Crisis 2.5: panic-inducing technical language

One difference between this crisis and the two previous ones (83 and 93) is that now we have much more information, moreover, this information is much more technical, data that, in many cases we do not even understand, but it encourages collective fear, and this fear feeds back into the crisis because it lowers domestic consumption, and with it the GDP.

I am not going to discuss whether or not the large flows of disorganized information, mainly through the Internet, are good or not, I think they are; and I am putting the Internet in the pillory because there are already data that place it as our main source of information. But it is true that in 1993 we did not have Internet and now we do; to face, digest and, above all, keep calm in the face of the flood of information that arrives through ADSL requires certain expertise, and I am not sure that we have it.

I am sorry to have to add that I think we are at the gates of crisis 3.0: conflict. In Greece they have been rioting for several days, under the pretext of the death of a young man at the hands of the police, are serving to show the anger with the Greek government and the economic situation of the country. The problem is that the Greeks are trying to export their riots, and, for example in Barcelona, there are already people who are trying to export their riots to the rest of the world. trying to import to Spain.

Regarding how to get out of the crisis, every morning we wake up with one more measure, and I believe that this is not solved with measures but with changes in the structures, changes that require time and patience, for example, betting on R+D+i, something that was being done, but not calling the Zenit and Consolider This is a terrible warning to navigators, that's the thing about structural changes, that there is no turning back, and they require consensus, and it seems that there was none in R&D.

Added on February 8, 2009

It's nice to see that I'm not the only one who thinks these things.

Extracted from The red pill

The economy is like a pressurized water hose: as soon as you plug a waterway on one side, the liquid starts to escape somewhere else.

Charles Leadbeater and James Meadway published in NESTA an interesting essay entitled Attacking the Recession in which they raise the following questions:

1ª) The most novel cause of the global economic cataclysm has been the hyper-connected nature of new finance.

2ª) Because it is a problem strongly linked to the network economy, the solution must include not only short-term financial measures but also a remodeling of the structure and use of the networks.

3ª) Networks will therefore require effective measures to be governed.

4ª) Networks will play a crucial role in the recovery. Both in the cooperation between institutions and between companies and individuals.

5ª) All crises accentuate the urgency for more and better innovations.

6ª) The innovations needed are not only technical, but we have to face multiple social and environmental challenges: how we will relocate workers from economic sectors that have simply disappeared, how we will relate to new markets, partners and Asian competitors, how the web of the future and biotechnology will influence, how we will achieve environmentally sustainable growth with less greenhouse gas emissions, how we will achieve sustainable growth with less greenhouse gas emissions, and how we will achieve sustainable development. CO2, what we will do about the aging of the population.

7ª) Innovation based on inventions will probably be one of the first victims of the crisis, due to the reduction in companies' R&D budgets. However, inventions are only one part of innovation. In future years, the greatest contribution of innovation to the economy will be in applications for the service sector.

8ª) Above all, innovations that reduce costs and make companies more efficient are needed.

9ª) Looking outward is crucial. Networks must open up to new players. By working only with the same incumbents and insiders We will only get more of the same.

10ª) We must limit as much as possible the long-term economic damage caused by the sudden rise in unemployment, but not at the cost of reducing economic growth for a decade. Move as many workers as possible into emerging industries and value-added knowledge jobs.


Comments

2 responses to "Crisis 2.5: panic-inducing technical language”

  1. I totally agree with you Javier. The other day we were talking in the office about the contradictions of the government: on the one hand they announce that investment in R&D is going to increase and, on the other hand, they cancel calls for proposals. To laugh (or cry), let's go...

  2. I believe that the state has to bet on R&D&I, adopting the role of "early adopter", that is, testing innovation, so that the money it pays to companies returns to the administration itself in case of use/success, while the project has a double value for the companies, money + reference, a win-win.
    Zenit and Consolider were basically forms of subsidies to large companies, they did not generate new ecosystems, I will not miss them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

English