Recently in Politics & Policy Category

Some Social Technologies colleagues and I recently had the good fortune to attend Al Gore's speech in Washington, where he unveiled a new challenge to the US: be free of carbon-based energy in 10 years. His challenge calls for the US not only to be oil independent but also coal-free, relying only on renewable energy. Gore emphasized solar, wind, and geothermal energy as replacements to carbon-based fuels.

Gore also called for a unified national grid, plug-in electric cars, and a carbon emissions tax. He emphasized the need for the US to be the leader, as well as a major innovator, of renewable energy.

Acknowledging his detractors, Gore said, "Of course, there are those who will tell us that this can't be done. But even those who reap the profits of the carbon age have to recognize the inevitability of its demise. As one OPEC oil minister observed, 'The Stone Age didn't end because of a shortage of stones.'"

Here at Social Technologies, we are interested in seeing the actual plan that will implement these changes, since the speech was vague in that regard. In my opinion, it is a lofty, yet admirable goal. Dear readers, what do you think?

Image: cplbasilisk (Flickr)

Italy’s love for life? Apparently, it's gone. Italians are now the least happy people in Western Europe.

Italians are older, poorer, and more in debt, contributing to their unhappiness. Italians' average age is 42, and they’re not having kids (there is a 0% growth rate). This year, Italy dropped three places to 20^th on the Human Development Index. The unemployment rate (7%) is high for a World 1 country. Italians have 106% public debt in proportion to their GDP (the sixth highest in the world). Even Italian staples aren’t selling well: sales of pasta and bread were down in 2007.

The Italian economy has relied on small, family-owned businesses that use cheap labor and produce high-quality products. But with competition from countries like China, these firms aren’t prospering in a globalized economy.

The nation seems angst-ridden and unsure how or whether to change. One Italian has devoted his entire blog to his country’s demise. At one level, it seems like Italy is just in a funk, but will it be able to get out? And, more importantly, is this what is going to happen to all aging World 1 countries? Or is Italy an outlier, while most of World 1 will adapt to new global realities?

Image: José Goulão (Flickr)

If you found this post useful, make sure to sign up for our RSS feed or subscribe by email.

PETA has announced a $1 million dollar prize to any researchers who could come up with a commercially viable "in vitro meat" product by 2012.  (The LATimes has more details on the offer.)

It seems like an unusual offer from PETA, which typically promotes vegetarianism. Perhaps they're coming to terms with the fact that some of us just aren't willing to give up our beloved meat, although widespread vegetarianism would admittedly be better for both animals and the environment. In vitro meat--there seems to be a consensus on the message boards that it needs a new name--would solve both these problems. It's also a topic that we covered last year in our Global Lifestyles project (subscribers only).

This decision apparently inspired a near-civil war within PETA, dividing the vegetarian purists and the animal rights advocates. Despite the internal controversy, this appeal to carnivores takes "cruelty-free" meat beyond free-range chicken.

Think this sounds like a half-baked sci-fi plot? William Saletan of Slate points out that scientists have already done some pretty impressive work on other body parts (hearts, livers, etc.), so in terms of science, this really isn't so out of the question.

Image: VirtualErn (Flickr) 

If you found this post useful, make sure to sign up for our RSS feed or subscribe by email.

SHANGHAI--The French have done it again.

The fallout from the Olympic torch run through Paris earlier this month has spread through the Chinese blogosphere on a wave of nationalist outcry. As I write, our Shanghainese research assistant is being bombarded by requests from friends to add a heart symbol to her instant messaging tag to prove that she loves her country and stands with China against France. She has also been asked, as has just about every Chinese person on the Internet, to boycott French retail giant Carrefour as an expression of disapproval.

Sound familiar? Recall the immediate aftermath of the French refusal to participate the Coalition of the Willing in 2003? French wine was poured into the streets, vacations to France were deferred or cancelled, and French pâté was tragically uneaten.

The decision by the Chinese government to publicize the French protests in China has catalyzed a grassroots fervor similar to the immediate post-9/11 years in the United States. Failure to express patriotism in a pre-approved way, whether in the form of an "I heart China" symbol on your IM profile or an American flag in your front yard, is met with swift and often intimidating disapproval.

The irony is that, as far as the cause of Tibetan independence or autonomy is concerned, the Olympic protests in Paris and elsewhere will likely do far more harm than good. Westerners, and certainly the Western media, are already predisposed to supporting Tibet, so nothing short of total independence would ever please them.

The real shift will be among the Han Chinese population. It's safe to say that most Chinese were largely unaware of the Tibet issue before the events of the past few weeks other than having a vague sense of Tibet being a part of China. Now they're fully energized and supportive of the government, and it feeds into a notion they have of themselves as victims. China watcher Roland Soong describes how much of a public relations coup this might be for the Chinese government.

Shanghaiist picked up on this earlier today as well.  

Image: Social Technologies

Iran’s online world is more vibrant than you might expect. While Reporters Without Borders ranked Iran’s press as the fourth least-free in the world, its blogosphere is full of lively conversation and rife with political dissent, as revealed in a new Berkman Center for Internet and Society (full disclosure: my former employer before I came to Social Technologies)  report on the state of the Internet, the blogosphere, and its affect on democracy in conservative, religious Iran.

 The report found that:

• Iran's blogosphere is male-dominated and incredibly diverse in content, and often features heated discussions about politics, religion, and pop culture.
• While the Iranian government vigorously censors the Internet and has arrested bloggers for expressing dissenting opinions, the report found a significantly smaller percentage of blogs being blocked than they expected: only about 15% of what the report deemed “reformist” (anti-government) blogs were blocked.
• Women are a significant minority in the Iranian blogosphere, except in poetry-themed blogs. (Poetry is a very popular form of expression for Iranians.)
• Even with the threat of arrest, Iranian bloggers don't write anonymously nearly as much as expected: for instance, the majority of "reformist" bloggers wrote under their own name, while the majority of "conservative" bloggers wrote anonymously.
• Young Iranian bloggers tend to be conservative and religious, while older bloggers tend to be reformist and secular.

What has emerged is a portrayal of an engaged, lively online community in Iran, a country where freedom of expression isn’t exactly valued. It's fascinating to see how a somewhat open Internet can change the way the citizens of an authoritarian regime are able to express themselves. It is also clear that while the Iranian government has attempted to block the most contentious blogs online, it lacks the resources to get all of them. And while it might be overly optimistic, the fact that this kind of honest and open dialogue can exist (with limits, of course) gives many the hope that the Internet can foster change in Iran, beyond just expression of personal opinions.

Image: Sander (Flickr)

Iran’s online world is more vibrant than you might expect. While Reporters Without Borders ranked Iran’s press as the fourth least-free in the world, its blogosphere is full of lively conversation and rife with political dissent, as revealed in a new Berkman Center for Internet and Society (full disclosure: my former employer before I came to Social Technologies)  report on the state of the Internet, the blogosphere, and its affect on democracy in conservative, religious Iran.

 The report found that:

• Iran's blogosphere is male-dominated and incredibly diverse in content, and often features heated discussions about politics, religion, and pop culture.
• While the Iranian government vigorously censors the Internet and has arrested bloggers for expressing dissenting opinions, the report found a significantly smaller percentage of blogs being blocked than they expected: only about 15% of what the report deemed “reformist” (anti-government) blogs were blocked.
• Women are a significant minority in the Iranian blogosphere, except in poetry-themed blogs. (Poetry is a very popular form of expression for Iranians.)
• Even with the threat of arrest, Iranian bloggers don't write anonymously nearly as much as expected: for instance, the majority of "reformist" bloggers wrote under their own name, while the majority of "conservative" bloggers wrote anonymously.
• Young Iranian bloggers tend to be conservative and religious, while older bloggers tend to be reformist and secular.

What has emerged is a portrayal of an engaged, lively online community in Iran, a country where freedom of expression isn’t exactly valued. It's fascinating to see how a somewhat open Internet can change the way the citizens of an authoritarian regime are able to express themselves. It is also clear that while the Iranian government has attempted to block the most contentious blogs online, it lacks the resources to get all of them. And while it might be overly optimistic, the fact that this kind of honest and open dialogue can exist (with limits, of course) gives many the hope that the Internet can foster change in Iran, beyond just expression of personal opinions.

Image: Sander (Flickr)

There I was driving through the Atlanta suburbs on February 10 when I started seeing teenagers with handmade signs and masks. In a few seconds I came over a hill and saw around 75 people with signs and face masks standing across the street from a line of police in riot gear outside of the local Church of Scientology. Later, I discovered that I had found the local version of a worldwide anti-Scientology protest held that day, organized by a group simply calling themselves "Anonymous."

Anonymous is a group of Internet users from across the globe who are organizing a series of protests against Scientology using basic Web technologies. What began as a simple series of hacks against Scientology's websites has turned into an international movement occurring in both cyberspace and in the real world. The amazing part of this story is how easily the group has managed to organize worldwide protests without a central leader or group telling everyone what to do.

Click to Read More ...

Image: BeketChai (Flickr)Social Technologies' Josh Calder spoke recently to Elisabeth Braw, a reporter for the Swedish newspaper Sydsvenskan, about poll results that revealed that more Americans feel their society is divided by class.

"Increasingly, more are feeling they are on the losing end of that divide," Calder notes.

He told Braw:

"The American mentality is that everybody is middle class and you lift yourself up through hard work, so these results are striking ... The division into 'haves' and 'have-nots' is a psychological phenomenon, but sometimes the loss they are feeling is very real, by the standard of a modern society."

Read the entire article (if you can read Swedish).

© 2007 Jupiterimages CorporationThe US media turned its glare this week on the normally unexciting Social Security office in Washington, where Kathleen Casey-Kirschling was signing up for retirement benefits. Casey-Kirschling is, as far as anyone knows, the first US baby boomer, thanks to her birth a few seconds after midnight on January 1, 1946--and, as the nation's reporters gloomily predicted, potentially one of the last beneficiaries of a golden age of American retirement.

Casey-Kirschling's own comment--"I'm thrilled to think that after all these years, I'm getting paid back the money I put in"--may never be echoed by younger members of her own generation, let alone by Generation X-ers or Millennials. Eighty million retiring boomers might drive both Medicare and Social Security into debt well before 2020. Meanwhile, most American companies have stopped the defined-benefit pension plans that provided safety nets for earlier generations of retirees.

But is the future really so grim? In one of a three-brief series about boomer retirement published by our Global Lifestyles multiclient project (GL-2006-6: Boomers in Retirement--A Financial Forecast), we reported that boomers are actually about 50% better off today, in absolute terms, than their parents were at the same ages, by the yardstick of assets and income. And when incomes are adjusted to account for the smaller average size of boomer households, they are 65% better off.

However, as boomers age we found that they are likely to diverge into three distinct tiers: about 20% who will be very well off in retirement (including a segment who will be very, very well off: the top 1% of boomers hold more wealth than the bottom 80%); a middle tier of about 50% of boomers who will muddle through on savings, retirement accounts, and home equity; and a vulnerable 25% or so who face seniorhood with few assets--and more exposure to the vagaries of Social Security that Casey-Kirschling has so neatly sidestepped. Many in this last group could see declines in their standard of living once they stop working.

Which is exactly why so many boomers intend to continue working--76%, according to a Merrill Lynch survey. The business implications of this surge in older workers are fascinating, as we detail in another brief (GL-2006-19: Boomers in Retirement--A Lifestyle Forecast). For one thing, older boomer workers are much more likely than average workers to become entrepreneurs or temporary employees. Many companies could find themselves with two large, divergent groups of employees: senior boomers and 20-something millennials, potentially with little in common.

In short, boomers look set to reshape the US workforce yet once more before they exit the national stage. Now if they could only do the same for healthcare....

© 2007 Jupiterimages CorporationIt looks like the whole issue of health insurance in the US is about to get really, really hot. Not only do we have presidential candidates weighing in, but some powerful forces in American society are also starting to take on the issue.

The American Cancer Society recently started a campaign that includes hard-hitting TV ads and an extensive website promoting universal access to quality cancer treatment.

"Fighting cancer is tough enough without having to fight for the care you need; but many uninsured and underinsured Americans are facing this difficult situation. This site will show you what we're doing and how you can help. Because winning the fight against cancer depends on improving access to quality cancer care," the society says on its webpage.

Having the American Cancer Society weigh in on an issue like health insurance is highly significant, but there is more. There also seems to be a major shift happening in business. Health insurance was a major issue in the recent GM strike. One blogger who watches the auto industry noted that health care was "the key item that affects the future viability of (General Motors)." A lot of other companies are feeling the pinch; premiums keep going up and benefits are slowly ratcheted down.

In the October 2007 issue of the Harvard Business Review, an article called "Realizing the Promise of Personalized Medicine" states that while over the past decade there have been numerous advances in the diagnosis and treatment of many diseases, the healthcare system itself is not functioning efficiently and effectively. It advocates moving to personalized medicine--using more refined diagnostic techniques to tailor treatment to each patient's unique physiology. However, the article notes that "obsolete business models, regulations, reimbursement systems, and physician behavior stand in the way but can be overcome."

When business, non-profit organizations like the American Cancer Society, and politicians converge on an issue, you can bet it's going to be a moved to the front burner and things are going to heat up.

The sudden collapse of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis, together with the explosion of a steam pipe on Lexington Ave. in New York City, have brought the important issue of America’s aging infrastructure to the forefront of public discourse.

Diversey (Flickr)In TF-2007-35: Lights! Water! Motion! (a brief from our Technology Foresight multiclient project), the authors project that necessary upgrades to world urban infrastructure by 2050 will total over $40 trillion, with the U.S. and Canada accounting for $6.5 trillion of that total. These numbers cover road and rail, power grids, water distribution, air travel and sea travel, so the cost of upgrading just one of these sectors would be manageable—which is exactly the problem.

Kamal H. (Flickr)The immediate reaction to the Minneapolis bridge collapse will likely be legislation aimed at improving this single component of infrastructure. These costs would be manageable and politically feasible. However, infrastructure is tightly intertwined—great bridges aren't much use if roads are deteriorating, or if the bridges lead to cities where underground pipes are bursting. The broader infrastructure debate will require more holistic planning, including international cooperation. Even if the US develops the most advanced air travel system in the world, the recent airline crash on a Brazilian runway highlights the need for global repairs and upgrades.

Infrastructure is not as exciting as war, terrorism, or even hedge fund loopholes, but it is truly the backbone of a tightly-integrated, just-in-time global trade system—and signficant breaks in the supply chain due to infrastructure failures could have worldwide repercussions.

Three weeks ago, at the height of the British-Iran face-off over those sailors, the following graffiti appeared in Dupont Circle here in DC:

A couple of days later, someone vandalized the message by crossing it out and adding a peace sign:

The graffitists must have reached some kind of détente as there were no new messages until this week:

(This reads: "Bin Laden was a scapegoat".)

("Ayatollahs were the only ones behind the 9/11 attack")

For all the talk of social networking sites such as Twitter, sometimes good old-fashioned graffiti is still the best tool for the job. Dupont Circle is a busy place. It hosts one of the more active metro stops in the city, is home to cultural attractions (museums, movie theaters), a thriving nightlife scene, and some of the most prestigious policy organizations in the world (Brookings Institution, the Carnegie Endowment, and a certain futures firm you are likely familiar with).

Thousands of people walk by this wall daily and see this message, and they don't need to sign up, register or log-in to do so. Furthermore, as its presence over the past three weeks indicates, the message persists, while new information is added, the old information remains visible.

The use of public space for political messages is as old as civilization. (The Romans were quite adept at politically motivated, scurrilous graffiti). And, for all the enthusiasm in some circles for social networking, this graffiti highlights its current limitations: users are a self-selected group with only those choosing to participate able to receive messages. This is only a temporary limitation as wireless access expands and the social networking ethos is incorporated into the architecture of a growing number of software applications. But as much as I enjoy these applications, I am cheered to see someone is still kicking it old school. Too bad he is a crank.

Who that crank may be is still a mystery--maybe an angry Brit? A frustrated Persian exile? Or perhaps it's just a hip guerrilla marketing campaign to get the kids fired up for another war. (Images: Social Technologies)

If you aren't aware of the emerging genre of serious games, you should be. To quote a recent Global Lifestyles brief on the subject mentioned below, "Serious games--games that provide players with opportunities to learn and understand complex situations or different points of view--have emerged as a distinct subset of video games. Creators of these games are taking the definitions of "play" and "learn" in new directions, often blending the two creatively."

Two items caught my eye recently on the topic: announcements about the second annual Serious Games Summit, coming up next month in San Francisco, and the creation of a new academic degree at Michigan State University in serious games design. While a lot of column inches and blogs have been consumed with discussion of sexier games like Second Life lately, the serious games movement has been spreading from a core of more political games into a more complex family tree of genres, as seen in the table to the left.

While serious games such as Darfur Is Dying and A Force More Powerful are among the best known examples, politics and advocacy are only two of the categories these games belong to. Interesting development is now happening in health care, for example, where serious games are being developed as both educational tools and simulators, and also for pain relief, as in the case of Free Dive, a game designed to distract young patients during painful medical procedures. (My children's' dentist has been on to this idea for some time, allowing his patients to play with Gameboys during some procedures to take their attention away from his tools and their throbbing teeth -- thanks Dr. Ed!) Serious games are also being used to help returning Iraq war veterans cope with the effects of post-traumatic stress disorder by simulating the sensory stress of combat conditions in a safe environment.

Where do serious games go in the near future?  Two of the half dozen possible directions we identified are:

• Broader applications--In only a few years the spectrum of applications for serious gaming has broadened to include everything from aiding cancer research to learning how to topple a government. Growth will likely be strongest in applications for job training, education, and "advertorial" content.
  
• More commercial use--Commercial uses for serious games have yet to take off, but the ability to attract new customers via advertorial games with a serious edge will be a strong lure for business. Companies need to be careful treading in this area, however. The tool may cut both ways as some consumers take offense at the blatant mix of commercialism and "education". One can imagine a pharmaceutical company using a game that raises awareness of a health condition while touting a brand-name drug, for example.
  

In Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know?, recently reviewed in Science,* Philip E. Tetlock of the business school at UC Berkeley puts experts to the test. Over a 15-year period Tetlock asked 284 experts in politics, international relations, economics, and related disciplines to make over 80,000 predictions related to world political events. His conclusion is that "it is impossible to find any domain in which humans clearly outperformed crude extrapolation algorithms, less still sophisticated statistical ones" (emphasis in original). Though no one does very well, some prognosticators are better than others. Those with varied knowledge, who draw from a multitude of traditions, and accept ambiguity as part of all situations ("foxes") generally do better than those whose expertise and point of view are narrow and formulaic ("hedgehogs").

We confess we haven't read Tetlock's book, but nevertheless make bold to add some observations from our experience as futurists. The reviewer (and perhaps the author) confuses "expert" with "specialist," when there is a subtle difference. Many futurists have observed that narrow specialists do not make good predictions. (They tend to be too optimistic, among other biases.) This is true in technology as well as in economic and political forecasting. Many studies have shown that generalists, when they know what they are talking about, are better at making forecasts than specialists.

Because we rely on information and inference  to make forecasts, an informed person or "expert" is more likely to correctly anticipate a trend and maybe an event than an uninformed person making wild guesses. We doubt the assertion that mathematical and statistical models are categorically better than expert judgment in making forecasts. Statistical and mathematical models typically capture only continuities, not discontinuities. They are also much more accurate for well-defined, stable, and short-term cases, not the long-term future. Only expert judgment can capture discontinuities. And, of course, all statistical models contain expert judgment (some expert had to decide what elements to put into the model and what to leave out). Our recommendation: use modeling as a way to frame and provide consistency and rigor to the exercise of expert judgment. -- Bill Croasmun and Steve Millett

*John T. Jost, "The Perils of Prognostication," Science, June 30, 2006, pages 1876-1877.

Those buzzkills at the Center for Science in the Public Interest have been systematically suing the food industry, and have seemingly been getting some results:

In recent months, CSPI has turned to litigation to get food companies to market their products more honestly. It has negotiated out-of-court settlements with Tropicana, Quaker, Frito-Lay, and Pinnacle Foods and was credited (along with Heideman Nudelman & Kalik) with being the catalyst for an agreement to get soda out of schools that the industry reached with former President Clinton and others. CSPI will likely soon sue Cadbury-Schweppes for rebranding 7UP as "all-natural" (it's not) and is currently suing the maker of a fungus-based meat substitute called Quorn. for failing to inform consumers that the product can cause severe vomiting, diarrhea, and breathing difficulties. Also, CSPI and the Campaign for Commercial-Free Childhood are having discussions with Kellogg about marketing junk food to young children and may ultimately sue that company and Viacom/Nickelodeon.

This would in part explain some of the recent changes in the food industry we have been discussing at S)T.

Now CSPI is turning their attention to KFC, over the level of trans-fats in fried chicken. If this pattern holds up, KFC will settle out of course and announce a "healthier" reformulation  of its frying oils.

While some may question CSPI's vision of healthiness, the organization can be a rather useful tool for keeping one step ahead of food industry change.