Nature’s Way: How Modern Economies Follow Evolutionary Processes

There are intricate similarities between the way evolution happens in nature and the formation of modern economies.

This article nudges you to ponder over the delicate balance of ecosystems, the iterative nature of evolution, and the evolving challenges within human societies.

To keep the conversation flowing smoothly, I've put it in the appendix instead. [1] [2] [3] [4]

Photo by Eugene Zhyvchik on Unsplash

The Evolution of Species & the Balance in the Ecosystem

When we observe nature at a point in time, it may seem to have established a natural power balance among its various species where each species has a certain role to play in a larger ecosystem e.g. cheetah eats deer, deer eats grass, etc. The food cycle as we call it.

In reality when we observe it over a time frame of millions of years then there is no power balance, species are evolving randomly and the power balance is also changing randomly. [1]

But over a shorter time frame, nature has a fine balance that helps in sustaining life.

The job of each species in the ecosystem is hard-coded in their DNA though each living organism performs essentially the same core functional activities like eating, excreting, resting, reproducing, and dying. [2]

Many species have risen to power where they dominated the resources [3]. Some of these species disturbed things (like humans) to the extent that their existence may become risky. But nature has its ways of solving the problem. Nature has been doing iteration for a very long time.

For instance, consider the case of the cheetah and the deer. Cheetahs are incredibly fast runners, while deers have evolved to be swift and agile to escape predation. This evolutionary pressure has led to a constant push and pull between the two species. Cheetahs have evolved to be incredibly fast, with adaptations such as long legs, a flexible spine, and non-retractable claws that act like cleats for traction. On the other hand, deers have developed strategies such as incredible agility, acute senses, and the ability to change direction quickly.

In evolutionary history, there may have been a time when Cheetahs may have increased in numbers due to their strengths but it may have resulted in competition within species and developing characteristics like the solitary and territorial nature of Cheetahs.

Anything that disturbs the current ecological balance can be called a ‘problem’ for other living organisms. In response to the ‘problem,’ certain characteristics may become more desirable to survive, and the evolutionary iterations shift directions towards it. Newer generations are likely to have genes to tackle the original problem. But no promise that a newer problem would not arise.

And hence these variations are random in response to ‘problems’ which may disturb the ecological balance which helps in sustaining life. So one can argue that the ‘newer problems’ (or forces that disturb the ecological balance) were the result evolutionary direction taken in response to previous problems. So it keeps endless iterations with random variations continuously ON and guiding it (probably nowhere?)

This phenomenon can be understood with the help of Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution which proposes two important pillars:

• Natural Selection: Individuals with traits that are advantageous for survival and reproduction are more likely to pass those traits on to the next generation. Over time, this leads to the accumulation of beneficial traits and the adaptation of organisms to their environments.
• Random Variation: Individuals within a population differ in their traits, and these variations can be heritable. This diversity provides the raw material upon which natural selection acts.

The Evolution of Modern Economies

1: Drawing structural commonalities in the operating structure

Think of
Different ‘animals’ in nature are equivalent to ‘organizations’
Different ‘organs’ in nature are equivalent to ‘jobs’
Different ‘cells’ in nature are equivalent to ‘humans’

Think of similarities in lifecycles
All organizations pretty much do the same thing i.e. start, grow, mature, stabilize, adapt, or die. In nature, every species does primarily the same set of activities during its lifecycle.

Unlike nature where the roles of animals in maintaining balance are fixed, humans or organizations can change and define their function in the economies.

The promise of ‘modern economies’ is to provide enough for humans to ‘eat’ and in return, they continue to participate in the endless iterations by acting as a unit. It is similar to the goal that ‘nature’ promises for its participants by being present in the ecology order.

2: The Cycle of Problem & Solutions

We are on the constant endless path of creating and solving problems. And, I feel the perfect solution for today ends up creating some massive problems for tomorrow. And, the current generation usually does not have the foresight to be able to see the effects and is busy fixing problems that were created by inventions of the past for example:

(a) agriculture (the perfect food solution of 8000 BC) led to forests disappearing & threatening life
(b) oil (the perfect energy solution of 1850) led to pollution
(c) social media (the solution for maintaining connections) is leading to loneliness

I am not sure where will the promise of EV or Solar Energy take us but we already know some negative consequences.

The negative consequences of burning oil may have been identified in the 1850s but it would have been extremely difficult to comprehend that it is going to cause a massive climate change problem in 150 years. The limitation may have been the available understanding of how the world works & where we are headed. It would have been impossible to accurately predict “How the usage of oil was going to explode”.

In a way, it is similar to the way nature operates. The newer problems (or the destructive forces that challenge the balance) only emerge once the evolutionary direction shifts in response to the problems of today.

And our modern economies are full of examples of the same. I have included more examples in Appendix [4].

What is different though with modern economies is that, unlike nature, which had to introduce hard-coded DNA variation in species, humans solve problems by introducing newer types of roles or by founding newer types of organizations. That new startup solving the world’s biggest problem of today is likely a new random variation in the macro schema of things.

3: Random Variation

Variations can be seen as the diverse range of ideas, products, services, and approaches that different organizations bring to the table. Just as individual variations contribute to genetic diversity, the unique characteristics and offerings of different organizations contribute to the overall diversity of the economy.

A new startup is a solution to a new problem that is not being addressed. Like an infinite number of species that co-exist in nature in some sort of equilibrium, companies or individuals trying to solve different problems also co-exist.

4: Natural Selection

The concept of natural selection can be metaphorically applied to the process of competition and customer choice. Organizations that are more efficient, innovative, and responsive to market demands are more likely to succeed and grow, while less competitive organizations may struggle or even fail. This process can lead to the gradual evolution and improvement of products, services, and business practices.

Modern Economy — A random variation of nature?

One may argue that the modern economy has its origins in a random variation of nature so the similarities are natural. It seems like a legit point.

Somewhere between 10,000–20,000 years ago, the domestication of plants and animals allowed early humans to cultivate crops and raise livestock, providing a more reliable and consistent food supply. It led to a shift from hunter-gatherer societies to settled communities. And the shift from a nomadic lifestyle to settled farming communities laid the foundation for more complex social structures to develop. Agriculture led to the production of food surpluses, which could sustain larger populations beyond what hunting and gathering could support. This surplus allowed some individuals to specialize in non-food-producing activities, such as craftsmanship, trade, governance, or religious practices. We can argue that the constant evolution of non-food-producing activities has continuously transformed the settled communities into the modern economy of today.

If we were to believe the interpretation then the modern economy is nothing but the constant evolution of a random variation that happened thousands of years ago to one of nature’s species (human’s domestication of plants & animals)!

Reflections

In the event of humanity’s collapse, life will endure, and nature will continue its cycles and iterations over vast time horizons.

It is essential to recognize that many of the problems we deem significant exist solely within the realm of the “modern economies” we have constructed. Consider issues like “easy lending”, “10-minute delivery” or “employability,” which hold little relevance in a purely natural context. We are now compelled to live within this “modern economies” framework, as returning to a state of coexistence with nature is no longer a viable option for most of us. It is worth noting that this is not a judgment of whether “modern economies” is good or bad in comparison to nature, but rather an acknowledgment of the current reality.

Newer problems will inevitably continue to emerge in “modern economies”. Perfect coexistence remains a myth, even in the seemingly serene realm of nature, which is bustling with animals vying for survival each day. The predicaments of the future may stem from the overdoing of the solutions we perceive as perfect today, unfortunately, we won’t be able to predict them.

Limitations

I understand that the complexity of human societies and economic systems goes beyond the simple analogy of natural evolution, and understanding the unique factors shaping economies requires a multidisciplinary approach. Evolution too is very complex (probably more complex than how economies operate). The goal is not to over-simplify understanding of how the world operates.

Like the evolution process, there is no goal for this article too. Except for making an observation that we’re on endless iterations with random variations and the sense of control that human appears to have is based on a fragile ego and extremely limited understanding of the complex world.

Appendix

[1] When dinosaurs dominated the Earth, mammals were generally small in size. This period is known as the Mesozoic Era, which spanned from approximately 252 to 66 million years ago. During this era, dinosaurs were the dominant terrestrial vertebrates, occupying various ecological niches and exhibiting a wide range of sizes and forms.

Mammals, on the other hand, were relatively small and inconspicuous compared to the large dinosaurs though they existed alongside dinosaurs. Most Mesozoic mammals were small, rodent-like creatures that occupied niches in the shadow of the dominant reptilian fauna.

[2] In nature, every species does primarily the same set of activities during its lifecycle i.e. feeding, metabolism, growth & development, reproduction, and interactions with the environment (such as temperature, light, water, and physical structures, as well as interactions with other living organisms, etc). While every species does primarily the same set of activities during its lifecycle but the specific behaviors and strategies employed can vary significantly among different organisms, these common activities serve as the foundation for the functioning and survival of species within their respective ecological niches.

[3] Examples of Species that dominated the Earth

Throughout the history of the Earth, various species have experienced periods of dominance and significant impact on the planet’s ecosystems. Some notable examples include:

1. Cyanobacteria: Cyanobacteria, also known as blue-green algae, played a crucial role in shaping the Earth’s early atmosphere. Through photosynthesis, they produced oxygen, contributing to the oxygenation of the planet and paving the way for the development of oxygen-dependent life forms.
2. Dinosaurs: Dinosaurs were a diverse group of reptiles that dominated the Earth during the Mesozoic Era, from approximately 230 to 65 million years ago. They occupied a wide range of ecological niches and exhibited a remarkable diversity of sizes and forms.
3. Sharks: Sharks are ancient creatures that have been present on Earth for over 400 million years. They have evolved and persisted through numerous geological eras, showcasing impressive adaptations and playing important roles in marine ecosystems.
4. Insects: Insects are the most diverse and abundant group of animals on Earth, with estimates suggesting millions of different species. Their adaptability, ecological versatility, and numerical dominance make them a significant force in terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems.
5. Plants: Plants have shaped the Earth’s ecosystems and atmosphere for millions of years. Through processes such as photosynthesis, they have influenced oxygen levels, provided habitats for other organisms, and played crucial roles in nutrient cycling and ecosystem stability.
6. Microorganisms: Microscopic organisms, such as bacteria and archaea, have been present on Earth for billions of years. They play vital roles in nutrient cycling, decomposition, and the maintenance of ecological balance.

[4] Examples of well-intentioned innovations or policies having unanticipated negative effects

1. Antibiotics: The discovery and widespread use of antibiotics revolutionized medicine and saved countless lives by effectively treating bacterial infections. However, overuse and misuse of antibiotics have led to the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, rendering some antibiotics less effective. This unintended consequence poses a significant challenge to public health as infections become harder to treat.
2. Pesticides: Pesticides were developed to protect crops from pests and increase agricultural productivity. While they have been successful in reducing crop damage and increasing yields, the heavy use of pesticides has had unintended consequences on the environment and ecosystems. It can harm beneficial insects, contaminate water sources, and disrupt natural ecosystems.
3. Plastic: The invention of plastic brought about numerous benefits due to its durability, versatility, and cost-effectiveness. However, the widespread use and improper disposal of plastic have led to severe environmental issues. Plastic pollution poses a threat to marine life, pollutes ecosystems, and contributes to global environmental degradation.
4. Automobiles: The invention of automobiles revolutionized transportation, offering convenience and mobility. However, the widespread use of cars has led to various unintended consequences. These include air pollution from vehicle emissions, traffic congestion, urban sprawl, and dependence on fossil fuels.
5. Nuclear Power: Nuclear power was initially hailed as a clean and efficient energy source that could reduce dependence on fossil fuels. However, the construction and operation of nuclear power plants carry risks such as potential accidents, the production of radioactive waste, and concerns over the long-term storage and disposal of nuclear waste.
6. Financial Deregulation: In the late 20th century, financial markets experienced significant deregulation, aimed at increasing economic growth and innovation. However, the loosening of regulations contributed to the 2008 global financial crisis, demonstrating the unintended consequences of inadequate oversight and unchecked risk-taking within the financial sector.