How much is the common
good in fact in our consciousness? Could it be that "thinking
with the end in view”
is not prominent in our thought process? Are we more
predisposed to linear thinking? People from developed economies,
given their experience, have developed a more adaptable thought
process. And the writer has observed the contrast over the last nine
years – working and living with his friends – in Eastern Europe.
(But they've realized this contrast and are embracing more and more
an adaptable thought process especially as they’ve pushed their
business to over 30 countries and counting.) The first time the
writer heard the distinction was many years ago from a then young
Brit who today is the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.
And two recent news
articles may remind us that our default-thought process indeed is
closer to linear thinking: (a) “Stakeholders in renewable energy
raise other concerns” [Business World, 19th Apr 2012] and (b)
“Lawmakers push bill to regulate large scale foreign investments on
land “[Inquirer.net,
20th Apr 2012]. The intentions of the people behind these news
reports must be sincere and credible. But if we are to “think with
the end in view,” we would be stating our perspectives and
positions differently. For example, as far as energy is concerned,
the common good is adequate and sustainable supply at competitive
costs. And with foreign investments the common good is to
create a bigger economic pie and generate a larger and sustainable
ecosystem. The failure of land reform is something to think about.
While it addressed the ownership element it missed to recognize that
its “endpoint” ought to be a sustainable economic undertaking –
i.e., efficiency across the board: credit, production, logistics,
marketing, financial management, etc. Similarly, we shall perpetuate
our juvenile economy if the juvenile instinct to ‘have our cake and
eat it too’ is our definition of patriotism in an interconnected
world?
Reading the above news
reports, it is understandable that everyone may have legitimate
concerns. But what is “the endpoint” and where is the bias for
the common good? And what is the order of priority? Even the Creator
needed seven days, which means that to prioritize is inherent in
creation, including secular undertakings?
If we are committed to
the common good, then our discussions could turn to: How do we get
there? What must we invest in time, talent and treasure to get us
there? And how do we prioritize so that we optimize the efforts, be
efficient and effective and get the biggest bang for the buck?
Investments are a prerequisite of an undertaking – something we’ve
finally realized and thus want to attract foreign investments? Or are
we still conflicted about it? It is this lack of conviction that
drives foreigners away – unwittingly reinforcing our cacique
system!
The reason the private
sector is more efficient in generating and sustaining economic output
is precisely because it follows the thought process described above.
For example they could simply state that the common good for a
business is “sustainable profitable growth.” But does Juan de la
Cruz have a problem with that or with the profit motive? It is not
the profit motive per se that is bad; it is an economy that is skewed
to oligarchy that is bad. When we say “inclusive,” we ought to
mean a broad-based economy, not one under oligarchic control? A
broad-based economy generates a larger economic pie and produces a
larger ecosystem that can create jobs – as we have seen with our
neighbors. Conversely, it is not about creating livelihood projects,
which at best is condescending and is characteristic of a cacique
environment! And the fact that it is ‘our normal’ reflects
our economic infirmities!
International agencies
have urged us to be pragmatic and model ourselves after our
neighbors. It is not an insult to our “abilidad and creativity.”
While we are thankful for OFWs and BPOs given their contributions to
the economy, what we sorely need is a broad-base economy, one driven
by the requisite elements of a robust enterprise: the fundamentals of
power generation and infrastructure, strategic industries and
competitiveness – i.e., investment, technology and innovation and
talent, product and market development. And that means we need to:
(a) channel our “kuro-kuro” to nation-building, (b)
develop the instinct for the common good and (c) the bias to
prioritize, and (d) recognize that our understanding of “inclusion”
has been narrowed by the reality of our cacique system and structure,
and our economic mismanagement.
No comments:
Post a Comment