All Posts By

FreedomLab

Menu
FreedomLab
In Economy, FreedomLab Insights, Health, Politics, Technology and Innovation

What to think of the Corona Pass?

Written by Sjoerd Bakker
October 18, 2021

Several European countries have introduced a health pass with which people can prove they are vaccinated, tested negative or have recovered from Covid. While the majority of people regard this as a necessary and temporary means to re-open society, others believe this is an example of wicked biopolitics and a clear violation of our basic rights.

What is really going here? Checks on age, criminal record or creditworthiness are commonplace in specific contexts to gain access to places, services, or goods. The corona pass is much more controversial, because it stretches the boundaries of governmental intervention towards our bodies; our body has to meet certain conditions (i.e. tested, cured or vaccinated) to gain access to (semi-)public spaces.

In light of the coronavirus crisis and our longing for ‘freedom’, this (temporary) biopolitical tool may be understandable and acceptable. Yet, the crucial question, from our perspective, is whether we are on a slippery slope towards more, and more casual, uses of such tools. Digital technology would certainly allow for these (automated) checks and the question really seems to be whether a next crisis, health- or otherwise, would warrant such ‘solutions’. Indeed, as a society we could very well conclude that these kinds of tools are once again a necessary evil to fight those crises as well.

Burning questions:

  • What constitutes a slippery slope when it comes to uses of technology and how could we make sure this remains a singular event rather than the start of a pattern?
  • If we were to limit individual freedom in a similar fashion in the future, is it primarily because of technological change and the possibilities this offers, or rather because of broader societal and cultural changes?
FreedomLab
In FreedomLab Insights, Geopolitics, Politics

AUKUS and the return of geopolitics

Written by Alexander van Wijnen
October 18, 2021

In his seminal 1990 paper From Geopolitics to Geo-Economics, Edward Luttwak described a global shift triggered by the end of the Cold War: international relations would no longer be dictated by instruments of military power, but by instruments of economic power. We have written before about several of such geo-economic phenomena, such as technical standards, German power and the G7 tax deal.

However, in recent years, geopolitics seems to be making a comeback. Examples include Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 as well as territorial disputes in East Asia. Most recently, AUKUS, the military agreement between the U.S., UK and Australia, has shown that the U.S., still the undisputed global hegemon, is returning to geopolitical instruments of power. Indeed, a shift back from geo-economics to geopolitics fits the return of hegemonic conflict, a process that will take decades. In the coming years, the return of geopolitics will be felt increasingly in sensitive areas like East Asia, the Middle East and the Indian Ocean.

Burning questions:

  • How will geopolitics and geo-economics co-exist in the coming years?
  • What are some extreme scenarios in the intensifying conflicts of geo-economics, in particular in the conflict between the U.S. and China?
FreedomLab
In Economy, FreedomLab Insights, Geopolitics, Politics

How a decline in trust can be a driver for new political leadership

Written by Vivian Elion
October 18, 2021

The latest Edelman Trust barometer shows that global trust in governments has declined, from 61% in May 2020 to 56% in January 2021. These findings suggest that the trust bubble that was built up during the coronavirus crisis has burst. A similar dynamic is visible in the Netherlands: research institute Ipsos found that six out of ten respondents have no trust in the government, up from four out of ten last year. The reasons for this decline in trust include health policy, the housing market and the struggle to form a new government.

Especially the last issue weighs heavily. Six out of ten respondents have lost faith in the demissionary cabinet, even though it looks like this exact cabinet will continue as Rutte IV in the coming four years. An NRC article rightfully points out: how can we expect the same people who caused the problem in the first place, to fix issues like the social benefits scandal in the future? Results of the Ipsos report hint at a possible answer to this question. Pieter Omtzigt, the former CDA politician who fought for justice for and transparency towards the victims, received the highest appreciation score from the respondents. It might be time for Rutte IV to step away from its pragmatic, utilitarian style of leadership and develop more of an ideals-based government with an explicit mission to take on challenges such as the lack of governmental transparency and societal inequality.

Burning questions:

  • Why did voters re-elect the same parties if trust in exactly these parties has decreased?
  • Who are the main agents of change in an ecosystem of declining trust: politics, civil society, business or citizens?
  • Will polarization and a decline in trust drive further radicalization of both the far left and right? If so, how?
FreedomLab
In Election, FreedomLab Insights, Politics

The traffic light turns green for German digitalization

Written by Sjoerd Bakker
September 30, 2021

Following Sunday’s elections, the greens and liberals are seen as kingmakers for the coming German government. Together they can decide whether to support a traffic light coalition with the Social Democrats, or a ‘Jamaica’ coalition with the Christian Democrats. While these two parties have many differences between them, e.g. on public spending, tax cuts and climate change, they do seem to agree on the need for Germany to catch up in terms of digitalization.

Germany is lagging behind the rest of Europe in terms of broadband connections, the use of digital services and digitalization of its industry and government. Fixing this situation, through public investments and more favorable regulations, should a be top priority for the new government. The greens and liberals could use such a plan to divert some attention away from issues that are politically more sensitive.

As citizens are still weary of information technology in general and e-government especially, cultural change should also be part of the ambition. From that perspective, it would be promising for the digital future of Germany if the deeply conservative CDU is left out of the coalition.

Burning questions:

  • How would a traffic light coalition go about public investments in the digital infrastructure, given the FDP’s fiscal conservatism?
  • Can and will sustainability be part of Germany’s digital agenda in terms of energy use of data centers, or the use of data and intelligence for sustainable solutions?
  • How can the government overcome Germany’s distrust in information technology?
FreedomLab
In Election, FreedomLab Insights, Geopolitics, Politics

The ‘Wechselstimmung’ after Merkel

Written by Sebastiaan Crul
September 30, 2021

Merkel’s main task was to hold things together and safeguard the nation’s prosperity. Looking back, she passed with flying colors. Merkel provided guidance and steered Germany through the financial crisis, the Eurozone crisis, the European migrant crisis and the COVID-19 crisis. The mother of the nation brought stability in turbulent times with her conservative moderate-right politics. Internationally, her calmness and rationality were the perfect antidote to the hysteria of emotional and short-tempered leaders such as Orbán and Bolsonaro.

Opponents point to the fact that Europe bouncing from crisis to crisis was also the perfect cover for Merkel’s lack of vision. When Trump entered the office, she somewhat shook off this image and naturally became the leader and face of liberal values. And with her stance in the refugee crisis, she won the hearts and minds of many worldwide. While outsiders mostly applauded this new face of Merkel, some Germans responded with disappointment or even felt abandoned. According to psychologist Stephan Grünewald, who is well-known for measuring the “Stimmung” of the country, confidence in Merkel has been showing cracks in the past years. After sixteen years of Merkel, the zeitgeist of the nation is now more ambivalent than it was at the beginning of the century. While the big challenges ahead have made many realize more structural change and progressive politics are needed (‘Wechselstimmung’), the perceived rising insecurity of a broad part of the population and the aftermath of a pandemic aren’t contributing. For many, change is exactly what is feared the most. Thus, even without Merkel, ‘Merkelism’ is likely to survive in German politics for some time.

Burning questions:

  • Will Merkel’s successor build on her image of “defender of the free world” or focus more on domestic policy?
  • With Scholz being a relatively conservative and technocratic politician, can we interpret his win as a sign that Germans are indeed afraid of change?
FreedomLab
In Economy, Election, FreedomLab Insights, Geopolitics, Politics

The future of the anti-establishment, conservative right

Written by Pim Korsten
September 20, 2021

Last week, many high-profile supporters of Trump voiced their support for incumbent president Jair Bolsonaro at the world’s biggest conservative, anti-establishment right political event. Bolsonaro is preparing for re-election next year, but his ratings and support have been falling to all-time lows. In other countries, the far right seems to have been losing ground as well recently, such as in France and the UK, or stalling, as in Germany. With many important elections in major economies next year, like Germany, France, U.S. (mid-term elections), Brazil, India, Sweden, Australia, next year could become a crucial year for the far right.

Reasons for this might be the mishandling of far-right governments of the coronavirus crisis, as in Brazil, Russia and the U.S. A second reason could be the resurgence of the Big Left and Big Government in the wake of the pandemic, fueled by calls of the general public for more government intervention (e.g. on inequality) and government spending. Lastly, there could be a general shift in consensus on what the core issue is; from identity politics and culture wars to fighting climate change and creating more resilient societies in a sustainable sense.

Burning questions:

  • Unlike in Western European countries, support for the far right is rising in Mediterranean countries such as Italy, Spain, Greece, and Portugal. Could we see a resurgence of the far right in these countries that were unaffected by the recent far-right wave that started in 2015?
  • Can far-right parties build momentum in the run-up to next year’s elections, as they have often done by proving polls wrong (e.g. remember Trump’s election odds?)
  • In what sense has the far-right agenda been taken over by “mainstream parties”, e.g. has the center become more right-wing and has identity politics become more for the middle parties?
FreedomLab
In China, Economy, FreedomLab Insights, Geopolitics, Hegemonic Shift, Politics, Technology and Innovation

China’s CBDC-as-a-standard?

Written by Alexander van Wijnen
September 20, 2021

An August 2021 report by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (CEIP) shows that China is far ahead of other countries in the development of a “central bank digital currency” (CBDC). Whereas most countries are still researching the possibility of a CBDC, China has been running different types of pilots since 2019. In effect, a CBDC, by eliminating the role of intermediary entities in the financial system, allows for more efficient financial transactions. Based on such efficiency, it is expected that China’s CBDC will boost the share of the yuan in the global financial system. Yet, turning the yuan into the global reserve currency is not China’s primary goal here.

Instead, China primarily seeks to protect its companies against American sanctions by building a financial infrastructure that parallels the US dollar system. The report highlights several reasons as to why China’s CBDC is likely to become a standard. China’s pilots are far ahead of other countries and its government is willing to boost adoption aggressively (e.g. discounts for consumers, incentives for trade). Also, China has already set standards for a new global financial infrastructure through “m-CBDC” (a cross-border payment project between China, Hong Kong, Thailand and the UAE), the Blockchain Service Network, and the inter-bank payment system of CIPS. Finally, China already has large international payment platforms which are accessible through government intervention (UnionPay, Alipay, WeChat Pay).

Burning questions:

  • What are the consequences of a Chinese parallel (to the U.S. dollar) financial system for trade and capital flows?
  • To what extent will the CBDC be able to boost the dominance of Chinese firms in other regions (e.g. Southeast Asia)?
FreedomLab
In Energy and Environment, FreedomLab Insights, Society and Culture

A new narrative on climate change

Written by Sjoerd Bakker
September 3, 2021

The recent IPCC report marks the definitive rhetorical shift from preventing climate change to limiting climate change. While it was widely known that climate change was taking place already, the common narrative was nevertheless that sufficient climate action could still limit global warming to acceptable levels. The new narrative instead tells us that climate change will be disastrous, no matter what we do, but that we still can, and should, prevent matters from getting even worse.

Looking back, we have to acknowledge that the mere threat of climate change was not sufficient to persuade us to take necessary measures. Looking ahead, we can only hope that being confronted with visible and undeniable climate change in the coming years, in the form of droughts, floods and wildfires, will finally result in the institutional and behavioral change that is needed to limit further harm. Most of all, such experiences could lead to concrete and direct action, instead of the long-term goals that have defined climate agreements thus far.

Burning questions:

  • Given the new narrative, can we avoid a sense of climate fatalism that would shift our focus towards (local) forms of climate adaption?
  • How can a so-called “just transition” prevent climate mitigation measures from hurting the poor the most?
FreedomLab
In Economy, Energy and Environment, FreedomLab Insights, Out of the Box, Philosophy, Society and Culture

What would a sufficiently sustainable ordinary life look like?

Written by Jessica van der Schalk
September 3, 2021

For many consumer practices it is difficult to imagine how we can make them sustainable. In some cases, such as flying, there’s simply no sustainable mode available, while in other cases the potential solutions require us to change our behavior radically (e.g. shopping without packaging material). Yet a clear and enticing perspective on what our new lives should look like when we do not live as if there are multiple worlds is lacking. Concepts such as minimalism or zero waste give some practical tips to reduce consumerism, but lack guidance regarding how we should organize our society when we would actually stop consuming non-essential products and services, and the profound impact this would have on financing our care system, infrastructure etc.

What is more, we lack perspective regarding how our society as a whole could give (new) substance to such a life. So called cli-fi (climate fiction) mostly paints an apocalyptic picture of a world tormented by one climate disaster after another, abandoning a successful response altogether. Finally, tech companies that are working on solutions frequently offer nothing more than pictures of high-tech worlds with many plants, remaining silent about the problems that technology cannot solve. Add to this the continuation of the encouragement of consumerism and we are left in the dark about how to build a new way of living that is both compelling and realistic.

Burning questions:

  • In the past, some have tried to organize society in a way in which consumerism had no place, for example communism (society) or the Franciscans (monks that aimed to live in accordance with the life of Christ). Those models did not last, will we be able to imagine one that will?
  • What new expectations, values and life purposes could form the new building blocks of a worldview that will support different consumer practices in a fulfilling manner, and will we be able to adopt them in time?
  • Are there other, and more just, means of changing our behavior, than steep taxes on polluting products?
FreedomLab
In Economy, Energy and Environment, FreedomLab Insights, Geopolitics, Philosophy, Society and Culture

Climate litigation and civil society

Written by Sebastiaan Crul
September 3, 2021

Over the past years, there has been a “rights turn” in climate litigation. Previously, most cases focused primarily on the violation of specific laws, when the court has to decide, for example, if a company is responsible for environmental damage in a specific region. Currently, a growing percentage of climate litigation employs right claims in lawsuits, with the Urgenda case as both a landmark case and turning point in climate litigation. Climate litigation has become climate change litigation. Governments worldwide are now being sued over global warming and their insufficient action to protect citizens.

In the wake of the IPCC report, climate litigation bears some clear advantages over traditional consensus-based legislation in democracies for citizens to speed up climate action. In addition, even if climate cases have an unfavorable outcome, there may be positive indirect effects such as lower stock prices of grey companies and growing public awareness. This “strategic” litigation is on the rise and could be a core feature of planetary citizenship in the next decade, favored over mass demonstration (e.g. “the case of the century” was signed by 2.3 million French citizens). However, because climate litigation cases entail human rights, defensive counter-cases are also a growing phenomenon, as this report shows. This “anti climate litigation” is a logical consequence of the polarized debate and could undermine climate action. If climate laws harm some people more than others, such as farmers or construction workers, then climate litigation could lead to an arms race of cases and put heavy pressure on the already struggling Western parliaments. Sidelining the parliamentary democracy is never without risks.

Burning questions:

  • What are the positive indirect effects of climate litigation?
  • How can parliamentary democracies prevent their being flooded with climate litigation cases in the future?
  • Is it time to grant basic rights to glaciers and other natural phenomena that are under existential threat?