1. ‘WHAT IS THE ‘REAL’ SEGMENTED WORLD MODEL?’

‘The new is always made up of the old . . . The future of the future is the present . . .’
Marshall McLuhan 1960

Interviewer: Hello. Today, I’m sitting in the garden at the home of Francis Nash – the author of The Path to Phillips Cay (2021) – to talk about a global model he has been creating. Francis, I contacted you, initially, because after finishing the book I was intrigued to read in the acknowledgements: “To find out about the ‘real’ Segmented World and more about the ‘fictional’ one, please visit www.thesegmentedworld.com”. So, can I start with the obvious question: ‘What is the ‘real’ Segmented World’ and as a follow-up: ‘How does it relate to the world I read about in The Path to Phillips Cay?’

FN: If you’re reading the transcript of this discussion from the Segmented World website, you will already know that the ‘real’ Segmented World is part of a Project (The Segmented World Project) that I started a few years ago, to help people develop their own view of the next thirty years. To achieve that I use two approaches: one, that I’m delighted you have already engaged with, is a set of novels (The Segmented World Book Series) that follow a family over the next thirty years, as they live through a particular Segmented World outcome. The second, that we’re going to discuss today, was to build a model to monitor and predict how the ‘real’ world will evolve over the next thirty years.

Interviewer: Predicting the future thirty years ahead – that’s a rather bold objective, isn’t it?

FN: If you are predicting details – who will win the UK Premier League in 2050, for example – then of course that would be nonsense. But what I am concerned with are major global trends – still ‘bold’ as you put it, but, given the particular point in human history that we have reached, less uncertain than in the past.

Interviewer: Others have tried this before, haven’t they? There was the Limits to Growth study by the team from the Sloan Management School at MIT, starting in 1971. (Meadows et al 1972, 1992, 2004).

FN: Yes . . . their computational-based prediction that unconstrained population growth and resource consumption would deteriorate the living conditions for human beings throughout the world, was rejected and ignored at the time, but today is seen as a prescient insight that is still on track, fifty years on (Guardian 2nd September 2014).

Interviewer: So, is this ‘real’ Segmented World an update of the MIT Model?

FN: No . . . although it is aligned with the Model with regards to its predictions on economic growth, it differs in terms of its global reach; its scenario-based approach and most importantly its ‘timing’.

Interviewer: What do you mean by timing’?

FN: The Limits to Growth Model was a remarkable, and I might add brave, piece of work. Not only because it warned of ‘growth limitations’ at a time when the world was economically expanding but, also, it was constructed when monitoring of global activity was still in its infancy. Today, we live in an intensely monitored world. We can easily access historical information on a wide range of topics – allowing trends to be constructed that can be readily extrapolated into the future. But by ‘timing’ I also mean something more profound, We have entered a time when the world is not only fully reported but also fully connected (Khanna 2016) and fully owned. Any global model being created now, must be rooted in a new paradigm that I call the Full-Up planet.

Interviewer: Can you explain that a little more?

FN: Ecologically, all species experience the urge to move-on, at some time, as a result of increasing numbers, rising pollution levels and depleting resources.

Interviewer: Oh yes, of course . . . that’s what Methuen, in the Book called, The Three Indulgences, wasn’t it: “Grew too much. Consumed too much. Polluted too much”.

FN: Yes . . . but the ‘new paradigm’ arises when, effectively, there is nowhere to move to . . . and . . . as a consequence, our actions begin to be felt not just by our neighbours but across all territorial borders . . . making us increasingly aware of our global interdependence. This is Humankind’s situation in 2021. The view that life can, ‘carry-on-as-usual’ has now become a dangerous assumption . . . for everyone.

Interviewer: But how can a new paradigm, like this, be incorporated into a predictive Model?

FN: To answer that, we must consider the fundamental human response we have evolved to cope with ecological pressure. Until now, when faced with a threat, we – like most animals – have been wired to either ‘fight’ or ‘flight’. Remember the Richards Adams’s book about a community of rabbits (Rex Collings 1972); when threatened with a major disruption to their home, they fled – embarking on a new journey that eventually led them to unclaimed land on Watership Down. In a Full-Up world with no unclaimed properties, Flight is no longer an easy option, while fight, on any sizeable scale, is constrained by the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

Interviewer: But ‘fight’ is still happening – just look at the number of conflicts around the world. . . and as for ‘flight’, that is clearly shown by the increasing scale of global migration whether for economic, political or weather-related reasons—

FN: And there you have the basis for the ‘real’ Segmented World Model. The choice is to either stick with the old ways of doing things . . . or adapt.

Interviewer: But how can we adapt, if ‘fight or flight’ is not an option?

FN: Well . . . we’re not rabbits! We are inventive, imaginative creatures. Rather than the adaption being physical – running away and/or fighting – it has to be a mental response – a change of mindset. I call it ‘compete’ and ‘cooperate’.

Interviewer: Well . . . there’s no lack of ‘compete’ in us . . . as we are witnessing in the pharmaceutical industry’s response to finding an effective Covid vaccine. But if the slow global rollout is anything to go by, I would question our capacity to cooperate on the scale you are describing.

FN: Sure . . . there’s plenty of healthy competition to find solutions but how much cooperation we will be able to muster to address the many important cross-border issues we face in a Full-Up world – that is the main uncertainty.

Interviewer: But why complicate the Model by including ‘soft’ issues like this? Surely it would have more credibility if you stuck to ‘quantifiable parameters.

FN: Human behaviour is a key element in prediction. Ignore it and not only is the prediction half-baked but, for the majority of people, it is just another ‘academic’ exercise that lacks a ‘real world’ feel. For a Model that poses problems requiring each and everyone to respond, that would be critical failure.

Interviewer: But how can you incorporate such unquantifiable components?

FN: There is only one way . . . by building multi-layered scenarios for the key parameters.

Interviewer: Stories!

FN: Don’t sound so shocked. That has been the way complex issues have been discussed and resolved for millennia—

Interviewer: But how do you even begin to build a ‘story’ than encompasses a parameter such as human behaviour?

FN: In the ‘expanding times’ many have experienced over the past fifty years, there have been few constraints leaving a wide range of options open to us. But in this new Full-Up stage, our choices – in particular, in how we behave – will be more limited.

Interviewer: So . . . we either adapt . . . or disappear?

FN: I doubt very much if Humankind will disappear . . . but our behavioural response will be, as ever, what will determine the quality of our lives in the future. Have a look at this first figure that deals with two fundamental human parameters.

DOWNLOAD THE FULL DIALOGUE