If you look at all of those little 1 hour strips on my graph, John, I think you will see they are all those same kinds of things that you refer to as shadow work. Almost all of them can be monetized...I can hire someone to do my shopping and then it becomes a part of the economy rather than shadow work. I can hire someone to teach me and monetize learning. etc. Feminist economics has focused for a long time on how all of the work that is done in the home (mostly by women) is not measured in economics and counts for nothing. Green or Eco-economics has held that in making its assumptions, neo-classical economics has neglected looking beyond its limited view to the effects that economic activity have on the environment both in terms of the impact of negative externalities and sustainability.

Man (a limited being) has taken a limited biosphere and attempted to devise a system for using the biosphere to provide for the fulfillment of the unlimited wants of mankind. With all of the assumptions, we have lost sight of the limits and in doing so, created an unsustainable monster that has little concern for the real needs of human beings. Family and personal/community relationships are not considered factors in economics beyond perhaps a limited view that education of man provides a better human resource than ignoring it.

I have turned even more skeptical than I was before (and there are people who will tell you that they can't imagine how I could get more skeptical!). People talk CSR...corporate social responsibility...and I think of PR and cover-up. (I should hold a contest for an alternative meaning for CSR that represents how I feel...I will have to work on it.)

There was/is an ugly attitude that parents could throw money at their family responsibilities and things would be OK. I didn't believe that and I don't believe most CSR spiels either and mainly for the same reasons. Responsibility is deeper than money. Family/corporate responsibility requires an total "gut" commitment to doing things right. Not spending time with your child and turning around and buying him some new toy doesn't deal with the real problem. Setting aside a portion of your "mega"-profits to build a park somehow seems dishonest while you are spewing contaminants into the biosphere.

There is a woman at an International Business School in England who is Buddhist and has brought a Buddhist view of communication and human resources to the field of HR. I don't fully understand what she is doing but it seems more real than business as usual. She looks at people as people with histories and life goals and responsibilities and tries to work with the people so that the work environment considers those facets. It seems to fit under mindfulness.

Good Corporate Social Responsibility, it seems to me, needs to look at the corporation, the society and and at the root re-evaluate how the two institutions work together to achieve the common good of societal well-being. It will require mindfulness.