2023 FUTURE OBSERVATORY
2023 FUTURE OBSERVATORY
An Economist editorial put on the record the widespread view that the cliché of the information age is that instantaneous global telecommunications, television and computer networks, will soon overthrow the ancient tyrannies of time and space. As recent example, the second edition of my marketing textbook was sent from the United Kingdom to India for re-keying of the entirety of its 760 pages and received back a week later (at a cost of less than $2,000).
On the other hand, the same Economist editorial then went on to point out that geography still matters. Certainly, this reflects my own experience. On my travels, I have often tuned into the local television news and, especially in the Third World, have been astounded by the parochial nature of the coverage; almost literally so, with a concentration on what seemed to be the minutiae of local events to the exclusion of global ones. Each time I reassured myself that at least the BBC, my 'local' station in the United Kingdom, was much better. It was only when I returned, acclimatized by several weeks stay abroad, that - each time - I realized that the BBC was just the same, in terms of its domestic channels at least. We are all conditioned to expect news which focuses on relatively local issues. For the English one death of a Briton, especially a television personality, outweighs a hundred or even a thousand deaths of mere foreigners; in terms of justifying front page headlines. This is not just a matter for the yellow-sheets; most of the participants in our own research groups betrayed similar biases - though, as might be expected, it was less obvious amongst the groups of experts.
The Economist goes on, however, to make yet another telling point that even the newest industries are obeying the old rule of geographical concentration.
Despite the impacts of globalism, most issues will still be determined on a local, national basis.
This will remain largely true, despite the new imperialism being pursued by the US
An Economist editorial puts on the record the widespread view that "The cliché of the information age is that instantaneous global telecommunications, television and computer networks, will soon overthrow the ancient tyrannies of time and space", and illustrates this with a couple of positive examples "Software for American companies is already written by Indians in Bangalore and transmitted to Silicon Valley by satellite." On the other hand, the same Economist editorial then goes on to point out "...geography still matters", and to say "... such developments have made hardly a dent in the way people think and feel about things. Look, for example, at newspapers or news broadcasts anywhere on earth , and you find them overwhelmingly dominated by stories about what is going on in the vicinity of their place of publication." Fujitsu-ICL, for instance, maintain a software house in India - employing no less than 900 staff (which is large by even global standards) - that serves its operations in countries across the world. As another recent, more mundane, example the second edition of my marketing textbook was sent from the United Kingdom to India for re-keying of the entirety of its 760 pages and received back a week later (at a cost of less than $2,000).
The Economist goes on to make yet another telling point "...even the newest industries are obeying the old rule of geographical concentration...all but one of the top 20 American carpet-makers are located in or near the town of Dalton, Georgia; and, before 1930, the American tyre industry consisted almost entirely of the 100 or so firms carrying on that business in Akron, Ohio. This is why the world got Silicon Valley in a short and narrow strip in California in the 1960s. It is also why tradable services stay surprisingly concentrated - futures trading (in Chicago), insurance (Hartford, Connecticut), movies (Los Angeles) and currency trading (London). This offends not just the techno-enthusiasts but also neo-classical economists; for both, the world should tends towards a smooth dispersion of people, skills and economic competence; not towards their concentration...The main reason is that history counts; where you are depends very much on where you started from."
They make a rather different, but supporting, point when they say "Global strengths must be matched by local feel - and a jet-lagged visit for a few days every so often does not provide one"; a sentiment with which - after much jet-lag and some poor decisions - I would whole-heartedly agree.
The Economist also reports "Companies that have gone furthest towards linking their global operations electronically report an increase, not a decline in face-to-face contact needed." This, too, echoes my own experience - at the beginning of the 1980s - leading a team designing one of IBM's earliest electronic office buildings; where one surprising requirement turned out to be a massive increase in the number of formal conference rooms and informal conference areas so that the staff, who we had previously expected would be glued to their new terminals, could spend even more time in meetings!
Benjamin Barber makes the point "Colonial masters did still worse in their time, drawing arbitrary lines across maps they could not read with consequences still being endured throughout the ex-colonial world, above all in Africa and the Middle East. Jihad is then the rabid response to colonialism and imperialism and their economic children, capitalism and modernity..."
26 April 2003
hits
Copyright © 2005 Future Observatory