Zero-sum logic—the belief that one person’s gain must come at another’s expense—undergirds much of scarcity ideology, casting support and resources as a fixed pie to be fiercely divided rather than a shared promise to be expanded.
In British Columbia’s schools and beyond, this fallacy justifies cuts, pits communities against one another and obscures the reality that genuine abundance lies in equitable systems, not zero-sum competition.
What is zero-sum logic
At its core, zero-sum logic assumes that resources are inherently limited, so any expansion of access to one group necessitates deprivation for another. This reasoning may seem intuitive under extreme scarcity, but it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy when adopted as policy. Instead of exploring creative solutions, decision-makers default to austerity measures—binning support programs, capping budgets and treating inclusion as a luxury, not a right.
How stress and crisis amplify zero-sum thinking
Research shows that acute stress—such as the prolonged anxiety induced by the COVID-19 pandemic—impairs our cognitive flexibility, heightening attentional biases toward threats and triggering zero-sum reasoning.
In one study, individuals under pandemic-level stress gravitated toward hoarding behaviours and resisted sharing protective materials, even when mutual access would enhance collective safety. nature.com.
Another found that elevated stress correlates with increased cognitive failures—our mental resources narrow, making us likelier to default to simplistic, competitive narratives rather than collaborative solutions. journals.sagepub.com.
Combined with a scarcity mind-set, where unmet needs consume our attention and tunnel our vision, crises like COVID-19 create fertile ground for zero-sum fallacies to flourish. apa.org.
The myth of scarcity in a resource-rich world
In truth, the material resources and wealth in developed countries far exceed the minimal thresholds required for dignified lives. High-income nations consume resources at rates many times greater than lower-income ones: rich countries use on average six times more resources per person than the rest of the world, generating disproportionate environmental and social impacts. unep.org.
As of 2025, the United States alone consumes approximately 6,900 barrels of oil per capita—nearly three times that of many European neighbours—and wields an outsized share of global materials extraction. worldpopulationreview.com. Even broader metrics confirm this imbalance: developed regions exhibited per-capita consumption rates over thirty times higher than less affluent areas as early as 2008. ebsco.com.
Far from living in a world of genuine scarcity, residents of wealthy nations occupy more space, extract more resources and generate more waste per person than is sustainable. Zero-sum logic ignores this reality, instead framing any redistribution of resources—whether funding for educational assistants or equitable class sizes—as “too costly” or “unfair to those who already have.” It’s a narrative that blames solidarity for deprivation rather than confronting structural over-extraction and misallocation.
Reframing scarcity ideology
To dismantle zero-sum logic, we must reclaim abundance as a policy goal and equity as its guiding principle:
- Shift from fixed-pie to growth-mindset frameworks. Emphasize that collaborative investments—such as universal design for learning—expand the capacity of the system, benefiting all learners rather than subtracting from existing budgets.
- Highlight shared benefits of inclusion. Show how supports for neurodivergent students—like sensory breaks or co-regulation strategies—reduce behavioural disruptions and free teacher time, ultimately enhancing outcomes across classrooms.
- Expose disproportionate consumption. Use transparent data dashboards to reveal how high-consumption practices—excessive standardized testing, large administrative overhead—drain resources that could instead fund direct student supports.
- Leverage crisis lessons for collective action. Remind policymakers that the pandemic demonstrated our interdependence: when one community lacked access to protective equipment or vaccines, all were at greater risk. Equity is not charity; it is mutual security.
- Embed equity-weighted funding formulas. Advocate for per-student grants that increase with demonstrated need, ensuring that investing more in higher-need classrooms does not subtract from others but uplifts the entire system.
Conclusion
Zero-sum logic thrives on fear and cognitive bias, magnified by stress and crises like COVID-19. Yet it crumbles under scrutiny of real-world resource distribution: when wealthy societies already consume far beyond basic needs, the premise of inevitable scarcity becomes absurd. Repost the ABCs of scarcity ideology to challenge this fallacy—because equity isn’t a zero-sum game, and reimagining abundance is the first step toward genuine, lasting inclusion.
