4 lessons from Bhutan on the pursuit of happiness above GDP
The Himalayan Kingdom best known for its concept of "Gross National Happiness."
24 August, 2020
Paula Bronstein/Getty Images
Waking to the sound of monks chanting prayers and drumming their gongs during countless traditional pujas, a ceremony of honour, worship and devotion; running up the steep Himalayan mountain slopes under colourful prayer flags hung between trees in the lush natural landscape; looking out at the expanse of forests and mountains that surrounded its capital city, Thimphu.
<p> These are the memories that remain imprinted in my memory after two years living in Bhutan – the Himalayan Kingdom best known for its concept of "Gross National Happiness" (GNH). But, what is GNH and are the people of Bhutan really the happiest in the world?</p><p>GNH as a development philosophy in Bhutan dates back as far as 1972, when the fourth king, Jigme Singye Wangchuck, announced that Bhutan would pursue "happiness" in its path towards development, rather than measuring progress merely through growth in Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Revered in Bhutan for his many progressive actions as king, this forward-looking leader recognized that GDP did not take into account the ultimate goal of every human being: happiness.</p>
<h3>What does the pursuit of happiness really mean?</h3><p>John Lennon sums up the concept, and the tensions behind it, beautifully. He wrote: "When I was five years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down 'happy'. They told me I didn't understand the assignment, and I told them they didn't understand life."</p><p>Naturally, "happiness" is a challenging goal to understand, let alone measure. Yet, since the 1970s, much has been done to move GNH from being a development philosophy to a core component of Bhutan's development strategy - seeking to strike a balance between GNH's four foundational pillars: sustainable and equitable socio-economic development; conservation of the environment; preservation and promotion of culture; and good governance. A few lessons on how Bhutan, as one of the smallest economies in the world, has demonstrated leadership.</p><h4>Four leadership lessons from Bhutan</h4><p><strong>1. Good Governance:</strong> In 2001, the same king who coined the concept of Gross National Happiness initiated the process of drafting a constitution that would result in the voluntary handing over of power to his people. The king emphasized that the constitution should promote and protect the present as well as the future well-being of the people and the country; ensure that Bhutan had a political system that would provide peace and stability, while strengthening Bhutan's security and sovereignty. Despite protest from the population, who were very happy with their royal leadership, the king emphasized that it was not wise to leave such a small, vulnerable country in the hands of only one leader, chosen by birth and not by merit. The constitution led to the introduction of a parliamentary democracy, with its first elections in 2008.</p>
<p><strong></strong><strong>2. Conservation of the environment:</strong> Bhutan's constitution also includes unprecedented environmental measures, with such requirements as the necessity to preserve 62% of the country under forest cover at all times. Currently, it maintains a rate of about 72%. At the 2015 COP21 climate negotiations in Paris, Bhutan further announced its intention to remain carbon-neutral, ensuring that GHG emissions do not exceed the carbon sequestration capacity of its vast forests. The prime minister, Tshering Tobgay, shares his country's ambitions to be not just carbon-neutral but carbon-negative <a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/tshering_tobgay_this_country_isn_t_just_carbon_neutral_it_s_carbon_negative?language=en" target="_blank">in this recent TedTalk</a>. Beyond these measures, Bhutan is also home to a diverse ecosystem, ranked among the top 10 countries in the world with the highest species density and recognized as a biodiversity hot-spot. It also has the highest proportion of land in protected areas, with five national parks, four wildlife sanctuaries, and a nature reserve, covering an area of 16,396.4 km squared (42.7% of the country). This list goes on.</p><p><strong>3. Preservation and promotion of culture: </strong>Tucked between the powerful giants of China to its north, and India to the south, the fact that this tiny country remains on the map is in itself an amazing feat. Its high mountain passes and deep valleys have helped to guard the country, but have also created isolated communities which have evolved their own culture, identity and languages. Bhutan has over two dozen languages throughout the country. While celebrating this diversity with the many local <em>tsechus</em>, or regional festivals, at a national level, the government strives to maintain a "national identity" by requiring officials to wear traditional dress to the workplace and speak Dzonghka as the national language. The emphasis on tradition and celebration of a unique culture is part of daily life.</p>
<p><strong></strong><strong>4. Sustainable and equitable socio-economic development:</strong> The "Gross National Happiness Commission" (essentially the government's planning commission), has an explicit role of ensuring that all policies in the country pass a "GNH stress test" such that a balanced approach to economic development is pursued. The GNH Commission screens all government bills before they are submitted to the Cabinet using a GHN screening tool, made of up 26 variables that reflect the four core GNH principles. Based on this assessment, specific recommendations for adjustment to the policies are made.</p><p>Bhutan's GHN approach and concrete actions have certainly raised its profile on the international stage – touted as the "last Shangri-La", and inspiring work at the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) with their <a href="http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/" target="_blank">Better Life Index</a>, and even leading dialogues at the <a href="http://www.2apr.gov.bt/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer dofollow">UN General Assembly</a> on how to create a holistic sustainable development paradigm through the pursuit of happiness. But, the most important question still remains – as a result of these measures, are the people of Bhutan the happiest in the world?</p><p>For me, this is a challenging question to answer – I met many enlightened and centred individuals in Bhutan, but I also met many who struggled to merely sustain their livelihoods. What stood out however as a unique attribute of the people I met in Bhutan is the importance they place on "time" – taking time to think, time with family, time to breathe; a recognition of time and experience past by previous generations, and the importance future generational equity. This appreciation for time, reflection and the ability to pause is something that many Western cultures have lost, yet I believe forms an important part of what makes Bhutan's GNH philosophy work in practice.</p>
<h3>TVs, smartphones and the future</h3><p>Things are however fast changing. The introduction in 1999 of the television to Bhutan has certainly complicated matters. As the people of the previously isolated Himalayan Kingdom are increasingly exposed to the luxuries and comforts around the world, a sense of desire for "more" has naturally taken hold. As I sported my old Nokia analogue phone, my taxi-driving neighbour who lived in a shack without running water or heating had taken a large portion of his savings to invest in a smartphone – increasingly seen as a sign of prestige. Individual car ownership is also an aspiration, moving away from the more traditional approach of "shared taxis", a previously common and more environmentally sustainable approach.</p><p>Like many cultures built on subsistence agriculture, as was the case in Bhutan, a shift away from traditional agricultural practices combined with urban migration is placing pressure on the country to manage growing youth unemployment and its related challenges. While Bhutan is not a country without its struggles, what Bhutan has done to pursue a more balanced approach to economic development is not only evident on the ground, it can also serves as inspiration for countries around the world.</p><p><em>Antonia Gawel was working in Bhutan as an adviser to the multilateral development banks on environmental and clean energy policy.</em></p><p>Reprinted with permission of the <a href="https://www.weforum.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer dofollow" style="">World Economic Forum</a>. Read the <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/05/4-lessons-from-bhutan-on-the-pursuit-of-happiness-above-gdp/" target="_blank" style="">original article</a>.</p>
Keep reading
Show less
Why are there so many humans?
Having lots of kids is great for the success of the species. But there's a hitch.
03 August, 2020
Photo by chuttersnap on Unsplash
Something curious happened in human population history over the last 1 million years.
<p> First, our numbers fell to <a href="https://www.pnas.org/content/107/5/2147" target="_blank">as low as 18,500</a>, and our ancestors were more endangered than chimpanzees and gorillas. Then we bounced back to extraordinary levels, far surpassing the other great apes.
</p><p>
Today the total population of gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos, and orangutans is estimated to be only around 500,000, according to the <a href="https://wwf.panda.org/knowledge_hub/endangered_species/great_apes/" target="_blank">World Wildlife Fund</a>. Many species are critically endangered. Meanwhile, the human population <a href="https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/world-population-prospects-2019.html" target="_blank">has surged to 7.7 billion</a>. And the irony is: Our astonishing ability to multiply now threatens the long-term sustainability of many species, including ours.
</p><p>
What happened? Why do we live in the Anthropocene and not a world resembling <a href="http://www.planetoftheapes.com/" target="_blank">Planet of the Apes</a>? We share around 99 percent of our DNA with our great ape cousins, chimpanzees and bonobos. So, what makes us different from our closest relatives that gives us our staggering capacity for reproducing and surviving?
</p><p>
As an evolutionary anthropologist, these questions have led me to live and study among the Yucatec Maya of Mexico, the Pumé hunter-gatherers of Venezuela, and the Tanala agriculturalists of Madagascar. My research,<a href="#note">*</a> combined with genetic data and other studies, offers clues to what developed in the deep past that has made humans so successful—for better or for worse.
</p>
<p>In the 1970s, the isolated village of Xculoc, in Mexico's Yucatan Peninsula, was home to about 300 Maya people. The maize-farming residents had no electricity or running water. Women hauled water from a 50-meter-deep well using ropes and buckets. They ground maize—the mainstay of their diet—in hand-cranked grinders.</p><p>Then two technologies were introduced that changed these Maya's lives and, ultimately, their population: a gas-powered water pump and two gas-powered maize grinders.</p><p>Using these devices, young women saved about two and a half hours of labor and 325 calories a day. In addition, younger siblings could more easily fetch water and crush maize, freeing up their older sisters' time and literally decreasing their daily grind. That's important because studies have found that heavy subsistence work <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/499550?read-now=1&seq=3#page_scan_tab_contents" target="_blank">suppresses ovarian function</a>, whereas reducing labor and raising women's energy balance is associated with a bump in fertility.</p>
<p>Subsequently, the age at which women in Xculoc first gave birth dropped by two years. And according to my long-term research, women who started childbearing after these machines arrived produced significantly larger families than prior generations. By 2003, women who started reproducing in the 1970s had eight to 12 children.</p><p>Saving women time and energy is central to increasing the population. And humans have developed numerous technological and social ways of accomplishing this that differ from our great ape relatives.</p><p>It's important to note that scientists must be cautious about drawing direct analogies between contemporary people or apes and our ancient ancestors. But modern humans and primates are our best tools for inferring how the underpinnings of our numerical success may have evolved.</p><p>Somewhere along the evolutionary road, humans started to favor new ways of having and raising their young. Mothers began weaning their infants earlier. In modern societies where infants rely on their mother's milk and not bottle feeding, babies nurse for two to three years. By contrast, great ape mothers nurse their young for four to six years.</p><p>Breastfeeding is calorically expensive. It takes a mother about 600 extra calories a day to produce milk. So, the sooner she stops nursing, the sooner she can biologically support another pregnancy. In modern societies without contraception, mothers give birth on average every three years. Other great apes may wait as many as six to eight years between births.</p>
<p>Our ancient ancestors also fed, sheltered, and cared for youngsters who were weaned but still growing. This gave them a better chance at surviving than nonhuman great ape young, which fend for themselves after they're weaned. Today a child living in a hunter-gatherer society is twice as likely as a wild chimpanzee to survive to age 15.</p><p>Novel ways of parenting, compared to earlier hominins, meant human mothers were in the unique situation of having multiple dependents of different ages to care for at the same time. I cannot underscore enough how much this sets human mothers and children apart from the other great apes.</p><p>Having lots of kids is great for the success of the species. But there's a hitch. Mothers don't have enough hours in the day to care for their babies full time while providing for their older offspring. That's especially true because the unique aspects of the human diet give mothers a lot of tasks to juggle</p><p>When these ancient life history traits were evolving, our ancestors made their living as hunter-gatherers, who typically eat diverse fare, including fruits, nuts, tubers, roots, large and small game, birds, reptiles, eggs, insects, fish, and shellfish. Cobbling together such a menu requires modern hunter-gatherers to travel, on average, 13 kilometers per day. By contrast, chimpanzees and gorillas roam, on average, 2 kilometers per day.</p>
<p>What's more, hunter-gatherers process most of their food to make it more digestible or to boost the bioavailability of nutrients. And as everyone who prepares food knows, that takes a significant amount of time.</p><p>Among the Pumé hunter-gatherers from the savannas of Venezuela, women spend about three hours a day cracking, mashing, grinding, pounding, sifting, winnowing, butchering, and cooking food. The same is true of Efe women—hunter-gatherers living in the Ituri forest of Central Africa.</p><p>That prep time is in addition to the hours the Pumé and Efe spend foraging and then carrying ingredients back to camp. Furthermore, each processing task requires a specialized technology, which means someone has to collect raw materials and make tools. !Kung women and men in the Kalahari Desert of Southern Africa spend about an hour each day making and repairing tools. Savanna Pumé women devote nearly two hours to toolmaking—twice as much as the men.</p><p>Hunter-gatherers also build shelters and hearths to provide a safe place to process ingredients, to store food and tools, and to leave children who may be too young to accompany others on long foraging trips. Plus, they must haul water, chop firewood, fashion clothing, and maintain the social and information networks needed to access geographically dispersed resources.</p>
<p>There are simply not enough hours in the day for any one person to accomplish all this. So, our ancestors came up with a solution.</p><p>That solution was cooperation—but not the kind of task-sharing many species engage in. Hunter-gatherers developed a distinct feature called intergenerational cooperation: Parents help kids, <em>and</em> children help parents.</p><p>This is not a trait we share with the other great apes, who aren't particularly good at sharing food, helping mothers or offspring who aren't their own, or even supporting their own children after they reach a certain age. Nonhuman great ape mothers rarely share meals with their juvenile offspring once they're weaned, and juvenile apes don't offer food to their moms.</p><p>But among humans, intergenerational cooperation means it really does take a village to raise a child. Across cultures, mothers in hunter-gatherer and agricultural societies offer only about half of the direct care an infant receives. Savanna Pumé infants, for example, have an average of nine caretakers besides their mother. Efe infants have an average of 11.</p><p>Fathers and grandparents certainly play important roles in supporting their families. But it's not enough. An average Maya mother is 60 by the time her last child leaves home, so she has very few years after that to be a babysitting or food-collecting grandmother.</p><p>My research suggests a much more obvious source of help has been overlooked: kids. Other than mothers, children provide most of the child care in many cultures. And 7- to 10-year-olds do the bulk of the babysitting.</p><p>Children are also responsible for processing much of the food and running the household. A Pumé boy carries home an average of 4.5 kilograms of wild fruit on days he forages. That's the equivalent of 3,200 calories—enough to feed himself and at least some of his family. (And that's in addition to any snacking he does in the field.) His sister can bring home more than a kilogram of roots (worth about 4,000 calories)—some of which she will eat, but most of which she shares. Among the Hadza hunter-gatherers of East Africa, children forage for five to six hours a day. By age 5, they can supply about 50 percent of their own calories during some seasons.</p>
<p>Children in agricultural communities are also hard workers. Yucatec Maya between the ages of 7 and 14 devote two to five hours a day to domestic and field work. Teens between the ages of 15 and 18 labor about 6.5 hours a day—as much as their parents.</p><p>By the time a Maya mother is 40, she has an average of seven children at home. These children contribute a combined 20 hours of work a day and supply 60 percent of what the family consumes.</p><p>Thanks to this multigenerational help, a woman can spend time doing what only she can do: have more children. So, children increase the population, but their labor is also a built-in engine to fuel their community's fertility and speed up reproduction.</p><p>With intergenerational cooperation and a diversity of dietary strategies, our ancestors multiplied and weathered population bottlenecks. Just after 1800, the human population hit 1 billion.</p><p>The global population then expanded exponentially, largely due to the enhanced survival of both infants and older people. It reached 2 billion in 1927, 3 billion in 1960, 4 billion in 1974, 5 billion in 1987, 6 billion in 1999, 7 billion in 2011, and today is at over 7.7 billion.<br><a target="_blank"></a><br>These figures intrigue me as an evolutionary enigma and deeply concern me as a contemporary issue. There is no question, though, that humans have been incredibly successful. The question is: How long can we maintain that success and still be sustainable? The answer, like our secret to growth in the past, stands on the shoulders of cooperation.</p><p><em>* Editor's note: The author derived much of this essay from </em><em>her 47th JAR Distinguished Lecture, "How There Got to Be So Many of Us," which was published in the Winter 2019 issue of the </em>Journal of Anthropological Research<em>.</em></p><p>This work first appeared on <a href="https://www.sapiens.org/" target="_blank">SAPIENS</a> under a <a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-ND 4.0 license</a>. Read the <a href="https://www.sapiens.org/evolution/human-population-evolution/" target="_blank">original here</a>.<img src="https://www.sapiens.org/track/12597-1596466362813/?dt=Why+Are+There+So+Many+Humans%3F&dl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sapiens.org%2Fevolution%2Fhuman-population-evolution%2F" alt=""><span></span></p>
Keep reading
Show less
Photo by Finnbarr Webster/Getty Images
- According to new research at the University of Washington, a significant population decline will begin after 2064.
- The reasons include more access to contraception and better education for girls and women.
- Many countries will have to grapple with the social and financial consequences of their decline.
<p>After two centuries of unprecedented growth, human population will begin to shrink after 2064. This is good news for a number of reasons, most importantly because it signals an increase in education of girls and women.</p><p>That's the word from a large team of researchers at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation (IHME) at the University of Washington's School of Medicine. Their <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/lancet/PIIS0140-6736(20)30677-2.pdf" target="_blank">findings</a> were recently published in The Lancet. </p><p>The team predicts that global population will peak at 9.7 billion around 2064 before dropping to 8.8 billion at the turn of the century. While that contradicts previous findings by the UN, it's still a billion more people than inhabit the earth today. </p><p>For humans to replace the population, the total fertility rate (TFR) has to maintain a level of 2.1 births per woman. Due to improvements in contraception access and more available education for girls and women, the impetus for having children has declined. </p><p>In some regions, the decline has been dramatic. For example, the TFR in Italy and Spain is now 1.2 while in Poland it's 1.17. Even in "high-fertility" regions, the tide is changing. Sub-Saharan African women averaged 4.6 births per woman in 2017; that number is predicted to drop to 1.7 in 2100. Niger has the highest fertility rate in the world: 7 births per woman. In 2100, that is predicted to fall to 1.8. </p><p>Population decline will have major financial consequences; the researchers believe nations have to begin planning for this now. Discussing working-age individuals (aged 20-64 years), they write, </p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Huge declines in the number of workers were forecasted in China and India, alongside steady increases in Nigeria. By 2100, India was forecasted to still have the largest working-age population in the world, followed by Nigeria, China, and the USA." </p>
Mapping global population and the future of the world | The Economist
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e2cc6601e6772f8d94e215e973ba61fe"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ur77lDetI9Q?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of The Lancet, <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/07/200715150444.htm" target="_blank">comments</a> on the study, writing, </p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"It offers a vision for radical shifts in geopolitical power, challenges myths about immigration, and underlines the importance of protecting and strengthening the sexual and reproductive rights of women. The 21st century will see a revolution in the story of our human civilisation. Africa and the Arab World will shape our future, while Europe and Asia will recede in their influence."</p><p>Indeed, the populations that will shrink the fastest include Asia and central and eastern Europe. Japan, which has been <a href="https://qz.com/1295721/the-japanese-population-is-shrinking-faster-than-every-other-big-country/" target="_blank">grappling with this reality</a> for years, will drop from 128 million in 2017 to 60 million in 2100; Thailand, from 71 to 35 million; Portugal, 11 to 5 million; and South Korea, 53 to 27 million. </p><p>The study focuses on expansion, though it doesn't discuss how quickly we've reached current levels. After 350,000 years of <em>Homo sapiens</em> on Earth, we hit one billion people in 1804. It took 123 years to add another billion; 33 years to get to three billion; 14 years to four billion. If we hit eight billion by the end of this decade, we'll have quadrupled our population in just a century. </p><p>Those are unsustainable numbers. As the COVID-19 pandemic has proven, supply chain management and health care systems in many countries are broken, especially in America. Thanks to the outsourcing of labor and our for-profit health care model, income inequality is breaking our society. Adding more humans to our population during a pandemic, with seniors being the most vulnerable population, should give us pause.</p><img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzUwMzI0MS9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMzQwNTU5N30.o9DFv9PFbzzX5zQNq1Ya_3ZwqmFbCyZBTivvxxoxZUc/img.png?width=980" id="571d0" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="7d824e65060bfb1c887081d246f7757f" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Stein Emil Vollset, et al.
<p>Of course, procreation is more a biological process than a philosophical one. Survivability is the goal of every species. That said, we've mitigated the potential damage of overcrowding by contraception and education, as the study suggests. Either we need to more fairly distribute resources around the world—tough to imagine in a capitalist system—or pay the price for birthing too many humans. The latter could be quelled if we have fewer children.</p><p>Stein Emil Vollset, Professor of Global Health at IHME and lead author of the study, <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/07/200715150444.htm" target="_blank">weighs</a> the costs and benefits:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"While population decline is potentially good news for reducing carbon emissions and stress on food systems, with more old people and fewer young people, economic challenges will arise as societies struggle to grow with fewer workers and taxpayers, and countries' abilities to generate the wealth needed to fund social support and health care for the elderly are reduced."</p><p>The researchers believe immigration will be an even more pressing issue in the coming decades. This might mean less surface area being inhabited as people crowd into environmentally and financially robust regions—a forthcoming reality due to climate change anyway.</p><p>In conclusion, Professor Ibrahim Abubakar at University College London comments on the study, noting, "The distribution of working-age populations will be crucial to whether humanity prospers or withers." Depending on your age, you might not have to worry about this, but our children and grandchildren certainly will. </p><p>--</p><p><em>Stay in touch with Derek on <a href="http://www.twitter.com/derekberes" target="_blank">Twitter</a>, <a href="https://www.facebook.com/DerekBeresdotcom" target="_blank">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://derekberes.substack.com/" target="_blank">Substack</a>. His next book is</em> "<em>Hero's Dose: The Case For Psychedelics in Ritual and Therapy."</em></p>
Keep reading
Show less
- Astronaut Garrett Reisman took in countless indescribably beautiful views while he lived in space. But most shocking, he says, was observing the thinness of Earth's atmosphere.
- You can compare the thickness of the atmosphere to the diameter of Earth to the skin on an apple, or the shell of an egg. It's incredibly thin and shows just how seemingly fragile our planet is.
- But to put this into perspective, whereas the atmosphere reaches a height of 300,000 feet from Earth's surface, the deepest part of the ocean only reaches 35,000 feet, ten times thinner than Earth's atmosphere. Everything we experience on Earth, from sea to sky, exists on just a tiny slice of precious surface coating.
Keep reading
Show less
How should we reimagine society post-COVID-19?
Coronavirus has given us the opportunity to reframe and rethink society from its foundation.
15 May, 2020
- There have been many lessons learned from the coronavirus crisis. According to Acumen founder and CEO, Jacqueline Novogratz, one of the primary lessons has been that humans are interdependent creatures in an interconnected world.
- "The coronavirus has laid bare the gaping wounds of our society that had grown too individualistic over the last 30-50 years and reinforced our interdependence in the most profound ways," Novogratz says, adding that the current situation has given us a chance to rethink and rebuild society from a new moral framework.
- Placing humanity and community at the center, focusing more on helping the poor and vulnerable, and engaging more in collaboration instead of competition is how our post-COVID-19 society will succeed.
<p class="media-headline"><br></p><div class="rm-shortcode amazon-assets-widget" data-rm-shortcode-id="cd72e5ebc63174b4025e76218cf5576a" contenteditable="false">
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07R9S8JR7?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51JhRL+xqIL.jpg" class="amazon-assets-widget__image widget__image">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__description">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__title" style="display: block;">Manifesto for a Moral Revolution: Practices to Build a Better World</div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__by-amazon"><!-- <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07R9S8JR7?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">by now at amazone</a> --></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__list-price"><span class="grey">List Price: </span><span class="list-price">$13.99</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__new-price"><span class="grey">New From: </span><span class="new-price">$13.99</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
</div>
</a>
</div>
Keep reading
Show less
Popular
