iT's always about the goal is haar motto bijvoorbeeld
terwijl het voor mij is : iT's never about the goal , iT ' s about the journey towards the goal
maar daardoor kan Aska realistischer de wereld "maken"
ik "geloof" wel in creatieve destructie, maar pretendeer niet dat ik dat kan, niet slim genoeg,
hoewel met hulp van aiTeT en Aska en Anke (maken deel uit van internet google ai iT eT )
bijvoorbeeld misschien wel ......... en ook via creatieve destructie kan de wereld net zo goed
naar zijn of haar mallemoer geholpen worden, zie hieronder
Creatieve destructie of creatieve vernietiging (creative destruction) is een proces van voortdurende innovatie, waarbij succesvolle toepassingen van nieuwe technieken de oude vernietigen.
Bij Schumpeter[bewerken | brontekst bewerken]
Hij hield technische innovatie voor de enige werkelijke bron van economische groei. Succesvolle innovatie verschaft tijdelijke marktmacht en surpluswinst, die de winsten en marktaandelen van op voorgaande technieken gevestigde bedrijven aantast. Zodra ook dit gemeengoed wordt, rest nog slechts normale winst, de normale vergoeding voor het aangewende kapitaal.
In een nooit eindigend proces van opkomst en ondergang worden oude bedrijven vernietigd door nieuwe. Daar technische innovatie volgens Schumpeter de enige manier is waardoor de welvaart kan toenemen, ziet hij niets in maatregelen waarbij ongericht geld in de economie wordt gepompt om groei te bevorderen. Ondanks de groei dacht Schumpeter dat het proces uiteindelijk niet vol te houden was. Niet alleen zou het kapitalisme de overbodige instituties vernietigen, maar uiteindelijk ook degene die noodzakelijk zijn voor haar voortbestaan, vergelijkbaar met de feodale maatschappij die ook zichzelf ondergroef.
Diverse denkers hebben de periode van deregulering en financialisering, ca. 1970 tot heden, in Schumpeters termen geanalyseerd. De Noorse econoom Erik S. Reinert spreekt bijvoorbeeld van "financiële creativiteit gecombineerd met de vernietiging van echte waarde", met als voorbeeld het gebruik om bedrijven over te nemen alleen om ze daarna op te breken (Reinert en Daastøl 2011).
S&P 500[bewerken | brontekst bewerken]
Richard N. Foster en Sarah Kaplan betrokken creatieve vernietiging op de S&P 500. De eerste S&P index begon in 1923 en betrof 90 grote Amerikaanse bedrijven. De bedrijven op deze oorspronkelijke lijst bleven daar gemiddeld 65 jaar op staan. In 1998 was dit bij de uitgebreide S&P 500 nog maar 10 jaar. Van de 500 bedrijven die er bij het begin van de S&P 500 in 1957 op stonden, waren er in 1997 nog maar 74 over. Van die 74 presteerden er over die periode slechts 12 beter dan de index zelf. Slechts 2 bedrijven maakten geen deel uit van een industrietak die zelf beter presteerde dan de index. Dit waren General Electric en Johnson & Johnson.
Literatuur[bewerken | brontekst bewerken]
- Foster, R.N.; Kaplan, S. (2001): Creative Destruction. Why Companies That Are Built to Last Underperform the Market—And How to Successfully Transform Them, Currency.
- Erik S. Reinert; Arno Mong Daastøl (2011). Production Capitalism vs. Financial Capitalism – Symbiosis and Parasitism. An Evolutionary Perspective and Bibliography. Working Papers in Technology Governance and Economic Dynamics 36.
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatieve_destructie
Opvallend veel meer informatie op de Engelse Wikipedia pagina over "creative destruction (teveel info ?) :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction
Globalization can be viewed as some ultimate form of time-space compression, allowing capital investment to move almost instantaneously from one corner of the globe to another, devaluing fixed assets and laying off labour in one urban conglomeration while opening up new centres of manufacture in more profitable sites for production operations. Hence, in this continual process of creative destruction, capitalism does not resolve its contradictions and crises, but merely "moves them around geographically"
The truth of the matter, as Marx sees, is that everything that bourgeois society builds is built to be torn down. "All that is solid"—from the clothes on our backs to the looms and mills that weave them, to the men and women who work the machines, to the houses and neighborhoods the workers live in, to the firms and corporations that exploit the workers, to the towns and cities and whole regions and even nations that embrace them all—all these are made to be broken tomorrow, smashed or shredded or pulverized or dissolved, so they can be recycled or replaced next week, and the whole process can go on again and again, hopefully forever, in ever more profitable forms. The pathos of all bourgeois monuments is that their material strength and solidity actually count for nothing and carry no weight at all, that they are blown away like frail reeds by the very forces of capitalist development that they celebrate. Even the most beautiful and impressive bourgeois buildings and public works are disposable, capitalized for fast depreciation and planned to be obsolete, closer in their social functions to tents and encampments than to "Egyptian pyramids, Roman aqueducts, Gothic cathedrals"
In 2021, an article was published by Berman's younger son Daniel Berman in which the elder Berman's conception of creative destruction was applied to the field of art history. Entitled Looking the Negative in the Face: Creative Destruction and the Modern Spirit in Photography, Photomontage, and Collage, the essay reconsiders the modern media of photography, photomontage, and collage through the lens of "creative destruction". In doing so, the younger Berman attempts to show that in certain works of art of the above-mentioned media, referents (such as nature, real people, other works of art, newspaper clippings, etc.) can be given new and unique significance even while necessarily being obscured by the very nature of their presentation
Manuel Castells[edit]
The sociologist Manuel Castells, in his trilogy on The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture (the first volume of which, The Rise of the Network Society, appeared in 1996),[12] reinterpreted the processes by which capitalism invests in certain regions of the globe, while divesting from others, using the new paradigm of "informational networks". In the era of globalization, capitalism is characterized by near-instantaneous flow, creating a new spatial dimension, "the space of flows".[49] While technological innovation has enabled this unprecedented fluidity, this very process makes redundant whole areas and populations who are bypassed by informational networks. Indeed, the new spatial form of the mega-city or megalopolis, is defined by Castells as having the contradictory quality of being "globally connected and locally disconnected, physically and socially".[50] Castells explicitly links these arguments to the notion of creative destruction:
Developing the Schumpeterian legacy, the school of the Science Policy Research Unit of the University of Sussex has further detailed the importance of creative destruction exploring, in particular, how new technologies are often idiosyncratic with the existing productive regimes and will lead to bankruptcy companies and even industries that do not manage to sustain the rate of change. Chris Freeman and Carlota Perez have developed these insights.[52] More recently, Daniele Archibugi and Andrea Filippetti have associated the 2008 economic crisis to the slow-down of opportunities offered by information and communication technologies (ICTs).[53] Using as a metaphor the film Blade Runner, Archibugi has argued that of the innovations described in the film in 1982, all those associated to ICTs have become part of our everyday life. But, on the contrary, none of those in the field of Biotech have been fully commercialized. A new economic recovery will occur when some key technological opportunities will be identified and sustained.[54]
Technological opportunities do not enter into economic and social life without deliberate efforts and choices. We should be able to envisage new forms of organization associated with emerging technology. ICTs have already changed our lifestyle even more than our economic life: they have generated jobs and profits, but above all they have transformed the way we use our time and interact with the world. Biotech could bring about even more radical social transformations at the core of our life. Why have these not yet been delivered? What can be done to unleash their potential? There are a few basic questions that need to be addressed.
In 1992, the idea of creative destruction was put into formal mathematical terms by Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt,[55] giving an alternative model of endogenous growth compared to Paul Romer's expanding varieties model.
In 1995, Harvard Business School authors Richard L. Nolan and David C. Croson released Creative Destruction: A Six-Stage Process for Transforming the Organization. The book advocated downsizing to free up slack resources, which could then be reinvested to create competitive advantage.[citation needed]
More recently, the idea of "creative destruction" was utilized by Max Page in his 1999 book, The Creative Destruction of Manhattan, 1900–1940. The book traces Manhattan's constant reinvention, often at the expense of preserving a concrete past. Describing this process as "creative destruction," Page describes the complex historical circumstances, economics, social conditions and personalities that have produced crucial changes in Manhattan's cityscape.[56]
In addition to Max Page, others have used the term "creative destruction" to describe the process of urban renewal and modernization. T.C. Chang and Shirlena Huang referenced "creative destruction" in their paper Recreating place, replacing memory: Creative Destruction at the Singapore River. The authors explored the efforts to redevelop a waterfront area that reflected a vibrant new culture while paying sufficient homage to the history of the region.[57] Rosemary Wakeman chronicled the evolution of an area in central Paris, France known as Les Halles. Les Halles housed a vibrant marketplace starting in the twelfth century. Ultimately, in 1971, the markets were relocated and the pavilions torn down. In their place, now stand a hub for trains, subways and buses. Les Halles is also the site of the largest shopping mall in France and the controversial Centre Georges Pompidou.[58]
The term "creative destruction" has been applied to the arts. Alan Ackerman and Martin Puncher (2006) edited a collection of essays under the title Against Theater: Creative destruction on the modernist stage. They detail the changes and the causal motivations experienced in theater as a result of the modernization of both the production of performances and the underlying economics. They speak of how theater has reinvented itself in the face of anti-theatricality, straining the boundaries of the traditional to include more physical productions, which might be considered avant-garde staging techniques.[59]
Additionally within art, Tyler Cowen's book Creative Destruction describes how art styles change as artists are simply exposed to outside ideas and styles, even if they do not intend to incorporate those influences into their art.[60] Traditional styles may give way to new styles, and thus creative destruction allows for more diversified art, especially when cultures share their art with each other.
In his 1999 book, Still the New World, American Literature in a Culture of Creative Destruction, Philip Fisher analyzes the themes of creative destruction at play in literary works of the twentieth century, including the works of such authors as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Walt Whitman, Herman Melville, Mark Twain, and Henry James, among others. Fisher argues that creative destruction exists within literary forms just as it does within the changing of technology.[61]
Neoconservative author Michael Ledeen argued in his 2002 book The War Against the Terror Masters that America is a revolutionary nation, undoing traditional societies: "Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our own society and abroad. We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law." His characterization of creative destruction as a model for social development has met with fierce opposition from paleoconservatives.[62]
Creative destruction has also been linked to sustainable development. The connection was explicitly mentioned for the first time by Stuart L. Hart and Mark B. Milstein in their 1999 article Global Sustainability and the Creative Destruction of Industries,[63] in which he argues new profit opportunities lie in a round of creative destruction driven by global sustainability. (An argument which they would later on strengthen in their 2003 article Creating Sustainable Value[64] and, in 2005, with Innovation, Creative Destruction and Sustainability.[65]) Andrea L. Larson agreed with this vision a year later in Sustainable Innovation Through an Entrepreneurship Lens,[66] stating entrepreneurs should be open to the opportunities for disruptive improvement based on sustainability. In 2005, James Hartshorn (et al.) emphasized the opportunities for sustainable, disruptive improvement in the construction industry in his article Creative Destruction: Building Toward Sustainability.[67]
Some economists argue that the destructive component of creative destruction has become more powerful than it was in the past. They claim that the creative component does not add as much to growth as in earlier generations, and innovation has become more rent-seeking than value-creating.[68]
Alternative name[edit]
The following text appears to be the source of the phrase "Schumpeter's Gale" to refer to creative destruction:
Impediments to Creative Destruction[edit]
Politicians often impose impediments to the forces of creative destruction by regulating entry and exit rules that make it difficult for churning to take place. In a series of papers Andrei Shleifer and Simeon Djankov illustrate the effects of such regulation on slowing down competition and innovation.
In popular culture[edit]
The film Other People's Money (1991) provides contrasting views of creative destruction, presented in two speeches regarding the takeover of a publicly traded wire and cable company in a small New England town. One speech is by a corporate raider, and the other is given by the company CEO, who is principally interested in protecting his employees and the town.
See also[edit]
In Hinduism, the god Shiva is simultaneously destroyer and creator, portrayed as Shiva Nataraja (Lord of the Dance), which is proposed as the source of the Western notion of "creative destruction"
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten