Progress should be a word we associate with innovation and human growth. A promise of a better future for people and the planet. Too often, progress comes with unexpected consequences – it has a rattle in its tail! (Maybe it’s those two “s’s” together that make it so). The usual victims? The easy-to-exploit – people, ecosystems and the planet itself, deforestation, pollution and (dare I say it) climate change.

Is it possible to re-define what we call progress? Could we aim for a version of progress that works with nature instead of against it? Could progress exist without hearing that ominous rattle?

It’s a question worth asking.

Technological advancements promise efficiency, but their hidden costs – environmental, social, and often painfully short-sighted – rarely make the headlines. The iPhone in your pocket comes with an upfront, eye watering price tag – but what’s its true environmental cost? Its lifecycle footprint. Including resource-intensive mining and energy-heavy manufacturing, global shipping to limited repairability, planned obsolescence, and the mounting e-waste of short-lived devices. There’s no doubting that mobile phones have made compounding computing progress. However, this giant electronic leap for mankind comes at a cost.

Does it have to be this way?

Can progress be redefined?

Take renewable energy as another example. Wind, solar, and geothermal technologies are reshaping how we think about power. But even these solutions demand raw materials, land and infrastructure. (“You can’t avoid cracking a few eggs!”).

But what if the problem lies not in progress itself, but in how we measure it?

It’s often measured in GDP, skyscrapers and non-stop production lines creating anything that can be sold on Amazon. (I have a theory that we’ll all end up working for Amazon). But what if we flipped the narrative? What if progress meant clean air, thriving ecosystems and equitable access to resources? What if we stopped viewing nature solely as a resource to exploit? What if we started treating it as a partner in our shared future? After all, if it’s not planet-friendly, it’s not progress – right?

Policies that reward short-term profits over long-term health should be challenged. We need to encourage innovation that values the planet. We should design cities to work with nature, not against it. We need products that are built to last, repairable, or fully recyclable. Failing that, perhaps some products shouldn’t even make it off the drawing board. Businesses must see environmental responsibility as an opportunity, not a burden, and governments need to reward those playing the long game, driving innovation towards solutions. To encourage businesses and investors to be brave, Governments should stop putting them through the mangle, squeezing the financial life out of them. Give credit to companies where credit is due.

Businesses MUST be brave. Policies could foster bravery, but they tend to snuff out the pilot light of innovation.

The good news is, some of this is (against the odds) happening. Regenerative agriculture is healing depleted soils. Circular economies are challenging the “take, make, waste” mindset. Young activists are demanding a future where progress doesn’t cost the Earth.

So, can progress exist without destroying the planet?

The answer depends on us. It relies on the decisions we make. It involves the systems we challenge. It is about the future we dare to imagine.

What would progress look like if it worked with nature, not against it? And what can each of us do to make that vision a reality?

And what will you do now that you know?

Simon

#ClimateAction #Sustainability #CircularEconomy #Innovation #RegenerativeAgriculture #ProgressForThePlanet #NatureFirst #EnvironmentalResponsibility #EcoAwareness #FutureThinking