The dimensions of the coming change are staggering. The first half of the 21st Century will be transformative. At the beginning of this century, North America and Europe accounted for over 60% of the world’s middle class spending; only 10% took place in Asia. By 2050, these proportions will more than reverse, European and North American middle class spending will account for 30% of the world total; China, India, and other Asian countries will be 60%[1]. The human population could increase by 2 billion people in that same time span (the equivalent of the entire human population alive in the 1930s!) and the percentage of us living in cities will increase from 50% to over 70%. Everything will be more interconnected, faster paced, and frequently shocked by digital information, resource shortages, climate change, financial bubbles, and social unrest. Natural resource shortages and degraded ecosystem services are already presenting significant business risks. A recent survey found 76% of executives from transnational corporations expect their core business objectives to be affected by natural resource shortages in the immediate future.[2]
You can feel the strain when walking the streets of Mumbai, Shanghai, and Detroit. The world is at a crossroads[3]. Either the global community will coalesce around the project of sustainable development or we will fracture into resource wars, political instability, and ecological collapse.
The transformation will create unprecedented opportunities. Imagine the best possible future these trends might create: a world full of empowered, wealthy, peaceful, healthy, communities, each thriving in their distinctive local bio-cultural conditions, each trading their own distinctive qualities and advantages, each pursuing solutions, hopes and dreams. What skill sets will be in demand? How will your organization, your community, and your country respond? What role will you play?
America needs change agents willing to influence the development trajectory leading towards 2050. We must face the challenges confronting us and grasp the opportunities the transformation will create.
Bold initiatives are needed, collaboration is essential, and fundamentally new models of business and governance must emerge. A desirable future can be constructed but it requires bringing together diverse communities of knowledge, power, and influence, adapting what works, and creating space for change to happen.
[1] Page 28 Kharas (2010) OECD report http://www.oecd.org/document/42/0,3746,en_2649_33959_42032170_1_1_1_1,00.html#summaries
[2] GreenBiz and Ernst and Young 2012. Page 22 http://www.ey.com/US/en/Services/Specialty-Services/Climate-Change-and-Sustainability-Services/Six-growing-trends-in-corporate-sustainability_overview
[3] Sachs, J. 2011. Our Commonwealth. Richard Heinberg.2012. China’s role in a world of scarce resources. http://www.thesolutionsjournal.com/node/1036
What a piece of trite propaganda. Please. Change agents, transformation, capacity building—all buzz words designed to manipulate people into thinking that they will have some impact on the plan being imposed on them. America2050.org shows you how the mega-regions will replace states. If you don’t mind the idea of unelected boards and commissions making rules and laws that you’ll be living under, that you will have no ability to vote out or stop, then go right ahead with your transformation. Parallel government and change agents step right up. Who needs that messy dissent?
You’re going to have your hands full, buddy. The country is waking up and kicking your ideology out. We will stop UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development.
I have to check you out, Bruce. Who pays you?
Your comment intrigues me and I wonder if I can get you to respond and explain it. In the blog post to which you replied I argued that the world is changing. Rapidly. As a result, things will look very different in 2050. The trends are very striking, especially the environmental ones.
They suggest that the political and business practices of the past will need to change. I’m unsure of your reasoning. Are you denying the trends and arguing that new strategies such as suggested by “sustainable development” are unnecessary? Or, do you accept that 2050 will look very different than 1950 and instead offer alternative political and business practices that you think will work better than those associated with sustainable development?
I would think you would be very receptive to the normally pro-business media that increasingly acknowledge the magnitude of the challenges these trends portend. Sources such as the WBCSD and OECD.
http://www.wbcsd.org/vision2050.aspx
http://www.oecd.org/document/11/0,3746,en_2649_37465_49036555_1_1_1_37465,00.html
Let us see if any of those MSM idiots still know what a dfienition is. Socialism at its very core IMPLIES Massive Social Spending. Those Nations that have Massive Social Spending ARE Socialist Nations. Karl Marx tells us in the Communist Manifesto that to get to a Communist State, a Nation MUST first go through Socialism. So all Socialists, whether they admit it or not, are really trying to get more control over the Means of Production, so that they can take the Wealth generated by a Capitalist Entity (Factory, Bank, Wall Street, et. al.) and give it away to those THEY deem worthy. This ensures their continued control over the Masses, who, if left to their own devices, could become Independent of such Massive Spending. But this Independence means there is no need for Big Gov’t. Social Spending, and all the Socialist Political Elites would lose their Power, Wealth and Privileges.So when one sees such articles as this, it’s just Propaganda by the American Socialists who are saying, See, we’re not as bad as the Other Guy, so don’t touch my Wealth, Power and Privilege, and, actually, we should be more like the rest of the World and Spend More! Anyone who thinks this is just Capitalistic Paranoia, please listen to Obama’s Budget Proposals from a couple of days ago.Know Thy Enemy.