Post-Capitalism: The Future of Economy in aHyper-Connected Era
Andree Pratana
Keio University
Faculty of Policy Management Year 4

Introduction
We are living in a pivotal moment of change, an era where recent advances in digital andinformation technologies are having a profound impact on human society. The impact brought onby technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), robots, the Internet of Things (IoT), and 3D
printers are so far-reaching that it touches upon every aspect of our society, not least theeconomic paradigm on which our day-to-day economic activities are based.
This paper tries to analyze how capitalism – the underlying principle which governs many if not
most economies around the world – is under siege from the advance of technologies and explores
the possibility of “Niche Capitalism” and “Social/Collaborative Commons” in post-capitalism
society.
Classical Economics
Let's begin with the basic notion of capitalism and value creation in the market economy. In essence,
capitalism refers to the commodification of goods and services, exchanged in the marketplace.
When individuals and firms participate in the economy – i.e. to work and to do business – economic
value is generated, whereby inputs of land, labor and capital are transformed into produce,
manufactured goods, and services. In the process, wage is earned, and profit is made. These wages
and profits are in most cases fed back into the economy, becoming the lifeblood of capitalism. As
the cycle repeats, the economy grows, and people become more prosperous. The reality might bemore complicated, but at least that's what Economics 101 teaches us about capitalism.
To further illustrate the process in detail, consider the following example: Buying a Big Mac. The
economic process of producing a Big Mac from scratch and delivering it to the customer can besummarized into the following steps:
1) farmers harvest wheat and grow cattle (farming), 2) wheat and cattle are processed into breadand burger patty in factories (manufacturing), 3) bread and patty are delivered to McDonald’sstores (logistics), and 4) the final product is prepared and served for consumption (service).
1Classical economics posits that, in competitive markets, 1) long-term profit becomes equal to zero
when 2) price approaches the cost incurred by a firm. In other words, the price a customer pays fora Big Mac will eventually be equal to its total cost throughout the value chain. The price is also themeasurement of economic value generated in the process, which is used, for example, in themeasurement of GDP.
The question is: with the advance of technology, what if the cost of delivering an extra unit of agood or service approaches zero? The fact is, the process has already begun. The emergence ofautonomous vehicles and intelligent robots coupled with connected devices and artificialintelligence is starting to wreak havoc on the notion of capitalism.
Towards Zero Marginal Cost and Hyper-Productivity
Recall that in the Big Mac example, there are four main processes: 1) farming, 2) manufacturing,3) logistics, and 4) service. As technology progresses, each of the processes can eventually beperformed with greatly minimized human input. Based on data from weather satellites and sensors
embedded in the soil, drones and autonomous tractors will be able to plant seeds, initiate irrigation
and apply fertilizers to crops. Harvested wheat and grown cattle will be processed in fullyautomated factories, the products being carried off to stores in autonomous vehicles. Once in stores,
robots will be working to prepare burgers and serve them to customers.
As illustrated above, the entire process of making and delivering a Big Mac from scratch may soon
be performed with little or no human labor. In fact, artificial intelligence might soon be able topredict the best way of growing the necessary crops based on data collected by numerous sensors,which would result in higher productivity. The idea of having robots perform those tasks mightsound like science-fiction to ordinary people, but real developments in this area are taking place at
an increasing rate.
For example, Kubota, a Japanese maker of farming vehicles, is developing a range of autonomous
farm machines (Kubota’s website, 2017). Since there are relatively few safety concerns, it ispredicted that the commercialization of these farm machines will take place sooner than that ofself-driving cars. Again, entrepreneurs in China are experimenting with the idea of cooking
machines and robot staff (Chen, 2016). While those technologies have not been commercialized
yet, online retailers giant Amazon has opened partially-automated convenience stores, Amazon Go,
which provide us with a realistic glimpse of the future.
Taken as a whole, emerging technologies are still experimental in nature, and at times rather more
anecdotal and sporadic (if one takes an extended view of the whole value chain). Nevertheless,there is a growing sense among academics and business practitioners that those technologies are
driving the economy towards zero marginal cost and hyper-productivity.
2Capitalist Time Bomb
Social critic Jeremy Rifkin argues that capitalism is paradoxical at its core (Rifkin, 2014:5-6). Thatmakes sense when one considers that in the capitalist economy, capital reaped from business
operations is regularly ploughed back into technology development to gain advantages overcompetitors. Technological advances drive up productivity, but more importantly, they also drive
down cost.
Productivity continues to increase until it passes a tipping point where the marginal cost of an extra
unit of good or service approaches zero, which consequently dries up profits, thus depriving
capitalism of its fuel. In other words, capital accumulation, private ownership, and the resultingcompetition – three of the essential pillars of capitalism – are also self-destructive in nature.
Although rapid recent advances in technology accentuate this contradiction within the capitalist
system, economists have long warned of this possibility. Oskar R. Lange, a Polish economist,
pondered in his 1937 essay, “[whether] the institutions of private property of the means ofproduction and of private enterprise will continue indefinitely to foster economic progress, orwhether, at a certain stage of technical development, they [will] turn, from being promoters,into becoming shackles of further advance.” (Lange, 1937:127).
Post-Capitalism 1: Niche Capitalism and Threat of Monopoly
It is no longer a question of whether, but rather when the demise of capitalism will happen. And
there is the bigger, looming question of what the economy and society will look like in postcapitalism. We have yet to find a definite answer. Nevertheless, a consensus among analysts isstarting to emerge.
First, it is highly unlikely that capitalism will die out completely. Instead, it will be confined tosome niche segments of the economy. Again, using the Big Mac example as a framework to makethe point, while the marginal cost of delivering a Big Mac to customers will be soon be plummetingto zero, the fixed cost (e.g., equipment) won’t.
Practically, that means business activities will shrink and be centered, for instance, arounddeveloping new types of autonomous vehicles and writing new algorithms for them to work. More
broadly, in the economy of the next era, it is likely that wealth will be measured in terms ofintellectual resources (ideas and concepts) instead of financial resources or capital assets.
Measuring such an economy using conventional methods will result in an inaccurate picture of theprevailing economic conditions. For example, it is completely plausible that GDP will decrease in
the next decades but that the living standard will not. Some scholars go as far as to suggest that thedeclining rate of growth of global GDP following the 2008 global financial crisis is, to some extent,
the result of underlying structural change happening in the economy. (Rifkin, 2014:20).
3

Nevertheless, there is one critical issue: given that normal business operations will no longer
generate profit (with cost being equal to price, approaching zero), how would a company recoverits upfront investment? What would be the incentives for it to innovate? Unfortunately, academics
and policy makers are yet to find the answer to these questions. Currently, the only viable option
seems to be granting monopoly rights to the inventor company, as put by British author Paul Mason,
who predicted that, “with info-capitalism, a monopoly is not just some clever tactic to maximize
profit. It is the only way an industry can run.” (Mason, 2016:119).
In that scenario, however, there is an inherent concentration of economic power in the hands of themonopolists. And the degree to which power is concentrated would be unprecedented, given that:1) everything except intellectual resources will become worthless, and 2) monopolistic firms andindividuals will hold exclusive rights to the new wealth, and therefore effectively granting
themselves absolute power.
Post Capitalism 2: Emergence of “Social/Collaborative Commons”
Another consensus which has begun to consolidate as an alternative to capitalism is the emergenceof the “Social/Collaborative Common”. The basic premise here is that the advent of autonomousmachines will soon liberate humans from economic constraints, so that they can devote their energy
to social activities and the search of life’s purpose.
Proponents of this view often base their argument on that of the great economist John Maynard
Keynes, who conceived of the possibility of absolute economic needs being fulfilled by stating, “apoint may soon be reached, …, when these [economic] needs are satisfied in the sense that we
prefer to devote our further energies to non-economic purposes.” (Keynes, 1931:365).
Practically speaking, it is highly probable that humans will not be working eight-hour days andfive-day weeks in the next century but will be engaged in multiple forms of social activities, often
organized by various social institutions, from local neighborhood associations, social circles andsports clubs, to foundations and charities. The output of social activities will be social capitalinstead of goods and service. Commons as a way of organizing economic life is distinct from both
capitalism and socialism in that there is no single centralized governing institution (such as themarket in capitalism and government in socialism). Each individual or organization acts as a free
agent driven by common values and interests. (Rifkin, 2014:16-8).
To illustrate this point, capitalism may be thought of as a system of countless engines (companies),
each independently containing a fixed number of gears (workers) and lubricated by capital, whilesocial commons is a system with a single giant engine and countless gears (individuals/socialorganizations) all working in tandem and lubricated by social capital.

4Social commons is not a new concept; it dates back to pre-feudal society. Since social commonsdeveloped alongside human civilization, they can be found in virtually every traditional ruralsociety. The Iriai system of managing common resources – lands, forests, coastal seas – found inrural Japan exemplifies the notion of social commons. By setting and enforcing a set of rules, localcommunities were able to build a sustainable livelihood.
Today, signs of the increasing prevalence of social commons are emerging. The amount ofinformation and social products generated in peer-based collaborative commons is ever expanding.
For instance, Linux and Wikipedia have both been developed by self-organizing commoninstitutions. The fact that contributors do not receive monetary compensation signifies the declining
importance of pecuniary value and probably, the growing prevalence of social capital.
Meanwhile, a study by The Brookings Institution concludes that the set of values Millennials holdhas a more social orientation than that of previous generations, stating that “Millennials …
demonstrate a greater desire to advance the welfare of the group and are less concerned withindividual success.” (Winograd and Hais, 2014:2).
In the following decades, the emergence of social commons is likely to accelerate with the spreadof newer technologies. Klaus Schwab, in his book The Fourth Industrial Revolution, argues thatthe impact of innovation will likely result from a single force: empowerment (Schwab, 2017:28).
Network-connected devices, 3D printers, access to low cost technological infrastructure via cloudcomputing, for instance, will enable millions of people across the globe to collaborate in the future
economy governed by social commons. Those technology platforms will enable an individual tobecome both consumer and producer simultaneously. The increasing usage of the word ‘prosumers’is evidence of social commons starting to gain hold in our economic life.
Future Employment
A study by McKinsey and Company suggests that the sectors in which employment will be least
affected by the wave of automation are those that involve the ‘application of human expertise’, i.e.,tasks of making, planning and creating, as well as sectors that involve ‘managing others’. Only
18% and 9% of those sectors, respectively, are likely to be automated. (Chui et al., 2016).
The report seems to support both the scenarios of “Niche Capitalism” and “Social/CollaborativeCommons” outlined above. In a world of shrinking capitalism, the authors hold that sectors
involving the generation of intellectual wealth will continue to exist. In a sense, this corresponds
to the sectors that involve the ‘application of human expertise’. Meanwhile, the importance ofsocial skills will be increasing along with the emergence of social commons. This corresponds tothe sectors that involve ‘managing others’, the sector last to be affected by automation.

5

Conclusion and Future Outlook
Advances in technology are driving our society and economy towards zero marginal cost andhyper-productivity. It is almost certain that at some point, sweeping changes will take place andaffect all facets of society, including the foundation of our current economic life.
What is less certain, though, is what society and economy in post-capitalism would look like. In
this essay, my purpose was to review existing literature and try and explore two major assumptions:shrinking capitalism and the threat of monopoly that comes with it, as well as the rise ofsocial/collaborative commons.
In any case, the implications for both economy and society will be profound and far-reaching.
Academia and policy makers will need to address these issues before any darker sides oftechnology change encroach on us.

References.
1. Kubota Global Newsroom. (2017, January 25). First display of autonomous farm machinery— tractor, rice transplanter, and combine harvester. Retrieved fromhttps://www.kubota.com/news/2017/20170125.html
2. Chen, T. (2016, July 24). In China, a Robot’s Place Is in the Kitchen. The Wall StreetJournal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-china-a-robots-place-is-in-thekitchen-1469393604
3. Rifkin, J. (2014). The Zero Marginal Cost Society. New York, N.Y.: Palgrave Macmillan
4. Lange, O. (1937). On the Economic Theory of Socialism: Part Two. The Review ofEconomic Studies, 4(2), 123-142. Retrieved fromhttp://www.jstor.org.kras1.lib.keio.ac.jp/stable/2967609
5. Mason, P. (2015). Postcapitalism: A Guide to Our Future. New York, N.Y.: Farrar Straus &Giroux
6. Keynes, J. (1931). Essays in Persuasion, Project Gutenberg eBook, 2011, p.358–74.
Retrieved from http://www.gutenberg.ca/ebooks/keynes-essaysinpersuasion/keynesessaysinpersuasion-00-h.html#Economic_Possibilities
7. Winograd, M. and Hais, M. (May 2014). How Millennials Could Upend Wall Street andCorporate America. The Brookings Institution. Retrieved fromhttps://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/Brookings_Winogradfinal.pdf
8. Schwab, K. (2017). The Fourth Industrial Revolution. UK: Penguin Books Limited
9. Chui, et al. (2016). Where machines could replace humans—and where they can’t (yet).
McKinsey Quarterly. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/digitalmckinsey/our-insights/where-machines-could-replace-humans-and-where-they-cant-yet
6