The following is an extract from The Economist:
"If you are a homeowner and a family man and you have, at some time, lived beyond your means in an effort to provide for your family
all the things that they want - then you will know roughly how many governments feel at the moment.
If, at some time, you had a cash problem and decided the only way to get out of trouble was to rashly throw more and more money into
the hat, just to keep things moving and prevent your personal “economy” from collapsing around you. If you kept that going for a long
time and then finally realised you could do no more, had no way out and need help - then you know exactly how some governments
feel at the moment.
Governments provide for the people in their countries. Depending on the country involved, they will provide for law and order, health,
education and employment services, upkeep and maintenance of the towns around you, transport (Including roads, utilities, water),
social services and the vast mechanism needed to keep the life of that country (including wars or a military outfits) running.
To do all that they need money - a lot of money. They raise most of the necessary funds from all of us, through taxes.
The problem is to get elected they have to make promises and to keep the people who elected them happy (so they will vote them in
again) they sometimes promise more than they can afford to deliver.
Then something bad, maybe a recession comes along and their revenues fall just when more money is needed for things like the
social services, helping the unemployed etc. Either the government cuts back on spending, raises revenue (i.e. taxes) or it borrows
money and runs a budget deficit.
Does it matter governments of the day chalk up these debts?
After all, world governments owe the money to their own citizens, not others. But the rising total is important for two reasons.
- First, when debt rises faster than economic output (as it has been doing in recent years), higher government debt implies
more state interference in the economy and higher taxes in the future.
- Second, debt must be rolled over at regular intervals. This creates a recurring popularity test for individual governments, rather
as reality TV show contestants face a public phone vote every week. Fail that vote, as the Greek government did in early 2010,
and the country can be plunged into imminent crisis.
So the higher the global government debt total, the greater the risk of fiscal crisis, and the bigger the economic impact such crises will
have.
It is not a pretty picture.
But this is the issue for which the medicine must be sought and taken. We, the people, have to understand that these measures need
to happen.
This is our money governments are spending and they’re doing it to provide us with services... admittedly- they don’t always get it right
and much is wasted."
The Economist (funny, is it not?)
When the money is not there, then there are two strategic imperatives for the country:
Government spending levels must be levelled and reduced before problems get worse. Sustaining government spending (that I,
as government when we help people, they would grow, i.e. refers to core-semi-prephery-periphery concepts of development: SCENARIO
I) is a product of linear thinking. This thinking needs to be carefully checked and reduced as we are often not aware that we are trapped
in these thoughts. Countries can go into bankruptcy as well and that’s no fun for anyone involved. Unfortunately, this is also the thinking
fostered intentionally within education in part.
Learn to see that the economy is fuelled by the private sector who has learned to grow systemically (who have invested in
self-seeking systems of growth: SCENARIO II) without expecting governments or foreign investors (more debt) needing to
stimulate (or bail) it constantly. This needs to happen in both the best and worst of times. These organizations are typically ones who
are quieter and do not seek to get into the political or news limelights. They are there at every level of society. They have developed the
inner dexterity to work with rather than against the world. Pay attention to these organizations from the sidelines, not to help them but use
them to help other organizations who need help in understanding how it is done.
This is not the time for bailouts. Organizations or individuals seeking bailouts are individuals who were already wasteful within the system or
brought it to where it is today. This is less obvious to all, than we believe.
The need to limit or control such tendencies becomes critical at this stage. Otherwise the eventual systemic implications for the globe can
become significant and neither do we quite fully help ourselves reel out of the situation.
The above scenarios, taking Botswana as an example, present how Scenario II may happen for a nation while Scenario I is kept at bay.












ECONOMIC SYSTEMS (REINFORCING LOOP 4)
|
FAMILY / ORGANIZATIONAL SYSTEMS (REINFORCING LOOP 1)
|
ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS (REINFORCING LOOP 2)
|
TECHNICAL SYSTEMS (REINFORCING LOOP 3)
|
GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS (BALANCING LOOPS)
|
THE FOLLOWING SCENARIO I IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE.
We have learned it in school as theory of development. It is easy to be lulled into this scenario by the seeming ease at which resources are flowing between the different parts. This is true intially. It usually becomes harder to do so in the long-term causing the growth to slow down and then become sluggish eventually. It does not grow without signficant efforts to resuscitate it. Therefore, if countries wish to see their nation grow in a sustained way, we would need to see a declining need for this perspective and move to another view if nations wish to develop a systemic approach to a nation's growth.
|
LEARNING TO SEE AN INCREASING NEED FOR A MORE SYSTEMIC PERSPECTIVE SCENARIO II:
This perspective becomes critical for the systemic growth of a nation that would eventually see its growth sustain over time. This would see even the UN Secretary General feeling he does not need to use male circumsion nor reel in the spiralling costs of dealing with HIV/AIDS. Such issues more easily become a thing of the past.
|
Systems Thinking Case Study
A Nation Coming Together: Seeing a Nation Grow Systemically
VIEWS OF NON-SYSTEMIC AND SYSTEMIC WORLDS
|
Scenario I: Non-Systemic World View
|
Scenario II : Systemic World View
|