Allan

Schnaiberg’s
Treadmill of
Production
(1980)
Lanka Adarsh
(21ssma10)
Historical Context The State of Environmental Movements and
Consciousness

● Published about a decade after some ‘landmarks’ for environmental

consciousness - declaration of Earth Day, the Clean Air Act, and the
National Environmental Policy Act.

● Led many to believe that “the problem has been solved, and the issues
are no longer important”. After sustained engagement with
environmental issues in the public realm, the public had become
complacent, and such issues had receded to the background in the
public consciousness:

“So why write this book? It is my view that environmental issues … have not only
been major social concerns throughout history, but will endure and even intensify
in the future. [...] This book is necessary today in part because of this decline in
visible public concern about our national environment [and other shortcomings of
contemporary environmental discourse].” - Schnaiberg
Historical Context Shortcomings of contemporary discourse on the
environment; Interventions

Schnaiberg identifies several shortcomings in From these, a number of interventions follow. He:
contemporary discourse:
● “[S]eeks an explanation of the social roots of
● They are “narrow social perspective[s]” or expanded production”, analysing the social
“narrow technical reports that lost sight of institutions that are responsible for producing
broader socioenvironmental issues”. and allocating surplus.

● They are “excessively myopic or abstract”, ● Institution of the social-environmental

concentrating only on the environmental dialectic, in which they are reciprocally related,
movement and not the context that births them. intertwined, and in a state of tension.

● The explanations for environmental problems ● Posits that a value-free analysis of the problem
are clustered around four causes - population, at hand is not possible, and asks: “for whom and
technology, consumption, and production - and from whom has it been protected?”.
usually exclude each other.
The Questions What questions does the book ask and (seek to) address?

Question 1: Origin, Historical Response Question 2: Social Structures

How has "society " generated these

environmental problems? How has "society"
responded to such problems in the recent and What social forms induce ever higher levels of
distant past? industrialization and extraction of resources?

Question 3: Consciousness Question 4: Solutions

How does this explain discrepancies between

public complacency regarding environmental
protection policies, and the growing concerns What are the long-term social options for
of many policy analysts? responding to future resource problems?
Basic Assumptions Ontological nature of the environment and environmental
problems; The distinctness of humans

● Environmental problems are real, but created by social action. It is also

a “social problem” in that it has social ramifications.

● “Humankind is different from other species despite shared biological

vulnerability”: “Societal economies” (that is, human societies) differ
from animal and other societies in the sense that they use socially
produced (economic) surpluses to “enhance the expansion of physical
capital and future production”; they organize to overcome ecological
constraints. Animal societies, on the other hand, use surplus to “expand
population and biomass”.

● Human societies differ from each other in terms of volume of

withdrawals and additions to the environment, the degree of
permanence of these, the impact they have on ecosystems, the range
of ecosystems, and the rate at which they degrade ecosystems.
Basic Concepts Producer or Consumer Sovereignty?

● Schnaiberg counterposes two models of sovereignty against each

other: Producer Sovereignty (where the producer makes all decisions
about production), and Consumer Sovereignty (where the consumer
makes all decisions).

● In Producer Sovereignty, the producer(s) is/are influential enough to

“dominate markets and governments alike”. This corresponds to
monopoly situations.

● In Consumer Sovereignty, producers are the “servants of society,

Is the customer king? Does the system
really serve the customer? responding to national needs as expressed by consumers and
government decision makers”. This corresponds to situations of
perfect competition.
Basic Concepts Producer or Consumer Sovereignty?

● Schnaiberg takes the middle route, conceding that “producers

have considerable powers”, but holding that they are
nevertheless beholden to “market and political constraints”.

● Producers have shaped a “consumer culture” through means

such as advertising, actively creating markets (and demand)
large enough to absorb their growing production.

● A good example of the above: De Beers and the artificial inflation

of the value of diamonds: “Under its watch, Diamonds transformed
from a gem like any other into a cultural touchstone” (Netflix, 2019)

The De Beers group held a virtual monopoly over

the diamond industry from 1888 to the start of
the 21st Century
Basic Concepts Monopoly Capitalism vs. Competitive Capitalism

Monopoly Capitalism: Competitive Capitalism:

● Large-scale production ● Small production volumes

● Capital-intensive production; modern ● Less capital equipment, technology not as

technology advanced (generally)

● High volume and rate(?) of profit ● Lower volume and rate(?) of profit

● Good degree of control over all aspects of ● Less control over aspects of production and
production and distribution distribution

● ‘Public’ ownership of capital through stock; ● Private ownership (owned by family or

bureaucratic setup takes decisions. individual who make all the decisions)

● Considerable market-share ● Small market share

Basic Concepts Monopoly Capitalism vs. Competitive Capitalism

Monopoly Capitalism: Competitive Capitalism:

● Stable levels of profit, except in terms of crisis ● Much more subject to whims of the market and
(think oil and ARAMCO / OPEC) the consumers; high variability of production
and profit.
● Far lower risk levels; have considerable funds for
contingencies and periods of loss. ● High levels of risk, stagnation, bankruptcy.

● Corresponds to advanced capitalist countries / ● Neoclassical economics holds this to be the

late capitalism and producer sovereignty (as in “ideal” state for society: a good degree of
the USA). Seen by Marxists and Neo-Marxists as competitiveness benefitting all. Corresponds to
a part of the trajectory of capitalism. consumer sovereignty.

Though Schnaiberg doesn’t take the argument to its natural conclusion, the fact is that the two are different
points in the same, larger trajectory of capitalism, since “multilateral accumulation necessarily turns into
unilateral accumulation” (Marx 2018). This leads to a few errors in his analysis.
Basic Concepts Relationships between Labour, Capital, and the State

● Schnaiberg identifies three main actors / institutions: Labour

(wage labourers), Capital, and the State.

● Between Labour and Capital, there can exist two types of

relationships: Cooperative and Competitive.

● Capital and Labour are cooperative in the sense that they work
Cooperative
together to produce various goods, and that labour consumes
the products that capital sells.

● They are competitive in the sense that they both gain only at the
expense of the other; capital tries to maximise profit by cutting
wages, and labour tries to maximise their comfort by demanding
Competitive better wages.
Basic Concepts Relationships between Labour, Capital, and the State

● The State has “close relationships” with Capital, as well as Labour

- a dual role.

● With / from Capital, in Capitalist systems, it:

- “[F]oster[s] expansion of private capital accumulation through

economic growth support”
- Levies taxes, and draws political support

● With Labour, it:

- Intervenes at many levels to ensure socioeconomic equality and

welfare, and “deal[s] with dissatisfaction of labour”
- Wage negotiations, transfer payments, etc.
Basic Concepts Interests / “Concerns” of Labour, Capital, and the State

● Capital: ensuring consumption of expanded production;

obtaining sufficient profit for protection from competitors, and
future expansion

● Labour: increased availability of jobs and good wages; qualitative

improvement in quality of life (education, healthcare,
recreational facilities).

● The State: taxes on profit should be enough to fund public

programs and services to keep Labour happy, but low enough to
maintain the support of/from Capital.
Basic Concepts How does change occur?

● Schnaiberg adopts the dialectical model of change - i.e. one that

occurs because of “conflicting goals or contradictions in the social
relationship”. However, it is quite different from the Marxist one.

● Marxist dialectics (dialectical materialism): conceptualises change as

occurring in “epochs”, with each epoch lasting centuries if not
millenia, and being quite different - qualitatively - from ones that
precede or follow. Originally conceptualised as a linear movement.

● Schnaiberg’s dialectic: scale of change, and the time within which

such changes occur, are small. There is a “tension within the
socioeconomic system at any given point in time, and thus affords
considerable potential for changes in the structure of the system
over time. These range from the short-term business cycles to
Becoming and unbecoming. long-term social structural changes”. Could be oscillation rather
Unravelling and rearrangement of
the old to form the new (Marx) than linear progression.
Basic Concepts The Ideology of Expansion

● The fact or desirability of production expansion is taken for

granted:

“Businessmen… have the freedom to decide how to allocate past surplus,

but not whether to do so”. (Schnaiberg 1980)

There is a "continued acceptance of capitalist organization [and its

production expansion] as means toward [individuals'] ends". (Gintis 1972 in
Schnaiberg 1980)

● This causes people to see “ultimate social values… in terms of

expanded economic growth” (materially and ideologically).
Materially, it involves greater social welfare; Ideologically, this is
a part of the “American Dream”, and the American ethos at large.
Basic Concepts The Ideology of Expansion

While societies for most part all agree that expansion is desirable,
there are two questions that still need to be answered:

1. How the surplus is mobilized

2. How the surplus is allocated (it is here that intervention in necessary).

Moreover, traditional models of ‘economic efficiency’ focus mostly on

economic growth; only sometimes do they include social welfare /
distributive parameters. The environment, though, is ignored even
though it is affected deeply by the current model of economic growth.
The American economy is much closer to the “monopoly capital” model of the Neo-Marxists, and hence also to one of “producer
sovereignty”. The treadmill here is at a high speed, and accelerating.
The Treadmill of Production What is it?

The treadmill of production links employment, income, expansion of production, and environmental
degradation. Crucially, it helps explain:

1. Why does production expand?

2. Why does monopoly capitalism expand its share of production over time?
3. Why production becomes increasingly capital-intensive, and hence causes more environmental
degradation.
The Treadmill of Production Base Conditions

Large Corporations emerge due to gradual

consolidation, the rate of which is
heightened during recessions and crises.
They can maintain dominance because:

1. They have a bureaucracy which helps

them calculate demand, minimize cost,
and maximize profit.
2. They have greater control over input
prices
3. They can be financed internally
(through stock).
4. They can swiftly dispose of
competition by price-gouging.
The Treadmill of Production Stages of the treadmill

This repeats. (At some point,

overproduction occurs, and
crisis dawns)
The Treadmill of Production What drives it?
Relation to the environment

The Treadmill is driven by two forces: the nature of competition (systemic), and the quest for profitability
(individual and systemic)

Directly proportional to capital intensification

The Environment Why is the environmental movement so weak in the
USA?

To Schnaiberg, this comes down to the historical tendencies, and recent shifts:

Labour has only been angling for a greater share in the surplus (“economism”), which in itself is attached to
the degree of production expansion; their interests align with Capital. In European countries, by contrast,
the workers have a greater control over the production process, and some say over questions of surplus
allocation. More recently, organized labour has suffered blows. Ultimately, it has little to no power.

The State has, for most part, supported Labour, through public employment, public programs, and public
services. But it remains under a lot of pressure to reduce taxes and make concessions for Capitalists.
However, if it gives to the capitalists, it risks accelerating the treadmill.

Capital has found itself in crisis, and blamed the state. Dawn of neoliberalism.
Slowing down What is to be done to slow down the Treadmill?

The most essential and important condition is the

convergence of environmental and labour
movements. Schnaiberg proposes educating
labour about:

1) The environmental hazards and discomforts

of the treadmill.
2) The “socially inefficient role of the state in
the allocation of surplus to the treadmill”.
3) The alternatives to the system.
Way Forward Possibilities

The stability of these synthesis vary; oscillations may occur

Criticisms
1. Sees capitalism not as a trajectory, but as several distinct “types” of systems.
2. Rather limited period of analysis - a 25 year period after WWII, which was exceptional in all senses;
Labour had accumulated good amounts of money in the preceding period, which they began to spend
after the world war ended, resulting in a period of prosperity. Interestingly, the book was published
during the time the USA began turning to Neoliberalism (Reagan was elected president in 1981).
3. Applies Marxist theory very selectively, and does not understand its crux.