Guest Commentary written by

Amy Lerman

Amy Lerman

Amy E. Lerman is a political science and public policy professor at UC Berkeley and executive director of the UC Berkeley Possibility Lab.

Lindsay Maple

Lindsay Maple

Lindsay Maple is the director of projects and planning and leads the “Abundance Accelerator” at UC Berkeley’s Possibility Lab.

California has a scarcity problem.

In recent decades, theĀ cost of consumer goodsĀ like cars and cell phones has fallen, while the cost of healthy food and childcare has climbed. We’re rich in natural resources, land and people, but when it comes to producing more of the things we need like housing, energy and transportation infrastructure, we’re drastically falling short.

In aĀ 2024 University of California survey, the Possibility Lab found that more than half of the state’s voters agree that it is difficult to access at least some essential goods and services.Ā 

Across the country,Ā a growing conversationĀ is taking shape around how we can build more of what people need to live full, thriving lives. It’s called the ā€œabundanceĀ agenda,ā€ and it argues that the administrative burdens placed on constructing and producing the things we need more of are simply too high.

California’s leaders should embrace theĀ abundanceĀ framework to solve our scarcity problem. But achieving this vision requires more than just focusing on efficiency — it requires investing in people.

We can’t achieveĀ abundanceĀ without the architects, developers, planners and construction workers building our infrastructure. Beyond building, we can’t bring aboutĀ abundanceĀ without the home care workers, pre-K teachers and primary care physicians who sustain our eldercare, childcare and health care systems. If we truly want to realizeĀ abundance, we need policies that make these jobs attractive and achievable: offering better wages, improving working conditions and building career pathways that recognize their vital contributions to a thriving society.Ā 

TheĀ abundanceĀ movement often implicitly — or explicitly — calls outĀ people as part of the problem.Ā Proponents criticize the participation of environmental and labor groups as slowing down progress. If we want to navigate the difficult trade-offs between what’s fast and what’s fair, though, weĀ need new models for engaging. The current systems, where public input often takes the form of prolonged review processes that empower NIMBY, or not-in-my-backyard obstructionism, isĀ not productive.

At the same time, simply overriding community concerns in the name of speed is neither equitable nor politically viable.

Instead, we need mechanisms for inclusive decision-making that foster consensus rather than gridlock. This could mean designing participatory planning processes that bring diverse stakeholders to the table earlier and at the level of city-wide or regional planning, setting clear timelines for input, and usingĀ deliberative and digital toolsĀ to enhance transparency and engagement.

It could also mean developing targeted policies to ensure that new development balances benefits to both future and existing residents, such as affordable housing requirements paired withĀ labor or community benefits agreementsĀ that link growth to local priorities.

For all of its promise, theĀ abundanceĀ movement risks remaining an intellectual exercise unless it embraces a clear, testable set of strategies. UC Berkeley’s Possibility Lab launched anĀ “AbundanceĀ Accelerator”Ā over a year ago to exploreĀ 12 key issue areasĀ whereĀ abundanceĀ policy can make a real impact. The lab is also working withĀ state and local agenciesĀ andĀ community organizationsĀ to design and test new models for community engagement to help reach shared policy goals.Ā 

The transition from conversation to action starts with the people who will implementĀ abundance. Policymakers and practitioners need to prioritize not only regulatory reform but also educational opportunities and workforce pipelines that ensure we have the trained population necessary to deliverĀ abundance.

Philanthropy and impact investors need to focus on funding models that support not just innovation but the human infrastructure required to scale it. And state and local governments must work with communities to establish decision-making processes that move past obstructionist politics and toward meaningful solutions.Ā 

AbundanceĀ is ultimately about human flourishing. That requires reimagining not just how we build, but who builds and who benefits, ensuring that those individuals are supported, trained and empowered.

If we want a future of trueĀ abundance, we must start by investing in the people who will make it possible.