The Abundance Movement

[2025 ended as a year many would just as soon forget, unless the U.S. stock market was your single benchmark. As the backlog of critical needs was building, I followed a series of authors in search of course corrections. One chain of thought that received some traction came to be known as the Abundance Movement. Starting with a book titled Abundance, by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson, I followed how other authors responded to the book, and what history and current events had to say relevant to the debate. The result is a series of eight essays that will be posted to Fifty Year Perspective weekly through January and February. Here the second of eight parts.]

American government’s inability to improve services has prompted a movement to relieve roadblocks to progress.  Abundance is the title of a book published in March 2025 by journalists Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson. The authors contend that many of the needs and deficiencies facing the U.S. today are effects of rules and regulations put in place to solve issues raised in the 1970s. Legislation was enacted to protect the rights of people intent on maintaining the status quo. That legislation launched arduous legal processes that add impossible cost burdens to new development.

Building regulations and zoning ordinances limit where and how new housing can be constructed. Today’s housing shortages are largely attributable to those laws. Similarly, new and expanded road construction must address environmental regulations controlling water runoff, natural habitat and air pollution, OSHA standards to protect worker safety, and costs of displacing people and businesses.

Solar energy and wind farms that could reduce pollution and cut energy costs are fought by established corporate interests in the energy sector, as well as residents demanding protection of their undisturbed natural environment.

Political, economic, and cultural challenges can delay projects for months, years, or decades, and any party perceived of being injured can sue for relief in court. Abundance also finds the U.S. innovation system lacking, citing risk aversion in science financing, high administrative costs on scientific research, and a poor record for converting scientific discoveries into marketable products.

In summary, the authors find the focus on process and regulation constraining progress. Add to that the laws that enable parties believing themselves to be injured to challenge any proposal, either in court or through political activism. Known by the acronym NIMBY, standing for “Not In My Back Yard,” NIMBYism has effectively derailed housing projects considered too dense or too cheap for a neighborhood, or road and traffic changes that alter the neighborhood’s character.

Absent these constraints, the authors suggest that the twenty-first century history of unaffordability and shortage can be relieved with targeted deregulation. More housing can be built with reformed zoning codes. Expanded support for scientific research will lead to better health outcomes and increased productivity. A reevaluation of construction standards could be applied to transportation and energy infrastructure.

Admitting that abundance cannot be achieved quickly, nothing less than institutional renewal must occur. From the local level to the Supreme Court, political opinion must embrace a moral perspective that will motivate action toward a future of abundance. But the Abundance movement has its critics.