In the first part of the series, we noted that for centuries, humanity has equated progress with expansion—more production, more consumption, more profit. But as we stand on the precipice of ecological and moral collapse, it becomes painfully clear that this version of “development” may be a dangerous illusion.
The article invited readers to reconsider the foundations of economic management and human ambition. Anchored by the Value Pyramid of Management, a paradigm that reorders stakeholder priorities with Nature at its apex and Shareholders at its base. Only by realigning our values, redefining our goals, and reimagining our systems can we chart a sustainable and humane path forward.
Greed, Not Scarcity: The Real Problem of Economics
The prevailing narrative in classical and neoclassical economics has long positioned scarcity as the central problem—the idea that resources are limited while human wants are infinite. However, this framing ignores a far more pressing and corrosive force: greed, which makes human wants infinite.
As Amartya Sen (1999), Nobel laureate in economics, points out in Development as Freedom, famines and economic suffering are not always caused by a lack of resources but by “entitlement failures”—the inability or unwillingness of people and institutions to share and distribute what already exists. In this light, the core dysfunction of modern economies is not material insufficiency, but the moral failure to restrain excessive accumulation.
Greed, defined as an intense and selfish desire for something, especially wealth or power, is not new to human nature. What has changed, however, is the way modern economic systems legitimize and reward it. In times of insecurity and future anxiety—conditions increasingly common in our volatile world—greed often masquerades as prudence or ambition. People cling to accumulation as a buffer against uncertainty. As philosopher Erich Fromm (1976) observes in To Have or To Be?, “modern society is geared to the mode of having, not of being.” He warns that societies obsessed with possession inevitably erode their capacity for empathy, solidarity, and ecological sustainability.
After the Second World War, American policymakers and economists intentionally engineered a consumer culture to jump-start the economy. William Rees, a professor at the University of British Columbia and co-developer of the ecological footprint concept, critiques this post-war pivot. Quoted in New Scientist, Rees highlights how U.S. economic architects promoted materialism as a civic virtue, rebranding consumption as the hallmark of personal success and national progress. Victor Lebow, a retail analyst, famously captured this ethos in 1955: “Our enormously productive economy demands that we make consumption our way of life… that we seek our spiritual and ego satisfaction in consumption.” (Journal of Retailing, 1955). The strategy worked—economic growth surged—but it also laid the groundwork for a planetary crisis.
Today, the consequences of this consumerist paradigm are global. Developing nations emulate Western consumption patterns, mistaking them for development, while the planet reels under the pressure.
Epidemiologist Warren Hern of the University of Colorado and William Rees jointly warn that the global economy is behaving much like a “cancer”—relentlessly expanding, heedless of the destruction left in its wake. As quoted in Andy Coghlan’s article Consumerism is Eating the Future (New Scientist), they argue that the impulse for growth is “a primitive survival mechanism” now embedded in economic ideology. Hern states that humans have become “a rapidly expanding species that is outgrowing its ecological niche,” and Rees warns that “we will keep going till we fill the Petri dish and pollute ourselves out of existence.”
The fundamental question then is not whether we can grow our economies, but whether we can outgrow our addiction to growth.
Undoubtedly, greed is not merely a private vice; it is a public hazard. When embedded into economic systems and normalized through cultural narratives, it leads inevitably to various forms of immorality—personal, corporate, and ecological. Reversing this trend requires a reorientation of values, where economic activity is not divorced from ethics, and where prosperity is judged not by accumulation but by justice, sustainability, and human dignity.
True economic development must reject this destructive model. It must prioritize ecological integrity, equity, and long-term sustainability over short-term profits and national competitiveness. As Herman Daly, one of the pioneers of ecological economics, argued, “a failed growth economy and a steady-state economy are not the same thing; they are the difference between a dying economy and one that is alive and sustainable” (Steady-State Economics, 1991).
Immorality and Economic Development
Greed, by its very nature, fosters immorality. While the popular conception of immorality often defaults to illicit sexual behavior, this is only a narrow expression of a much broader moral failure. Indeed, the pursuit of excessive wealth and power—unchecked by ethical constraints—undermines the moral fabric of society at multiple levels. As St. Thomas Aquinas argued in his Summa Theologiae, greed or avaritia is a “capital sin” because it leads to other forms of moral failure, including deceit, injustice, and exploitation. In modern economies, these manifestations are not just isolated acts of misconduct; they are often embedded in the very structure of economic activity.
Granted, there’s documentation that link between economic affluence and sexual immorality. Scholars such as Michel Foucault (The History of Sexuality, 1976) and Anthony Giddens (The Transformation of Intimacy, 1992) have observed how liberal capitalist societies, under the guise of individual freedom, have commodified and hypersexualized human relationships. Research by the World Health Organization (2015) notes that sexually transmitted infections rise in correlation with urbanization and affluence, suggesting that the same conditions that promote economic growth also catalyze risky sexual behaviors. These outcomes have deep psychological consequences—ranging from depression and anxiety to diminished self-worth—especially among youth who are bombarded with consumerist and hedonistic messages in media-driven environments.
However, the moral crisis induced by greed extends far beyond personal conduct. In the realm of business, immorality frequently manifests in fraud, corruption, and corporate negligence. The 2008 global financial crisis is a prime example. As economist Joseph Stiglitz (2010) remarked in Freefall, “the crisis was not an accident; it was man-made, the result of immoral behavior on the part of many players in the financial system.” Major financial institutions, motivated by profit and enabled by deregulation, engaged in deceptive practices that devastated economies and livelihoods across the world. Meanwhile, the perpetrators received bonuses and bailouts, illustrating the systemic moral failure underpinning modern capitalism.
Corporate immorality is also evident in environmental degradation. Companies knowingly release harmful products into the market, often with the tacit or overt support of corrupt government regulators and compromised media. Naomi Oreskes and Erik M. Conway, in Merchants of Doubt (2010), expose how corporations have manipulated science and public discourse to downplay the risks of harmful products—from tobacco to fossil fuels. This collusion between private and public actors reflects what Pope Francis has termed “the technocratic paradigm,” where profit-driven logic overrides ethical and ecological responsibility (Laudato Si’, 2015).
Furthermore, environmental destruction is perhaps the most egregious expression of greed-driven immorality. Mining, deforestation, and pollution are not mere externalities—they are ethical violations against both current populations and future generations. As ecologist Vandana Shiva asserts, “a person who pollutes and destroys the environment is not a developer, but a destroyer” (Earth Democracy, 2005). Such individuals and corporations, often celebrated as engines of economic growth, are in reality inflicting violence on nature and society. The paradox is that while armed robbers or serial killers are rightly condemned and punished, those who preside over environmental disasters—causing mass displacement, disease, and biodiversity loss—are lauded as captains of industry.
This moral inversion, where exploiters are exalted and victims are marginalized, calls into question the very nature of what we call “economic development.” If development results in environmental collapse, widespread inequality, and a breakdown of moral norms, can it truly be considered progress? As Mahatma Gandhi once warned, “Earth provides enough to satisfy every man’s needs, but not every man’s greed.”
Watchout for the third and final part.
Please let’s interact: +1 (914) 259-0242
The author is a dynamic entrepreneur and the Founder and Group CEO of Groupe Soleil Vision, made up of Soleil Consults (US), LLC, NubianBiz.com and Soleil Publications. He has an extensive background In Strategy, Management, Entrepreneurship, Premium Audit Advisory, And Web Consulting. With professional experiences spanning both Ghana and the United States, Jules has developed a reputation as a thought leader in fields such as corporate governance, leadership, e-commerce, and customer service. His publications explore a variety of topics, including economics, information technology, marketing and branding, making him a prominent voice in discussions on development and business innovation across Africa. Through NubianBiz.com, he actively champions intra-African trade and technology-driven growth to empower SMEs across the continent.
