You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘society impact’ category.
Map of all Arab Spring and Occupy Movement nations 2011 - Source: blatantworld.com
A dynamic year 2011 is ending: Crisis. protests, movements, system skepticism
What is in your mind? What will I have I forgotten to mention? Arab spring, occupy movement, maybe a stolen Arab spring in Egypt, maybe an awakening civill society in Russia. And kind of “cold (civil) war” in US. And ever more extreme weather conditions around the globe. Durban climate conference at the end of the year is a new confirmation of cognitive mis-mapping of the political leaders. As cognitive psychology has shown often: A certain complexity of a system cannot be handled by most of human beings, they take refuge to heuristics and kind of superstitious solution approaches.
Oh, Fukushima not to forget – for some 10,000 years – radiation is a reminder future generations did not ask for … What else? A lot of rather helpless activities to handle the debt cirisis in Europe. Angry citizens. Credibility of systems solutions going down, down, down. Politicians’ growth paradigm seems 99% unchanged. Locked in the mindset, which is the problem, not the solution. And again confirmation of the uncontrollable “innovation avalanche” of the hightech super-innovative society. News: H5N1 avian flu created in the laboratory.
Occupy the economy – New models please!
Oh, not only bad news!!! Some weeks ago I was really surprised and excited about the announcement of a “Funky Business Barcamp” in Berlin. Was this the “mycel of transformation” reaching the economy? Will there be emerging new models how to make business in a different cultural setting, with different values and goals – and in a intrinsically sustainable manner. It was an unconventional barcamp and time will tell, whether something substantial will spread from it. I will watch this carefully and will tell if it is …
Update – related posts (oops … Cassandra complex)
- 2009 vs. 1789 – Will the crisis end in a revolution? (March 30, 2009 – detecting weak signals)
- Titanic in full speed, me, you and the Trojan horse (II) (October 23, 2010 – the economic-political world system with extreme deficit of learning capacity)
Updates: Changed avian flu news + link; added two images
The Eco-Singularity is near. Preface (I) - … Definition (II) - … Solutions (III)
As I have said in the posts above there is a structural problem with our accelerated hightech civilization: We are witnessing two growing avalanches – the avalanche of technological solutions and the avalanche of secondary effects of these solutions. The manifold and shocking helplessness to deal with the nuclear accidents in Fukushima after the earthquake and tsunami are a strong example about this fatal dynamics.
Damage after an Earthquake and Tsunami at the Dai Ichi Power Plant. (credit: DigitalGlobe) www.digitalglobe.com
In this week I have an exciting contrasting program to this anachronistic technology. I am attending the Ecosummit 2011, where the smart green economy is meeting. That feels good.
Image source: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernkraftwerk_Fukushima-Daiichi
Three posts about ecological singularity and the avalanche of change
The Eco-Singularity is near. Preface (I) - … Definition (II) - … Solutions (III)
.
Eco-Singularity – core concept, strengths and challenges
In part II a first approach has been accomplished to define the concept of “eco-singularity”:
Eco-Singularity definition (from Part II)
Eco-Singularity is the event, when our (growing) capacity to solve the totality of anthropogenic problems is superseded by the volume of the (growing) totality of anthropogenic problems. (Part II)
The definition’s strength is that it meets the intuition, that there is a race between the problem elements of the system (total biosphere) and the solution elements of the system (total biosphere). There are some challenges of the concept – find more about it in the appendix beneath.
The two avalanches: Can the "solution system" catch the expanding "problem system"?
.
Scenarios and insights: Will we have the innovation avalanche we need to survive our own technology?
I will unfold the main scenarios in some future post. For the moment the most important insight is, that there is a high uncertainty concerning the “innovation race of mankind”. Some more insights in no special order:
- Industrialization 1.0: With the global spreading of technology and industrial production the consumtion of natural ressources is growing and environmental pollution is increasing – as everyone knows.
- Industrialization 2.0: We find the secondary technologies to avoid unwanted effects nearly everywhere on the globe: filter technologies to avoid emissions, sewage plants to keep the water clean, recycling infrastructure etc.
- Only deeds count: The extent of neutralization clearly is dependent on the technology, innovation generation, effectiveness and especially the actual application of the technology.
The two avalanches: Problem system and solution system interacting
- Dynamic picture: There is a race of the two avalanches – and this is a more complex picture than thinking about the “limits of growth”. “Limit thinking” is right to point to the fundamental fact, that the planet’s material ressources are … limited.
- Do not underscore the innovation factor: We are part of a naturally limited system, right. But technological innovations of all kind can shift the limits dramatically. E.g. when re-cycling valuable ressources, what is done routinely, the same atoms can be used again and again. It is a different question, whether this is done to an adequate extent and whether it is possible in a energy- and cost-efficient way.
- Disruptive innovations are needed: With China, India, Russia and Brazil (the socalled BRIC nations) increasing their metabolism with nature we find that the Industrialization 2.0 standard efforts are not capable to compensate for the “problem input” to the biosphere. The resistance to some (rather weak) CO2 treaty is a good indicator of the mismatch. Probably we need disruptive innovations to reach the goals. We then might come back to some sustainable metatboilism with our biosphere – if it is possible anyway.
The message: Think innovativeness beyond technological innovation!
If you realize the trouble we are in, you might be a bit discouraged. Everyday some 130 species are extinct for ever – this is 1.000 times more than the natural extinction rate, i.e. 100.000%. Every acre of land which is deforested, will cost us so much more to re-forest … and so on.
But there is reason for hope: The creativity of the human being and the human culture is incredibly huge! Today we see the investments of hundreds of billions in the technological sector of innovation. We have to seriously add other sectors of innovation:
Viable path: How to respond to the urgent global challenges? We have to combine technologocical ingeniousity with social, political and economical innovations.
- Social innovation: New ways of working, sustainable lifestyle, happiness driven “social layout”
- Political innovation: New ways of opinion-forming, decision making, politcal representation
- Economical innovation: New sustainable business models, new ways to create value chains
If you look around you will find a lot of signals and drivers of change.
- Social innovation examples: Crowdsourcing, Coworking places, “transition towns” …
- Political innovation examples: netbased debate, Liquid Democracy platform, civil society, (weak signal of “new civil dissent”: “Stuttgart21 protests” in Germany) …
- Economical innovation examples: (macro)wikinomics, microfinance and microwork platforms …
Together with convergent innovative technological solutions we might be witness of the birth of some new socio-economical “blueprint” leading to global sustainable society – before selfmade “eco-singularity” is winning against ourself.
Update! 2010-11-02 – Thank you very much Ralf!
There are more and more people, who understand the core problem. Yesterday somehow marginalized by the “leaders”, today they are literaly entering the stage: E.g. Leaders listening to thoughtleader Otto Scharmer at World Economic Forum, China 2010
Thank you very much Ralf (@RalfLippold: MIT Passionist, BMW Leipzig Fellow, System Dynamicst, Boundary Spanner, Visionary, Helper http://leanthinkers.blogspot.com), you gave an absolutlely great link in your comment!
Most of the readers might want to skip the beginning of the video and start with the ideas of Scharmer. Just go to minute 8:00 and enjoy the perspecitves of Otto Scharmer: the world needs macro-innovation, a 4th coordination mechanism, a new type of attitude, thinking and leadership: We have to enable awareness based collective action. And trust as the enabler!
I completely agree. Great to see that convergence in analysis and conclusions. We just need to adjust our common sense a bit and open our eyes – the cognitive ingredients have not to be invented, actually they are in the making. I really recommend to view the video! http://bit.ly/cHHiHq
Update: Great, here is the embeddable version of the video (skip to the 8th minute for Scharmer):
.
Update! 2010-11-04 – Wolff Horbach (Business Blog innovativ.in) has done an interwiew
Wolff Horbach (Business Blog innovativ.in) asked me about my analyses and theses, thanks a lot!
Wolff Horbach helps people and enterprises to understand the dynamics of … happiness, Everyone wants it, nobody really knows and understands it. Isn’t it a goal and a ressource at the same time? He has writen a book too (German), find more about it here: Faktor G - Glückliche Mitarbeiter. Glückliche Kunden. Glückliche Unternehmen.
.
APPENDIX
Challenges of the eco-singularity concept (in the perspective of hard science)
The definition’s weakness partly lies in the “limits of measurement”: How to measure “problem volumes” and “solution capacity”? There is a overwhelming complexity in both parameters. We have intuitions that a problem A (having cancer) is “bigger” than a problem B (having cought a cold), and that a solution A (teaching safe driving) has more capacity than a solution B (teaching to avoid traffic controls). This means that some “soft” metrics should be possible. There is a first list of complexity issues:
- (a) the vast amount of options,
- (b) causal interdependency of choices (combining two optima sometimes leads to a suboptimal global solution),
- (c) value dependency (the moral value coordinates determine the rating and ranking of problems and solutions)
- (d) self-referentiality and non-linearities
There might be some more intricacies, but we can set all this aside for the moment since the concept at first is useful to understand the “big picture” of global technological history. It will be useful as a kind of world view or cognitive tool even if the details of the defining features have to be worked out.
*
Minor updates
- 2010-11-01 Some minor changes in spelling, hyperlinking some words. adding second graphics
- 2010-11-04 linking the three posts
.
Three posts about ecological singularity and the avalanche of change
The Eco-Singularity is near. Preface (I) - … Definition (II) - … Solutions (III)
Reflections after the econsense meeting
- US, China, Europe have ambitious green tech and clean tech goals. But: Eyeing for the emerging green markets will not be enough
Green outlook of China, US, Europe (slide: Kux, Siemens)
- Speakers at econsense meeting made an appeal to bring the sustainability issue into the DNA of the company – I totally agree; as an analyst I know the difference of appeal, role, institutionalization and generalized corporate behavior; today we find a lot of big companies at awareness level 2 or 3 – that means they have established some “sustainability modules” as I would call it; there is a sustainability policy and a reporting routine, i.e. some new roles (= level 2) and institutionalization (= level 3)
- Probably we need to do a lot more! We need to rebuild the whole DNA of the company and the economy. Why? Humankind is riding spaceship earth totally over capacity – day by day. Did you know that the “ecological debt day” in 2010 was August 21? (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_Debt_Day)
- Other fact: There are about 10.000 business schools around the world (FT.com) producing the leaders of tomorrow
- I am really afraid that they somehow produce the same type of manager, which brought us here
- FT.com: “Just 326 have signed up for the UN Principles of Responsible Management Education. Only 60 schools are members of the Academy for Business in Society and 40 are in the Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative. Just 149 schools entered the last Aspen Institute’s Beyond Grey Pinstripes biennial rankings.” (Business education _ Schools ignore sustainability revolution / FT.com – October 3, 2010)
From “Business Schools” to “Planet Schools”
- Is it a waste of time to target business schools for “deep change” i.e. strategic sustainability?
- Do you really think you can set the shareholder value at first place and at the same time make decisions beyond that “particular interest” of the shareholders? E.g. even respect generations in the distant future, living when you and your company will be forgotten … I am afraid there are some rules of logic you cannot discard.
- I have a radical step in mind to foster paradigmatic change: Let us close the “Business Schools” in the long run and have a new start with “Planet Schools”, a completely new framework from the roots. This new schools will not teach strange esoteric stuff or utopian economics, but have to be committed to the realism. Guidnig question: “How to have metabolism with a finite planet?”. The core belief of business schools of today have to be unmasked as utopian thinking (“Infinite growth is possible.”). This step might ensure transformation of the mindset – what do you think?
Part I: Titanic in full speed, me, you and the Trojan horse (I)
Shortened: http://bit.ly/econsense2010
Are you on the bridge seeing, acting, taking responsibility?
Are you in the Marconi Room sending SOS? Or are you in the squach court? A call from the sidelines with an eco-singularity point of view (http://blog.futurefacts.net/2010/10/09/eco-singularity-is-near-definition-ii/).
econsense meeting, 10th anniversary – So what is the level of awareness in Germanys industry?
Just the new green markets in mind? Or is it more? I have been attending the meeting Oct 12th and will tell you a bit more soon.
Three posts about ecological singularity and the avalanche of change
The Eco-Singularity is near. Preface (I) - … Definition (II) - … Solutions (III)
.
The planet issue
Part I was about getting there, the backstory of why and when I wanted to get deeper into the issue of “PSP” – planet saving politics : ) Before I start to explain that strange neologism “eco-singularity” let us have some reality check: Where are we today, about eleven months after the failed summit? A reality check is quite easy since there is a meeting in these days again.
Yesterday, today and tomorrow: Climate talks without adequate political will
In Tianjin, China, negotiators from 177 nations are meeting for U.N.-mandated climate talks . Guess we will see the same syndrome as in Kopenhagen. Even after this years extreme weather events (from Poland to Russia to Pakistan to bring some to mind – and: yes I know the difference of weather and climate!) we do not see “adequate response”. Diagnosis: The econo-techno-political system in it’s entirety just is not capable to process the (mostly unambigous) input of science into the output of necessary decisions.
We are over capacity! Will innovation stretch our limited ressources somehow? Image source: Wackernagel 2010
Connect the both time series. We are part of non-linear systems – surprising changes to the worse are probable. Image source: Munich re 2004
I am not a techie.
I am not a techprogressive.
But I bet on Augmented Reality to be a decisive component of the fine-granular information ubiquity environment, which is emerging in this decade 2010-2020.
The reality is becoming a web
The web has become a reality in the last 20 years – and now we witness that the reality is becoming a web. It is transforming into a weblike matrix of “activated space”. The space of today may be called “mute space” and “blind space” in the future – if it is not
enriched with information, not “talking”, not “hearing”, not reacting to the people around. The analyst predicts this. (My personal opinion is that we still should strive for silence and contemplation in the future.) See the merging of AR principle and powerful recognition technology in the video – to allow/limit this kind of (intrusive?) social transparency is a political issue in this decade.
AR to counterbalance the technological intelligence around us (Subjectoid)
Remind the lesson of evolution biology: A population is shaped by the environment, but at the same time it is shaping the environment. With Augmented Reality on the one end and Sensor Web on the other we envision the Mixed Reality and Ambient Spaces reacting
Augmented Citizen – a concept for the time to come
The times are changing – and the semantics of our expressions too.
When I brought the concept of the “Augmented Citizen” into being it was rather narrow, thanks to the context of Government 2.0 Camp in August 2009 (see slideshare.net). Then in December I realized the full potential and future usage patterns of (Social) Mobile Augmented Reality at the AR meeting in Rotterdam (NL). In the keynote I even encouraged the folks to think beyond the interaction concepts and sensory channels of today, when thinking about augmentation. E.g. we can have augmentation and overlays of other perceptive fields than the visual – and with al kinds of immersion in a social-networked surroundings (for Rotterdam AR meeting see blogpost: Augmented Citizen – next: augmented reality ecosystem).
Later mobile business visionary and social technology architect Dan Romescu and I had some fruitful dialogues concerning the evolution scnarios of mobile AR. Actually he seriously caught fire and went to Mobile World Congress as an “Augmented Citizen Advocate”, blogging at http://www.augmentedcitizen.org So I am proud to present our slides from the Mobile AR Summit at MWC.
Are you a skeptic and have read up to here? Then remind that Juniper talks about a market size of USD 732 million for 2014. Or just think about slide 8:
Q: Isn‘t AR just a new mode how to display information?
A: Yes, but this in fact means to change the
mode of interaction with the world,
your physical and social reality.
16 business models for Augmented Reality (remind the hype curve)
Just as an addon to the previous post talking about mysterious “augmented participation” as a possible growth field here is the colorful Gary Hayes list:
16 Top Augmented Reality Business Models | PERSONALIZE MEDIA
With some well known examples as seen on youtube (2009!). The collection and systematic has not been evaluated by me, just want to kick it in here as a starter for the AR skeptics.
Auguverse?
Google “auguverse” and you will find virtually nothing – however we will call it, the “mixed / augmented reality universe” might be a 1.000 times bigger in 2020 as a information space, than the web of today (measured in counted information objects, not the exabyte volume). Hey, I am a futurist and it is Friday, I can talk like this – with IPv6, sensor web, social ubiquity and internet of things in mind.
Straigt to flickr image in a readable form.
Mr. Schirrmacher is one of the smartest minds in Germany, commenting latest developments in the media business and the radical challenges for the print media and their business models. I even share a lot of his worries concerning information overload. Clay Shirky famously said: “It’s Not Information Overload. It’s Filter Failure.” – but, Clay, does not the filter management (= social media management) today cost us to much of our valuable time? Schirrmacher is quite right in analyzing the trouble of “digital life” complexity.
Time of transition, yes
Confession: I personally got rather tired of social media and the social network issue, often I am even skeptic about the longterm effects of social hyperconnectivity. Construcitve turn: Thinking about the future of balanced connectivity and tools for that. Actually I am thinking like so much folks about the transition from Web 2.0 to the next paradigm and how this will look like (web squared, third wave, pragmatic web, synaptic web, just “Web 3,0″?)
iPad pre-configures usage patterns, yes
Mr. Schirrmacher commented on the nice new shiny i-thing in town, the iPad (Die Politik des iPad, faz.net). Steve Jobs actually is a top business genius, may be the top in consumer IT today. Schirrmacher is right to think about the “politics of the iPad”. Hardware, end devices and their layout shape our doings and action patterns, channel our needs and wishes. But Schirrmacher is not quite right, when he thinks that the web of the future will not be so participative – after the iPad.
Participation will change, grow – Augmented Reality participation tools ahead
With mobile end devices allowing to contribute reviews, ratings (thumbs up/down) in a monent, participation will change in content, effort and intention. In the nearest future every smart phone has augmented reality apps as a standard. This will enable us to post annotations just in the physical space around us, attached to buildings, things, shops, even persons with some face recognition. Finally, new participation tools are spreading, pushing transparency – with huge impact to society and our lifestyle, shifting values (for more see Augmented Citizen post).
