Nick Bostrom:
"An existential risk is one that threatens the premature extinction
of Earth-originating intelligent life or the permanent and drastic destruction
of its potential for desirable future development. The materialization
of such a risk would be an existential catastrophe.
Although it is often difficult to assess the probability of existential
risks, there are many reasons to suppose that the total such risk confronting
humanity over the next few centuries is significant. Estimates of 10-20%
total existential risk in this century are fairly typical among those
who have examined the issue, though inevitably such estimates rely heavily
on subjective judgment. The most reasonable estimate might be substantially
higher or lower. But perhaps the strongest reason for judging the total
existential risk within the next few centuries to be significant is
the extreme magnitude of the values at stake. Even a small probability
of existential catastrophe could be highly practically significant."
Nick
Bostrom is Director of the Future of
Humanity Institute, Oxford University
and presents at our next event the
future of the Future - Thursday, 3 November!
.... interested in knowing
more and sharing thoughts and ideas .... join us!
The Club of Amsterdam identified
some key ares of global challenges and dedicates this Journal to "Burning
Issues".
"Burning Issues" is a contribution to a continuous
dialogue that intends to motivate, connect, accelerate ideas,
innovation, solutions ... We invite you to join and share your
ideas, experience, to report about projects, theories, more burning
issues ...
Thursday, November 3, 2011 Registration: 18:30-19:00,
Conference: 19:00-21:15 registration more
information
Location: Volkskrantgebouw,
Wibautstraat 150, 1091 GR
Amsterdam [former building of the Volkskrant]
The conference language
is English.
In collaboration with Gendo
The
speakers and topics are
Nick
Bostrom, Director, Future of Humanity Institute,
Oxford University The work futurists do, humanities great potential.
Arjen
Kamphuis,
Co-founder, CTO, Gendo The Cassandra Syndrome, nobody likes a party pooper.
Anders
Sandberg,
James Martin Research Fellow,
Future of Humanity Institute,
Oxford University Cognitive biases
and what to do about them. The
art of usable foresight.
Moderated by
Kwela Sabine
Hermanns
.A
Education
Wealthy countries currently give $2 billion each year to
help poor countries pay for basic education. They would
need to give an additional $10 billion each year to put
all children in school by 2015. Global Citizen Corps
One in five adults
in the developing world - almost 862 million people - cannot
neither read nor write. Women's illiteracy rates exceed 70
percent in more than 20 developing nations. The educational future
of millions of children is also is bleak: 125 million primary
school-aged children are not in school, two-thirds of whom are
girls. Some 150 million children do not complete primary school,
and another 200 million suffer in poor learning environments. CARE
The worldwide e-learning industry is estimated to be worth
over $48 billion according to conservative estimates. Developments
in Internet and multimedia technologies are the basic enabler
of e-learning. The five key sectors of the e-learning industry
are consulting, content, technologies, services and support. Wikipedia
Peter
van Gorsel, Educational Business Developer, University of
Amsterdam
Peter spent many years in publishing before becoming Director
of the Institute for Media and Information Management at the Hogeschool
van Amsterdam. Since October 2010 he started his current assignment. Club of Amsterdam: Are the current educational standards
and policies accurate to prepare future generations to this ever
more globalized world? Which countries over the world seem best
prepared?
Peter van Gorsel: There is no perfect way to educate people
because local, national and international culture plays a big
part and young people are not cattle. So there is no global answer
to what education should be and what policies will work and what
policies not. The difference between countries are enormous and
there seem to be no countries that are the best in everything.
Each country has institutions that are very good in some area's
but those same countries are doing very bad in others. Nobody
is really prepared for the uncertain future and unsure job market
that will come out of this crisis. Education certainly can't be
everything to everybody. Education in a broad sense is preparing
people for a fulfilling life and a rewarding job that matches
their talent and capacities. Most educational thinking is still
very much rooted in the 19th century and revolves around the transfer
of static knowledge that the teachers grew up with and is strongly
divided along lines that are blurring: academic, vocational, artistic
etc. It also takes the position that teaching is something completely
different form the outside world. Hence the walls between education,
business and arts. Politicians often see education as a means
to enhance economic development or a way to promote their view
or policy. Funding is in such cases used as a lever to bring about
changes that they want to see in educational systems. Top positions
in education are therefore often a political more than a professional
nomination. The world maybe globalized but education isn't.
Do we now face
more challenges concerning education in a globalized world then
the ones we already had such as illiteracy, the necessity to prepare
generations for the future or women's uprising through education?
Peter van Gorsel:Future
generations will have to deal with the effects of globalization
and their careers will be much more erratic and unsure. Intensified
competition for top jobs will be a feature of the future as well
as strong division between high earners and the mass of workers
below them bridging about stronger class divisions and erosion
of educational systems as state support falls away. Students in
western parts of the world seem to be especially unaware of this
while they are the first ones that will have to face these harsher
circumstances. The role of women will be more important than in
the past both in education and inn the workplace. They, however,
work and learn, differently from boys. Education should reflect
that without bending too much in one direction.
What role should
technology play in our educational system in the context of a
globalized and evermore technologically advanced world? Should
we set limits to the use of technology in education and if so
to what extent?
Peter van Gorsel: Technology can never take the place of
good and committed teachers. It can, however help teachers to
work in a more interesting way and assist students with complicated
projects and give them access to knowledge now beyond their reach
and means. Technology is vital when we look at the education and
training or those people already out there. Lifelong Learning
is certainly one of the most important aspects of the future of
education. Through blended learning, on line coaching and monitoring
workers can stay up to date and abreast of the latest in their
field. There are no limits to use of technology in education;
there is however the fine balance between the time spent with
technology and the time spent with teachers.
.B
Resources: Water, Energy, Air, Food
Resources
Water
More than 1 billion people have no access to clean and safe drinking
water while over 2 billion lack access to adequate sanitation. Global Citizen
Corps
Agriculture currently uses 11 percent of the world's
land surface and uses 70 percent of all water withdrawn
from aquifers, streams and lakes for crop production. Land and
water resources are, however, unevenly distributed. Cultivated
land area per person in low income countries is less than half
that in high income countries, and its suitability for agriculture
is generally lower.
FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Energy
Countries belonging to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD) experienced their strongest demand for
energy since 1984, up 3.5 percent. In contrast, power consumption
in Non-OECD countries grew 7.5 percent in 2010.
China's 11.2% energy consumption growth made it the world's largest
energy consumer, pushing the U.S. from the top spot. China accounted
for just over 20% of all the energy consumed in the world during
2010.
World-proved oil reserves in 2010 were sufficient to meet
46.2 years of global production. The Middle East holds 752.5 million
barrels of oil, more than half the world's total. South and Central
America is a distant second with 17 percent of proved oil reserves.
Qatar's proved natural gas reserves have exploded 98 percent
since 1990 and today account for 13.5 percent of the world's output,
third highest behind Russia and Iran. Qatar's natural gas production
has experienced a similar rise, growing 30.7 percent in 2010. Coal supplies nearly 30 percent of global energy due to
strong consumption demand from China and the developed world-where
coal expenditure grew at the fastest pace in 30 years. The U.S.
holds the largest reserves of coal (28 percent) but China accounts
for roughly 48 percent of the world's demand.
Brazil's use of hydroelectricity has increased 30 percent
since 2000 and the country accounts for nearly 12 percent of the
world's total. China accounts for slightly more than 20 percent
of worldwide consumption and saw its hydroelectric use increase
by more than 5 percent in 2010.
Consumption of renewable energy has skyrocketed 209 percent
over the past 10 years, far outpacing coal's 48 percent jump.
Nearly one-quarter of the total renewable energy usage comes from
the U.S. which uses 121 percent more renewable energy than it
did a decade ago.
China has surpassed the west to emerge as the world's largest
manufacturer and producer of solar panels. Wind, solar and biomass
energy are expected to represent 8 percent of the country's energy
output by 2020.
U.S. Global Investors
Air Clean air is considered to be a basic requirement of human
health and well-being. However, air pollution continues to pose
a significant threat to health worldwide. According to a WHO assessment
of the burden of disease due to air pollution, more than 2 million
premature deaths each year can be attributed to the effects of
urban outdoor air pollution and indoor air pollution (caused by
the burning of solid fuels). More than half of this disease burden
is borne by the populations of developing countries . WHO - World Health Organisation
Food
925 million hungry people in 2010:
Asia and Pacific 578 million, Sub-Saharan Africa 239 million,
Latin America and the Caribbean 53 million, Near East and North
Africa 37 mllion, Developed countries 19 million. FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
The number of hungry
people has increased since 1995-97, though the number is down
from last year. The increase has been due to three factors: 1)
neglect of agriculture relevant to very poor people by governments
and international agencies; 2) the current worldwide economic
crisis, and 3) the significant increase of food prices in the
last several years which has been devastating to those with only
a few dollars a day to spend. 925 million people is 13.6 percent
of the estimated world population of 6.8 billion. Nearly all of
the undernourished are in developing countries. World Hunger
Michael
Akerib, independent higher education professional
Part academic, part consultant, of multicultural background, fascinated
by Russia, the Arctic, Brazil, natural resources, demography,
new spaces, Biotechnology, post-humanity and many many more issues.
A Halloween Story
'You are confusing two concepts: answering the questions
and formulating them correctly. Only the latter is required of
an author.' - Chekhov
A message for Halloween: let us not listen to the witches that
tell us to walk into an age of scarcity and perhaps even into
the next dying out by destroying the strategic natural resources
our earth has been endowed with: air, food, water and energy sources
which are intricately woven to form our environment from which
we derive our basic needs.
Instead, let us resuscitate the voices of the fairies that were
left drifting while we were only concerned with prices and that
are telling us we need to avoid an impending disaster. They are
telling us there is a problem and that a solution needs to be
found as quickly as possible. So does the United Nations Environment
Program which states in a recent report that if the right systems
are implemented as of today, agriculture could feed 9 billion
people AND become largely carbon neutral.
The alternative would satisfy the witches: the inability to produce
sufficient food would lead to mass migrations, famines of an unprecedented
scale and global social movements as prices skyrocket to unprecedented
levels and the poor suffer even more.
The agro-industrial model, built over the last half-century, which
sees the environment as a machine from which products must be
extracted from unlimited resources with the help of technology;
and the market as a global free-for-all arena, driven by price
rather than quality - so as to reduce the percentage dedicated
to food from our disposable income - is unable to sustainably
feed a growing human population. We now consume more food than
we produce, thus depleting stocks.
We need to rethink not only agricultural production but also the
policies of retailers - who have driven the prices down to levels
at which farmers can no longer concentrate on quality - and the
expectations of consumers.
The very first step in any decision making process is becoming
conscious of the problem and therefore of the need of a solution
and this seems to have finally happened.
For a humanist, the alternative model to 'us or the planet' is
one that sees humans as a component of a broad biological system
- a complex dynamic model that links man and the earth's resources.
Concrete steps to apply this model include stopping deforestation,
in particular in tropical areas, as these prime biotopes are essential
cogwheels in the water cycle and in reducing atmospheric carbon.
Fertilizer addition to the soil needs to be reduced as it contaminates
water tables and rivers. Methane release from animal manure, cattle
in particular, also requires a substantial reduction.
Land usage (including not only pasture but also land devoted to
grain farming) to produce beef is colossal. Convincing consumers
to eat other types of meat or, on a more technological vein, producing
meat in the lab, would contribute to preserving our environment.
Investments in agroecology would represent a big step forard in
solving the food issue as well as allowing a satisfactory management
of the three other resources. These investments can only be made
by governments as major food companies are not interested in systems
that offer a lower productivity per hectare. Investments must
include storage facilities to enable farmers to store product
rather than selling at harvest when prices are lowest. Investments
must also be made in educating farmers to use these techniques
and laws must also allow small farmers ownership of the land.
Indeed, agroecology, by relying less on external outputs, offers
the advantage of breaking the reliance of agriculture on energy
which is required for fertilizers, pesticides and to drive agricultural
machinery. Pests are controlled by a variety of methods, such
as insect repellent plants or animals such as fish in the case
of paddy rice.
Prioritizing local production, as against global supply chains,
also reduces the energy required to process food and transport
it over long distances. This will not reduce the need for infrastructure
to avoid produce spoilage which is a major source of waste in
developing countries.
Introducing such methods would cease making the small farmer 'the
global epicenter of extreme poverty' as he is described in the
Millennium Project.
The reduction of food wastage should also become a matter of interest
to retailers and consumers - statistics show that up to 30 to
50% of food products are thrown away. A pick up and recycling
system in France, in particular to use this wastage as an energy
source, has been shown to be profitable.
Water scarcity, already a fact in many countries, and variability
in rainfall (and let us not forget that 80% of crop-land uses
rainfall as its water source) becomes less of a problem with new
forms of agriculture, which includes better rain water harvesting,
particularly if new varietals are developed which require less
water. Small infrastructure building is essential to enable access
of water for the poor living in arid areas.
Yields, and therefore farmer income is increased.
New desalination technology, using substantially lower amounts
of energy, will enable countries to regulate water availability
in periods of low rainfall.
Our planet has a unique atmosphere that allows life and regulates
the climate. An increase in the content of CO2, as is forecast
from developing countries, would induce major changes in the earth's
ecological and geological system. Power generation is a major
contributor to this state of affairs.
We discussed above the importance of tropical forests as carbon
sinks. On the supply side, agriculture is a major contributor
of climate change as manure releases substantial quantities of
methane.
Coal usage in OECD countries should be gradually replaced by natural
gas as CO2 emissions are heavily taxed. This is unlikely be the
case in the rest of the world, and in China in particular.
Transport also has a major impact as it consumes sizable quantities
of energy essentially in the form of gasoline. While the number
of vehicles is expected to increase sharply, particularly in Asia,
more efficient engines and alternative energy sources, particularly
in cars developed and sold in America, Europe and Japan, should
contribute to slow the expansion of oil consumption. 'Smart' vehicles
and roads could reduce consumption by up to 40%.
As the world's energy consumption increases, alternatives to oil
will inevitably have to be used particularly as reduced availability
of 'black gold' will drive prices upwards - whether peak oil is
due to dwindling reserves or to the enormous amounts of capital
required to locate and develop new deposits, oil production is
set to fall. Reduced energy consumption would contribute to cleaner
air by reducing the amount of pollutants released.
Technology will be a major factor determining the choice of the
substitute, whether it is by cleaning coal, developing advanced
materials for solar energy or inventing groundbreaking technologies.
Developing countries may well have considerable difficulties to
access these new sources and remain contributors to atmospheric
pollution and global warming.
Greenhouse gas emissions could also be reduced if meat was grown
in the laboratory as experiments under way appear to make it a
clear possibility.
For such programs to become reality, retailers must lend a hand
by accepting products with a greater variability. Standardization
is difficult, if not impossible, to achieve with sustainable agriculture.
Higher prices of oil would undoubtedly assist in making this change
in the agricultural paradigm. Such price increases could be a
result of conflicts in producing countries - such as has recently
been the case in Libya - or of the ability of China and the US
to each secure captive production sources leading other buyers
to pay premium prices.
Major price increases in oil would lead once more to the transfer
of wealth from consumers to producers, with the poorer countries,
particularly in Africa, suffering most. Turbulence in the currency
market, particularly a weak US dollar, has negative long-term
repercussions on oil availability and therefore leads to higher
prices. A concerted action by Central Bankers would help stabilize
currencies - perhaps with the introduction of a new global currency
or the return to an indexation on gold.
The doorbell has just rung - children from the neighborhood were
treat or tricking me. Having run out of sweets I offered them
a ten dollar greenback which they turned down. Just like they
turned down a 10 Euro bill. They asked for a gold coin, or a barrel
of oil, but I did not have one. I am lucky to live in Switzerland
and was able to give them a 10 franc note. They took it - no trick
for me.
I hope the same applies to all those of us who live on this planet.
Seven billion at the latest count.
.C
Health
Cardiovascular
diseases (diseases of the heart and blood vessels that can
cause heart attacks and stroke) are the leading causes of death
in the world. Healthy diet, regular physical activity and avoiding
the use of tobacco would prevent most of these deaths. Mental disorders such as depression are among the 20 leading
causes of disability worldwide.
Extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis has been recorded
in 45 countries.
Worldwide, deaths of children under-five years of age declined
from 93 to 72 deaths per 1,000 live births between 1990 and 2006.
There are 9.2 million physicians, 19.4 million nurses and midwives,
1.9 million dentists and other dentistry personnel, 2.6 million
pharmacists and other pharmaceutical personnel, and over 1.3 million
community health workers worldwide, making the healthcare industry
one of the largest segments of the workforce. WHO - World Health Organisation
In 2003, healthcare costs paid to hospitals, physicians,
nursing homes, diagnostic laboratories, pharmacies, medical device
manufacturers and other components of the healthcare system, consumed
15.3 percent of the GDP of the United States, the largest of any
country in the world. For United States, the health share of gross
domestic product (GDP) is expected to hold steady in 2006 before
resuming its historical upward trend, reaching 19.6 percent of
GDP by 2016. In 2001, for the OECD countries the average was 8.4
percent with the United States (13.9%), Switzerland (10.9%), and
Germany (10.7%) being the top three. US healthcare expenditures
totaled US$2.2 trillion in 2006. According to Health Affairs,
US$7,498 be spent on every woman, man and child in the United
States in 2007, 20 percent of all spending. Wikipedia The world healthcare IT market is expected to grow
from $99.6 billion in 2010 to $162.2 billion in 2015, at a CAGR
of 10.2% from 2010 to 2015. marketsandmarkets.com
Philip
Gagner, Chief Scientist and Vice President, Schloer Consulting
Group
Schloer Consulting Group
is presently developing large scale interoperable electronic health
records (EHR) systems specifically designed to assist in the delivery
of patient-oriented, biometrically secure healthcare on municipal,
regional, and national levels.
Philip has more than 30 years of experience in the computer and
technology fields, including robotics, digital hardware design,
software development, data communications, finance, and law. He
earned a Juris Doctorate from Georgetown University, and has litigated
some of the lead cases in software and technology law. In addition,
his technical experience includes work as a researcher at the
M.I.T. Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, hardware and software
engineering as Senior Software Engineer at Digital Equipment Corporation,
several years as a senior researcher at the Federal Judicial Center
in Washington, D.C., and founder of Legal Data Systems, a software
solutions company.
Club of Amsterdam: With technology now present in all aspects
of our daily lives it is not surprising that healthcare systems
in high-income countries are depending more and more on technological
and computer assisted devices for their functioning and services.
The 2011 American healthcare system reform illustrates perfectly
the computerization of a number of Medicare activities. Are the
current security measures and regulation rules enough to guarantee
the functioning of the system concerned with such an important
issue as health?
Philip
Gagner:Let me,
somewhat artificially, divide healthcare technologies into two
parts: First are those that actually deliver healthcare (such
as EEG machines and which I will label "medical devices")
and second are those that keep patient histories and perform
billing and financial systems (which are generally called Electronic
Healthcare Records systems). I think that, given current technologies,
these must be viewed separately, although some devices such
as sleep apnea PAP machines, some dialysis machines, and some
insulin dispensers are both therapeutic and keepers of records.
With regard to
medical devices, the current security situation is appalling.
At a recent Black Hat conference, a security researcher demonstrated
how easily he could hack medical devices such as an insulin
pump. The researcher, Jerome Radcliffe, was interested in the
security of his own insulin pump and he discovered that there
was essentially no security at all in the device: He could remotely
control it with a simple radio transceiver, assisted by a java
applet provided by the device manufacturer.1
More and more medical
devices are being networked, and those networks are connected
to the Internet. This is true both for home monitoring and for
use in physicians' offices and hospitals. The convenience of
remote access (as well as remote control) makes such connections
inevitable.2 The increasing
use of wearable monitoring devices (often connected to smartphones)
presents other security issues, both privacy issues and even
the continued good health of their users.
Connecting a device
to a smart phone is easy. However, smart phones are notoriously
easy to hack, and any system that uses them is vulnerable to
denial of service, eavesdropping, man in the middle, and insertion
of dangerously false data or commands. These devices are generally
connected wirelessly, and the protocols that they use (CGM and
serial Bluetooth, for example) are also fatally insecure. In
addition to wearable sensors, hospital equipment is increasingly
connected to networks, and the security used is generally non-existent
or easy to compromise.
If the possibility
of remote commands to mis-delivery insulin is not sufficiently
alarming, consider the group of researchers who were able to
gain wireless access to a commercially available heart defibrillator
and pacemaker. They were able to do so in an undetectable manner,
and claimed that they could easily have set the device to kill
the user, had the device been in a human body.3
Many millions of
such devices are implanted or worn today, and tens of thousands
more are prescribed or implanted each day. For existing devices,
correcting even the most blatant security flaws is an intractable
problem. As Gollakota et al. point out, such devices,
have limited memory and limited possibility of upgrade. Replacing
them would often require major surgery with high risks. In addition,
using cryptographically secure techniques might actually endanger
the patients, for example if doctors at a different hospital
required emergency access to the device.
For future devices,
security can, and must, be built into the devices. Existing
medical standards are inadequate, and all software (including
crypto software) for medical devices has special requirements
of reliability and proper fail-safe modes. All software is notoriously
prone to unanticipated bugs, and the more complex the device,
the more prone to bugs it becomes. Security for medical devices
must be simple, and at the same time highly resistant to passive
(e.g. unauthorized monitoring) and active attacks. Active
attacks here mean attacks that issue unauthorized commands to
the medical devices.
Adopting rigorous
medical device communication standards and thorough device testing
can reduce the above problems for future devices. Today, there
are no universally accepted standards, and there is little if
any penetrability testing. Even so simple a method as wearing
a removable metal shield over the implanted device can significantly
reduce radio remote control hacking (see footnote 3), but these
are not generally known to, or even thought about, by doctors.
The difficulties
of allowing access to authorized medical providers while denying
it to unauthorized ones, ties the problems of device security
to problems in electronic healthcare records (HER). The healthcare
records industry is fragmented not only along national borders,
but also within nations. In many countries there are multiple
competing systems of EHR, with the United States being the worst
example. Simply obtaining a patient's electronic healthcare
records can be such a bureaucratic and technical nightmare that
doctors often merely fax them. This is even more true for records
might be stored on incompatible systems, or systems with incompatible
authorization protocols
When healthcare
records are stored electronically, there are no universally
accepted security standards. There are various laws in various
countries regarding patient privacy, but from a technical standpoint,
these are meaningless. If my doctor has my records on an office
computer, and a worker in the doctor's office, on the same network,
downloads a pirated electronic game containing computer viruses
and Trojan horses, then all the policies and laws in the world
have no effect. A famous case of public disclosure involved
cancer records of the actress Farrah Fawcett and other celebrities.
In 2008, an unauthorized employee with an administrative password
was easily able to access them and sold them to the press.4
Security of EHR,
like security of medical devices, is both a technological problem
and a medical problem. As medical devices and medical records
systems become more and more integrated, issues of security
and privacy become issues of medical ethics and of sound medical
practice. Just as doctors should not use equipment on which
they has not been trained, neither should they use computer
systems that they don't understand. But, every day, in every
country, they do.
Social and legal
systems must be changed to address these issues. First, we can
no longer tolerate fragmentation of EHR standards. To be minimally
medically acceptable, an EHR system must be able to forward
records to at least the likely set of medical providers My company,
Schloer Consulting, has designed a system that provides for
electronic translation and interchange of EHR between all major
standards, and uses biometric security and encrypted channels
as integral components. This is not a perfect solution, but
it is far superior to most systems.
Devising secure
technical solutions for EHR within one group - a nation, for
example - is not that difficult, but it is expensive. It requires
cooperation and enforced standards between providers, and between
providers and payers.5 In the
United States, such cooperation has been mandated by recently
passed legislation, what Republicans there term "ObamaCare".
We do not think that this legislation goes far enough and it
certainly does not solve, or even address, the problems globally.
Medical device
and EHR cyber security standards both must be rigorous, and
both ought to require thorough penetration testing. The first
murder by cyber attack probably has not occurred - although
we would not know if it had - but in today's world, it is a
very real possibility. The first major releases of EHR have,
indeed, occurred. Present security technologies for medical
devices and records are totally inadequate. We can correct this
with a combination of legal, ethical, and technological changes,
but resources must be made available to do this. I do not see
this happening to nearly the extent that is required.
The Personalized Healthcare Initiative, a recently launched
project in the USA, has set itself the goal of using clinical
and genomic information to improve the effectiveness, safety
and quality of treatment for patients by adapting treatments
to each individual's medical identity. Would this kind of project
be possible on an international scale or are the established
healthcare systems, such as the French one characterized by
universal coverage, the most efficient system we can hope for
at this scale?
Philip
Gagner:The US healthcare
system is a disaster. People in the USA pay four times as much
as most of the civilized world for healthcare, without significantly
better outcomes (and in many cases, such as infant mortality,
much worse outcomes). Despite the deplorable state of both its
public and its private healthcare, the US remains a leader in
medical technology research. One of the most ambitious and controversial
high-tech programs is the Personalized Healthcare Initiative
(PHCI).
In the words of
the US Department of Health and Human Services official documents:
"The Personalized
Health Care Initiative will improve the safety, quality and
effectiveness of healthcare for every patient in the US. By
using "genomics", or the identification of genes
and how they relate to drug treatment, personalized health
care will enable medicine to be tailored to each person's
needs."6
The PHC has two
guiding principles and four goals:
Principle
1: Provide federal leadership supporting research addressing
individual aspects of disease and disease prevention with the
ultimate goal of shaping preventive and diagnostic care to match
each person's unique genetic characteristics.
Principle
2: Create a "network of networks" to aggregate
anonymous health care data to help researchers establish patterns
and identify genetic "definitions" to existing diseases.
The
four goals are generally to (1) link clinical with genetic information;
(2) protect individuals from unauthorized or discriminatory use
of genetic information; (3) ensure the accuracy and clinical validity
of genetic testing; and (4) develop common policies for access
to genomic databases. It is notable that neither of the two guiding
principles explicitly includes either ethical or privacy concerns.
The second goal (and to a limited extent the fourth) addresses
individual privacy concerns but, as I read the descriptions of
them, fail to recognize that privacy is, in fact, in conflict
with the other goals and principles.
PHCI builds on
prior U.S. law, primarily the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination
Act (GINA) that prohibits most uses of genetic information by
employers and by health insurers. This law, according to the
NIH National Human Genome Research Institute, is required to
ensure that individual healthcare can flourish without patients
worrying that test results may adversely affect their work or
insurance situation.
It is worth focusing
on GINA because it is both an inspiration for, and intimately
connected with, the implementation of PHCI and because the concern
about whether patients will risk bad non-medical consequences
from a medical test is a valid one. Employers are rationally
less likely to hire and train an employee who carries a genetic
marker for early death. Similarly, private insurance companies
are less likely to provide health insurance to somebody who
is more likely than average to develop a severe condition requiring
expensive medical care, if they have the option.
Employers are relatively
easy to regulate. Their actions are, to the employees, quite
public, and measures in the US such as work hours, minimum wage,
and even anti-discrimination laws have been widely successful.
Because this is another anti-discrimination statute, it also
is likely to be widely observed and honored.
Insurance companies
are another matter. American insurance law does not protect
people with non-genetic indicators of future bad health, such
as cancer polyps or a negative X-ray diagnosis. In fact, GINA
actually leaves them worse off, because, deprived of clearly
relevant predictive data, insurers must rely on less reliable
indicators or on secondary sources, such as treatments given.
This means, at best, attempts to indirectly circumvent the prohibition,
as well as the use of an inconsistent set of predictors. It
means increased randomness as to outcomes, which in turn means
that the overall variance in cost of insurance premiums will
rise for the population. Because negative diagnosis can be inferred
from treatment (and the use of this data is not prohibited),
it means that patients will be less willing to undergo preventative
care methodologies if they perceive them as likely to raise
their premiums.7
Second, patients
who receive bad news about their genetic testing will, rationally,
opt-in for higher medical insurance coverage, and patients who
receive good news will, rationally, opt for less. The outcome
is an overall smaller population with more healthcare risks,
and the GINA goal of spreading the risk through the population
cannot possibly be satisfied.
The distinction
between genomic information and other medical information is,
in my view, arbitrary and without any valid basis in science.
If you consider a future where genetic testing technologies
are low cost and commonplace, and where better genomic knowledge
predicts more and more about human physiology (including disease
processes), then such testing becomes just another medical tool,
like a biopsy. The entire idea behind GINA, the distinction
between genomic disease probabilities and observable current
medical conditions is a false distinction, and the underlying
policy problem is that insurers are permitted (in the United
States) to discriminate by risk pool manipulation based on any
medical test.
In a society, such
as the French medical system, where essentially 100% of the
population is in the same risk pool, there is no discrimination
by excluding those with genetic markers perceived as negative.
Many of the features of PHCI and of GINA are based on policies
to prevent such exclusion, but they do not solve the problem
in a way likely to succeed, nor are such features necessary
or desirable in other nations.
Whether or not
prohibiting discrimination by employers is another matter. To
me, it seems probable that such a prohibition would be both
necessary on moral and social grounds, and effective, and similar
prohibits are found in French and other European nation laws.
Other provisions
of PHCI remain valid, and appear to hold great promise both
for clinical treatment and public health. Genomics testing is
still expensive, but far less so than it was a decade ago -
by as much as 500%. This cost will continue to decrease, and
equipment to sequence DNA and DNA fragments will be available
at any large hospital in developed countries. With present technologies,
much of the analysis required to perform genetic tests is done
by highly trained people, but nearly all of this can, very likely,
be automated. One researcher at George Washington University
Hospital is developing large molecule detection devices that
cost less than ten dollars and are disposable. These particular
devices test for certain antibodies, but similar technologies
are feasible for DNA marker testing.
The medical risks
of genomic testing - as distinguished from risks of genomic
diagnosis - are almost non-existent for adults, and minor for
infants and fetuses. Assuming that current cost reduction trends
continue, and that an increasing number of disease processes
are linked to genetic markers, demand by physicians and patients
will increase. Pharmacogenetics, allowing the targeted prescription
of drugs based on DNA and large molecule markers, has entered
medical practice and has been successful.8
Low cost and large-scale
genetic testing provides two very different benefits: First,
it has clinical utility, that is, it can alert healthcare providers
to increased probabilities of certain outcomes for an individual
patient. Second, it can provide a database for medical research.
These two benefits have two sets of parallel risks. In the clinical
practice case, the risks include the psychological burden of
knowing that one is at higher risk for a certain condition (which
may lead to behavioral changes that are harmful to the individuals
overall health, such as fad diets, wasting money on charlatan
healers, or even taking unnecessary medications), and can include
false complacency based on negative test results).9
By way of example,
consider a newborn screened for genetic markers for cystic fibrosis.
Early diagnosis of that condition is believed to significantly
improve clinical outcomes by allowing prompt administration
of pancreatic enzymes and treatment of infections.10
There are, of course, corresponding risks, and one can easily
identify the risk of incorrect test results among them. Nevertheless,
as a matter of clinical utility, one must determine whether
the evidence-based benefits outweigh the evidence-based risks.
From the public
health viewpoint (which is the viewpoint in which the database
referred to above is useful), there is a significant benefit
to large scale genetic testing. But, since the public at large
will carry the cost burden, the public health benefits and risks
must also be measured. As a matter of basic research, the type
of database envisioned by PHCI will be valuable, and a simple
example is correlating gene markers on one DNA segment with
those on another and comparing them with other observed health
information. Such database mining has already found correlations,
and has found areas for further (non genomic) research into
specific disease processes. The problem here is that, to achieve
the benefits, individual data including environmental data must
be stored in the database. The more data that are stored, and
the greater the degree of public access, the more difficult
it becomes to protect (or obscure) the identity and privacy
of the tested individuals.
An example might
be helpful here. Consider a database that contained the following
information: A male individual, (name and exact address obscured
in the database) mixed Caucasian-Asian ancestry brown hair,
dark brown eyes (all easily determinable from DNA markers),
born July 2009, early medical history includes persistent cough,
stomach swelling, lives in a farming community near Nice, France,
within 5 km of a fertilizer storage and processing facility,
and has some genetic markers for cystic fibrosis. Given this
information, it very likely would be possible, even easy, to
identify the particular individual. At present, testing infants
at birth for cystic fibrosis (particularly if there is a family
history) is commonplace. But the results of that testing are
not stored in a large and generally accessible database, and
so are not available to neighbors, potential employers of other
family members, the press, or charlatans hoping to peddle quackery
to distressed parents.
A large public
database with highly personal and traditionally private information
is, by its very nature, inconsistent with individual privacy.
The more one limits access to such data, the less likely the
data are to be used for useful research. The more access one
provides, the fewer realistic assurance of privacy one can give.
This problem cannot be solved by legislation or by technology
- it is simply that two different but worthwhile goals are inconsistent.
One must decide how important the privacy issues are, and how
valuable the research results will be, and then adjust the database
content and access to achieve the balance.
In conclusion,
he United States, first with GINA and later with PHCI, has determined
to create a highly regulated national database of individual
genomic information. The designers of the system are correctly
concerned with the individual privacy issues and with public
health risk issues, including those described here. The Obama
administration has determined that the probable public benefits
outweigh the public and individual risks, and this is likely
the correct decision. But, it is in my view, a decision in an
area fatally marred by the US healthcare payment and insurance
coverage system. An insurance company that, in partial or complete
defiance of the law, uses genomic information to reduce its
payment risk will make greater profits than one that does not.
Since the purpose of corporations is to maximize profits, this
pressure to gain information will be intense. And although the
US law prohibits using individual data, it does not, as I read
it, prohibit using genomic information to create risk pools
by statistically analyzing the data after removing individual
identification. The smaller (the more specific) the risk pool,
the more this becomes like discrimination against individuals.
There is a large grey area of vagueness here, and insurance
companies will undoubtedly exploit it.
By contrast, in
a system where healthcare coverage is universal, the calculus
becomes much easier. Assuming that reasonable measures are taken
to maximize privacy and minimize security and penetration risks,
the benefit to the public of such a database seem to quite clearly
outweigh the risks. Genomic markers generally indicate a probability,
not a certainty, of medical conditions, and genes generally
work in combination to produce physiological effects. Understanding
probabilistic evidence in favor or against clinical therapeutic
measures only comes with large populations11,
and such a database is likely to reduce the number of expensive
clinical trials. In addition, knowing what genetic predispositions
exist in the population as a whole is valuable to public health
officials.
Genomic information,
in databases or otherwise, is not different in kind from other
medical information, it is just newer. The same measures that
are necessary to protect people from disclosure of private matters
are necessary for genomic information, not more and not less.
Those features of PIHC that do not relate specifically to the
US healthcare insurance industry can, and should, be adopted
in other countries and, to the extent politically possible,
the PIHC database should be extended to an international genomic
database of the human race.
1)
Hacking Medical Devices for Fun and Insulin: Breaking the Human
SCADA System, Jerome Radcliffe, http://www.blackhat.com/html/bh-us-11/bh-us-11-briefings.html
(retrieved October 19, 2011).
2) Wearable Wireless Sensors, ABI Research, 3Q 2009
3) They Can Hear Your Heartbeats: Non-Invasive Security for
Implantable Medical Devices. Gollakota, Hassanieh, Ransford,
Katabi, Fu, In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM. August 2011.
4) Los Angeles Times, May 09, 2009. (retrieved October 14, 2011)
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/may/09/local/me-hospital9
5) In the data processing world, it is often
said, jokingly, that the best things about standards are that
(1) there are so many to choose from and (2) if you don't like
the existing ones, wait a month because they change so frequently.
This is certainly true in healthcare records management, and the
only feasible solution is to mandate, by government regulation,
that systems must be compatible with (that is, capable of interchanging
data with a certain standard of choice). Yet, this very requirement
adds complexity and new security vulnerabilities.
6) http://www.hhs.gov/myhealthcare/
(October 18, 2011).
7) This analysis of insurance company reactions to GINA was first
and cogently argued by Professor Russell Korokin, J.D., UCLA Center
for Society and Genetics and UCLA Law School, and Dr. Rahul Rajkumar,
M.D. J.D. of Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. The
conclusions from the argument, however, are mine, and not to be
attributed to them.
8) Genetic Testing in Clinical Practice, Lamberts and Uitterlinden,
Annu. Rev. Med 2009, 60:431-42.
9) What is the clinical utility of genetic testing? Scott
D. Gross, M.D. and Muin J. Khoury, M.D. Ph.D., Genetics in Medicine,
Vol. 8 No. 7 (July 2006).
10) Ibid at 449.
11) Genetic Testing in Clinical Practice,
Annual Review of Medicine, Vol. 60: 431-442 (Volume publication
date February 2009).
.D
Climate Change / Sustainability
Climate change
Climate change is an issue that already affects and will increasingly
impact all nations. The complexity of the problem is intrinsically
linked with overarching societal issues. Progress is required
on effective mitigation, adaptation, reduction of greenhouse gas
emissions, development of green technologies, and political support
for the establishment of effective international and national
policies. UNESCO
Climate change affects the fundamental requirements for health
- clean air, safe drinking water, sufficient food and secure shelter.
The global warming that has occurred since the 1970s was causing
over 140.000 excess deaths annually by the year
2004.
Many of the major killers such as diarrhoeal diseases, malnutrition,
malaria and dengue are highly climate-sensitive and are expected
to worsen as the climate changes.
Areas with weak health infrastructure - mostly in developing countries
- will be the least able to cope without assistance to prepare
and respond.
Reducing emissions of greenhouse gases through better transport,
food and energy-use choices can result in improved health. WHO - World Health Organisation
Every ton of recycled paper saves almost 400 gallons of
oil, three cubic yards of landfill and seventeen trees. Americans consumes six times more energy than the
world average.
The energy saved from one recycled aluminumcan
will operate a television set for three hours.
As many as 17 trees are required to make one ton of
paper.
Making aluminum from recycled aluminum uses 90 to 95 percent
less energy than making aluminum from bauxite ore.
The energy saved from recycling one glass bottle will light
a 100-watt light bulb for four hours. NYU
Sustainability Sustainability is the capacity to endure. For humans,
sustainability is the long-term maintenance of well being, which
has environmental, economic, and social dimensions, and encompasses
the concept of stewardship, the responsible management of resource
use. In ecology, sustainability describes how biological
systems remain diverse and productive over time, a necessary precondition
for human well-being. Long-lived and healthy wetlands and forests
are examples of sustainable biological systems. Wikipedia
Chandran
Nair, founder and CEO, GIFT - Global Institute For Tomorrow
His new book is entitled Consumptionomics: Asias
role in Reshaping Capitalism and Saving the Planet.
How to Accommodate 9 Billion and Save the Environment
Worlds largest population centers, centered in Asia, cannot
aspire to live like Americans
HONG KONG: At the height of the financial crisis in 2008 Asians
were urged by Western politicians and economists to consume more
to help rebalance the global economy. At the same time, during
the run-up to the climate talks in Copenhagen, Asians, especially
the Chinese, were scolded that they had to be responsible global
citizens and reduce carbon emissions.
Few global leaders
and commentators dared connect the dots and openly acknowledge
that asking Asians to reduce emissions while asking them to consume
more simply did not add up.
Now try imagining
a world with three Americas. Difficult? But thats where
economists say were heading.
Within two decades
at most, China will overtake the US and become the worlds
biggest economy. Within another 20 years, by 2050, India will
be as big.
And what will drive
this? Human aspiration apparently aided by free markets,
technology and finance. As the cheerleader of globalization, Thomas
Friedman has written: World population is projected to rise
from 6.7 billion to 9 billion between now and 2050, and more and
more of those people will want to live like Americans.
This is unthinkable. If the United States is joined by two more
economic masses as big or bigger, as on current trends
the American economy will also have trebled in size by mid-century
all aspiring to live like Americans, our planets
resources will be stressed beyond imagination.
Wherever we look
be it carbon emissions, oil and gas, food shortages, water,
rare earths, fisheries or forests there just isnt
enough for the world to soak up another two consumption-driven
Americas.
To stop heading down
this road, Asian governments must immediately recognize that a
bleak future lies ahead if Asians attempt to live out an aspiration
to consume like Americans. The current debt crisis in the US,
ultimately fueled by over-consumption, has even led Chinas
media to lecture the Americans that its time to revisit
the time-tested commonsense that one should live within ones
means.
Above all, Asia must
reject the blinkered views of those who urge Asians to consume
relentlessly be they Western economists and leaders who
want the region to become a motor of growth or Asian
governments convinced that ever-expanding economies are what their
populations need.
Instead the world
and Asia first of all must find alternative ways
of promoting human development. Asian governments must shape expectations
critically around the issue of rights with the clear focus on
the following basic needs: food as well as security and safety,
water and sanitation, low-cost housing, education and primary
health care. It must be made clear, for example, that car ownership
is not a right. Growing demand for non-essential goods and services
must reflect true costs.
Asian governments
should look at the Arab spring and understand that what the people
on the street want is not some utopian democratic state but a
state that even with imperfections focuses on the key areas of
human development and progress. Governments should wake up to
the reality that in the region, the majority of people
more than 2 billion in total still do not have equal access
to the basic necessities of clean water/sanitation, housing or
adequate nutrition.
Asian nations will need
frameworks of fiscal measures, land-use practices and new approaches
to social organization that can create sustainable national economies.
This requires shaping expectations through public education that
aspiring to live like Americans is a bad idea for the creation of
more equitable societies in a crowded world and unattainable.
Resource management
must be at the center of all policymaking, and putting a proper
price on greenhouse gas emissions and the resources we use via
taxes, licenses and other charges.
Measures constraining
resource usage must be extended to every area of life at
play and work. They must become an inherent part of all economic
and social policy.
Countries in the
region must structure incentives to reward more is less
activities. Its not that people must be poor, rather consumption
should be funneled in ways that do not increase the demands on
our already-stressed resource base, deplete or degrade our environment,
and put at risk the livelihood and health of hundreds of millions.
A key step: fiscal
and labor policies aimed at strengthening local economies that
both reduce poverty and prevent mass migration to cities.
Curbs on the resource-intensive
practices of industrialized agriculture would further aid development.
Where basic living needs are met, employment policies can explore
other directions that reduce wasteful consumption, such as shorter
working weeks or more training. People must be encouraged to regard
quality-of-life issues as extending beyond the size of their disposable
incomes.
Energy networks using
renewable sources in conjunction with pricing to penalize excessive
use would be another likely target of state funding. But technologies,
particularly government-supported ones, should be aimed at spreading
well-being rather than only maximizing economic returns. Its
better to forestall environmental problems than expensively treat
them.
Another area to be challenged
is how consumption-driven capitalism has developed techniques to
displace traditional outlooks, and whether these can be countered.
One example is todays preference for owning over yesterdays
for doing. Previously children played games, now they have PlayStations.
We should also revisit
the possibilities offered by traditional cultural attitudes, such
as the preference many Indians have for a vegetarian diet and
an age-old way of life that is increasingly under threat as Indians
seek to ape Western lifestyles.
In education, ideas
about constraints, the way we use and manage resources must be
placed at the center of learning, especially in economics and
business courses not brainwashing, but aggressively countering
the promotion of unfettered consumption that lies at the heart
of modern commerce and advertising.
For too long, schools
and universities have been regarded as the training ground for
economic growth, be it preparing people for the disciplines of
company life or learning marketable skills. Instead,
education should be redirected towards giving people an understanding
of limits, the human impact on the world and the consequences.
We should return
to stressing the public interest rather than individual rights.
This is in stark contrast to the arguments of consumption-driven
capitalism with its claims that allowing everyone to pursue individual
self-interest eventually leads to benefits for all.
Governments must
also back policies with constant reminders that being well-off
involves balancing a range of factors, among them ensuring social
equity and an environment fit to be handed on to future generations.
This wont be
easy in Asia, especially in societies which for the last few decades
have been repeatedly told that all limits can be overcome and
prosperity can only come from conventional forms of consumption-driven
economic growth. Required is a strong, confident state, one with
an understanding that its legitimacy depends on changing direction
and better serving the needs of the disenfranchised majority.
If the governments
of the region rise to this challenge, the decision-makers in Beijing,
Delhi and Jakarta will determine whether our world has a future
not the capitals of Europe and America.
Douglas
Mulhall and Diana den Held for the Academic Chair 'Cradle
to Cradle for Innovation and Quality' - Rotterdam School of Management,
Erasmus University
Club of Amsterdam: Sustainable area development needs to tackle
the core environmental issues related to - amongst others - mobility,
housing, consumption, connectivity. Reuben Abraham from the Center
for Emerging Markets Solutions in India states that by 2050, it
is expected that the world will be 80 percent urban. Both India
and China are witnessing the greatest migrations in human history
as hundreds of millions leave the countryside for urban areas.
What are your thoughts on this? Is a global collaboration needed
and also realistic?
Douglas Mulhall and Diana den Held: First of
all, if we really want to make this, we need to design buildings
and area's that contribute positively to their environment, not
just be 'less bad'.
Sustainability as defined by current regulations and laws, is
more part of the problem than the solution.
Eco-efficiency that treats people as 'human resources' will not
solve area development questions; it will only make them worse.
That's why C2C goes beyond sustainability.
Diana den Held: It has now been shown that it is possible
to make buildings that can clean the air, contribute to the biosphere
and supply energy and clean water, but further steps are necessary,
especially for area development. We really have to help each other
speed up. That's why I feel it is so important to work on and
communicate about Cradle to Cradle® case studies, as we are
doing here at the C2C® Chair at the Rotterdam School of Management.
My favourite example of international cooperation is the Cradle
to Cradle Islands project, led by the province of Friesland. No
other project in the world has so many different cultures working
together simultaneously on C2C.
It's silly when you think about it, but in present days, most
islands depend on the mainland for their raw materials. Which
makes islands perfect small scale pilots for resource management.
And I'm not just talking about materials when I say that. Think
of fresh water as well: the demand for water on the islands keeps
increasing, mainly due to an increase in tourists and it's always
the highest when the offer is lowest: in summer. Most islands
are connected to the mainland by large waterpipes, to ensure there
is enough drinking water available.
Recently the Minister of Environmental Protection Administration
of Taiwan, Mr. Shu-hung Shen has, after been invited to do so
by Prof. Dr. Braungart, announced Taiwan to become a honorary
member of the Cradle to Cradle® Island community. Isn't it
fantastic to see how such a project now can grow from small pilot
islands like Ameland and Texel, to an island this size and use
the first results of the C2C Islands project directly in Taiwan
strategies?
Taiwan can take the next step, and together these islands can
show others what they have experienced and learned. I think this
is a beautiful example of international collaboration on Cradle
to Cradle implementation, a.o. in area development. It's not just
possible. It's being done. Right now.
.E
Economy / Stock Market / Poverty
Economy / Stock
Market
In 1980 the world's financial assets, comprising banking assets,
stock market capitalization and bond market value, amounted to
108% of the value of annual production, more or less in line with
each other. 25 years later the total value of global financial
assets amounted to $165 trillion, nearly four times the size of
global GDP of $45 trillion.
In 1980 bank deposits made up 42%of all financial securities.
By 2005, this had fallen to 27%, the remaining deposits were being
used by capital markets and investment banks to fuel corporate
development.
In the year to April 06, overall turnover on the foreign exchange
markets averaged around $2.9 trillion a day. That's around 60
times the value of the world's GDP for the whole year, and more
than 10 times the size of the combined daily turnover on all the
world's equity markets.
Foreign exchange trading increased by 38% between April 2005 and
April 2006, and has more than doubled since 2001. STWR - Share The World's Resources
Poverty Decades
of economic globalization have created the widest ever gap between
rich and poor, both within and between nations. STWR - Share The World's Resources
Global income is more
than $31 trillion a year, but 1.2 billion people of the world's
population earn less than $1 a day. World Bank
The Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) of the poorest 48 nations (ie a quarter of the world's
countries) is less than the wealth of the world's three richest
people combined.
World Centric
Hardy
F. Schloer,
President and Managing Director, Schloer Consulting Group
Hardy is a strong team builder, entrepreneur, accomplished scientist
and visionary theoretical thinker with extensive people and public
relation skills.
Club of Amsterdam:
Does the
2008-2009 crisis, by its consequences, need to be considered as
the main economic challenge we now face; or was this crisis a
painful highlight of the economic and financial defaults of our
globalized economy?
Hardy F. Schloer:
The short answer is: Both. Nevertheless, a longer and more careful
view at this subject, looking perhaps into the next 2 decades,
reveals a much more complex picture. The current global economic
and geopolitical situation, as it will develop between 2010 and
2030, expectations are not comforting, including the prognosis
of conflict and deeper economic adversity. Nevertheless, an informed
understanding of these current and future trends could contribute
to innovative solutions to manage these events, at least on a
case-to-case basis.
The world continues in a fast transforming and unstable global
framework of complex problems and multi-dimensional influences.
A cluster of different types of crisis has now matured into a
"perfect storm" that will transform the entire planet
very extensively. These crises are systemic problems, and are
therefore very difficult to manage.
The crisis of 2008-2009 was not the real and pivotal global crisis,
though it felt so to many; it was simply a mild and early marker
of what is yet to come on a much larger, more sustained scale
and of what will have greater consequence. Over the past decades,
Western societies have committed serious errors in their economic
planning and fiscal policies. The results are dependency on accelerated
deficit spending and an enormous accumulation of external debt.
The conflicts of
the future will be conflicts of social unrest. We are seeing this
not just across the Arab world, in Syria, Libya, Egypt, but also
across England and Israel during August 2011. We believe that
this wave of social unrest will continue to spread throughout
the world in the years to come. This social unrest comes exactly
as I predicted in 2010 and even before. The world is not just
economically but moreover socially in a state of redefinition
that will bring in a period of extensive chaos and be accompanied
by global anxiety.
Trends in the United States
The United States
government is bankrupt; its finances are beyond the point of no
return. The reoccurring debate over the debt ceiling only serves
to obscure this painful fact. The downgrade earlier in 2011 of
American debt by Standard & Poor's to AA+ is the first sign
of this fact seeping into general consciousness, the facts about
an intractable budgetary predicament. The only plausible future
scenario is default by the U.S. government, or significant devaluation
of the dollar - which is basically the same thing in monetary
terms; this will happen regardless of further modifications to
the debt ceiling.
In the midst of the debt crisis, the U.S. will undergo the greatest
strain to its cohesion as a single country since the civil war,
more then 130 years ago. It will not only lose its global status
and leadership in governance and lifestyle, it will internationally
become more and more economically and politically ignored. Social
tensions will again test the breaking point of the American Union.
Although this may be speculative from today's perspective, the
trends are clear and the likely outcomes of these social tensions
have a number of possible consequences that include international
isolationism similar to the pre-World War I era, and a potential
break up into 3 or 4 separate geographical and cultural units.
We project China will overtake the U.S. economy in 2016 or latest
2017. A good share of the U.S. economy has become devoted to a
high level of military spending and maintaining the country's
government debt. In contrast, China has relatively little debt,
relatively low military spending in comparison (2.2% of GDP versus
4.7% in the USA) and is investing in the country's prosperity.
This disparity will accelerate the eventual passing of power between
these two countries.
Unlike Europe, the
U.S. will be faced with the added transition of an ethnic and
consequently cultural shift towards a Hispanic society. Hispanics
traditionally tend to prefer working in smaller companies and
groups, as opposed to big corporations, and prefer working in
small manufacturing and trade as opposed to finance and banking.
The dominance of the U.S. in international banking was largely
due to the dominance of certain European groups, British and German
for example, in the U.S. mainstream after 1900. In the future,
the U.S. will start acting like a Hispanic society, and will have
stronger ties with Latin America than with the East or West. America's
new friends are increasingly found in the south - not overseas.
Trends in Europe
The end of the Western
financial model extends from New York to Frankfurt. Europe also
suffers from U.S. fractional reserve-style banking and insurmountably
high debt levels in nearly all states, with Greece, Spain, Ireland,
Italy and France being some of the most prominent examples In
the U.S., national bankruptcy is being driven by the debt and
refusal to deal with the debt. In the Euro zone, it is driven
by the discrepancy between currency management and the political
integration that has been a hallmark of the European project in
the last few decades. The French and German answer to the currency
problems is that all Europeans should become like Germans, but
other nations strongly resist this. Although there is a single
currency for this geographical area, debt is issued by governments,
not by the European Union. Without any politically effective means
to resolve these tensions, the crisis will continue to spiral
downward. Europe further suffers from the costs of a demographic
transition towards a substantially higher average age, and a fast
diminishing population in several key countries.
The repercussions of this crisis will create a substantial power
shift from a Western and Caucasian dominated world to an Eastern
and Asian dominated world, with South America gaining influence
on its northern neighbours. The West will begin a very long economic
and social decline well into 2025 to 2030 while concurrently losing
influence in the world.
The waves of social unrest that will continue to sweep the world
in waves of climactic events will also affect China to some degree,
but in a way that is a bit disconnected from their economic process.
The currently more police-controlled state will very slowly give
away to a much milder form of governance, as we have seen happen
in Shanghai, and bring a more balanced form of existence to Chinese
citizens all across the nation. The government is extremely active
in staying on top and is well engaged in political and social
developments in the world. But in order not lose their migration
to a position of global power; Chinese leaders must focus on maintaining
stability and relative peacefulness in the country. The Chinese
government will however not hesitate in the future to make a point
of power, if deemed necessary.
China's internal
political weakness is exacerbated by fast shifts to a male dominated
society (males outnumber females in increasing numbers due to
frequent abortions of female fetuses). This partially results
from forced family planning, and partially from the traditional
preference for male children. But, in an era when more boy children
survive than previously, it also means more internal conflict
amount young males. This fact may move China into a more conflict
willing society and may cause external conflicts in the 2020s
or 2030s and beyond. A corrective measure here would seem to be
a priority.
From 2025-2030 onwards, the world in general will be sobered by
deep crisis, and ready for a renaissance. Just as Europe built
out of the ashes of the world wars a period of unprecedented peace,
so Asia and the rest of the world will be ready to experience
a new age of enlightenment. The meaning of globalization will
have gone from being, what can everyone steal from himself throughout
this planet, to discovering how we can live together, on a global
scale.
How can the westernized
countries best manage their downfall in power facing the rise
of the new superpowers such as China, India or Brazil?
Hardy F. Schloer:They cannot.
However, the West must do two things to soften the landing and
to position for a better future later.
Firstly, the West
must seek economic investment from the East. An increasingly self
sufficient China that migrates from a export society to a self
consumption society is less interested in such investments in
the future, therefore such investments must be thought after now,
not later. Secondly, the West must focus on producing products
that are increasingly important to the East. The gold of the future
is agricultural commodities and clean drinking water. Especially
Eastern Europe has here a very large and unused capacity that
could bring very advantages trends to a region that has been economically
challenged for a long time. Thirdly, Europe must change its immigration
policies in the nearest term to attract young people from abroad
to relocate into Europe and to make up for the loss of a young
working population in that region due to a fast accelerating demographic
shift. Developed Western countries are aging dramatically; the
average age is over fifty, compared to for example Turkey, Malaysia
or the Middle East where average ages are between 19 and 23 years
of age.
The majority
of experts, professionals and the public opinion now all agree
governments provided wrong answers and policies to various economic
challenges in the last decades: what should be the measures taken
for the future? Do politics still have a strong role to play in
an ever more globalised economy?
Hardy F. Schloer:
First of all, governments do not run the world. Goldman Sachs,
Citibank or global multinational corporations with interconnected
networks run the world; not in a way of conspiracy, but simple
in the way they seek through maximization of profits also maximum
leverage of their global influences. Today, governments can be
bought, and they are bought through political donations, lawyers,
lobbyists, and economic threats by powerful economic interests.
When a government is bought, it becomes irrelevant.
Secondly, no one can deny that the benefits of globalization are
manifold. A global financial perspective has facilitated the standardization
of products, as well as the rapid movement of goods, people, capital,
technologies, and information around the world. The rapid adoption
of information and communications technology makes it easier to
fragment the production of goods and services, and to outsource
certain tasks to other countries. This has extended the reach
of globalization to domestic activities where workers were previously
sheltered from direct international competition. And yet, despite
some of the advantageous aspects of the trend towards global knowledge
and product sharing, the current global economic crisis shows
us that the financial system governing this interaction is obsolete
and inadequate.
What is needed here
is a vision that is radically different from the economic and
financial model of today - a model, that I, and many others have
argued, is inherently unstable, unfair and repressive. The current
model gives monetary speculation and financial derivatives a central
role in defining the character and dynamics of not only the way
in which people accumulate wealth, but also the way in which some
people impoverish others. Quite simply, the current instruments
used in the financial industry have made much of the world poorer.
Following the statistics of the World Bank and the IMF demonstrate
most clearly, that the existence of these institutions did not
prevent poverty, but make it worse over the last 50 years by substantial
margins.
According to various distinguished sources including the Bank
for International Settlements (BIS) in Switzerland, the amount
of outstanding derivatives worldwide, as of 2008 reached USD 1.144
Quadrillion, (i.e. USD 1,144 Trillion), a number that equates
to a shocking 190,000 USD per person on the planet. The term "quadrillion"
is a number usually reserved for use in complex super computing
processes or astronomical measurements, not for economists and
bankers.
Certainly, the human mind boggles when contemplating these enormous
amounts of "paper promises" holding no intrinsic value,
created by the current system's need for an ever expanding economic
value that is not based on actual goods and services. Yet, these
so called financial instruments have been used to negotiate products
and services of true value in every day's business, in spite of
such instruments' total lack of value. In other words, such empty
paper promises being used to negotiate "true value."
Nevertheless, this near fraudulent transaction is called in modern
business school language "maximizing profits" or simply
good or innovative business.
What is more, under
the complex guise of financial exactitude and an evolving spiral
of inter instrument dependency, financial derivatives have instrumentalized
risk in a way that forces ownership and property to take a new
form. History shows us that the limited liability and "absentee
ownership" in the second half of the nineteenth century marked
the beginning of a transformational shift in the way the human
collective responded to trading goods for services. With this
transformation towards unchecked liability, true ownership was
less tangible, and less based on any underlining reality. It was,
in fact, a relationship between a complex, underlying, loose process,
and the powers that be.
The event of derivatives only added another layer of obstruction
to the system and loosened the ties to reality even further, as
they act as financial instruments with absolutely no direct tie
to any particular commodity or asset. It is also important to
mention that from the perspective of personal responsibility and
stewardship, derivatives are based on the "disengagement
and financialization proceeds via the construction of indifference
to the exigencies of 'real' economic competition." (Wigan,
Duncan, 2009).
In the context of
the current financial and economic crisis, some economists argue
that the current speculative system cannot go on, unchecked, forever.
A collective, financial "reality check" will soon be
needed. What humanity must do soon, East or West, is to evaluate
some of the most basic systems. We must ask tough questions, such
as: do we need money at all to manage a functional and creative
global society? Or if we chose to use money or a money like system,
would one single currency, that serves the whole planet, be a
good step towards an economic more equal world?
.F
Biodiversity
Biodiversity is the
variety of all life forms on earth the different plants,
animals and micro-organisms and the ecosystems of which they are
a part. Australian
Government
Biodiversity for
food and agriculture includes the components of biological diversity
that are essential for feeding human populations and improving
the quality of life. It includes the variety and variability of
ecosystems, animals, plants and micro-organisms, at the genetic,
species and ecosystem levels, which are necessary to sustain human
life as well as the key functions of ecosystems. FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Human actions are contributing to irreversible losses in terms
of diversity of life on Earth. While species extinction is a natural
part of life on Earth, human activity has increased the extinction
rate by at least 100 and possibly as much as 1000 times compared
to the natural rate. Biodiversity loss has been more rapid in
the past 50 years than at any time in human history and is expected
to continue at the same pace or even to accelerate.
IUCN - International Union for Conservation of Nature
Biodiversity is
life
Biodiversity is our life Official
video of the International Year of Biodiversity 2010
The Earth's biodiversity-the rich variety of life on our planet-is
disappearing at an alarming rate. And while many books have focused
on the expected ecological consequences, or on the aesthetic,
ethical, sociological, or economic dimensions of this loss, Sustaining
Life is the first book to examine the full range of potential
threats that diminishing biodiversity poses to human health.
Edited and written
by Harvard Medical School physicians Eric Chivian and Aaron Bernstein,
along with more than 100 leading scientists who contributed to
writing and reviewing the book, Sustaining Life presents
a comprehensive - and sobering - view of how human medicines,
biomedical research, the emergence and spread of infectious diseases,
and the production of food, both on land and in the oceans, depend
on biodiversity. The book's ten chapters cover everything from
what biodiversity is and how human activity threatens it to how
we as individuals can help conserve the world's richly varied
biota. Seven groups of organisms, some of the most endangered
on Earth, provide detailed case studies to illustrate the contributions
they have already made to human medicine, and those they are expected
to make if we do not drive them to extinction. Drawing on the
latest research, but written in language a general reader can
easily follow, Sustaining Life argues that we can no longer see
ourselves as separate from the natural world, nor assume that
we will not be harmed by its alteration. Our health, as the authors
so vividly show, depends on the health of other species and on
the vitality of natural ecosystems.
With a foreword by
E.O. Wilson and a prologue by Kofi Annan, and more than 200 poignant
color illustrations, Sustaining Life contributes essential
perspective to the debate over how humans affect biodiversity
and a compelling demonstration of the human health costs. It is
the winner of the Gerald L. Young Book Award in Human Ecology
Best Sci-Tech Books of 2008 for Biology by Gregg Sapp of Library
Journal
.G
Waste / Pollution
According to the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements,
only between 25 and 55 per cent of all waste generated
in large cities is collected by municipal authorities.
The UN Development Programme (UNDP) estimates that more than five
million people die each year from diseases related to inadequate
waste disposal systems.
Industrialized countries generate more than 90 per cent
of the world's annual total of some 325-375 million tons
of toxic and hazardous waste, mostly from the chemical and petrochemical
industries.
Nearly two per cent of North America's underground aquifers
may be contaminated by dumps. Germany has identified 35,000
problem sites; Denmark has 3,200 and the Netherlands
4,000.
? According to the Worldwatch Institute, there are more than 80,000
tons of irradiated fuel and hundreds of thousands of tons of other
radioactive waste accumulated so far from the commercial generation
of electricity from nuclear power. ? GDRC - Global Development Research Center
Air pollution is a major environmental risk to health.
By reducing air pollution levels, we can help countries reduce
the global burden of disease from respiratory infections, heart
disease, and lung cancer. Indoor air pollution is estimated to cause approximately
2 million premature deaths mostly in developing countries. Almost
half of these deaths are due to pneumonia in children under 5
years of age. Urban outdoor air pollution is estimated to cause 1.3 million
deaths worldwide per year. Those living in middle-income countries
disproportionately experience this burden. WHO - World Health Organisation
Each year, the US sends 500 million tons of solid hazardous
waste to landfills and adds 3 million tons of toxic chemicals
into the air and water.
Recycling, composting and reuse can cut that waste stream by up
to 75%.
Americans consume an average of 2,200 standard two-ply napkins
per year - or the equivalent of more than six napkins per day.
NYU - New York University
Douglas
Mulhall and Diana den Held for the Academic Chair 'Cradle
to Cradle for Innovation and Quality' - Rotterdam School of Management,
Erasmus University
Club of Amsterdam:
Industrialized countries generate more than 90 per cent of the
world's annual total of some 325-375 million tons of toxic and
hazardous waste. Urban outdoor air pollution is estimated to cause
1.3 million deaths worldwide per year (source: WHO). Can you describe
the key achievements in environmentally-intelligent design since
launched in the Cradle to Cradle® movement in 2002?
Douglas Mulhall and Diana den Held: The key achievement
has been that hundreds of products and thousands of components
have been redesigned so their materials are safe for life processes
and can be recovered at the same level of quality for reuse.
Diana den Held: To be able to get there, one of the first
steps Prof. Dr. Braungart initiated was to go and talk with the
big players in the chemical industry, to go to the very core of
intelligent design. That process actually already started in the
late 80s, way before the term "Cradle to Cradle" was
introduced.
It is at these companies where important innovations have been
and still are taking place. Important, since their products are
the basic tools to work with. You cannot go and ask a furniture
company to look at the materials they are using, if healthy materials
won't be there for them to use, companies need to work together
on this.
Still, a lot of work needs to be done. But at this point of time,
hundreds of products and thousands of components have been redesigned.
Which means: these materials and products will not become 'waste'
in the old meaning of that word any more.
Please do get me right: Prof. Dr. Braungart is not asking people
to take only these types of materials as a starting point in their
concept phase. What is not available now will be there in a few
years, especially if people ask for it. But it is a given fact
that people can work with healthy materials if they want to.
In the Netherlands you can point out > 100 organisations that
are working on C2C® inspired projects or sell C2C products
that are designed to go into the biosphere, or are designed for
disassembly. It is amazing to see what has happened since the
very first broadcast, in 2006, of the Tegenlicht documentaire
'Afval is voedsel' ('Waste Equals Food') by Rob van Hattum. It's
only 5 years later, and we see companies as well as governments
and educational institutes applying the Cradle to Cradle principles.
Together they change the way (raw) materials are (re)used. And
it isn't that difficult to calculate how to profit from that.
What are the current issues when dealing with waste and pollution?
Is there a difference between developing and developed countries?
Douglas Mulhall: The main issue is that more than half
of our topsoil for agricultural production globally has been lost.
The current trends to replace fossil fuels by burning biomass
and attempting to replace lost humus with poorly designed fertilizers
is one of the most urgent topics to address. If nutrients are
incinerated along with mixed waste, the nutrients cannot be used
to replenish the soil.
Instead, mined phosphate fertilizer is used to replace some of
the nutrients. This fertilizer not only fails to replace humus
but also contains high levels of uranium and other heavy metals
that contaminate (top)soil and water.
Topsoil is generally defined as the top metre of soil, and is
central to human civilization because agriculture depends on it.
Topsoil is one of the most important materials for maintaining
a balance of climate change gases, because two thirds of the carbon
on land and in the atmosphere globally is held as nutrients in
topsoil.
Most nations, especially but not limited to those with highly
developed economies, are losing their topsoil at an alarming rate,
accelerating CO2 release and ultimately leading to non renewability
of biological resources. However, there are opportunities to restore
soil and capture CO2 by combining energy delivery with nutrient
recycling. This requires assuring that the biological nutrient
metabolisms that products are designed for are free of harmful
contaminants.
Biodegradable fabrics, polymers, and paper for example can be
designed to be compatible with biological systems so they can
contribute to restore topsoil.
In Europe, each of us produces an average of 500kg domestic
waste per year. What are the contributions everybody can do? Is
it possible to reach zero domestic waste?
Douglas Mulhall and Diana den Held: When looking
at a question like this from a Cradle to Cradle perspective, we
need to start by stating that 'zero' is the wrong goal. As Prof.
Dr. Michael Braungarts always phrases it: 'Who wants to be zero?
People want to be beneficial, they don't want to be known as nothing'.
Diana den Held: So, let's face it: customers are currently
paying tax to get rid of products that they don't want anymore
(and in many cases, of which they never wanted to be the owner).
That can be done differently: if the manufacturer designs their
products so that they can easily be taken apart, they can have
the material picked up again from the customer. As a customer,
you then go from 'paying to get rid of something' to 'being paid
to supply materials'.
You really don't need to be stuck with something as a user. For
example, you can buy a number of hours of television viewing.
And if you need something else, trade in your device. As Prof.
Dr. Braungart always puts it: 'Why should you be stuck with an
old television set if you just want to watch television?'
I'm not trying to say that everything should end up in a lease
construction. I wouldn't want huge monthly payments because all
my products are paid per month. I'd find that quite oppressive.
But I can imagine manufacturers letting users choose either monthly
payments or buying with a deposit, or something similar. It could
be useful for offices if they could lease their office chairs
on a monthly basis, for individual users it would be much better
to be paid back after use for example, having your carpet picked
up.
Today customers are able to have their Desso carpet picked up
because it is suitable for disassembly, but not a carpet of another
brand. The one is happy with what you recycle and will reward
you for it, while the other you have to take care yourself and
indirectly pay to get rid of it. Users are eventually not going
to put up with that anymore.
However, not only buyers need clarity from manufacturers; material
collectors do as well. If a disassembly company knows where a
certain material can be found in a product, they can effectively
ensure that the material be put back into the cycle.
The government will also have a role to play in this part of the
cycle. A tax on waste needs a totally different model since discarded
material is still very valuable to the end user recycling it,
the collector, the material collector and the manufacturer who
sees significant savings when it comes to buying it. This will
be even more so the case every year, since the consumption of
raw materials is still on the rise.
And then individual customers will wake up. They will realise
all of a sudden that every product they throw in the rubbish bin
is basically shaking their wallet above the same bin. I think
that we will see some momentum when customers will demand their
place in the cycle and ask companies to change the situation.
.H
Globalization
The changes
have been driven byliberalisation of trade and finance,
changes in how companies work, and improvements to transport and
communications. Institute of International Trade
The way manufactured goods are produced has changed
dramatically in the last 50 years as the cost of transport and
communications has fallen.
More and more goods are produced by global multinational
companies with production plants around the world.
The world distribution of wealth and income is highly unequal.
The richest 10% of households in the world have as much yearly
income as the bottom 90%.
BBC
Consumers spend >$63 billion/year in the world on wireless
accessories (cases, batteries, memory cards, hands-free kits,
headsets, etc). Mobile entertainment content and services (games, music,
social media, etc) revenue projected to increase from $33.2 billion
in 2010 to $38.4 billion in 2011.
CTIA - International Association for the Wireless Telecommunications
Social Media Revolution
Madanmohan
Rao, Research
Advisor, Asian Media Information and Communication Centre, Singapore
Madan is a consultant and author from Bangalore. He is the editor
of the five book series: The Asia Pacific Internet Handbook,
The Knowledge Management Chronicles, AfricaDotEdu,
World of Proverbs, and The Global Citizen.
He is the research director of Mobile Monday, a global network
of mobile and wireless communication professionals, and co-founder
of the Bangalore K-Community, a network of knowledge management
professionals. Madan is the founder of the Indian Proverbs Project,
Asia editor for M2M Insights, and world music & jazz editor
at Jazzuality and World Music Central.
Club of
Amsterdam: Globalization
accelerated through liberalisation of trade and finance, changed
production and service processes, a revolution in transport and
especially also in communications. The above video illustrates
the rapid change in the media landscape and consumer behaviour.
Has media irreversibly turned into a global platform? What can
we expect in the future in relation to local versus global culture?
Is there a danger of loosing cultural roots and values?
Madanmohan Rao:
We are seeing two major trends in media changes. In broadcast
TV, BBC and CNN used to be major agenda-setters in news, and Hollywood
set the pace for movies. Now strong players have emerged from
the Middle East (Al Jazeera), India (Bollywood), South Korea (movies),
Nigeria (Nollywood) and Mexico (telenovelas).
In digital media, social media have emerged as the new environment
of choice. They are global in nature (especially Facebook, Twitter)
- but here also there are regional variations (largely in China,
with its own home-grown social media platforms). But whichever
platform they choose (US or Chinese), social media have ushered
in person-to-person communication on an unprecedented scale.
I have charted some of these changes in my book series, The Asia-Pacific
Internet Handbook. What emerges is that new media are technologies
of power. They are not inherently good or bad, but the outcome
depends on those who have the passion and skills to use them.
In the realm of politics, social media can empower people but
can also be used by authoritarians to track dissenters and spread
rumours. In the realm of business, social media emerge as stronger
tools for consumers. In educational activities they enable peer-reinforced
learning, but also pose challenges as sources of distraction during
immersive book-oriented learning.
Social media are terrific ways to preserve and promote local cultures
(eg. I tweet Indian proverbs daily from @IndianProverbs drawn
my recent book). But in the area of language they are also reducing
grammatical competence.
The Internet is now an integrated part of doing business. This
can be both local and international. Virtual companies or services
outsource their production to firms around the world. The global
supply chain or IT services are managed through the Internet.
Who will be the winners? What role or chance will developing countries
have? How will this change the global business landscape? What
will be the role of Mega countries like China and India versus
small countries?
Madanmohan Rao:
The Internet has been a godsend for countries with diaspora populations,
especially China (an estimated 50 million people of Chinese origin
living outside China) and India (20 million diaspora population).
The Internet has become the glue for them to stay connected to
the news, culture and business of their homelands. It has also
opened up new ways for emerging economies to plug into global
workflows, eg. for offshoring activities.
Countries like India and China play along all four dimensions
of globalization: sources of production, markets for consumption,
service centres and innovation hubs. The Internet plays a key
role as a platform for knowledge flows in all these areas. And
in the domain of workplace learning, social media are powerful
enablers for organisational knowledge management, as described
in my book series on knowledge management. Indian companies regularly
feature in global and regional top rankings of the Most Admired
Knowledge Enterprises (MAKE Awards), thanks to knowledge cultures
reinforced by social media.
In the context of the recent 'Arab revolution' the use of mobile
phones, smart phones, live streaming of videos by users has been
widely discussed. Facebook, Google etc have unprecedented access
to personal information. What are the long-term chances that the
democratisation of media will continue? Tim Berners-Lee - one
of the "inventors of the Internet" - advocates the idea
that net neutrality is a kind of human network right. What needs
to happen to secure this in the future?
Madanmohan Rao:
Social media
along with mobile access have definitely amplified the Arab Spring
thanks to grassroots communication and 'smart swarming.' Democratisation
of social media will accelerate thanks to ever-cheaper smartphones
and a proliferation of open-source apps. But the use of smartphones
by rioters in the UK has also shown the proverbial 'dark side'
of new media, and there will be demands by governments to restrict
access and open up user records. Many social media companies have
therefore set up explicit policy practices for interaction with
the government authority community.
This just goes to reinforce, however, the point I made earlier
about social media being technologies of power which can be used
for and by good and bad (with a lot of 'grey' areas in between!).
Social media have five key properties - free, interactive, global,
immediate and archived - thus making them powerful tools for interaction
between global and local movements.
.Agenda
2011/2012
November
3, 2011 the
future of the Future
Utopia versus The
End Of The World As We Know It November
3, 2011, 18:30-21:15
Location: Volkskrantgebouw,
Wibautstraat 150, 1091 GR Amsterdam [former
building of the Volkskrant]
January,
2012
February
23, 2012
the
future of Social Biomimicry
What we can learn from nature February
23, 2012, 18:30-21:15
Location: Amsterdam
March 29, 2012
the future
of Languages - more than just words March 29, 2012, 18:30 - 21:15
Location: Amsterdam
April 2012
May 2012
June 2012
The
Breakfast Club will soon announce the next events!
.Credentials
Felix Bopp, Editor-in-Chief
Raphaelle Beguinel, Assistant Editor
.Contact
Your
comments, ideas, articles are welcome!
Please write to Felix Bopp, Editor-in-Chief: editor@clubofamsterdam.com