 |
Muhammad Yunus expresses faith in entrepreneurs at G20 summit
Posted on: November 23, 2011
Category: News
Microfinance Focus, November 4, 2011: Professor Muhammad Yunus was invited to deliver a key note speech during the G20 Young Entrepreneurs Summit held in Nice, France. Professor Yunus addressed an audience of more than 400 entrepreneurs from all G20 countries. In his speech, he shared his personal entrepreneurship experiences, his faith in young entrepreneurs to be the pillars of society and the need to include poor countries in the discussion process in making global decisions.
Professor Yunus being an entrepreneur himself started off creating the Grameen Bank that provides microfinance services to the poor who had little access to financial provisions. From that, he ventured into a wide number of social businesses such as Grameen Nursing College, Grameen Eyecare Hospitals, Grameen Shakti, etc. He has always considered young entrepreneurs to be the most effective solution for the future. He said “In my opinion, G20 YES is a fabulous initiative, gathering so much energy and momentum from all over the world. Because of their creativity and leadership, provided that they commit to share the value they create, these 400 young entrepreneurs in this room can change the world.” Professor Yunus is also a member of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) Advocacy Group, advising the Secretary General of the United Nations. Hence, he believes that the next generation of youths should be handed over the process of the MDGs as soon as possible. He believes that entrepreneurs will have a key role to play in fulfilling the MDGs, if they are committed to the social value created by their companies, and social business can be part of the solutions. In his speech, he added that the G20 needed to broaden its scope to deal with the current world crisis. It can no longer remain a political forum with economic agendas. The G20 needs to create a social agenda as well. Professor Yunus proposes that ‘social business’ should be brought to the agenda of G20, as one of the concrete and effective solutions to be considered for immediate implementation so as to guide capitalistic investment towards social value and jobs creation, rather than sheer profit maximization strategies. A social business is a cause-driven business where profits stay within the company for its sustainability. Lastly, Professor Yunus concluded that the G20 should be expanded into the G25, where poor countries from each continent should be included in the global agenda which they are part of. He added that “Their problems are inter-related with others, and their proposals of solutions should be considered by the most economically advanced countries in making global decisions. A G25 would be a big step toward ensuring that global social issues are raised, and MDGs implementation is fully shared on the global agenda. And finally, because fighting poverty together is the only way to bring long lasting peace in this world.” Source: http://www.microfinancefocus.com/muhammad-yunus-expresses-faith-entrepreneurs-g20-summit
inquiries chris macrae info @worldcitizen.tv us tel 301 881 1655 ; us office 5801 nicholson lane suite 404, North Bethesda, MD 20852 USA - skype chrismacraedc
Mapping is a process of discovery. Crucially maps are only as usable as updating correctness of bottom up information. Think of your own use of a map. You look for the "you are here arrow". You want to be directed to somewhere/someone you dont know how to get to; you want your return vist to be safe as well as a value multiplying win-win.
Does anyone remember the simplest findings of einstein and jon von neumann. Einstein proved that to innovate more value you need to go more micro in what you model; von neumann showed that there is more value to be networked by interfacing safe flows across systems instead of ruling over separation of boundaries. There isnt a single global metrics profession that gets these mathematical -and natural - principles right. Unless we change this global markets will cycle through ever greater collapse and more and more communities will lose sustainability. Mapmaking is that critical an idea to what the net genration will achieve in 2010s; but its also one that children from primary age up can action learn. Its simple. Its just that it works the other way round from top-down people's fatal conceit.
It explores how to make the invisible principles and practices of real wealth creation visible, and therefore useable. Our planet needs case studies underline the search for new win-wins that build ‘system integrity’
Trust-flow is the unseen wealth to invest sustainability in. Tranpsarently mapped it develops a goodwill gravity tyhat invites with roleplayer in a community to multiply goodwill while sustaining their own cashflow.. Trust is not some vague, mushy, abstract warm-hearted sentiment. It is an economic powerhouse – probably just as economically and socially important as oil. The point is, there are specific things you need to do to get trust flowing, just as there are specific things you need to do to get oil flowing. And like oil trust has a dark side. Right now, the world is awash with the carbon emissions which threaten the stability and sustainability of its ecosystems. Right now, the world is also awash with the ‘carbon emission’ of trust – mistrust. Indeed it may well be that our ability to tackle the one issue – the threat of environmental catastrophe – depends on our ability to tackle the other issue: how to generate, deepen, extend and sustain trust.>br>But what is the best way of doing this? One thing is for sure. You don’t build and sustain trust via some sentimental exercise of goodwill to all and sundry. There are three very simple principles at the heart of effective trust generation. First, trust is generated via win-win relationships. It’s virtually impossible to generate or sustain trust without mutual benefit for those involved. But beneficial outcomes are not enough in themselves. For trust to be built and sustained, both sides need to signal a demonstrable commitment to finding win-win ways forward. Such a commitment may require real changes to what we say and do. Second, real ‘win-wins’ are hardly ever purely financial or material. You don’t build trust simply by walking away with more cash in your pocket. Trust works at all the dimensions and levels of human exchange. Yes, it’s about financial and material rewards. But it’s also about purpose (what people want to achieve). It’s about politics with a small ‘p’: the use and abuse of power, the crafting and application of rules of fair play. And it’s about emotions: the sometimes overwhelmingly strong emotions, both positive and negative, that are generated when people deal with other peopleWhat’s constitutes a ‘win’ – a sense of real improvement – is therefore highly specific. It depends absolutely on the details of who the parties are, what they are trying to achieve, in what context. Building trus, therefore involves discovering these specifics. Just as oil doesn’t flow out of the ground, get refined and pump its way into motor vehicles automatically and without effort, so identifying and doing what is necessary to get trust flowing requires dedicated, skilled effort. It requires a disciplined, structured process, not a vague sentiment. 3) Third, even if we do steps 1) and 2) there’s still a good chance it won’t succeed. Why? Because it ignores an invisible third factor. In the real world, purely two way bilateral relationships don’t exist. There is always a third party whose interests or outcomes are affected by what the other two parties do but who is not a party to the contract. The environment is a case in point. Producers and consumers may both benefit from buying and selling to each other – but what happens if, in doing so, they destroy the environment they both depend on? This raises a hugely important question. When two parties pursue win-wins and build mutual trust, are they doing so in a way which creates a win and builds trust for the third party at the same time? Or are they simply pushing the problems – and the mistrust – further down the line on to this third party? Building vigorous, healthy networks of trust is a different kettle of fish to ‘you scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours’ win-win conspiracies. It requires a Map of all the key relationships plus careful consideration of knock-on consequences. It requires a different perspective. These three simple, basic steps do not happen automatically. They need to be worked at. The territory needs to be deliberately Mapped and explored. What’s more, there are obstacles in our way – mental and practical obstacles that need to be cleared. Prevailing economic theories about ‘rational economic man’ for example, deny the need to commit to win-win outcomes. Instead, they promote supposedly ‘rational’ (i.e. narrowly selfish behaviours) which actively undermine trust The same theories insist that the only valid measure of human benefit is money, thereby excluding from consideration many of the biggest opportunities for improvement. Meanwhile many vested interests do not want to extend the circle of trust to third parties and complete networks because their positions of power depend on their ability to take advantage of the weaknesses of these third parties. That’s another job for Mapping: helping to identify and mount such obstacles. The potential benefits of doing so are unthinkably huge. They start with a simple negative: the relief that comes from when you stop banging your head against a brick wall. Mistrust breeds wasteful, wealth destroying conflict that tends to feed on itself. Anger and hatred engender anger and hatred. Simply easing or stopping the terrible waste of mistrust would transform prospects for many millions of people. We desperately need to find ways of doing this. Then there are the positive benefits. Understanding the real nature of human wealth – all those dimensions of purpose, ‘politics’ and emotion as well as money and material comfort – means we can start being human again; human in the way we think, and act. What’s more, many of these intangible benefits won’t cost a penny. They’re there for the taking, if only we puts our minds to it. But there’s more, because trust is also an economic superpower in its own right. In the pages that follow we will show conclusively that material and financial riches are also dependent on trust. In fact, we will argue the case for going one step further. We will say that material and financial riches are a by-product of trust: the visible fruits of invisible, intangible human exchange. Once you understand that sustainable cash flows are a by-product of sustainable trust flows, your understanding of what makes a successful business is transformed. Separately, each of these three fruits – reducing the waste of conflict, unleashing the potential intrinsic benefits of human exchange, and energising the sustainable creation of material wealth – are massive in their own right. Put them together and they represent a vast new continent of opportunity. As we said, this book is addressed to entrepreneurs and system innovation revolutionaries. Wherever you happen to be, whatever the change you want to make is, the principles explored in this book apply. The wish to change and the will to change are not the same as being able to change successfully. For that you need to understand your territory. You will need new Maps
.
0.1 Has a continental or worldwide search solutions on job creation that can be replicated across communities been organised before this EU launch of Nov 2011?
While alumni of entrepreneurial economics have always valued job creation searches- we know of no clear evidence that this has been top of mind in the way that continental-wide government has operated since 1984 even though it was scripted by The Economist's Unacknowledged Giant as the number 1 question the first net generation would need to mediate if sustainable futures and humanity's most needed millennium goals are to be served
what's different about nov 2011 is 4 top directorates of the EU have nailed their future reputation to this search -more
 obamauni@obamauni bon mots hillary zero sum thinking leads to negative sum results http://www.erworld.tv/id347.html HCL Technologies@hcltech Press Release: #HCLT listed for the fourth consecutive year in the @WorldBlu's "Most Democratic Workplaces" list. http://hclte.ch/KbzBGH Retweeted by Traci Fenton Al Robertson@al_robertson About last night's British Council @time_image film collection launch, with three of my favourite BC films! http://bit.ly/IJwmsc #WhoWereWe Retweeted by Lloyd DavisTRANSCRIPT: 'The Unthinkable' Video above. Tom Ashbrook: You're talking about, writing about the end of the EU, the end of the common currency. Paul Krugman: it's unthinkable except that continuing down the current path is unthinkable. Spain is actually the epicenter. The Spanish government did nothing wrong. Spain was running a budget surplus before the crisis. It had low levels of debt. But it had a monstrous housing bubble, as did a lot of places, largely financed by the way by German banks which were lending to Spanish banks, which then lent on. And when the housing bubble burst you were left with a severe, extremely severe recession, and so the answer has been government austerity which just makes the slump deeper.
The alternatives to a breakup of the euro have to be Europe-wide solutions. And so the solution, if there is one, involves accepting a higher rate of inflation for Europe as a whole and that particularly means higher inflation in Germany.
What are Spain's alternatives here? Well, if they still had their currency, their own currency, the answer would be devalue, let the peseta drop, Spanish exports would become a lot more competitive, they'd be well on their way to recovery. They don't have their own currency, so people are saying: Well, you have to do all this stuff to stay within the Euro. At some point you say: Well, you know if your answer to our problem is just ever more suffering, ever more you know... 25 percent, 50 percent youth unemployment. If that's your notion of a solution, then maybe although it would be a very terrible thing to have the Euro breakup, maybe that's better than what we're doing. So that's becoming a real possibility now.--Paul Krugman The alternatives to a breakup of the euro have to be Europe-wide solutions. And so the solution, if there is one, involves accepting a higher rate of inflation for Europe as a whole and that particularly means higher inflation in Germany. Talk to the Germans about this and of course they go crazy, but you have to say to them: What is your answer? What you're doing right now is just a path to the collapse of the euro with enormous damage and radicalization and a lot of things that you don't want to see happen in Europe happening. TA: If the Germans can't take their foot off the brakes, they're just intrinsically and against history and everything else, Weimar, if they can't do it, what happens? PK: Then Europe breaks up and... No, I mean I think it's that stark. It really is, it really is that extreme because you know it's one of those things, you can't be saying that, but then you say: Well, let's talk this through. You know, let's as it said in the original edition of the Godfather - Let us reason together. Right? What are the ways that this can work out? And the current path is not one that can work out. It's like an irresistible force hitting an immovable object. On the one hand it's unthinkable that they'll allow the euro to fail because the euro is a terribly important thing, it's not terribly important economically, it would have been better off if they'd, if they had never done it, but now that it has been done, for it to fail is a defeat for the European project, the whole project of bringing peace, democracy, integration to a continent with a terrible history. So it's unthinkable that they'll allow it to fail, but it's also unthinkable that the Germans will accept moderate inflation which is the only solution any of us have been able to come up with. So one of two impossible things is going to happen. Your bet. , Powered by Register.com | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Friday, December 31, 1999
.
...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment