Fundamental human needs

Fundamental human needs and human-scale development,^[1] developed by Manfred Max-Neef and others (Antonio Elizalde and Martin Hopenhayn), are seen as ontological (stemming from the condition of being human), are few, finite and classifiable (as distinct from the conventional notion of conventional economic "wants" that are infinite and insatiable).^[2]

They are also constant through all human cultures and across historical time periods. What changes over time and between cultures is the strategies by which these needs (and created desires) are satisfied. Human needs can be understood as a system—i.e., they are interrelated and interactive. In this system, there is no hierarchy of needs (apart from the basic need for subsistence or survival) as postulated by Western psychologists such as Maslow, rather, simultaneity, complementarity and trade-offs are features of the process of needs satisfaction.

Manfred Max-Neef and his colleagues developed a taxonomy of human needs and a process by which communities can identify their "wealths" and "poverties" according to how their fundamental human needs are satisfied.

This school of Human Scale Development is described as "focused and based on the satisfaction of fundamental human needs, on the generation of growing levels of self-reliance, and on the construction of organic articulations of people with nature and technology, of global processes with local activity, of the personal with the social, of planning with autonomy, and of civil society with the state."^[3][4]

One of the applications is within the field of Strategic Sustainable Development where the individual Fundamental Human Needs (not the marketed or created desires and needs) are used to refine the Brundtland definition. Together with other aspects of the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development, summarized as backcasting from sustainability principles, it enables planning and designing for sustainability.

Classification

Max-Neef classifies the fundamental human needs as:

• subsistence
• protection
• affection
• understanding
• participation
• leisure
• creation
• identity
• freedom

Needs are also defined according to the existential categories of being, having, doing and interacting, and from these dimensions, a 36 cell matrix is developed ^[5]

The BElNG column registers attributes, personal or collective, that are expressed as nouns. The column of HAVING registers institutions, norms, mechanisms, tools (not in a material sense), laws, etc. that can be expressed in one or more words. The DOlNG column registers actions, personal or collective, that can be expressed as verbs. The column of INTERACTING registers locations and milieus (as times and spaces). ^[6]

Types of satisfiers

Max-Neef further classifies Satisfiers (ways of meeting needs) as follows.

1. Violators: claim to be satisfying needs, yet in fact make it more difficult to satisfy a need. E.g. drinking a soda advertised to quench your thirst, but the ingredients (such as caffeine or sodium salts) cause you to urinate more, leaving you less hydrated on net.
2. Pseudo Satisfiers: claim to be satisfying a need, yet in fact have little to no effect on really meeting such a need. For example, status symbols may help identify one’s self initially, but there is always the potential to get absorbed in them and forget who you are without them.
3. Inhibiting Satisfiers: those that over-satisfy a given need, which in turn seriously inhibits the possibility of satisfaction of other needs. Mostly originating in deep-rooted customs, habits and rituals. For example, an overprotective family stifles identity, freedom, understanding, and affection.
4. Singular Satisfiers: satisfy one particular need only. These are neutral in regard to the satisfaction of other needs. They are usually institutionalized by voluntary, private sector, or government programs. For example, food/housing volunteer programs aid in satisfying subsistence for less fortunate people.
5. Synergistic Satisfiers: satisfy a given need, while simultaneously contributing to the satisfaction of other needs. These are anti-authoritarian and represent a reversal of predominant values of competition and greed. For example, breast feeding gives a child subsistence, and aids in the development in protection, affection, and identity.

Human scale development

Human scale development was created in response to neoliberalist and structuralist traditional hierarchical development systems in which decisions start at the top and flow down instead of in a democratic manner.^[7] It focuses on development by the people and for the people and is founded upon three pillars: fundamental human needs, increasing self-reliance, and balanced interdependence of people with their surroundings.^[8] This system of development gives people a platform for community organizing and democratic decision making to empower people to take part in the planning process to ensure it meets their needs. Max-Neef's fundamental human needs forms the basis for the creation of his alternative development and, as opposed to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, which focuses on a ranking of psychological needs, Max-Neef includes needs that are complementary, each one necessary for achieved satisfaction.^[5] This proposal for an improved development system is useful on a small scale and gives insight into achieving fundamental needs through societal institutions.

Research

Human Scale Development:^[9] Conception, application and further reflections. By Manfred A. Max-Neef with contributions from Antonio Elizalde Martin Hopenhayn (1991)

Recent research appears to validate the existence of universal human needs.^[10][11]

References