The Fifth Industrial Revolution is Happening - Is it Time to Reshape Our Future? | Summit 2018

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 24 авг 2024
  • What can we learn from what has come before? British-Venezuelan economist Carlota Perez argues that we are halfway through the fifth industrial revolution, which she says means that the time is right to take control and reshape the future built on a vision that benefits business, people and the environment.
    The 2018 Summit took place at The Roundhouse in London on Thursday June 21st. Speakers discussed big ideas and world-views re-shaping how we view our economy, the role of digital technologies in making the previously unimaginable possible and shared stories of disruptive realities in business, cities and policy already happening today.
    ------
    Thank you for watching this video. The Ellen MacArthur Foundation is a UK charity working on business, learning, insights & analysis, and communications to accelerate the transition towards the circular economy.
    Find out more about our work here: www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org
    Follow us online on these channels:
    Instagram: / ellenmacarthurfoundation
    Facebook: / ellenmacarthurfoundation
    LinkedIn: / ellen-macarthur-founda...
    Website: https:/www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org
    #circulareconomy

Комментарии • 15

  • @pranavmanie1479
    @pranavmanie1479 2 месяца назад

    I think it's really hard to visualise Kondratiev waves and truly define them in periods, but hats off to Perez for her models. seeing how we're accelerating development of solar and wind technologies today, she might not be wrong. I'm optimistic.

  • @thoughtsurferzone5012
    @thoughtsurferzone5012 5 лет назад +1

    Okay, this needs to be emailed to every member of congress.

  • @distancejunkiemonkey4491
    @distancejunkiemonkey4491 Год назад

    Every revolution was about 50 years apart. 1971 was 47 years before this filming, yet she ignores this 50 yr rotation, stating we are in the middle of a “sustainable age”. Without being really long, winded to explain this, she’s basically mixing a couple facts, which are that our social economics, rotate and replace them selves, reinvent themselves every 50 years, with the old guard way of thinking to keep themselves in power. Again, she represents the current old guard that’s trying to stay in power and have the government control every aspect of your lives through money and finance. Use this person as a warning to what your life could be in this country, if they remain in power. and use the opposite of what your life could be when they get thrown out over the next 10 years.

  • @hierontatohtori8696
    @hierontatohtori8696 6 лет назад +7

    The problem with Ms. Perez presentation is that despite all the great changes that she is describing, there is no real decoupling in material & energy consumption sense. Yes, there is relative decoupling - GPSs might be growing faster than the resource extraction, but resource use is growing stupendously fast too. It is outpacing the population growth, i.e resource use is growing faster than just keeping up with the global population. So circular economy, sharing economy, sustainable (affluent) lifestyles, etc. are currently not changing our economic systems fast enough. We just have to cut the material and energy throughput radically down, and that sense we need to degrow our carbon based economic system. Of course, the needed change also creates enormous possibilities for hectic economic activity (just to change our energy infrastructures). I do agree with her on active governments and stringent policy measures, and defining a shared goals. But we do not need to grow the economic cake in order have ecologically and socially sustainable world. Rather we need to diminish it and share that smaller cake more equally.

    • @korkutuluaydin6660
      @korkutuluaydin6660 5 лет назад

      Very nice points. Your comment reminded me of Kurt Gödel... Being trained and lived thru a pseudo-imperialist and capitalist environment, one cannot make a complete prediction of this transformation's final end for now... But she is very consistent for sure...

  • @bradynields9783
    @bradynields9783 5 лет назад +3

    I agree with a lot of what she says but relying on governments to do anything not in its self interest I don't see happening ever.

    • @carlotaprzperez
      @carlotaprzperez 4 года назад +3

      Sorry that I didn't see this before.
      The self-interest of governments is nothing more than to please their supporters to win elections. The supporters are both those who finance than and those who vote for them. So, with enough pressure from the voters and some turning of th tide among the funders (which is already happening with ESG and stakeholder capitalism) they might just shift in the sustainability direction

  • @maxpainmedia
    @maxpainmedia Год назад

    We are on the 4th Industrial Revolution shes speeding up a little

  • @yvonne495
    @yvonne495 3 месяца назад

    I don't understand why the world has to be driven by profit. It's disgusting.

  • @yoannailieva8905
    @yoannailieva8905 2 года назад

    wow what a vision!

  • @rushparul
    @rushparul 4 года назад

    Thank you :)

  • @anastaciocastro89
    @anastaciocastro89 6 лет назад +9

    Bad audio :(

  • @ioanciumasu994
    @ioanciumasu994 4 года назад +6

    All nice and beautiful, except that societal consensus must not be confused with state intervention. Friedrich Hayek already explained why state canot be de determinant of things. People must be sovereign. We need Democracy, not Bureaucracy (the two are opposite!). The Keynesianism promoted by some golden chair economists in the academia (like Mariana Mazzucato and many others) has another name: educated naivety useful for bureaucracy. Keynesianism has two problems: (1) is not relevant anymore for current and future times (it was partially relevant in "simpler" times so to speak, meaning that science was much less than what we have now) - so Hayek is even more relevant now, and will more and more relevant, and (2) it opposes the Schumpetterian (innovation-oriented, "creative destruction"), i.e., transformation, paradigm change) view promoted by Carlota Perez. AND, this idea of "active policies" and "direction by the state" used here by the speaker are unfortunate misnomers. Instead of consensus, let's talk about SOCIETAL consensus obtained organically through social interaction (market and market signals included!). Instead of "active policies", let's talk about SMART action, which includes the acknowledgement of what Hayek has already explained. Otherwise, we will end up with University Professors inadvertently providing justification for increasingly fat and oppressive bureaucratic layers. Plus ... remember that planned economies failed? Remember "caviar socialists"?
    PS. "If we work together, Business, Government and Society". Don't you think there is something missing there? SCIENCE is what makes the whole thing possible. Granted, we need better science - science has some important internal problems (notably fragmentation and distorted incentives). But we need more Science in Society: Science needs to be respected by Society and also Science needs to take more responsibility in society, actively (now that we like this word ...) assuming a bigger and more central role in the progress of Humanity (and not running away from it). There is no Ivory Tower anymore.

  • @symphantic4552
    @symphantic4552 4 года назад +1

    Wow! This gives me hope for the future
    Just bought her book... really looking forward to it

  • @123axel123
    @123axel123 4 года назад +5

    I like Perez model, but really dislike her overt left-wing views. Why does she have to devalue her own impact by being a political hack.