I am Wikipedian

I proudly announce I am the starter of the Wikipedia articles on the Portuguese Institute for Development Support and AICEP Business Development Agency. Now, you know the rules…

Can you think of a better world?

These are two YouTube modern classics: Zeitgeist Addendum (1h59) and HOME (1h33). Go on, it doesn’t hurt to watch.

Introduction to Guinea-Bissau: Cashew & Drugs

Cashew is the solution, because currently it represents in its cheapest form more than 90% of the country’s exports and because economic development leads to poverty reduction. Watch on YouTube: Cashew harvest reaps small bounty for Guinea-Bissau

Drug trafficking is the problem, because it makes political stability harder to achieve thus keeping most foreign investment away. Watch on YouTube: Tiny Guinea-Bissau a big player in drug trade

Turkey and the EU: “In varietate concordia”

The opposition to Turkey’s EU membership is often based on the country’s vast population, their wrongly publicized religion, their unconsolidated economy, their uncertain politics, their critical geographical location and their stereotyped culture. I argue that those, with few exceptions, must be seen as dynamic, thus prone to inevitable change. Given that today’s Europe is a pool of variety and ideas that represent our major competitive advantage in the world, the future, in a context of increasing globalization, will require even more of Europe’s efforts. Turkey might prove to be the essential ingredient to Europe’s sustainability.

In varietate concordia: Latin translation of “United in diversity”, adopted as the European Union motto in the year 2000


Concentrating on the risks Europe has at hand regarding Turkey’s EU membership keeps us from looking ahead, to the future of EU and of Turkey itself. Broadly and irrefutably speaking, things change. And as is often the rule, change means improving. Since the coal and steel era things have been getting better in Europe and the community is now a prosperous region “united in diversity”. Turkey has also changed impressively. If one looks back to the 1920’s Ottoman Empire and compares it to the modern Turkey, the change is unbelievable. I believe there are no reasons to assume that things will stop changing and improving. So I ask, what is preventing EU of courageously assuming and committing to its role on Turkey’s change? The answer is often based on the following: Turkey’s vast population, their wrongly publicized religion, their unconsolidated economy, their uncertain politics, their critical geographical location and their stereotyped culture. I argue that those, with few exceptions, must be seen as dynamic, thus prone to inevitable change.

Turkey is a large country of approx. 70 million people. Population growth estimates clearly point out that Turkey will be the most populated country of the EU. That is hardly changeable, but solely, poses no major threat. The commonly perceived risk comes out of a combination of that vast population with the current EU rules that take population size into account for the voting process, but those rules are not perpetual. The vast Turkish immigrant communities have contributed to Europe’s growth and today are an example of good integration. If the future of Europe passes by a Constitution, that should guarantee in a comprehensive manner the protection of the interests of all the European citizens.

Turkey’s major religion is Islam. But generally religion is a vague concept and Islam has been especially prone to erroneous interpretations that distort its meaning and, with the help of sensationalist media, severely harm its image abroad. In addition, being religious or being identified as “Muslim” doesn’t mean the same to every individual, which obviously also applies to Christianity and other beliefs. It is important to be aware and keep in mind the differences among Islamic countries, and doing so, one must position Turkey by the tolerant edge. Moreover there are differences within each country and that is especially obvious in Turkey: between different regions, but most importantly between different generations. The educated Turkish youth is well informed and tolerant and that is the trend underlying Turkey’s future on the topic of religion.

Turkey’s economy has deficiencies but those have been changing and improving. Turkey has reached sound macroeconomic stability and is part of so called emerging markets. Although the modern infrastructure of the western part of the country is hardly comparable to the impoverished east, EU should look beyond the cost of setting the grounds for Turkey’s development and focus on the shared benefits of an enlarged integrated market.

The political panorama in Turkey is unstable and multipartite but, as in the European Union, demonstrably dedicated to the well-being of their citizens. Turkey is gloomed by many unresolved issues of great significance. For instance, the Kurdish minority still claims the recognition of an own cultural identity, the Alevi communities insist on the religious minority status while Cyprus remains divided. These and the incidents related to the power struggles between the Islamic and secular blocs keep hindering developments in the EU accession negotiations. The military, extended politically through the nationalist CHP party, has demonstrated to be a threat to the quality of Turkey’s democracy. Nevertheless, Turkey is a recognized democracy and as long as Turkish people want it to be, and they demonstrably do, then the future is optimistic.

Turkey’s complicated location, bordering countries such as Syria, Iraq or Iran, is often seen as a drawback of Turkey’s membership to the EU due to the great importance that security preservation has to its citizens. In fact, if we think beyond the cost of setting an appropriate border control, extending the boundaries of EU that far represents an opportunity to increase the long term safety of the European citizens by means of increased control and monitoring. Furthermore, Turkey’s location is an important asset to secure Europe’s energy future, making the connection to the sources of the Caspian Sea.

Finally, there is still to mention the Turkish culture. It can be seen as one of the most rewarding aspects of Turkey’s membership to the European Union. Today’s Turkey inherited much of its vast history of multiculturality and diversity, visible throughout the country and in its people. Many examples can be given: a visit to Istanbul’s Dolmabahçe palace is a tour around Europe in excellence handcraft and the palace’s architecture has elements of Baroque, Rococo and Neoclassic traditions, blended with Ottoman art; The Turkish Constitution is based on that of France, Germany and Italy; The Turkish language, spoken by more than 70 million people, traces back to Central Asia, and is today spoken in small scale throughout the Balkan and Eastern Europe, a result of the western expansion of the Ottoman Empire, and among substantial immigrant communities; The Ottoman gastronomy is worldwide famous and greatly admired. The popular döner kebab is part of Europe’s popular food culture, having gained a singular place in Germany’s national menu; and Turkish music is very much appreciated all over Europe, from Pop to the Classical.

For anyone who takes the chance, Turkey might represent one of the most challenging and rewarding experiences of intercultural exchange within Europe, and certainly contribute to widening the horizons of the European citizens. Today’s Europe is a pool of variety and ideas which represent our major competitive advantage in the world. The future, in a context of increasing globalization, will require even more of Europe’s efforts and Turkey might prove to be the essential ingredient to Europe’s sustainability.

Brazil (according to Samba-rap)

The recurrent case study for International Business and Development Studies scholars - Brazil - is analysed differently by the country’s Samba-rap musicians. The well performing clusters, such as the footwear cluster of Sinos Valley, was analysed by Humphrey and Schmitz (2002) regarding its functional upgrading triggered by US’ demand and value chain governance on one hand and by China’s competition on the other hand. The brazilian rapper De Leve describes - amid the well blended sound of drums, reco-reco, pandeiro and cavaco - “Trabalho em multinacional, escravidão high-tech” (I work for a multinational, high-tech slavery).

Brazil is, with no doubts, an interesting case study. Few arguments convince: a large economy 6 times bigger than the one of its former european colonizer, Portugal, and as great as that of the entire Scandinavian region; its market is wide - more than 170 million people - and its working force counts with more than 100 million souls; furthermore, despite being a funny-speaking nation (Portuguese) for the rest of Latin America, Brazil is the continent’s most influential nation (you can watch a series of video reports exploring the relations between Brazil and each one of its neighbours: BBC Brasil - Brazil in the eyes of Latin America - unfortunately only in Portuguese). Its growth rate allows it to score greatly on the fight against poverty, but “the problem is not the economy” as Marcelo D2 clarifies with a rhyme, “the problem is the corruption”.

The topic is similar for rappers all over the world. They align the timbre of the socio-economic troubles of their own country or city, but Brazilians do it specially well; my guess: the dazing amount of such problems, afecting in general the whole Latin America, provides limitless inspiration that is skilfully blended with the joyful nature of their music, that only Brazilians can do. Seu Jorge, Marcelo D2, De Leve (Voltair) and many others are not published in the International Business academic periodicals but they reach many millions with argumentation that is as empirical as it can be.

Turkey, on the right way?

There are two reasons why following news on Turkey’s EU accession is quite an easy task.

First, it is a slow process. Turkey wrote an unsatisfactory application to the EU in 1987 which according to Wikipedia was immediately turned down on the basis of its poor economical and political situation, bad relations with Greece and their conflict with Cyprus (or so to say Greek Cypriots). The request was accepted seventeen years later, so at the end of 2004 the negotiations started. As we enter 2009 Turkey has surely more money (a larger burden of IMF loans too), but in the political arena coups are still fashionable (e.g check out on Ergenekon), the relations with Greece are not the greatest and the problem with Cyprus remains. But that’s just part of the story.

Second, it’s very much about a few standard statements from the country’s political power. One of the latest from the PM Erdoğan was that accession to the European Union was a top priority and that he hoped his country would move closer to that goal in 2009.

I would be glad to read that their top priorities were to solve the damned Kurdish issue, to make Islamists and Secularists have çay together, to end the denial of 10 million Turkish Alevis and to make history on the last divided capital: Nicosia/Lefkoşa, Cyprus. It seems to me that Erdogan’s recurrently publicized hope (EU) would then be a matter of writing a proper application and wait Brussels to type it in the computer.

But why isn’t this process following this sequence?, i.e. first tackle the old ghosts and then get the EU membership? Maybe because these problems - the Kurdish issue, the Islamist/Secularist divide, the Alevis and the Cyprus dispute - are far greater and historically heavier than anything related to the European Union. Solving them would mean a different identity and would imply a great deal of loss or defeat for the Turks.

Is the membership to a complicated bloc that isn’t sure of wanting Turkey around more important than Turkey’s territorial integrity or even, than Turkey’s identity as carved by Mustafa Kemal a.k.a Atatürk? Maybe yes, maybe not. There’s a complicated trade off between identity and EU membership that, in my opinion, is what Turkish politicians are trying to reach, slowly, at the cost of their future generations.

Shell: sticking to the oil

Apparently, Shell announced it will stop investing in wind energy. The reason is simple: it is not profitable enough. That may be true on narrow terms, on the accountant’s fact sheet, but I ask: have they talked lately with their marketing people or with the one’s struggling to give the oil giant a greenish look? If a firm discredits the good intentions behind CSR, at least it should give some credit to its Business Case [''the Business Case of CSR'']. Given the increasing global awareness about climate change, I wonder if Shell calculated the cost of managing a socially irresponsible firm on the long term.

Portugal’s commitment

I invite you all to take a look at Energy from Portugal

It powerfully starts like this: 43% of our energy comes from renewable energy sources. No wonder we worship the sun, the sea and the wind.

It reveals testimonials from Bill Clinton, Sam Bodman, Tony Blair, the King of Sweden and the President and CEO of Nissan and Renault.

Furthermore the website presents Portugal’s energy policy, nothing less than: Leadership in renewable energies

The success stories are quite some and the results achieved are:
- 43% of gross electricity generated from renewable sources;
- Largest wind farm in operation in Europe;
- Largest PV solar plant in the World;
- First worldwide wave energy project to reach the market;
- National platform for electric cars in 2011;
- EDP the 4th company in the world in renewable energy.

The website links to some related press. I add one more:
- Portugal’s renewable energy boom (Guardian.co.uk photo story)

 

The last of Portugal’s true commitments, to globalization, took place 5 centuries ago and produced many admirable results too, such as:

- The discovery of the direct maritime route from Europe to India, rounding the Cape of Good Hope, under Vasco da Gama;
- The discovery of Brazil, by Pedro Álvares Cabral;
- The first expedition around the world, under Fernão de Magalhães;
- The discovery of Australia (not confirmed), New Guinea, Timor Island;
- The first trading ship to reach China;
among many others…

Now, as 500 years ago, the sun, the sea and the wind are taking us further.

Bacalhau superstar

Mark Kurlansky’s prized book on Codfish (Gadus morhua or ‘Bacalhau’ in Portuguese) is full of curious and quite strange facts. The protagonist, an open-mouthed fish that swallows whatever it finds, is honoured to the skies and as the title makes clear codfish changed the world. The book has a great deal of convincing arguments and runs brilliantly throughout 1000 years of fishing history - and its economical and political connectedness - making also great accounts of the main countries involved (remarkably Iceland and the Basque Country but too, in a lesser extent, Portugal). The book draws valuable messages from the overfishing practices, logically extended to other domains of natural resource exploitation. As Mark puts it, no matter what we do… “Nature, the ultimate pragmatist, doggedly searches for something that works. But as the cockroach demonstrates, what works best in nature does not always appeal to us”.

Clear as water

On Mark Notaras’ article for UNU’s OurWorld 2.0 webzine we can find several facts about water and its harmful bottled version. Facts presented are as shocking as “developed countries alone consume over one billion bottles weekly” and “unrecycled bottles represent 80% of those consumed”. The situation worsens when Mark shows how water resources are being transferred away from vulnerable communities towards consumers who already have access to clean water at a fraction of the cost. The issue doesn’t get any better when “from 1999 to 2004, India tripled and China doubled their consumption“.

Mark does present some facts and work being done to tackle the tendency and shows some interesting campaigns taking place. NYT shows how the problem has reached the inventive minds of two students who designed water bottles that could be filled with sand and reused as a brick to build housing and reduce waste in developing countries.

However, on the same article we can read that “bottled water sales are increasing exponentially as water companies make record profits“. Where from should the solution take departure? From the thirsty consumers, from the record-beating firms, or from the governments’ regulation?

Portugal, a developed country?

Update: This post comments a website that no longer exists as it did, therefore the links displayed won't function

It is a strange question to ask. Regardless of what ‘development’ really means, most people would say Portugal is undoubtedly a developed country. After all, the small western European republic is part of the EU since 1986. However it is not what it looks like after visiting the website of the country’s Business Development Agency (AICEP), a key institutions for captation of (relevant?) foreign investment within the country’s Ministry of Economy and Innovation. On their website one doesn’t take long to notice that the agency is erroneously promoting the Portuguese workforce as the cheapest of EU. Wasn’t that a policy of developing countries? A strategy that helped many countries, most notably the East Asian tigers, hook up with the developed world, learn from it and upgrade? The current reality tells us a different story. The days when cheap labour was a competitive advantage are gone, even for developing countries.

~

A website is extremely important, there’s no need to explain that. So why does AICEP’s website seem abandoned? If a student, an investor, a public servant, let’s say anyone who wants to know about the institution visits the website will find, among many others, the following situations:

a) The website claims “Portugal has the lowest labor costs in the EU…” and ‘proves’ it by showing a graph from 2005 including countries such as Poland, Slovakia or Latvia, among others, with lower labour costs. Weren’t they part of the EU in 2005? Yes, they were.

b) One of the four main sections of the same website is the ‘newsroom’. This section has three “news”, and the first is related to the start of the agency under the new administration on the 1st of July, 2007! Furthermore, the sorting system of these ‘news’ is quite peculiar since the oldest of the three comes in the middle!

~

Evans (2005) in his article entitled “The Challenges of the Institutional Turn” brings up some ideas on institutions:

“The possibility of institutions that are disadvantageous to long-run development emerging for idiosyncratic reasons that have little to do with any kind of overall “efficiency” or “social return” and then getting “locked-in” is all too plausible.”

“Once institutions take hold, they are likely to endure even if they have a long-run negative effect on development, crowding out the possibility for the emergence of more efficacious institutions.”

“If existing institutions provide differential returns to some portion of society, which consequently has a special vested interest in their maintenance, then the problem gets worse. If that segment is also differentially powerful, which is highly likely if not axiomatic, the problem is even more intractable.”

Let us hope it’s not the case of AICEP.