Fundamental human needs

The taxonomy of fundamental human needs is a theory developed by Manfred Max-Neef in collaboration with the Chilean sociologist Antonio Elizalde and the Chilean philosopher Martín Hopenhayn, described in the 1991 book Human Scale Development.

Theory

In this theory, the fundamental human needs are seen as ontological (stemming from the condition of being human), few, finite, and classifiable (as distinct from the conventional notion of conventional economic "wants" that are infinite and insatiable).^[1] They are also constant through all human cultures and across historical time periods – what changes over time and between cultures are not these needs but the strategies by which these needs (and created desires) are satisfied. Human needs can be understood as a taxonomic 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 Maslow; rather, simultaneity, complementarity and trade-offs are features of the process of needs satisfaction.

The theory provides a concept of "Human Scale Development", 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."^[2] It also gives a process by which communities can identify their "wealths" and "poverties" according to how their fundamental human needs are satisfied.

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 9×4-cell matrix is developed ^[3]

The Being column registers attributes, personal or collective, that are expressed as nouns. The Having column registers institutions, norms, mechanisms, tools (not in a material sense), laws, etc. that can be expressed in one or more words. The Doing column registers actions, personal or collective, that can be expressed as verbs. The Interacting column registers locations and milieus (as times and spaces).^[1]

Satisfiers

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

Violators

A violators claims to be satisfying a need, 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.

Pseudo satisfiers

A pseudo satisfier claims to be satisfying a need, yet in fact has 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.

Inhibiting satisfiers

An inhibiting satisfier over-satisfies a given need, which in turn seriously inhibits the possibility of satisfaction of other needs. They mostly originate in deep-rooted customs, habits and rituals. For example, an overprotective family stifles identity, freedom, understanding, and affection.

Singular satisfiers

a singular satisfier satisfies one particular need only. These are neutral in regard to the satisfaction of other needs. For those who do not have the means to find singular satisfiers under their presiding socioeconomic conditions, singular satisfiers are often institutionalized by voluntary, private sector, or government programs. For example, food/housing volunteer programs aid in satisfying subsistence for less fortunate people.

Synergistic satisfiers

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.^[4] 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.^[5] 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.^[3] This proposal for an improved development system is useful on a small scale and gives insight into achieving fundamental needs through societal institutions.

Research

Recent research appears to validate the existence of universal human needs.^[6][7]

Application

One of the applications of the theory 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 Natural Step framework for Strategic Sustainable Development, summarized as backcasting from sustainability principles, it enables planning and designing for sustainability.

References