Long-term planning, upstream investment and early action to prevent harm
04 April 2012
Preventing harm is the wise option, adopted far too rarely. More often, we wait until things go wrong and end up coping with the consequences, which is costly and unsustainable.
We must get better at preventing harm – to people, planet and the economy. This calls for long-term planning, upstream investment and early action. It will improve people’s quality of life, make better use of public money, reduce the need for costly state services and help to safeguard the future. Preventing harm is essential if we are to make the Great Transition to a sustainable future.
To build an economy that serves the interests of people and the planet, by promoting well-being and sustainable social justice for all, we have to understand why things go wrong, and tackle the underlying causes of harm – for example:
There are different levels of prevention:
Sometimes, prevention is needed on all three levels. But ‘downstream’ intervention should be a last resort. Without tackling the underlying causes of harm, ‘midstream’ and ‘downstream’ measures will have little or no lasting effect.
The underlying causes of harm in society, the environment and economy are often strongly linked and can be mutually reinforcing. So adopting a preventative approach can bring multiple benefits. Examples include encouraging active modes of travel such as walking and cycling, and insulating homes against the cold. These can yield social, environmental and economic dividends.
Climate change is threatening catastrophic damage to the natural environment. Social inequalities are widening. The neoliberal paradigm for managing the economy is in crisis and threatening the future of the welfare state.
Prevention works best when it involves change from the bottom up: people and organisations acting for themselves, becoming more resilient and less vulnerable. But action at this level needs strong support to tackle the political, economic and cultural factors that have helped to cause the harm in the first place. People need information, education, advocacy and strong leadership to understand and act upon the wisdom of prevention.
The logic of prevention seems to contradict the ‘rescue principle’ that defines philanthropy, charity and most health care. People who want to do good in the world are committed to helping those who are already needy. They may see upstream measures as a diversion. To tackle this problem we must change professional cultures, build up skills, knowledge and experience, and challenge the ethics of failing to prevent harm.
Rescue and cure tend to have immediate, tangible and measurable results, while preventative measures are long-term, more complex and harder to measure. This creates a political bias against shifting the balance of investment upstream. Meanwhile, the neo-liberal consensus favours maximum freedom for markets and minimum state intervention. At the very moment when we most need to move upstream, for social, environmental and economic reasons, the ideas that shape our economy and politics are still pulling strongly in the opposite direction. This is unsustainable.
There is mounting evidence that unfettered markets are failing. Dissenting voices are growing stronger and more plentiful. Now is the time to put the wisdom of prevention at the heart of a new political economy. Change will need to be steady and incremental, winning public confidence through dialogue and partnership at every stage. We must take every opportunity to raise awareness, to show the benefits of early action and build up the evidence base. If we fail, we risk losing the capacity to cope with the consequences of harm.
If you back a recovery plan based around great public services, protecting the planet and reducing inequality, please support NEF to build back better.
The case for universal services
Daniel Button, Anna Coote
28 September 2021
Short-term funding pots are not enough to fix the damage of austerity.
Beti Baraki, Rose Grayston
29 July 2021
This hangover of the austerity mentality is both unnecessary and inaccurate
07 June 2021
The case for insourcing public sector cleaners and facilities management
Aidan Harper, Rebecca Winson
03 June 2021