I’ve found many ways of pointing the finger to global corporations for the displacement of humans, based mostly on the premise that globalization has shifted human activity to those hubs where it is cheaper. But in the game of crisis-induced migrations, globalization may have found its match: global warming. We should start to consider the demographic changes ahead of us.
Hearing about it all over the news is one thing, but experiencing it first hand is a real wake-up call: I’ve lived in Canada for the past 9 years and during that time I have see the usual cruel winter days, but I’ve also seen some unbelievable days of +10¬∞C right in the middle of the season (when it should be -10¬∞C!). An event like this is hard to forget and they say most people have fond memories of one of such days when nature shared a little smile to keep them going. People remember because this is not supposed to happen more than a few times in a life time. So what do you do when this becomes the norm? In what could’ve been an omen, we celebrated the first day of 2007 by walking in the park in a +12¬∞C sunny day. The most disturbing fact is that according to the official report the average increase in temperature during the last 9 winter seasons has only been 2.1¬∞C.
This gives us a bit of perspective on what a 2.0 – 5.4 ¬∞C likely range of Temperature Change will do this century. This according to the recently released IPCC 4th Assessment Report. Statistics are kind of evil that way: an average can hide a lot of peaks, so don’t be too optimistic about just a few degrees warmer.
What caught my attention in this table was the definition of each scenario (from best to worse):
- B1: a convergent world with rapid change in economic structures towards a service and information economy, with reductions in material intensity and the introduction of clean and resource efficient technologies. The emphasis is on global solutions to economic, social and environmental sustainability, including improved equity, but without additional climate initiatives.
- A1T: a world of very rapid economic growth with rapid introduction of new and more efficient technologies with emphasis on non-fossil energy sources. Major underlying themes are convergence among regions, capacity building and increased cultural and social interactions, with a substantial reduction in regional differences in per capita income.
- B2: a world in which the emphasis is on local solutions to economic, social and environmental sustainability. It is a world with continuously increasing global population, at a rate lower than A2, intermediate levels of economic development, and less rapid and more diverse technological change than in the B1 and A1 storylines. While the scenario is also oriented towards environmental protection and social equity, it focuses on local and regional levels.
- A1B: same as A1T, but with a balance in the various energy sources.
- A2: a very heterogeneous world. The underlying theme is self reliance and preservation of local identities. Fertility patterns across regions converge very slowly, which results in continuously increasing population. Economic development is primarily regionally oriented and per capita economic growth and technological change more fragmented and slower than other storylines.
- A1FI: same as A1T, but with an emphasis on fossil intensive technologies.
Franke James has a visual essay on how deep the impact of Global Warming will be for Canada, elaborating on a quote by Steven Levitt (from Freakonomics) about how “good” it could be. It captures both the frustration of having to deal with the nuisances of changing weather patterns and the disruption they cause to our little traditions; and to live in an apathetic society that will need a LOT MORE than a few warm days to react.
Aside from confirming global warming, the IPCC report concludes that failing to create a global culture that favors social and environmental sustainability and an economy based on service and information technologies is almost as bad as our suicidal race on fossil intensive technologies. A real solution will need a lot more than taxing polluting industries and blaming corporations.
It sounds to me that now more than ever there is a strong case to continue the discussion about a global culture that makes possible the propagation of core principles aimed at the long term goals outlined above. Many of the ideas exist already in privileged circles, but an important degree of participation is required to make those ideas widespread. I’m certain apathy of the general public will be as bad as the negligence of a few bad corporations.
Via ALT1040 I found the 2006 ranking for global brands, according to branchannel.com. If I was to summarize the overall positioning, I would say that everyone loves a good western: just take a look at how many of the most influential brands are located on the West Coast of the U.S.A.: Google, Apple, YouTube, Starbucks, Yahoo!, Microsoft. It almost gives a new meaning to the West Coast Cool, used frequently to denote a certain type of Jazz.
 Of course, all these brands have global presence and it would be absurd to suggest that the success of their marketing efforts is localized in a single office. However, we must assume that the big ideas that power these brands are inspired by the everyday events that take place in or around the cities where their headquarters are located. There must be something in the air that serves as a catalyst. Maybe it is the fact that these cities have plenty of influence from outsiders thanks to their massive immigrant populations that allow for people living there to grok the world around them, making possible to create services and products with universal appeal.
Want to read more? In misunderstanding globalization I had criticized one of their previous articles.
In an attempt to forecast what the growth of Internet users may be over the next few years, I came up with a very simple realization after analysing the data from Gapminder: the current (2004) distribution of Internet users resembles the distribution of phone users back in 1996:
Notice how after making a selection of 12 countries (India, China, United States, Canada, Brazil, Mexico, Indonesia, Japan, Rusia, Germany, France and United Kingdom) with significant populations and grouping them, the distribution in both cases is very similar with the U.S. & Canada leading the pack.
The reason I make this comparison is because we know exactly how the number of phone users grew over the last 10 years and if we consider that the type of infrastructure development that is required to acquire new Internet users follows a similar path than the one that was required to acquire phone users: Continue reading déjà vu
About a year ago, Coca-Cola Co. announced it would attempt to take on Starbucks by introducing new technology to deliver single servings of coffee through their own newly designed brewing machines. Last month the first Far Coast Cafe opened its doors in Toronto, Canada.
Since I don’t drink coffee, it is hard for me to judge them on the quality of their product. And as hinted by my very first post I must have some sort of obsession with coffee:
Global Culture should not be about MacDonalds and Starbucks in every little town around the world. It should be the opposite: being able to experience your own cultural heritage in the context of a foreign community. So if you come from Venezuela, where good coffee is a century-old tradition, you should be able to find the equivalent to your traditional coffee house wherever you go. If done well, becoming a global citizen should not require you to loose your cultural baggage.
 If you read through the reviews, most people are drooling over how cool the Far Coast lounge is, but people like Paul Terefenko from NOW Magazine have dissected every element of their operation, from the apparent eco/social responsibility of the brand to the extensive market research that allowed them to come up with refined spaces that appeal to the knowledgeable urbanite.
However, this story is bigger for another reason: Continue reading is far coast cool?
The recent shift in U.S. politics may have a lot of people assuming that policy changes will soon improve their situation, whether they hurt for the lack of jobs, stagnant wages, poor access to health care or education. The sad reality is that the government (any government) may not be able to affect the destiny of its people when global corporations have taken over the destiny of the world.
BusinessWeek’s cover story “Can anyone steer this economy” is a review of how classic economic principles are no longer effective to control global forces with far too much influence on the affairs of the world. The article by Michael Mandel is mostly focused on the U.S., but it is easily a reflection of what the entire world should expect.
Sometime next year [...] the U.S. will hit a milestone. For the first time in recent memory, the cost of imported goods and services will exceed federal revenues. In other words, Americans will soon pay more to foreigners than they do to their national government.
Through the many posts about Globalization, I’ve reiterated the basic premise that corporations are taking over our destiny in all possible ways, affecting even the most traditional aspects of our culture. However, a renewed sense of urgency to discuss this problem should be felt when realizing that even the most powerful economy in the world is falling to the mercy of these forces: Continue reading a new economic era
A recent exchange with Richa Govil from Infosys led me to a couple of posts on their blog: The War for Talent Heats Up and Talent Wars, cont’d…. Their blog provides an insight into globalization from the perspective of those on the other side of the equation, supplying the talent to the corporations looking for ways to remain competitive.
My position in the matter of outsourcing was established in the post the outsourcing culture, and while it may be assumed antagonistic to the views of a company like Infosys, I found some support to the ideas presented earlier in their own blog:
Business communities in any country (at least at the mid to senior management levels) tend to be small. Even India with its billion people, relies on a much much smaller business community and business graduates to run its companies. It seems that young workers in India have not yet developed the maturity to realize this fact. With the over-abundance of opportunities this behavior appears to be the right choice (or even the logical one by some calculations). But this will prove to be a short-sighted approach when the economy turns as it eventually must.
The particular behavior they talks about is the perceived unprofessionalism of those workers that may not feel bound by a contract as a result of how many opportunities there are. It seems is becoming quite common for people to continue looking for opportunities even after accepting offers at a particular company. In a market with such a high demand for talent is only to be expected that people will adjust their attitudes.
However, I would also like to suggest an alternate explanation: after exhausting the original talent pool that led to the outsourcing boom in India, they may have created an important shift in the work culture, making it easy for youngsters to earn a quick technical diploma in order to participate in the labour market without really having an interest in anything else but benefiting from the apparent chaos caused by corporations deploying their armies of headhunters and cheap-labour tactics. You can say that some people learned how to fool the system, creating a difficult landscape for businesses, but more importantly damaging the work culture of an entire industry.
It is a common trait of corporations to focus on the now. Obsessing about earnings for the quarter, forecast for the year, franchises to open the next year; their ability to think long-term is almost non-existent. This is why it is so easy for environmentalists, anti-globalist, and other movements thinking about the future to find the arguments to fight. Whenever I think about globalization, the image of a rat race comes to mind. A race in which all corporations are running wild through the world marking territory.
Part of the problem may be that our ability to see really long-term implications of our actions today (I mean generations, not years) is nearly impossible with the pace at which we are moving. We would be lucky to get right a forecast of world affairs for the next year.
A refreshing take on this issue was presented by the Long Now Foundation as part of the Long-Term Thinking Seminars by John Baez with his presentation entitled Zooming Out in Time. Most of the presentation is a study of climate change, but not the type we see in the news comparing current temperatures against those last year. He is talking climate change over the last 65 million years. It truly helps visualize the magnitude of the problem. The climax of his presentation is the conclusion that although the earth is used to climate change (and a lot more than what humans could be causing), it is not used to such RAPID change.
It is our obsession with speed that may get us into trouble. So what do you think happens when you’re moving really fast and the driver is only watching the side window, enjoying the now?
|
|
|
Most Popular