Ep. 123: Second-order effects
Negative 2nd order effects are well known in engineering. But we apparently also have a childish tendency to go for shiny new things in many areas, ignoring long-term negative consequences.
It appears that there is a universal principle in action all over the place: “Go for the positive first-order effects, ignore the far more negative second-order effects”. I have been seeing this phenomenon more and more often. So much so that I am beginning to believe that this is the norm, perhaps because there is often total ignorance about the second-order effects.
This phenomenon is the opposite of what you’d expect from the work of the recently-deceased Nobel laureate Daniel Kahnemann, who, among other things, demonstrated that we are risk-averse, and that the downside risk looms larger for us than the upside gain. But we apparently also have a childish tendency to go for the shiny new things on offer right now, without paying attention to the long-term negative consequences. Marketeers know this.
A couple of examples will illustrate the point. All of us were tempted by the charms of the corona vaccines that promised instant immunity. (Ok, some of us were told by governments that you better take the vaccines, or else.) The fact that the most popular and widely used vaccines were mRNA based -- an unknown and unproven technology -- faded into the background in the frenzy of partisan hype. First order effect.
Over time, the negatives of the vaccines have begun to come to the fore. Anecdotally speaking, and possibly even statistically speaking, quite a few people have had heart problems and other unexpected side effects, with increased rates of death as well. Furthermore, there are possible genetic changes that may take years to manifest, considering that RNA and DNA are intimately linked. Second order effect, despite that other caveat: “correlation is not causation”.
Another is the White Revolution. As a result of the introduction of A1 cattle breeds (eg Jersey), there has been an increase in the volume of milk produced in India. First order effect. But at what cost? Native zebu cattle produce superior quality A2 milk; furthermore, it turns out that, though Jerseys do indeed produce more milk per pregnancy, zebu cows have more calves over their livespan, so that the total lifetime milk production may be higher.
Besides, locally-evolved zebu are heat-resistant, do not need exotic cattle feed, and have never had a single instance of mad-cow disease. Zebu variants are thriving in Brazil and places like Texas (eg Bramah bulls). But not in India: I read figures that 87% of Kerala’s cattle are now A1 hybrids: the traditional humped bull is virtually extinct, including for instance the miniature Vechur cow. That is the second order effect.
When Dr M S Swaminathan was posthumously awarded the Bharat Ratna, I was one of the few people who were not altogether thrilled, for similar reasons. While his Green Revolution helped increase the quantity of foodgrain production, thus leading to food self-sufficiency, the loss of genetic variants is a serious problem.
The intellectual property of countless generations of Indian farmers was lost as it was handed over (without compensation or even credit) to the International Rice Research Institute. While it can be argued that this made it available to humanity at large, as in the case of Geographical Indications, it is very much the case that those who create IPR have a right to fair recompense. Claude Alvares’ harsh criticism in “The Great Gene Robbery” has a lot of truth to it.
Another truism universally mouthed by economists (and others) is that increasing the number of women in the paid workforce is a good thing. At first glance (yes, first order effect) this is an unalloyed good: more workers means GDP goes up; women get to fulfill their potential and their aspirations by getting away from household drudgery. All of the above are indeed true.
But there is the inevitable second order effect. Women in the paid workforce means families suffer. It is clear that it is women who instill values in children; and so working mothers will end up leaving their children to their own devices. We already see an epidemic of angst and alienation in many post-industrial societies, leading to “quiet-quitting” at best and murderous rage and fentanyl-style exiting from society at worst. See San Francisco’s streets filled with hypodermic needles and human feces.
Furthermore, working women will naturally tend to have fewer children, as there are economic disincentives. In a world that is tending towards disastrously low fertility rates, far below the replacement rate of 2.1 in Total Fertility Rate, this may not exactly be the desired outcome. As it is, countries like Italy, Japan, Russia, China, South Korea, etc are facing demographic collapse.
The problems of working women are legion. My mother, a professor, was an example. At one point, after she had retired, she said wistfully to me: “When you kids were young, I had no time for you because I had to work and run a household. Now when I have time, you are gone.” In my parents’ case, they did need the two incomes.
One hopeful sign I see in a lot of Indian households is that when they can afford to live on one income, women stay at home to look after the kids. This involves a certain amount of sacrifice, it is true, and that may well be a pertinent factor: raising children involves sacrifice, which is something many self-absorbed young people may be unable to relate to. The fact that your children grow up to be better adults is definitely pertinent for the nation.
To my old-fashioned eyes, even the multi-generational family was a great place both for kids and for grandparents, because they relate to each other; and this is how civilization is passed on. In addition, the matrilineal Kerala Hindu household of old, where the women held sway, and the men came to live with the woman’s family, was also a rather brilliant invention. Even if your parents didn’t look after you much, some aunt would.
Without going much more into this topic, I hope it is clear that the second order effect of women in the paid workforce is not necessarily as positive as one might have thought, but we tend to ignore that in the flush of excitement over the first-order effect.
That tendency is seen in sector after sector. I have the feeling that we’ll see this in the current hoopla over generative AI, which is supposed to bring all sorts of benefits; i bet it will being job losses, loss of credibility for the written word and for images/videos, and other second-order effects I am not sagacious enough to foresee at the moment. The same thing will likely be true with the newly fashionable weight-loss drugs that are taking obese communities by storm.
It can be argued that the Western reaction to the Ukraine invasion by Russia falls into a similar dichotomy: it was earlier felt that Russia would be decimated (a good thing according to the West). The second-order effect is that Ukraine is devastated, much of Europe has been hurt economically, and there is the looming threat of de-dollarization. Not good second order effects.
The old adage “act in haste; repent at leisure” seems to sum it up. Or to put it in modern terms, beware of marketing people bearing gifts. They will not tell you of, and they may themselves not be aware of, the sting in the tail.
1231 words, April 5, 2024