I love the Finnish myth of the creation of the world which
starts with an exploding egg. What I
love even more is the cosmology that was developed around the stellar path of
the Milky Way – the Linnunrata. At the
edges of the earth, according to the legend, was the warm home of the birds to which
they would fly along the path of the band of stars that stretched across the
heavens only to return with the summer to nest in the forests of Finland. The warm south was an idyllic place where
birds, souls and fantasies all flew during the long, cold winters.
HSBC just published their updated
forecast for where the world’s economies will grow and shrink by 2050 and, to
say that the Finnish and Norse birds have flown the coop is the
understatement. Denmark, Norway, Sweden,
and Finland all are forecast to free-fall from the upper echelons by enormous
scale and with them much of the rest of Europe.
These ranking drops in excess of 20 places on the world stage happen in
the face of ascendancies by countries like India (forecast to be the third largest
economy behind China and the U.S.) which is slated to rise 5 ranks, Mexico
rising to 8th (+5), Turkey rising to 12th (+6), and
Philippines to 16th (+27), Malaysia to 21 (+17) and Pakistan to 30
(+14). In fact, the largest gainers are
South Central Asian and South American while the biggest drops are all
European.
This report struck me as
fascinating in part because of the massive geopolitical ramifications that
these transitions portend but more so because to the absence of creativity
reflected in the metrics. Apparently, we
are to assume that in the next 36 years, we’re still going to be measuring and
counting things the way we did at the end of the Cold War. The birds in Finnish mythology, go to the
south in the winter and find their way home following the stars of the Milky
Way bringing with them the humanity and warmth that they experienced in the
south at the edge of the world. While
HSBC sees the rising Tigers and MINT countries (Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria, and
Turkey) is the age of Odin at its end?
In 2007, I gave a speech entitled
10 Years Hence in which I was asked by the Mendoza School at the University of
Notre Dame to discuss what the world of 2017 would look like. I’ve excerpted it below to stimulate a
conversation that may light a path to envision a world not of rising or falling
ranks but of a More Perfect Union.
We live in an era defined
by Ignorance Arbitrage. By this, I mean
that all of our implicit social constructs rely on the selective “knowledge
consensus” among authorized network members.
We explicitly communicate within archetypes constrained by presuppositions
of awareness that may, or may not, be encoded for others to understand in part
or in whole. As long as equilibrium, or the appearance
thereof, is preserved, we’re comfortable.
However, when the preponderance of evidence no longer sustains our
contrived realism, we despair over our impending obsolescence.
Let’s review our modern credo
of manifest destiny.
We begin with a resolute
recitation of Doctrine of Conquest. Following World War II, a victor’s conundrum
emerged. You will recall that in 1945,
the Soviet Union was our military ally together with Britain,
France, Australia, Belgium, Brazil,
Canada, China, Denmark,
Greece, Netherlands, New
Zealand, Norway,
Poland, South Africa, and Yugoslavia. You will also recall that our enemies included
Germany, Italy, Japan,
Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria. Four short years later, we were in the Cold
War. From 1949 to 1989 the global
economy was shaped by the dichotomies of the specter of Communism vs. the
supremacy of Capitalism in a neat East vs. West model. It is worth noting that Socialism was largely
ignored (albeit frequently invoked as Communism’s evil cousin) despite its
important contributions in Europe, India, and other “lesser developed
countries”. The West embraced
materialism at every level to overtly display social and economic supremacy and
constantly contrasted it to the despondency of those living under the iron fist
of “the others”. When the Soviets, in
1957, successfully launched the highly relevant technology – a satellite – the United States’
response was to put a man on the moon!
We, the country founded on conquest, reclaimed supremacy by conquest of
a large dusty rock as though we didn’t have enough dusty rocks on earth. While I would not suggest that our Space Race
didn’t have unintended benefits, it’s comical that modern communication rides
on the back of the “losers” of the Cold War.
In short, to confirm our myth of our own divine right, we engaged in a
conquest of an inert object. To the
victor goes the re-writing of history.
From Conquest, our
Catechism teaches the Doctrine of Colonization. In the 1980’s, the steel of our cars and guns
and the copper of our electronics conveniences provided little solace when
Japan out invented the United States in a number of critical technologies – challenging
a doctrine of intellectual supremacy that was significantly built on the backs
of the German engineers relocated to the United States after the end of World
War II. After all, the MacArthurian
utopia was supposed to cooperate with our global economic policy but something
had gone terribly wrong. Japan learned
from the excesses of the industrial West during the 1970’s and started beating
us at every turn. You will recall our
response in the 1980’s was:
- Slashing domestic industrial
manufacturing to “build competitiveness” thereby un-employing 2.8 million
Americans;
- Doubling of Foreign Direct Investment
into the U.S.
nearly making up for the job cuts in American businesses by employing
Americans in foreign owned enterprises;
- Pumping billions of dollars into
state-sponsored research kicked off by the Stevenson-Wydler Technology
Innovation Act of 1980 in which the following doctrine was
elucidated. “It is the continuing
responsibility of the Federal Government to ensure the full use of the
results of the Nation's Federal investment in research and development. To
this end the Federal Government shall strive where appropriate to transfer
federally owned or originated technology to State and local governments
and to the private sector… including plans for securing intellectual
property rights in laboratory innovations with commercial promise and
plans for managing such innovations so as to benefit the competitiveness
of United States
industry.”
- Malcolm Baldrige, U.S. Secretary of Commerce,
architected the “Trade War” doctrine as a matter of national economic
response to Japan
– a policy strikingly similar to that deployed today against the Chinese;
- The Capitalist Victor of the Cold War
minted the oxymoronic phrase “unfair competition” to level against any
country that happened to outperform U.S. economic execution.
Colonization,
under the moniker of “Free Trade”, means that U.S.
and European policy reserves the right to define “Free” and “Fair” and the
litmus test to apply to measure the relative pH of the system is how the
behavior of others impacts U.S.
and European industry.
When fully
bloomed, we achieve the transcendence of the Doctrine of Eminent Domain.
In this final incarnate step, we see the emergence of the unholy trinity
of creator, purveyor, and manipulator. If we say that we create all things that are
innovative and valuable, and we convince others that they want and must have the
things we create and allege to be innovative and valuable, and finally, if we
actively insist that only that which we say is valuable can achieve value, we
have achieved bliss. When white collar
jobs followed the blue collar exodus to India,
Vietnam, Korea, Singapore,
China, and Thailand, the American people were reassured by
policy makers and the media that all was fine because, after all, all the
innovations come from America. The assumption followed, therefore, that as
long as we created all that is new and valuable, the rest of the world would
“need” us. However, this assessment
never fully calculated the fact that, since 1987, the majority of foreign
students being educated in the programs created under the 1980 – 1983 national
research competitiveness programs came from Taiwan,
China, India, and South Korea. By 1994, the U.S. Department of Education
reported that over 50% of all doctoral degrees awarded in computer science and
engineering were awarded to foreign students.
A subtly in that report (published in 1996) was the observation that
while Taiwanese and Indian students were more biased towards computer science
and engineering, students from the People’s Republic of China were more focused
on the natural sciences. One early
indicator of pending transformation can be drawn from this statistic – namely
that the PRC has millions of basic scientists from whom the next new “new
thing” is likely to emerge as their training has not merely prepared them to
out-engineer and optimize but to understand the basics of discovery. Just because we educated masters and doctoral
students doesn’t mean that they all returned to their home countries with a
permanent sense of loyalty to their academic progenitors. The assumption that eminent domain applies to
the landscape of the mind, while a wistful aspiration, has not held true in the
past and will not hold this time. The
Stevenson-Wydler Act inadvertently has educated and enabled the GDP growth of
others while we preside over a flat or decreasing GDP on our shores. Since we’ve educated the world, we should be
cooperating with it rather than vilifying those whose intellects we’ve shared.
A series of
clearly identifiable factors began to warm the seas into what promises to be
the economic El NiƱo that bodes for a
transformational 10 years hence.
- In 2006, one third of all international
IPO’s were from China
with proceeds growth of 87% in a single year.
- The total proceeds from global IPO’s
has not yet returned to 1998 levels though the average deal size has grown
by almost 20%. The companies that
are raising money are hardly at the innovative edge of future technology
and business models – credit cards, airplanes, real estate, hotels, and
car rental to be precise - concerning the top 5 grossing deals in 2006. It is troublesome to be reminded that
one of the common reasons for the slowdown in IPO deals is the requirement
for compliance under Sarbanes Oxley – an unwanted burden of accountability
and oversight which leads me to my observations about the future.
- The “strength” of the U.S. economy is
measured with metrics which systematically under report: unemployment and under-employment; the consumer
contribution to the economy that is increasingly representing new debt
(much of which has been supported by hyper-inflation in perceived real
estate value); national entitlement programs including Social Security,
Medicare, Medicaid, together with the grossly overlooked actual financial
position of the FDIC, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and their attendant
solvency risks which are nowhere to be found in Federal fiscal
transparency; and, the actual
contribution and double counting of Federal underwriting of government
spending on both consumable products and services as well as the perpetual
abuse of the in-process research and experimentation tax credit which is
supposed to finance our future GDP.
- Industrial stalwarts such as General
Motors, General Electric’s plastics division, pharmaceutical giants, and
consumer electronics increasingly see global competition catching and
surpassing them with little or no option than to option off their futures.
- James Wilsdon’s critique of the British
investment in science, and the underlying presumption that this is linked
to what I refer to as Gross Innovative Output in the November 3, 2006 Financial Times, in which he
illuminated an industrialist paradigm at the public policy level which has
become unmoored. The notion that
investing in laboratories, academia, and industrial research and
experimentation will somehow positively correlate to the next new thing
may have worked in a more industrial society. However, in a world where proprietary
value – that which protects goods or services from commoditization and
minimal profitability – is increasingly based on knowledge franchises,
this public policy and financial prioritization is outmoded.
- According to the FDIC, the total of
past due and nonaccrual assets in 2006 were predominantly (82%) in real
estate-secured and consumer credit (51% and 31%, respectively). A closer look reveals that a potential
double exposure exists driving the remarkable increase in these statistics
from 2004 to 2006 of over 20%. Leading the increase in non-performing
obligations were debts for the 1-4 family residential real estate sector
and the credit card debt non-performing sector which are tracking each
other very closely supporting the concern that the seven consecutive
quarters of negative savings in the U.S. is impacting not only wealth
accretion but is also beginning to adversely impact long-term credit
rating foundations.
- One of the largest financial
innovations of 2005 and 2006 was the creation of the sukuk – an Islamic finance product originated in the Gulf States and subscribed from Indonesia to Germany. This novel finance vehicle, in two year’s
time, raised close to 10% of the global total financing proceeds compared
to all funds raised through IPO’s in the traditional markets. While the rest of the world was learning
about, and investing in Shari’ a-compliant
investments, U.S.
policymakers were protesting port security provided by one of our allies
who floated a sukuk offering.
In short, our
love affair with our domestic ever-expanding consumption without transparency
and accountability has resulted in a financial and social bankruptcy the import
of which has not been lost on the rest of the world.
The Silk
Road is coming back. For
over two thousand years, stretching from the Eastern Mediterranean to the Sea
of Japan, southward through the Indian Ocean, the Silk Road was the nexus for
the emergence of knowledge transfer and international trade networks which
rival, in diversity and value, modern conventions. While the U.S.
and Western Europe prosecute military campaigns in Iraq
and Afghanistan, the Silk Road is emerging as a literal and figurative power
reminiscent of its earlier glory. It was
after all, on this network, that one of the most compelling technology
transfers was facilitated. Between C.E. 300
and 1168, Chinese and Muslims developed and applied the core technology for
potassium nitrate, arguably one of the most explosive technologies that has
shaped two millennia of human endeavors.
To set the context, it is
helpful to picture the Silk Road Economic Block in the following way. Starting in Alexandria,
Egypt and terminating in Beijing, China,
draw your latitude line angling from N30° to N40°. Then look south of that line to the
Equator. This region holds close to ½ of
the world’s population; is home to most of the world’s religious and cultural
progenitors; enjoys unprecedented GDP growth forecast to represent over 20% of
the world’s GDP in the next ten years; and, is actively building cross-border
economic cooperation at the corporate and national level. The strength of the Silk Road Economic Block
poses a number of compelling arguments for a global shift in power within 10
years hence.
First, the U.S.
dollar. In 2006, 47% of the U.S.
Treasury securities were held by foreign interests while the U.S. Monetary
Authority retained 17.8%. The Federal
Reserve estimates that two thirds of U.S. currency is held outside the
country amounting to over $700 billion. While
the U.S. dollar represents 47% of the world’s official foreign exchange
reserves, it is helpful to consider that with that exposure comes certain risks. In June 2005, the Bank for International
Settlements warned that countries would need to act “together” to deal with the
burgeoning U.S. trade deficit and went so far as to suggest that the U.S.
should consider cutting expenditures and raising taxes. Failure to address this issue could lead,
they suggested, to disorderly decline of the dollar and trigger significant
global market perturbations. As we all
know, the appetite for this medicine has not yet created the impetus for
change.
As we see our country slip
in its influence on the foreign policy front, we cannot ignore a maelstrom of
our own creation. While we’ve leveraged
our nation in our pursuit of energy consumption, insatiable material
acquisition, and protection of our way of living, we’ve actually mortgaged our
economic fulcrum in shaping global policy.
When China elects to
build energy alliances with Iran,
paid for in U.S. dollars and financed on U.S. Treasuries, precisely what leverage
have we retained. Given the fact that U.S. consumption has provided vast wealth to
those in the Middle East and Asia who now are
cast as “emerging threats” to our national security and “sponsors” of terror,
what incentive have we provided to engage in constructive dialogue?
Increasingly, innovations of
global consequence are emerging from the Silk Road Economic Block. In Singapore,
Malaysia and China, biofuel
technology is being funded and deployed.
In China,
near-zero emission transportation and municipal systems are being
developed. In Iran, low-fire glass ceramics are
being developed to safely dispose of highly radioactive nuclear waste. In India
and Iran,
transgenic tomato plants are being developed to produce vaccines for biological
warfare agents. In Singapore, a
global surprise anticipation center is being built to fundamentally change
national and international policy from reactionary to proactive and
anticipatory. In Saudi Arabia, Kuwait,
and the United Arab Emirates,
novel energy and water municipal systems are years, if not decades, more
advanced than the municipal systems in much of the U.S.
and Europe.
Islamic financial products – based on fundamental ethical requirements
for transparency and risk-sharing – are attracting capital market participation
for funds that have never been liquid in the global economy. National treasuries are adopting policies for
foreign direct investment within the Block realizing that economic gain is
inextricably linked to domestic and regional security. In short, the region is emerging the “Fusion
Economy”.
Why Fusion? First, because it accurately describes at the
physical sciences level the imperative driving the emerging reality. In the fusion reaction, the application of an
external nuclear force overcomes the naked repulsive electrostatic force that
keeps nuclei repelled. When one nucleon
is added to a nucleus, it attracts others and, by doing so, adds mass while
emitting energy. What’s coming? The Fusion Economy.
Highly divergent, one could
argue polar, forces exist in the cultures of the Silk Road Economic Block. Nowhere are the divides between wealth and
poverty; progress vs. preservation; theism and modernism more brightly
illuminated. Nowhere is there a more concentrated
aggregation of wealth denominated in U.S. dollars. Nowhere are markets so entirely dependent on
the consumption of energy, goods, and services demanded by, but out-sourced
from, the West. However, in spite of
these conditions, a single catalyzing event (triggered by war on an economic or
corporeal level) could serve to unite those who appear so woefully
segregated. Who would have imagined that
Chinese restaurants would become commonplace in Tehran?
Who could imagine that China
could evolve an intellectual property regime that would actually begin
successfully invalidating presumptive monopolies that other nations feared to
challenge? Could it be possible that ½
the world could create a self-sustaining resiliency that would be denominated
on a non-U.S. treasury / currency platform?
Could a new paradigm integrating compulsory, ethical innovation
licensing be paid for in “virtual value units” that entitle the bearer to water
or energy rather than a call option on a Central Bank? Is it possible that we’ve actually placed in
motion sufficient antipathy to forge Atheist, Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim alliances
that embrace more common values than the Anglo-Saxon values we seek to
purvey?
Ten years hence, Chinese
won’t be buying IBM computer businesses – they will be engineering
nanotechnology autonomous appliances.
While we debate how to deal with global warming in the U.S., New Delhi
and Cairo may
very well fund emission free public transport.
While our aging population finds itself under increasing financial
burden to pay for medicine, Abu Dhabi Organics may be feeding the Gulf States medicament plants engineered at that National Research Center
for Genetics and Bioengineering. And,
yes, my dear friends in the Kashmir may
finally have the traditional herb compound that grows back my hair.
Today, we can choose the
path that allows us to participate with those for whom we’ve had exclusionary
practices for years. We can begin to
unwind the pejorative archetypes defining those like us as developed and those
unlike us as aspirants. We can
participate in the financial accountability of ethical investing. We can enter into dialogue with those we’re
sure seek to do us harm. Can we sit and
objectively listen to former President Khatami quote the great Persian poet Sa’di’s
words, “With devotion I will take that poison as the cure has been created by
the Almighty,” and understand that this riddle contains not only the key to
understanding those we find so foreign but a gentle echo of the admonition from
the very Bank for International Settlements with whom no Silk Road voice
conferred? We have before us the paradox
left by our Greek progenitors – to choose an Odyessian or Orphean destiny for
the sirens are singing. I choose the
sweeter sound.