the direction of becoming
either unproductive or unaffordable.
We have plucked much of the low-lying fruit in the area
of knowledge production. Fundamental discoveries like
electricity and penicillin no longer wait to be made.
As research problems grow increasingly intractable, the
complexity of the research enterprise increases, leading
to diminishing returns to research investments.
We have the impression of continued progress because
the scale of the research enterprise has grown so
largeand it has been proposed to grow larger still.
 Historical Conditions Underpinning
Innovation Will Not Continue
Declining EROI and increasing resource costs
will reduce discretionary spending.
Increasing complexity and costs will limit energy
production, curtailing growth.
Increasing complexity and costs of innovation,
and diminishing returns, will curtail investment
in innovation.
By the end of this century, our system of
innovation will look very different, if it endures
in anything like its present form.
 Historical Conditions Underpinning
Innovation Will Not Continue
Declining EROI and increasing resource costs
will reduce discretionary spending.
Increasing complexity and costs will limit energy
production, curtailing growth.
Increasing complexity and costs of innovation,
and diminishing returns, will curtail investment
in innovation.
By the end of this century, our system of
innovation will look very different, if it endures
in anything like its present form.
 Historical Conditions Underpinning
Innovation Will Not Continue
Declining EROI and increasing resource costs
will reduce discretionary spending.
Increasing complexity and costs will limit energy
production, curtailing growth.
Increasing complexity and costs of innovation,
and diminishing returns, will curtail investment
in innovation.
By the end of this century, our system of
innovation will look very different, if it endures
in anything like its present form.
 Historical Conditions Underpinning
Innovation Will Not Continue
Declining EROI and increasing resource costs
will reduce discretionary spending.
Increasing complexity and costs will limit energy
production, curtailing growth.
Increasing complexity and costs of innovation,
and diminishing returns, will curtail investment
in innovation.
By the end of this century, our system of
innovation will look very different, if it endures
in anything like its present form.
 Sustainability:
The Fundamental Question
Are the technological optimists correct? Can we
always innovate to overcome resource depletion
and other problems?
 Sustainability:
The Fundamental Question
Are the technological optimists correct? Can we
always innovate to overcome resource depletion
and other problems?
Or is our system of innovation vulnerable to its
own decline, mirroring the decline of the factors
that make it possible?
 Sustainability:
The Fundamental Question
Are the technological optimists correct? Can we
always innovate to overcome resource depletion
and other problems?
Or is our system of innovation vulnerable to its
own decline, mirroring the decline of the factors
that make it possible?
Can we sustain our way of life if our system of
innovation declines?