Goldman Sachs first coined the expression BRICs – Brazil, Russia, India and China – to identify the economic giants of the future that will reshape the world economic order. While Russia’s economy is linked to the prices of commodities, energy in particular, Brazil has not lived up to expectations. Of the four countries, China and India have shown the most impressive growth in recent years with, respectively, 10% and 8%. Excluding Brazil, the population of the BRIC represents 40% of the world’s inhabitants.
With Asia, reckoned to be today the most dynamic continent, accounting for 65% of the world’s population, and China and India together accounting for 40%, these two countries can potentially alter the fragile equilibrium of the world’s economy. It is forecast that by 2030 the East Asian economies will be the world’s largest economic bloc.
Due to diverging political ideologies and concerns, however, this bloc does not, in fact, exist other than in prose. Even worse, all the countries in the area have made significant investments in military equipment over the recent past thus sharply increasing the risk of conflict particularly as fears grow over China’s intentions.
The US’ dream, during the cold war, of creating an Asian equivalent to NATO was short lived. Today, Asia has five nuclear powers: Pakistan, India, China, North Korea and Russia. On the other hand, the US is constrained by budgetary problems.
Our argument in this series of articles is that the development of Asia, and its impact on the rest of the world, depends to a large extent on the relations between five countries: China, India, Japan, South Korea and the US. Depending on the structure of the type of relations that will develop, and choices made by Russia and the US, for instance on their energy policy, we may see a new world order developing, very different from that of the last four hundred years. Further, if the Chinese economy faces difficulties in the future, the US will be instrumental in determining Asia’s future. Conversely, if the US economy falters, China, if it so wishes, could assume the world’s economic leadership.
Since the end of the Second World War, the US’ role in the area has been a major influencing factor politically, militarily and economically and while it has declined recently, it remains, nevertheless, important. Asia is challenging the EU as the world’s most important trade bloc.
The US imports from Asia for over $2 trillion per year, thus making the US responsible for the creation of hundreds of thousands of jobs. A weakening of the US dollar could significantly diminish the US’ role in the region.
At issue here is what A F K Organski has termed ‘Power transition theory’ – i.e. the change of the guard of the dominant power where the dominant power occupies this position because of its control of resources, be they demographic, economic, geographic, natural or military.
According to the theory, the dominant power, or powers, must ensure the stability of the system failing what the system might be challenged by an emerging hegemon. These situations are conducive to confrontation, very often military.
The emerging hegemon is, no doubt, China, and the events in Eurasia, over the coming quarter century will witness an indirect confrontation between China and the US, a confrontation whose secondary actors are India and Russia.
Is China striving to attain the status of great power and challenge the US, at least regionally, and what role do the other regional powers, as well as Russia and the US play? Or is it just trying to reduce its feeling of being surrounded by enemies?
Asia has become a powerhouse with several countries showing economic strength and appearing to be rivals. A dangerous rivalry inasmuch as five countries in the area have a nuclear arsenal (China, India, North Korea, Pakistan and Russia), with two more (Japan and South Korea) able to produce a nuclear bomb in a relatively short time.
Monetary reserves in Asia are sufficient to allow the area to develop without much further foreign investments. Further, an increase in economic stability is heralded by the recent agreement between several Asian countries – the members of ASEAN, China, Japan and South Korea – to pool their financial resources in case of a speculative attack.
While the major trade partner of most of the countries in the area is Australia, the European Union and the United States, regional trade has increased considerably. Services such as tourism also cater increasingly to Asians.
There remains the question of whether the continent is able to develop its own technological base to compete with Europe and the US. There are diverging points of view on the issue.
The perception by the Asian countries of the effect of China’s domination of the continent evolved into an understanding that they only have two options – siding with China or with Japan and its US ally.
The financial difficulties originating in the US and which have spilled all over the world have affected Asia in its role of major exporter. As a reaction, China, Japan and South Korea are considering the creation of a community modelled on the European Union that would help them expand trade within their area and increase trade with the ASEAN countries, Russia, the Middle East and Europe. They are encouraged in this action as inter-Asian trade has been growing at twice the rate of global trade. Inter-Asian trade is more important as a percentage of total trade than inter-NAFTA trade.
The US should fear the creation of a trading block including China, Japan and South Korea as it would represent 43% of US’ foreign trade and holdings of over one trillion dollars in US Treasury paper.
The countries in the area, with the notable exception of Russia, share two major problems: access to raw materials in general, and energy in particular, and an economy essentially geared to exports, and thus very dependent on the purchasing power of EU and US consumers. This last aspect is changing rapidly though with domestic markets starting to take shape and offering local producers a partial insulation from the American-led boom and bust cycles.
It is generally felt in the US that China has not been doing enough to stimulate internal demand – the number of consumers is no bigger than Italy while the population is 20 times that of the European country – and that the situation has been worsened by the decision of the Chinese government to peg the Yuan to the US dollar, thus effectively undertaking a devaluation.
Should China’s export drive remain as a major contributor the country’s economy, the accumulation of reserves by 2020 will be bigger than that of Germany, Japan and the Middle East countries put together. America’s response could be to return to a more isolationist policy by slapping import duties on Chinese products or getting China to open its doors to greater exports of US products.
Both China and India have to contend with an extremely large population. In fact, they are the only two countries with a population of over 1 billion persons. Economic development has brought, to both countries, an uneven distribution of wealth to the extent that social disruptions can be feared in the future.
China has become the world’s second largest oil consumer and it is likely that it will surpass the US to lead the world in energy use. Imports which represent 50% of consumption are likely to rise to reach 80% in another 10 – 15 years particularly considering the oil intensity of economic growth is particularly high, as in most developing countries. Thus, for each 1% growth in GDP, the country needs 1.2% additional oil.
In fact, China is the world’s fast-growing energy user, Russia is the most inefficient user of energy and he US is the country with the largest carbon footprint.
China is also the world’s largest consumer of several raw materials.
The country’s search for natural resources has been done in a predatory way, and there is fear that, backed by its staggering reserves, it could encourage suppliers to increase prices at levels beyond those acceptable to a large number of other users.
India’s energy requirements are expected to grow by 30% in the next 3 to 5 years and its imported crude oil dependency is expected to reach 95% by 2025.
India depends for 50% of its energy needs on coal and increasing its use would create major environmental problems.
Its gas suppliers are considered to be relatively unreliable and include Bangladesh, Iran, Myanmar and Turkmenistan.
This situation has encouraged India to pursue the road to nuclear power.
Such growth in raw material requirements is not sustainable and is strategically dangerous.
Both China and India have very large armies (in fact the largest in the world) and nuclear weapons.
Japan is also a major energy importer, relying entirely on imports for oil. Japan has an important stockpile of energy products, and it has encouraged other Asian countries, including China, to jointly plan the stocks and their administration.
Indeed, Asia’s energy needs are expected to double in the coming 20 years. In spite of this, OPEC countries do not seem to be prepared to invest in increasing production, in large part because of the massive funds required. They have been estimated by McKinsey to be of the order of $ 45 billion a year over the next three decades.
The countries in the area perceive themselves as rivals in securing energy sources and China, particularly, has shown an eagerness to develop partnerships, whether through limited investments, or through political support, in the United Nations, of countries like Iran.
Hydrocarbon reserves in the China Sea are claimed by several countries, and are a growing point of contention. Neighboring countries are fearful of China’s rising military power and have led them to develop closer relations with the US.
In an effort to temper their competition, India and China have made some joint bids to buy and share oil fields.
Japan too is dependent on energy imports and has recently been unlucky with their supply sources. Thus, they have had to curtail their investments in Iran, Kuwait, Russia and Saudi Arabia.
To counterbalance these losses, Japan has offered Saudi Arabia the possibility of building oil-storage facilities in Okinawa, provided Japan can have access to them in case of emergency.
A closer rapprochement between the two countries depends, however, on the US’ willingness for this to take place as the Saudi monarchy depends on the US military shield against the rising threat of Iran and of the djihadists, and there is no way Japan can replace the US in that role. This, in spite of the fact that Asia is today, by far, the largest buyer of both Saudi and more generally, Middle Eastern oil – up to 60% and 70% of their exports, respectively.
Reliance on Russia for energy is therefore extremely important. While a pipeline is being built from Siberia to the Pacific that could partly alleviate these escalating needs, a number of other pipeline projects have been proposed. All these projects require large investments ($ 1-2 million per kilometer of pipeline or around $ 12 billion for the pipeline that will link Russia and China), long delays in building and face substantial political and ecological problems. Further, the gas transmission systems in China and Japan are under-developed and therefore not suitable for the transport of large quantities of imported gas.
Russian industry has access to gas supplies at prices substantially below those practised on world markets and has therefore become a voracious user. The Russian government will be increasing prices for domestic consumption, including for private heating, and / or turning to alternative energy sources such as coal, hydro-electric or nuclear power.
Other possibilities have also been considered, but they all depend on Russia’s cooperation.
Thus, for instance, integrating the energy grids of Russia with those of China, Japan and the two Koreas has been proposed to enable the exchange of seasonal surplus.
This entails not only Russia’s cooperation, but also North Korea’s. It also requires large investments, although possibly not of the scale of building a pipeline network.
Another common point between the China, India, Japan and South Korea is that they constitute, jointly, the world’s largest weapons market and their suppliers are the European Union, Russia and the United States.
China and Japan also share the will to stop North Korea’s nuclear program.
The two countries are also large emitters of greenhouse gases.
Both China and Russia fear, perhaps rightly so, that the US is conducting an encirclement strategy due to their military presence in Central Asia as well as, in Japan, South Korea and Taiwan as far as China is concerned, and Russia is concerned with a possible NATO expansion in Europe.
Foreign direct investment is not coming to Indonesia. Really?
The economic topic receiving most attention in the last few days is certainly that of foreign direct investment, or FDI, thanks to the World Bank, which brought this issue to Indonesia’s President Joko Widodo’s attention. One of the key messages was that, FDI is simply not coming to Indonesia. The evidence cited was that 33 investors have exited People’s Republic of China (PRC) since June due to the escalating trade war. Most shifted their investment to Viet Nam and, crucially, none came to Indonesia. Since attracting FDI is one of President Jokowi’s priorities, his reaction to this was swift. All ministries involved in facilitating FDI had to address the problem fast. Intrigued by the news coverage, I did some online research on the issue. To my surprise, it barely hit the headlines in PRC and Viet Nam but there was a huge amount of coverage on President Jokowi’s reaction. This prompted me to dig deeper to get to the heart of the matter.
Total FDI to Indonesia is still rising
Firstly, this is a key fact: total FDI in Indonesia is still rising. After an absence from the FDI destination list for a few years after the 1997–1998 Asian Financial Crisis, Indonesia was back in the top 10 destinations following the 2007–2008 Global Financial Crisis (Table 1), thanks to reforms during the government of former President Yudhoyono as well as improved domestic economic growth prospects.
Table 1: Top Recipients of FDI in Asia (US$ million)
|2003-2007 Annual Average||2008-2016 Annual Average|
|Hong Kong, China||36,251||Hong Kong, China||92,247|
|Republic of Korea||10,387||Indonesia||14,171|
|Japan||6,592||Republic of Korea||9,692|
|Hong Kong, China||110,685||Hong Kong, China||115,662|
|Republic of Korea||17,913||Viet Nam||15,500|
|Viet Nam||14,100||Republic of Korea||14,479|
Source: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. World Investment Report 2019 Statistical Annex Tables. Accessed September 2019.
President Jokowi continued the FDI-friendly policy when he took office in 2014 and FDI flows to Indonesia continued to increase. In nominal terms, FDI flows to Indonesia in 2018 increased by $7.8 billion compared to the annual average flows in 2008–2016, higher than the increase in India and Viet Nam over the same period at $6.5 billion and $6.2 billion, respectively. So why the perception that FDI is not coming to Indonesia?
FDI to manufacturing is declining
Most FDIs to Indonesia in the last few years have been channeled to non-manufacturing sectors. The top five destination of FDIs in Indonesia have been renewable energy, mining, chemical, real estate, and metals. After that, sectors of choice were services such as hotels, information technology, and finance. Only at number 10 does a manufacturing sector—the automotive industry—figure. Broadly speaking, FDI to manufacturing in Indonesia has been shrinking in the last few years, whereas foreign investment in Viet Nam’s manufacturing sector has been surging. Somehow, foreign investors see Indonesia’s strength lying outside manufacturing. When they come here, they gravitate to natural resources, tourism, and other booming service sectors. And those investors who do look at manufacturing, such as automotives, do so to tap the domestic market.
It is these key facts that underlie the reasons why those 33 investors opted to overlook Indonesia. Trade tensions, by their very nature, affect export-oriented manufacturing sectors the most. So, when investors need to find a new home, naturally they go to places that are also export-oriented. Viet Nam is ahead of most other Asian countries in this respect since it has always espoused an export-oriented growth strategy. A progressive FDI policy supports that. The country also has a good education system considering its level of development capable of producing an ample quantity of skilled labor that can participate in a wide range of manufacturing. Geography helps too. Viet Nam exports more to PRC than any of its competitors in part because it is located right next door.
The World Bank advised the Indonesian government to address FDI policy credibility, certainty, and compliance with President Jokowi’s policy. This is something the government has been working on, which is why FDI has been increasing in the past few years. But to match Viet Nam in attracting FDI to manufacturing, the government will need much more than that. The long-term challenges in the inflexible labor market needs to be addressed. Schools and colleges need to produce graduates with better skills, which can nicely match with industry’s needs. Additionally, Indonesia’s export-oriented sectors not only need an FDI-friendly policy, but it also needs progressive policies to attract manufacturing investors. PRC and now Viet Nam are examples of countries that have benefited from progressive FDI policies. Yes, there are costs associated with progressive FDI policy. One of them is the need to accommodate a small number of foreign workers. But the benefits are much larger, including increasing productive employment, inclusion into the global value chain, and, more importantly, opening wider opportunities for learning and chances to be part of the global technological innovation. Finally, to ensure investors come to Indonesia and stay here, the government should make sure all parts of the FDI engine are working smoothly and in sync under a strong and effective coordination framework.
If we want sustainable development, we have to work together
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is our plan for the future. It aims to transform our world and to improve people’s lives for more prosperity and a healthier planet. And on the 24thand 25th of September, world leaders will meet once more at the UN General Assembly to review what progress we have made in achieving these goals.
But already in July this year, countries were disclosing their Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) on their SDG progress at the UN High Level Political Forum. There were real highlights such as 63% poverty level reduction in Rwanda, Pakistan launching a universal health coverage initiative and New Zealand implementing a national wellbeing measure of progress to complement the economic measure already in place. But the discussions also revealed existing challenges, including one embodied by the One Young World Ambassador Yolanda Joab Mori in her heart-breaking speech, which was a call for action to tackle the climate change that her home country Micronesia and the island states are experiencing worsening consequences of.
Different from its predecessor (the Millennium Goals) which focused more on sustainability in developing countries, the SDGs are explicitly goals for us all; rich and poor countries alike. They were created by governments, civil society and business in partnership and are not only designed to accelerate progress in developing countries, but to inspire developed ones too. Neither goals are exclusively for nations, but for everyone from businesses and NGOs to adopt in taking action.
In fact, like many others, this call for action was why our organization Pax Tecum Global was born. For us it was to support the SDG 17Partnerships for the Goals via partnerships between civil society, private sector and investors with international governments to progress greater impact, as we realised that our skill set could be utilised to initiate, facilitate and foster these relations. Our aim was to open up for conversations that were not being had and to nurture new collaborations for a more sustainable future.
Because let’s be honest – despite all the political polarisations we are seeing at the present time, we are still living in a world that is more interconnected and global than ever before. What happens in Britain will affect people in Brazil and what happens there can affect people in China. As this world is coming more and more together, so should our approaches to working with each other to improve our world.
We need partnerships in order to increase sustainable impact in our world.
Whether it’s an NGO looking to implement programs in Oman that can empower doctors with vital training to improve the health outcomes of women in their country, or a FinTech company looking to bring a vital service to a country in Ghana that can help rural residents access mobile banking where traditional banks failed them, partnership is required. Whether partnering with government, key stakeholders or even other businesses, collaboration and attaining will (whether political or business-like) is crucial in order to increase the potential for work being both long lasting and ultimately sustainable.
It’s the entire purpose of SDG 17 and why it’s among the most important to really progress the global goals, from reducing poverty to decreasing child mortality. It’s these partnerships that will help countries bridge the developmental gaps they have in attaining the key level of sustainability they need in achieving both their goals and report effectively in the VNRs on how they’re doing.
Because after all, this is what we all need to do, businesses, civil society organisations, governments and individuals alike. Evaluate what you’re about, and if you want a prosperous future for the world, find out where is your scope to support.
With the UN General Assembly approaching this September and still 11 years before the 2030 deadline intended to achieve the SDGs, this is when the world leaders will reconvene for a global review of the SDG progress. Yet while it’s the head of states and global glitterati that attend the meeting, it’s real the progress that they are really looking for is the one that we are all part of creating through working together.
National Mobilization of Entrepreneurialism; Skills gaps strategy
Uplifting midsize business economy, nation by nation
Although neglected, the revival of midsize business economy is extremely critical, as declaration of trade-wars on others are increasingly becoming living proofs of one’s own unskilled citizenry unable to quadruple exports. More heroic are the real declarations of internal skills-wars to retrain nation’s working citizenry to stand up to global-age standards of performance, productivity and quadrupling exportability bringing in local grassroots prosperity for better harmony. Observe the restless citizenry and the brutal decline of small medium enterprises amongst developed nation. Critically needed, to catch up lost decade a generational transformation is required, such challenges demand global-age style execution and are less dependent on new funding. So who is blocking and what’s stopping all this?
First, the driving philosophy:
So long the proof of the decimated grassroots prosperity among developed economies of the world is not required; so long the leadership accepts the calls of restless citizenry entangled on diversity and tolerance issues and growing populism. Although not be confused when cries about social justice and inequality often being bundled on ethnic and gender lines and labeled as mass populism. Very calm and very deep discussions are mandatory.
Furthermore, to explore reality, we must acknowledge that when mankind is in trouble, only mankind’s rules will solve the issues. In searching of answers, observe how the mind is limitless and hardwired like the open universe, therefore, eliminating random routes to endless journeys, a focused mind is one of the biggest achievements of life. If the mind is a miracle of the universe, the body its natural temple, self-discovery, self-optimization and lifelong learning is where we need to start once again on a new blank page. We need focus and we need harmonious progress.
To deploy technology in right directions and create highly productive national working citizenry compatible with global-age demands we have to fall back on mind. Civilization has always survived on these humanistic challenges with common-sense advancement principles.
Therefore, now enters an entrepreneurial mind; a product of lifelong learning, a cognizant and very capable element to handle such local, national or global tasks. Being added to the world are currently some billion new entrepreneurs in Asia, after all, it were some 100,000 entrepreneurs whom carved out the entrepreneurial supremacy of America that lasted well over a century. On productivity, performance, and supremacy of excellence our new world is zipping by the hour with no mercy for crawling nations. New speed of critical thinking and global age execution style must emerge across the nation or it will simply grind economy to halt. A lot of proof is out there
Especially, if the above national uplifting deployments and mobilizations are not new funding dependent but are rather combinations of technologically advanced global-age styles of execution dependent so now the main issue of what’s stopping all this should become the core issue.
Hidden in the differentiation with deeper understanding of “extreme-value-creation’ grassroots economies” and the “domination of ‘hologramic-debt-based economies” and this is where the future challenges are buried.
What can nations do?
During recent decades, developed economies were too slow to understand ‘soft-power-asset-management’ the art of imagining things over ‘hard-asset-centricity’ where staying deeply stuck to old routines on old factory floors is rewarded. This is like when forbidden are the bicycle makers to dream of ‘drones’ or flying cars. Some 100 millions small and large plants around the world are badly stuck in old groves of decades old mentality, unable to transform to the meaning of global-age, unable to rapidly optimize to grow to new heights with new global age thinking and execution. Imagine all that wasted potential, talent and machinery, infrastructure under dead weight of old mentality still logged into hard-assets… deeper studies are critical.
Next: A Global Revolution of Mind
Self-discovery poised to find all hidden potentials,
Self-optimization to deploy all new skills and potentials
Realization of producing extreme-value.
Realization of producing extreme-image-positioning.
Market navigation to reach global corners.
Understanding value of creating local grassroots prosperity.
Learning to live in harmony, diversity and tolerance
Rest is fakery
As new measurements of success; nations are now required to prove their mastery of transforming their own working-citizenry capable of global age skills with lifelong learning? To ensure a nation ending up with soft-power-assets and to become globally agile on trade and claim their global image supremacy of innovative excellence, leaving far behind hard-asset-centric traditionally structured economies based on short-term profit results.
New models of creating national wealth and identity; If investing only on selected lower hanging fruits is considered a good strategy, now investing more into hidden jungles and new trees while they grow into new fruitful heights will become an even smarter strategy. Building a soft-power-asset-centric society is much better over maintaining large industrial age complexes. Economies will increasingly face restless youth and anxious citizenry and there is nothing more critical than creating nationwide grassroots prosperity, all via lifelong learning and uplifting fear of automation, because displaced citizenry needs protection. As the cycle of laborious-work are getting replaced by smart-work while smart-work getting replaced by smarter machines, the ‘Masters of Robots’ will be the new smart unlearners, the ‘Slaves of Robots’ will be the deniers of change.
Critical Observations: Why immediate replacement of old education system around the world with new global-age transformation has become so necessary? It’s a liability on national productivity, it’s a burden of debt on the emerging youth of any nation and it’s rotten from the inside damaging economic philosophies in silence of the day.
This can be a wake-up call for economies of the world; rethinking,
reprioritizing, reinvesting and reinventing investable all over. Is it is easy
to transform people?
No, it’s almost impossible most of the times.
Here are some global-age options and new style thinking.
Calling mass transformation and mobilization of working-citizenry
Self-Discovery; close your eyes and discover your hidden talents, create supreme performance and become a global age thinker. This will open entrepreneurial thinking.
Enterprising Journeys; open your eyes and study the global age and indulge at the enterprise level, build and create massive growth. Do something phenomenal. This will open new business ideas.
Grassroots Prosperity; open your mind and lead by example, deploy and create grassroots prosperity, improve surroundings, help teams, share knowledge and create extreme value. This will open collaborative thinking and leadership roles.
National Mobilization; open your heart and share your authoritative command and knowledge, mobilize and help your own nation and make sure it is moving in the right direction, assist in boosting the national economy.
Mankind demands straight answers, seeks new alternatives, strives for grassroots prosperity and ready to lift the weight via power of entrepreneurialism
Can a nation declare top priority to discover its hidden and untapped talents of their citizenry?
Can it demonstrate superior skills to mobilize small and medium businesses across the nation?
Can it adopt continuous self-learning to foster occupational superiority for the nation?
Can national leadership demonstrate refined understanding of entrepreneurial skills?
Fact: The world can
easily absorb unlimited exportable ideas in unlimited vertical markets.
Fact: The well-designed innovative ideas are worthy of such quadrupled volumes.
Fact: The entrepreneurial and dormant talents of a nation are capable of such tasks.
Fact: The new global age skills, knowledge and execution are now the missing links
The Five Pillars of Global-Age
Global Age Exportability:
What’s really stopping a high potential enterprise from expanding to 100 countries?
Global Age Thinking:
What will it take to re-organize and operate as a multinational organization with little or no extra costs?
Global Age Modeling:
How to optimize and integrate soft power assets against sluggish hard asset centricity.
Global Age Execution:
How to get trained to achieve what normally takes 365 normal days to do it in only 365 dramatic hours.
Global Age Presence:
How to bring the image supremacy of innovative excellence into global space and profit.
Global Age Prosperity:
How to become a magnet of prosperity with new revenues, new funding, and new alliances
Cold Facts and Warm Realities: Success at times is failure management; failure is often a lost battle, but not a lost war, as ultimate success is not necessarily winning the war, success is far more about understanding the battlefield, as the real victory is hidden outside the war. Soon, economic leadership will be less about raw commodities and infrastructures and more about mental endurance and global age skills of its citizenry. Imagination and entrepreneurialism is far more important over commodities and infrastructures
Three steps for Midsize Economy to advance on grassroots prosperity:
Identify 1000 to 10,000 or 1,000,000 small and midsize entrepreneurs within a nation, and create a national agenda to quadruple their performance on innovative excellence and exportability. Caution–this is not to be confused with old out-dated-dysfunctional-government-data rather it requires the assembly of ultra-modern-digital and current-profiles of midsize enterprises within a nation. Deploy digitization of top national trade associations and chambers of commences to upgrade to world-class digital platforms so that their entire membership can skate nationally and globally showcasing their goods and services. Caution–this is not to be confused with already broken and disconnected websites from the last decade; this is more like LinkedIn format with colorful and highly interactive platforms. Study Expothon Strategy and how over a decade it has perfected the model; observe how Worldbank also adopted similar approach with their well executed Econothon project. Expect some serious deployments in this arena. It is time to engage the national entrepreneurial talent, 1000-10,000- or 1,000,000 small and midsize businesses in ongoing discussions and high quality entrepreneurial debates and to create global bounce that will unveil unlimited growth. Caution– this is not to be confused with a single plastic award night; this is about outstanding performance of the remaining 364 days of the year each filled with active and daily engagements.
Timelines: Once tackled the mobilization agenda starts progress within a year or less.
Why is there a critical lack of knowledge? Was there ever a senior level debate and authoritative discussion on such deep integrations? Some 10,000 Chambers of Commerce of the world are sorting out trade wars and trade disputes, but there is little or no concentration on new global age demands of the global marketplace for their memberships. In the meantime there are some 100,000 National Trade Associations of the world stuck in last century thinking when it comes to advanced level digital platforms and are afraid about their future roles and return on investment on membership fees. They all will shine under new flags of creating new global bounce and prosperity. Caution—what’s already on the floor of these organizations is just dead weight, in needs of a scale-up to measure the opportunity loss. Public Sectors of the world are grossly under-optimized and have little or no knowledge of their own hidden talents. They are seriously afraid of entrepreneurialism and without global-age skills or innovative ideas they know nothing about taming the elephant of global survival. It is time for the Public Sector to become confident, highly optimized and fearless, and will contribute freely to new ideas and prosper.
By all means, such transformations are no easy task; but however, they are less dependent on new-funding but are heavily dependent on global-age-execution and strategic agenda
In the meanwhile, the small and mid-size economies of the world though in critical need of global age expertise, are already drowning in hot soup and do not have the time, finances or the luxury to intellectualizing such issues. They have already lost faith in their local support but once rejuvenated they will become the number one source of new job creation within the nation and once they wake up to the fact that prosperity is easily in their reach. Lifelong learning and systematic training and coaching is where the missing links are as individually it cannot but in a massive mobilization mode it games a game changer for all small and medium enterprises. So what’s stopping this?
The overflow of free technologies, progressive local, national and global solutions are grossly misunderstood and the least optimized areas. This is an ocean in need swimmers and scuba-divers.
Such programs also improve current status of the national issues, like:
Nations are already flooded with massive innovations, but lack
Nations have over certifications and degrees but seriously lack business directions.
Nations have empty incubators and exhausted accelerators like real estate projects.
Nations have economic development programs but often without mega punch.
A Round-table or Senior Cabinet Level discussions is always good starting point.
After stalling last year, renewable power capacity additions to hit double-digit growth in 2019
After stalling last year, global capacity additions of renewable power are set to bounce back with double-digit growth in 2019,...
Foreign direct investment is not coming to Indonesia. Really?
The economic topic receiving most attention in the last few days is certainly that of foreign direct investment, or FDI,...
Kashmir: The Unconquerable Will of Kashmiris is still Alive
Every dictatorship flourishes more on the continuing incapacity of the public to examine and evaluate reality in the way that...
Liquidity Crisis Weighs on An Already Strangled Palestinian Economy
Palestinian Authority (PA) faces a financing gap that could exceed US$1.8 billion for 2019 driven by declining aid flows and...
How to Design Responsible Technology
Biased algorithms and noninclusive data sets are contributing to a growing ‘techlash’ around the world. Today, the World Economic Forum,...
Emerging East Asia Bond Markets Continue Growth Despite Risks
Emerging East Asia’s local currency bond market expanded steadily in the second quarter of 2019 despite downside risks stemming from...
Saudi oil attacks put US commitments to the test
Neither Saudi Arabia nor the United States is rushing to retaliate for a brazen, allegedly Iranian attack that severely damaged...
South Asia2 days ago
Abrogation of Article 370 and Pakistan’s Pathetic Response
Eastern Europe2 days ago
Foreign Affairs of the Absurd: The Strange Case of Abkhazia 2019
East Asia2 days ago
How to turn the page on WW II in Asia
International Law3 days ago
National Interest surpassing human rights: Case study of Kashmir
Reports2 days ago
Iceland’s slowdown underlines the need to fix structural issues
Energy3 days ago
Attack on Saudi oil facilities: Consequences and solutions
East Asia3 days ago
U.S. and China Gear Up for Ideological Warfare
Reports3 days ago
Agricultural Innovation & Technology Hold Key to Poverty Reduction in Developing Countries