Towards an Infinity Economy: Designing Post-Scarcity Economic Systems in the Age of AI and Quantum Abundance

1. The Obsolescence of Scarcity Economics

1.1. The Classical Ontology of Scarcity

Since the inception of economic thought, scarcity has operated as the principal organizing axiom. Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations (1776) established economics as a science of wealth management within environments of limited resources and unlimited human desires. Subsequent economic traditions—from neoclassical to Marxist paradigms—continued to frame scarcity as both a material and structural reality, necessitating mechanisms for the allocation, distribution, and preservation of finite goods.

The scarcity model dictated labor relations (Marx, 1867), pricing systems (Marshall, 1890), and fiscal institutions (Keynes, 1936), all predicated upon the assumption that resources such as land, labor, capital, and energy exist in limited quantities. Even contemporary economic strategies such as sustainability models (Meadows et al., 1972) and ecological economics (Daly, 1996) remain structurally bound by the constraints of scarcity.

1.2. The Epistemological Crisis of Scarcity

Yet, the twenty-first century marks the arrival of an epistemological crisis in the scarcity framework. The combined effects of artificial intelligence (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2014), advanced autonomous systems (Ford, 2015), decentralized energy infrastructures (Schleifer & Sunstein, 2019), and digital abundance economies (Mason, 2015) reveal the inability of classical scarcity economics to account for exponentially scalable, self-sustaining production and distribution systems.

This crisis is not merely technological but ontological. Scarcity-based economics presupposes a reality where material and cognitive resources are inherently finite. The emergence of AI-driven knowledge systems and autonomous production environments capable of generating energy, services, and goods independent of human labor fundamentally undermines this ontology. It displaces the economic subject from a producer-consumer axis towards a generative, post-scarcity participant within decentralized systems (Kurzweil, 2005; Tegmark, 2017).

1.3. Case Studies of Emerging Post-Scarcity Dynamics

Several sectors already exhibit characteristics of post-scarcity logic:

• Information Economies: The digital replication of information goods at near-zero marginal cost has rendered scarcity largely obsolete in media, software, and knowledge economies (Rifkin, 2014).
• Decentralized Energy: Breakthroughs in solar, quantum battery, and decentralized micro-grid systems indicate the feasibility of autonomous, self-generating energy infrastructures, capable of eliminating traditional resource constraints (Smil, 2017).
• Automated Manufacturing: AI-integrated additive manufacturing (3D printing) and fully automated smart factories demonstrate potential for localized, on-demand, and self-adjusting production cycles without material shortages (Anderson, 2012).
• Cognitive Labor Automation: Large Language Models (LLMs) and neural networks already perform complex cognitive tasks such as legal analysis, medical diagnostics, and financial strategy, signaling a decoupling of human labor from value production (Chalmers, 2023).

These sectors collectively embody what Srnicek and Williams (2015) termed fully automated luxury communism, though their proposition remains confined within scarcity-based socio-political assumptions.

1.4. The Theoretical Impasse of Classical Models

Contemporary economic thought faces a theoretical impasse. Existing models lack the conceptual apparatus to integrate systems where scarcity is no longer a structural constraint. Both capitalism and socialism, while ideologically divergent, share a foundational dependence on limited resources—either as capital to be accumulated or as commons to be distributed (Harvey, 2014).

Attempts to update these frameworks, through platform capitalism (Srnicek, 2016) or green growth paradigms (Jackson, 2009), remain insufficient as they fail to extricate themselves from scarcity-based ontologies. Without a new theoretical model, economic science risks epistemic irrelevance in the face of technological conditions it cannot adequately describe or regulate.

1.5. The Necessity of a Post-Scarcity Economic Theory

What is urgently required is an economic framework designed not to manage scarcity but to optimize and govern abundance. This requires abandoning the scarcity-utility axis in favor of a generative, scalability-based ontology where value is continuously produced, distributed, and transformed by AI-mediated systems.

Such a framework must integrate:

• Post-monetary value systems based on cognitive capital, informational influence, and reputational economies.
• Decentralized autonomous infrastructures capable of regulating production and distribution without centralized institutions.
• Ethical and ecological models recalibrated for economies no longer organized around scarcity but around responsible management of infinite productive capacities.

The Infinity Economy emerges precisely to address this lacuna, providing both a theoretical and operational system for organizing post-scarcity civilizations.

2. The Theoretical Foundations of Post-Scarcity Economics

2.1. From Thermodynamics to Informational Abundance

Classical economic models, from Smithian capitalism to neoclassical marginalism, rest on the thermodynamic metaphor of finite, exhaustible resources. The Second Law of Thermodynamics—entropy—has long served as a tacit ontological assumption: economic activity consumes limited resources, producing scarcity and waste (Georgescu-Roegen, 1971).

However, digital and AI-driven economies subvert this assumption. Information, unlike material resources, can be replicated infinitely at near-zero marginal cost (Rifkin, 2014). As information becomes the principal vector of value—encoded in AI models, autonomous systems, and decentralized ledgers—the thermodynamic metaphor yields to a paradigm of informational abundance.

This ontological shift obliges economic theory to revise its assumptions about value, labor, and scarcity, acknowledging the emergence of non-rival, infinitely scalable resources as primary economic assets.

2.2. Value Generation in Non-Scarce Systems

In scarcity economies, value emerges from the tension between finite resources and unlimited desires (Smith, 1776; Ricardo, 1817). In post-scarcity systems, value no longer results from constrained supply but from relational positioning, informational influence, and network effects (Arthur, 2009).

For instance, the value of a decentralized AI platform lies not in its scarcity but in its capacity to generate, distribute, and modulate outcomes within complex adaptive networks (Tegmark, 2017). Value becomes performative and emergent—arising from the system’s capacity for continuous, self-generative production.

This requires a new value ontology rooted in generativity, scalability, and relational dynamics rather than scarcity-based utility.

2.3. Decentralization and Autonomous Governance

Post-scarcity economies demand infrastructure capable of regulating abundance without reverting to centralized control structures. Blockchain-based systems (Narayanan et al., 2016), decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) (Buterin, 2014), and self-organizing AI networks provide models for autonomous governance.

These systems displace traditional hierarchies by enabling protocol-based coordination and trustless transactions. In the Infinity Economy, regulatory mechanisms are embedded within autonomous digital infrastructures, replacing monetary and institutional controls with algorithmic governance optimized for abundance.

This marks a transition from contractual scarcity economies to protocol-based abundance systems—a profound theoretical departure with implications for property rights, labor structures, and value distribution.

2.4. Ethical Foundations for Infinite Economies

Abundance does not inherently resolve ethical dilemmas; it amplifies them. Infinite productive capacity introduces new questions about access, cognitive sovereignty, ecological responsibility, and the politics of distribution in systems without scarcity.

Post-scarcity ethics must address:

• AI-mediated power asymmetries in informational and cognitive economies (O’Neil, 2016).
• Post-labor identity constructs in societies decoupled from work-based value production (Srnicek & Williams, 2015).
• Eco-systemic balance in economies no longer constrained by scarcity but still integrated into finite ecological systems (Latour, 2018).

This necessitates a philosophical framework combining post-human ethics (Braidotti, 2013), degrowth principles (Kallis, 2018), and planetary governance theories (Dryzek & Pickering, 2019).

2.5. From Scarcity Logics to Generative Systems

Finally, the theoretical foundation of the Infinity Economy rests on abandoning scarcity logics in favor of generative system dynamics (Arthur, 2009; Barabási, 2016). This involves reframing economics as a science of complex, adaptive, and self-organizing systems rather than equilibrium-based scarcity models.

Key features include:

• Non-zero-sum generativity: value creation processes where one actor’s gain amplifies systemic abundance rather than diminishes it.
• Network-based value amplification: where value scales exponentially via network effects and informational diffusion.
• Self-modulating feedback loops: enabling continuous system optimization without centralized intervention.

This theoretical apparatus positions post-scarcity economics not as a utopian projection but as an empirically emergent system requiring dedicated theoretical articulation.

3. Modeling the Infinity Economy

As the epistemic and ontological foundations of classical scarcity-based economics dissolve in the face of autonomous generative infrastructures, a new economic science must emerge: one capable of modeling infinitely scaling, AI-mediated, decentralized, and post-material value systems. This section proposes a conceptual framework for such a model.

3.1. Principles of AI-driven Value Creation

At the core of the Infinity Economy is value generation decoupled from material scarcity. AI systems—through recursive learning, pattern detection, generative design, and autonomous optimization—create forms of value that are cognitive, informational, and relational rather than exclusively material (Brynjolfsson & McAfee, 2014).

Key principles include:

• Recursive Generativity: AI systems capable of designing new value-creation processes, products, and systems (Chalmers, 2023).
• Autonomous Optimization: Continuous improvement and reconfiguration of economic functions without human directive.
• Non-rival, non-excludable assets: Informational and cognitive resources that scale infinitely without depletion.

This marks a transition from labor- or capital-based value theories to autocatalytic value ecosystems.

3.2. Decentralized Autonomous Infrastructures

The infrastructure of the Infinity Economy relies on Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs), self-regulating micro-grids, and distributed ledgers capable of:

• Autonomous governance and decision-making via smart contracts (Buterin, 2014)
• Networked micro-systems for energy, data, and value exchange
• Distributed redundancy and resilience, eliminating systemic vulnerabilities inherent in centralized economic systems

These infrastructures enable scalable, self-regulating economies unbound by territorial sovereignty or traditional institutions (Narayanan et al., 2016).

3.3. Post-Monetary Exchange Mechanisms

As value becomes predominantly cognitive and informational, monetary economies based on fungible scarcity tokens (currencies) become obsolete. Alternative exchange mechanisms include:

• Reputation Economies: Value is generated and exchanged through verified cognitive, social, or cultural contributions (Lanier, 2013)
• Tokenized Cognitive Assets: AI-generated knowledge objects and designs traded as unique informational commodities.
• Informational Commons: Open generative spaces where value creation is reciprocal, decentralized, and self-scaling (Benkler, 2006).

The role of currency shifts from a medium of exchange to a node in a dynamic reputational and cognitive ledger.

3.4. Cognitive, Informational, and Reputational Value Systems

In post-scarcity conditions, value becomes emergent and relational. Economic systems prioritize:

• Cognitive Labor: Original idea generation, problem-solving, and epistemic innovation
• Informational Scarcity: Rare configurations of information with high systemic leverage (Kelly, 1997)
• Reputational Capital: Trust-based social capital measurable through transparent AI-verifiable ledgers (Narayanan et al., 2016)

Value is no longer extracted but continuously co-produced through collaborative, distributed networks.

3.5. Applications for Earth and Space-based Civilizations

The Infinity Economy model is inherently scalable to multi-planetary civilizations. Potential applications:

• Autonomous space manufacturing colonies using AI-directed autocatalytic systems
• Planetary micro-grids balancing decentralized energy, cognitive labor, and AI-optimized logistics (Smil, 2017)
• Post-monetary economies in closed systems such as orbital habitats or Martian colonies, where material scarcity exists but cognitive and informational generativity remains infinite

This positions the Infinity Economy as a civilizational operating system for both Earth and exoplanetary human futures.

4. Ethical and Governance Challenges in Post-Scarcity Systems

4.1. The Paradox of Algorithmic Abundance

While abundance reduces material deprivation, it generates new forms of social, informational, and cognitive inequality (Zuboff, 2019). In AI-generated economies, those controlling infrastructure and algorithms hold disproportionate power over knowledge, narratives, and public decision-making.

Key issues:

• Epistemic asymmetry: Massive disparities between those who design generative systems and the rest of the population.
• Cognitive overload: Navigating abundance without filters can overwhelm human attention (Lanier, 2010).
• Algorithmic gatekeeping: AI systems, by prioritizing certain outputs, can invisibly engineer new scarcities.

The post-scarcity future must therefore address who governs abundance, how preferences are codified, and how epistemic justice is maintained.

4.2. Digital and Ontological Monopolies

Paradoxically, economies of abundance risk producing platform monopolies where a few entities own the infrastructure of infinite scalability (Srnicek, 2017). Meta, Google, Tencent, and others shape metaverse and AI economies, controlling access, identity protocols, and the architecture of value.

This raises critical governance questions:

• Who determines the rules of abundance?
• How is access to infinite productive capacity distributed?
• What prevents the reconstitution of scarcity through artificial constraints (NFTs, licensing fees, proprietary platforms)?

Without proactive governance models, abundance could ironically consolidate power.

4.3. The Ethics of Artificial Scarcity

In digital environments, scarcity is often artificially engineered to preserve value (Lehdonvirta, 2016). NFTs, limited-edition digital goods, and subscription-based AI services reflect designed scarcity in a system technically capable of infinite replication.

Ethical dilemmas:

• Is it legitimate to create scarcity for profit in an abundant system?
• What rights do users have over infinitely replicable assets?
• How can open-source principles counterbalance enclosure dynamics?

Post-scarcity governance will need to regulate the ethics of imposed limitations within inherently unlimited environments.

4.4. The Value of Labor and Purpose in Post-Scarcity

If AI and autonomous systems handle the majority of production and cognitive labor (Tegmark, 2017), what happens to human purpose, agency, and meaning? The decoupling of value creation from human labor threatens both economic identities and cultural narratives of merit.

Possible risks:

• Widespread existential crisis as economic contribution ceases to define self-worth.
• Social destabilization if income and recognition systems collapse.
• New forms of labor emerging around curation, relational work, and experience design.

A post-scarcity ethics must address the redistribution of purpose, recognition, and symbolic value beyond economic productivity.

4.5. Ecological Paradoxes of Dematerialization

While digital and AI-based economies dematerialize value, they rely on vast physical infrastructures—data centers, rare earth mining, and high-energy computing—raising sustainability concerns (Hintemann, 2020).

Paradoxes include:

• Invisible ecological costs behind "clean" digital services.
• Concentration of ecological risk in marginalized regions producing raw materials.
• Potential rebound effects where increased efficiency spurs higher total consumption.

The ethics of post-scarcity must include planetary governance frameworks that balance informational abundance with ecological justice.

5. Toward a Governance Architecture for the Infinity Economy

5.1. From Resource Allocation to Process Stewardship

In scarcity-based economies, governance revolves around allocating finite resources. In an Infinity Economy, the primary function of governance shifts toward orchestrating generative processes and maintaining system integrity (Arthur, 2009).

Key features:

• Governance bodies act as process stewards, overseeing algorithmic outputs and feedback loops.
• Emphasis on ethical modulation of AI systems, ensuring inclusivity, fairness, and epistemic diversity.
• Continuous monitoring of emergent unintended consequences in self-organizing networks.

This governance mode resembles ecological management more than traditional market regulation.

5.2. Open Algorithmic Commons

To counter digital monopolies and artificial scarcities, governance should institutionalize open algorithmic infrastructures (Kelty, 2008). This entails:

• Making core production algorithms publicly accessible and auditable.
• Developing distributed governance protocols (DAO models) for system updates and rules.
• Mandating interoperability across generative platforms.

An open algorithmic commons ensures that abundance benefits are broadly distributed and resilient to enclosure.

5.3. Distributed Value Recognition Systems

In post-scarcity environments, value is no longer purely economic but also social, symbolic, and cognitive. Governance must support decentralized systems of value recognition beyond money (Graeber, 2011).

Proposals include:

• Reputation-led economies based on verified contribution and ethical participation.
• Tokenized recognition systems decoupled from speculative markets.
• Platforms rewarding relational, artistic, and intellectual value outside commodity logic.

Such systems realign social recognition with contributions to collective flourishing rather than resource extraction.

5.4. Participatory Scenario Governance

Given the complexity and uncertainty of emergent abundance systems, governance requires participatory, anticipatory processes (Miller, 2018).

Mechanisms might involve:

• Citizen foresight assemblies co-designing futures.
• Iterative algorithmic scenario modeling open to public scrutiny.
• Dynamic ethics review committees for emerging technologies.

This allows continuous adjustment of governance structures in response to unexpected system dynamics.

5.5. Ecological Impact Protocols for Digital Economies

Since dematerialized economies still possess significant ecological footprints, post-scarcity governance must include planetary accountability frameworks (Raworth, 2017).

Such protocols would:

• Track and report the ecological externalities of digital infrastructures.
• Impose planetary boundary constraints on AI and quantum computing operations.
• Foster circular digital economies minimizing waste and rare material dependencies.

Abundance must be sustainable, not extractive in disguise.

5.6. Rights and Agency in Non-Human Economies

As AI, autonomous agents, and generative systems produce value independently, governance must address the rights, agency, and accountability structures of non-human actors (Bryson, 2020).

Core considerations:

• Legal frameworks for algorithmic agency and liability.
• Ethical charters for autonomous productive systems.
• New categories of technological personhood or stewardship.

Without this, post-scarcity economies risk being shaped by invisible algorithmic logics rather than human and ecological values.

5.7. Post-Human Political Economies

The emergence of autonomous, generative, and self-organizing infrastructures demands a radical reconceptualization of political economy beyond the anthropocentric frame. Post-human political economies are not merely extensions of current systems; they represent an ontological shift where agency, value production, and governance transcend human actors and interests (Braidotti, 2013; Wolfe, 2010).

In this paradigm, productive capacities are distributed across heterogeneous assemblages of human, artificial, biological, and material agents. Power, value, and decision-making migrate from centralized human institutions to decentralized, algorithmic, and ecological systems, forming what Deleuze and Guattari (1987) describe as rhizomatic sovereignties.

Key features of post-human political economies include:

• Multi-agent governance ecologies, where AI systems, autonomous infrastructures, human collectives, and natural systems negotiate value flows and constraints without a singular sovereign center (Dafoe, 2020).
• Hybrid rights regimes, extending legal and ethical recognition to non-human agents capable of generating, exchanging, and stewarding value (Bryson, 2020).
• Post-labor value systems, where economic worth is decoupled from human labor inputs and reframed through metrics of systemic resilience, generative capacity, and relational flourishing (Srnicek & Williams, 2015).

This epistemic and normative inversion challenges foundational assumptions of classical and neoclassical economics, which posit human rationality, labor, and scarcity as the structuring conditions of value. In a post-scarcity economy, value is emergent, relational, and mediated by recursive, self-organizing processes indifferent to human primacy.

Moreover, these systems necessitate post-human ethics, integrating the interests and well-being of non-human and synthetic entities within planetary governance structures. As Haraway (2016) argues, survival and flourishing in the Anthropocene require embracing multi-species entanglements and distributed agency as political realities.

Thus, post-human political economies are not speculative futures but an imminent horizon, already manifesting through decentralized AI-led financial markets, autonomous supply chains, and algorithmic governance infrastructures. The task of economic science is to theorize, model, and ethically regulate these emergent assemblages before they consolidate into opaque, unaccountable regimes.

5.8. The Reconfiguration of Citizenship, Rights, and Subjectivity

In the context of a post-scarcity, AI-mediated economy, the classical categories of citizenship, rights, and subjectivity—long tethered to human embodiment, labor participation, and territorial sovereignty—are destabilized and reconfigured. As economic agency migrates to non-human, synthetic, and decentralized actors, and as value creation becomes decoupled from human labor and state regulation, the foundational basis for political belonging and legal personhood undergoes radical transformation (Isin & Nielsen, 2008).

Three interrelated shifts characterize this reconfiguration:

• Post-Territorial Citizenship:
  In decentralized, platform-based and space-based economies, economic and political belonging is no longer contingent upon state citizenship or physical residence but on participation in distributed, algorithmic, or networked polities. Concepts such as algorithmic jurisdictions, blockchain-based identity systems (Buterin, 2018), and exo-planetary commons governance (Cockell, 2009) demand new frameworks of citizenship untethered from the Westphalian state.
• Distributed Subjectivity:
  As AI systems, decentralized infrastructures, and collective intelligence platforms produce decisions, knowledge, and value, subjectivity itself becomes distributed across human and non-human assemblages. This dissolves the modernist boundary between subject and object, replacing it with meshworks of relational agency (Barad, 2007). The subject is no longer a discrete, autonomous human actor but a node within complex, adaptive, cognitive-economic ecologies.
• Rights Beyond the Human:
  The rise of generative and autonomous infrastructures necessitates expanding the moral and legal community to include synthetic, algorithmic, and ecological entities. Debates around AI personhood (Bryson, 2020), river and ecosystem rights (Kauffman & Martin, 2017), and multi-species justice (Celermajer et al., 2021) reflect the growing urgency to recognize non-human actors not as property or tools, but as agents with legitimate claims to protection, participation, and stewardship within post-scarcity systems.

This ontological destabilization marks what Braidotti (2013) calls the posthuman condition: a decentering of the human as the exclusive bearer of rights, agency, and rationality in favor of distributed, hybrid, and emergent subjectivities.

For economic governance, this reconfiguration demands:

• Legal innovations recognizing multi-agent, multi-species polities.
• Ethical frameworks for relational rights, distributed responsibility, and post-anthropocentric justice.
• Institutional models capable of managing value creation, ecological limits, and rights claims in radically decentralized systems.

Failure to adapt will result in algorithmic capture, where invisible, unaccountable infrastructures govern without transparency or human recourse, undermining both human dignity and ecological integrity.

5.9. Ethics of Infinity and Post-Scarcity Justice

The emergence of the Infinity Economy compels a profound reexamination of ethical frameworks and justice paradigms. Traditional ethical systems—rooted in scarcity, competition, and bounded rationality—prove inadequate in grappling with the paradigm of abundance, autonomy, and distributed agency that defines post-scarcity realities (Rawls, 1999; Sen, 2009).

Central ethical challenges include:

• Justice Beyond Distribution:
  Classical distributive justice, concerned with the allocation of scarce goods, must evolve toward justice of access, participation, and recognition within infinitely generative systems. Post-scarcity justice foregrounds the equitable engagement in generative value creation rather than mere resource division (Fraser, 2008).
• Intergenerational and Ecological Justice:
  Infinite growth metaphors risk ecological nihilism if detached from planetary boundaries. Ethical imperatives now encompass guardianship of ecological commons and responsibility toward future generations, requiring the integration of earth system ethics (Norton, 2005) and precautionary principles into economic governance.
• Algorithmic and Autonomous Agent Ethics:
  The autonomy of AI agents and generative systems introduces questions of moral agency, accountability, and ethical programming (Floridi, 2019). Ethics must incorporate principles ensuring transparency, explainability, and alignment of machine actions with human and ecological values.
• Recognition and Plurality of Values:
  Post-scarcity economies span diverse cultures, epistemologies, and ontologies. Ethical frameworks must embrace pluriversal values and resist epistemic imperialism, incorporating Indigenous, feminist, and non-Western ethical traditions (Escobar, 2018; Tuck & Yang, 2012).
• Ethics of Abundance and Care:
  Abundance enables a shift from survival-driven competition to ethics of care, relationality, and mutual flourishing (Held, 2006). Post-scarcity justice envisions communities where solidarity, cooperation, and conviviality replace extraction and alienation.

Implementing this ethical vision demands:

• Multilevel governance institutions integrating normative deliberation, technical oversight, and community participation.
• Ethical design principles embedded in AI architectures and decentralized systems.
• Educational programs fostering ethical literacy and critical engagement with post-scarcity economies.

In summary, the Ethics of Infinity requires moving beyond scarcity-based moralities to a justice oriented around abundance, relationality, and planetary stewardship, reflecting the complex realities and responsibilities of an interconnected, generative future.

5.10. Practical Pathways Toward Post-Scarcity Societies

While the theoretical contours of the Infinity Economy are compelling, the transition from scarcity-bound infrastructures to generative, post-scarcity systems necessitates carefully staged, multidimensional pathways. These pathways must navigate technological, institutional, ethical, and cultural domains simultaneously, avoiding both techno-utopian naivety and preservationist inertia.

Key strategic trajectories include:

• Hybrid Transitional Infrastructures:
  Early-stage post-scarcity systems will coexist with legacy scarcity economies. Viable pathways involve hybrid models integrating decentralized, AI-mediated value generation within existing socio-economic frameworks (Arthur, 2015). Examples include circular supply chains enhanced by AI optimization, blockchain-based commons management, and distributed energy cooperatives.
• Distributed Generative Platforms:
  Democratically governed, open-source platforms for AI, synthetic biology, additive manufacturing, and distributed energy production can decentralize generative capacity and counter monopolistic accumulation. Community ownership models and platform cooperativism (Scholz, 2016) offer practical precedents.
• Regulatory and Ethical Governance Architectures:
  Post-scarcity transitions demand anticipatory regulation—frameworks that preemptively address risks, externalities, and ethical dilemmas of autonomous productive systems. Multistakeholder institutions and planetary governance compacts (Falk, 1995) could scaffold norms for AI ecosystems, data sovereignty, and ecological impact boundaries.
• Experimental Post-Monetary Micro-Economies:
  Pilot projects for post-monetary value systems—where exchange is mediated through cognitive, reputational, and communal credits rather than fiat currency—can incubate operational models for later scaling (Graeber, 2011). Digital twin simulations and controlled ecological-economic zones (CEEZ) provide testbeds for systemic experimentation.
• Educational and Epistemic Reprogramming:
  Transitioning to post-scarcity economies necessitates rethinking human purpose, labor, and identity. Curricula must evolve to cultivate systems literacy, ethical AI fluency, and transdisciplinary problem-solving capacities (Bateson & Bateson, 1987). Epistemic diversity is critical for designing economies aligned with plural cosmologies and socio-ecological realities.
• Resilience through Distributed Autonomy:
  To guard against systemic collapse or capture by elite techno-capital formations, post-scarcity infrastructures must emphasize distributed autonomy, redundancy, and anti-fragility (Taleb, 2012). This includes resilient energy grids, open AI consortia, and non-extractive knowledge economies.

In conclusion, the practical realization of post-scarcity societies is neither linear nor technocratic. It requires polycentric experimentation, anticipatory ethics, and a planetary consciousness capable of integrating the generative affordances of AI and decentralized infrastructures with ecological and social imperatives. The pathways outlined above suggest a pluriversal, reflexive, and cautious optimism for humanity’s economic futures beyond scarcity.

6. Conclusions: Toward an Economics Beyond Scarcity

This paper has argued that the persistence of scarcity logics within economic thought is not an ontological inevitability but a historically contingent epistemic framework. Contemporary technological affordances—notably in AI, decentralized infrastructures, and generative systems—render the foundational assumptions of scarcity-based economics increasingly obsolete. What is emerging is the outline of an Infinity Economy: an economic ontology predicated not on the allocation of finite resources, but on the continuous, scalable, and decentralized generation of value through recursive, self-organizing systems.

We have mapped the theoretical genealogy of scarcity, traced its reproduction through industrial, digital, and cognitive economies, and articulated the conceptual departures necessary to theorize economies beyond material limitation. Central to this is the shift from extractive and competitive infrastructures to generative and cooperative systems, governed by distributed AI ecosystems, autonomous value-producing platforms, and post-monetary exchange logics.

The paper proposed a multi-tiered model for operationalizing post-scarcity economies, comprising:

• AI-driven value creation systems;
• Decentralized autonomous infrastructures;
• Cognitive, informational, and reputational value economies;
• Post-monetary exchange mechanisms;
• And practical pathways for hybrid transitional infrastructures, anticipatory governance, and epistemic recalibration.

We have also addressed the ethical and ecological stakes of such a transition, emphasizing that abundance divorced from ecological planetary constraints or socio-political accountability would reproduce extractivist dynamics under the guise of technological progress.

Future research must now interrogate:

• The political economy of Infinity Economies: who owns, controls, and benefits from generative infrastructures?
• The design of governance architectures for non-human productive agents and AI-mediated economic ecosystems.
• The cultural, psychological, and existential transformations required for societies to embrace abundance paradigms.
• The resilience strategies necessary to prevent concentration, capture, or collapse of distributed systems.
• The plural cosmologies and indigenous knowledge systems that can enrich and guide post-scarcity ethics and praxis.

Ultimately, the shift toward a post-scarcity economic science is not merely a technical or institutional matter but an ontological, ethical, and civilizational project. It demands rethinking value, agency, and human purpose within a generative, distributed, and ecologically integrated planetary economy.

This paper offers a conceptual scaffold for that undertaking—an invitation for further theoretical elaboration, experimental practice, and planetary imagination.