It’s the Knowledge Economy, Stupid!

With apologies to former President Bill Clinton for tweaking his famous 1992 campaign slogan, let us summarize the results shown in the last few blog posts through this diagram (the areas of the circles are proportional to the estimated magnitudes):

From this bird’s eye view, the indicative global agenda are (it is easier said than done and many leaders have been seriously doing or trying to do these; but I will say it anyway):

• Longer-lasting tangible assets (e.g. “planned obsolescence” and heavy “gas guzzler” models in the car industry are stupid);

• Establish new policies and institutions to recover and strengthen business confidence in financial systems (allowing financial carpetbaggers to run loose is stupid);
• Confidence-building processes and more bridging leadership to reduce tensions among nuclear and near-nuclear powers;
• Continue the shift in global wealth creation from industry to services (Colin Clark saw this even before World War II; see “Colin Clark hypothesis”);
• Continue or accelerate shifting the basis of global wealth creation less and less from extraction of non-renewable natural resources (and the stupid destruction of regenerative stocks of renewable natural resources), and more and more from application of human knowledge and creativity;
• Establish more policies and institutions to accelerate value-creating innovation (e.g. military R&D and Internet viruses are value-destroying innovations).

What’s in your mind?

-

(Note that there are embedded links in this blog post. They show up as colored text. While pressing “Ctrl” click on any link to create a new tab to reach the websites pointed to.)

=>Back to main page of Apin Talisayon’s Weblog
=>Jump to Clickable Master Index

Q19- Negative(?) Metacapital #2: the Threat of a Nuclear War

Our research at CCLFI discovered that most successful community development projects are those that leverage on the intangible assets of the community. I introduced the more generic term “metacapital.”

When applied to communities, their metacapital can be positive or negative. I reproduce below a table from one of my KM conference papers. The entries in red italics are negative metacapitals – they can destroy value (market or social value) of the community or frustrate value creation that development projects seek to achieve.

In my judgement, some negative metacapitals are very serious. I indicated four of them above in bright red text. Do you agree with my choices?

If we translate these four at the global level, these great value destroyers are, starting with what I think are the most serious:

1. Threat of global nuclear war
2. Corrupt, egotistical or trigger-happy leaders
3. Global environmental crisis
4. Destructive syndicates: criminal, banking-financial, terroristic.

These are the common threats to wo/mankind. Compare this with the “15 Global Challenges” according to the Millennium Project.

What is your view?

=>Back to main page of Apin Talisayon’s Weblog
=>Jump to Clickable Master Index