Stakeholder Consideration
Investor-centric, primarily benefits shareholders, financial institutions.
Multivocality perspective, including various stakeholders, accounting for broader benefits to future generations, public institutions, and ecosystems.
Terminal Value Assumption
Based on Gordon Growth Model, assumes constant indefinite growth.
Uses real-world decay functions, incorporating variable growth rates and inherent uncertainty.
Conclusion: Uncertain Calculative Practices and the Adjacent Possible
The purpose of this paper is not to suggest that the conventional NPV models have no analytic validity, but rather that they may be enhanced to better reflect the wider opportunities and challenges of investment in the future. To this end, we propose an Outcomes-based NPV model that expands the set of material variables included in the NPV calculations, specifically in terms of dynamic discount rates, pluralistic discounting, and intergenerational equity. In this context, we also bring in the concept of bounded rationality as a decision-useful heuristic reframing of conventional, positivist, decision-making processes as a fully rational process of finding an optimal choice given the information available. Thus, bounded and positivist rationalities could be combined to allow better decision-making in contexts where there is uncertainty with multi-decade forecasting. Specifically, the interplay between bounded rationality (operating under constraints and incremental updates) and unbounded rationality (aspiring for optimization based on full knowledge and foresight) can lead to a more adaptive and realistic framework for long-term financial decision- making. Moreover, this approach recognizes that behavioural inertia - such as the tendency to favour status quo decisions - does not necessarily impede rationality but can provide a stabilizing force when balanced with a capacity to adapt. By blending bounded and unbounded rationality, we can create a decision-making framework that is both flexible and resilient, accommodating uncertainty while making use of consistent principles that guide human behaviour. This is particularly important when addressing challenges that span decades, such as climate change, resource management, and infrastructure investments, where static assumptions often fail to capture the dynamic interplay of risks, opportunities, and evolving values. In terms of the implementation of the model, we fully acknowledge the path dependencies and institutional structures that mitigate against structural changes to existing financial models and the likely resistance to change. Further challenges include, but are not limited to, the subjectivity of allocations on capital contributions for a given investment and their corresponding discount rates. However, the implementation of ONPV is beyond the scope of this paper and will be explored and developed in subsequent work. Therefore, we frame the ONPV model not as a radical challenge to the status quo, but rather as a futurology pathway towards a more holistic, accurate, and equitable model with which to calculate future value. Specifically, we imagine the ONPV model as an adjacent possible pathway that offers an alternative future for calculations of long-term value - as a conceptual heuristic rather than a normative guide or idealised methodology. The term ‘Futurology’ was first coined by a German political scientist, Ossip Flechtheim, in the mid-1940s as a new branch of knowledge that would include the science of probability, specifically focused on peace and conflict studies. He defined it as the ‘study of the future’ (Keßler, M.,
32
Powered by FlippingBook