25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
       
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Plausible Futures of Socialized Risk: Integral Sustainability or Globalized Dystopia?

      Preprint
      In review
      research-article
      Bookmark

            Abstract

            Contemporary corporate and governance structures do not go far enough to protect the public against the socialization of market risks—particularly during states of globalized crises occurring with increased frequency. While many have written about these problematic structures, this article introduces a novel concept of “transunity,” the desired state of a globalized ecosystem that continuously leverages its collective intelligence in harmonious knowledge production and innovation to achieve a shared strategic vision of integral sustainability. This article also describes the required leadership capacity of State and institutional actors capable of leading such an incredible movement of change. What is transunity? Simply put, it is a state of harmonious, yet sovereign, sustained globalized cooperation. The “blue moon” opportunity for transunity arises amid rare catalyzing events that compound existential risks in the short- and long-term, producing a level of destabilization so great, that only a dystopian future is plausible. The key element for producing a transformative outcome is a shared vision extending beyond what is currently known and seen as possible. This article has three goals: First, to explain the current state and its prevailing root causes, highlighting the failure of the current neoliberal system. Second, to introduce and define the concept of transunity, a novel, complex state of harmony enabled in a globalized system of governance whose optimal performance increases with heterogeneity. Finally, the article examines plausible challenges at the edge of chaos—the phase of forming transunity—and the culturally diverse leadership and institutional fortitude required to move into harmonious complexity and actualization of the moonshot vision.

            Content

            Author and article information

            Journal
            ScienceOpen Preprints
            ScienceOpen
            13 July 2022
            Affiliations
            [1 ] Division of Global Leadership and Change, Graduate School of Education and Psychology, Pepperdine University, Malibu, California, USA
            Author notes
            Article
            10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-.PPQPYXL.v1
            22fe38c6-41de-4d85-a3b4-cc07aaad5cf1

            This work has been published open access under Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0 , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Conditions, terms of use and publishing policy can be found at www.scienceopen.com .


            All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article (and its supplementary information files).
            Sociology,Social & Information networks,Social policy & Welfare,Conflict resolution & Mediation,International & Comparative law,International economics & Trade,Movements,Risk management,Political economics,Cultural studies
            chaos theory,research on peace justice and strong institutions ,SDG16,public policy,socialized risk,plausible futures,global governance,cultural diversity leadership,collective intelligence,sustainability

            References

            1. Małecka Magdalena, Walsh Jason. Mariana Mazzucato, The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy. OEconomia. (10-2):369–373. 2020. OpenEdition. [Cross Ref]

            2. Aboelela Sally W., Larson Elaine, Bakken Suzanne, Carrasquillo Olveen, Formicola Allan, Glied Sherry A., Haas Janet, Gebbie Kristine M.. Defining Interdisciplinary Research: Conclusions from a Critical Review of the Literature. Health Services Research. Vol. 42(1p1):329–346. 2007. Wiley. [Cross Ref]

            3. Alfoqahaa Sam, Jones Eleri. Leading at the edge of chaos: historical perspectives on the qualities of leadership for cultural diversity and conflict resolution. International Journal of Public Leadership. Vol. 16(2):217–248. 2020. Emerald. [Cross Ref]

            4. Betz Hans-Georg. Nativism Across Time and Space. Swiss Political Science Review. Vol. 23(4):335–353. 2017. Wiley. [Cross Ref]

            5. Elliott Mark. Stigmergic Collaboration: A Framework for Understanding and Designing Mass CollaborationMass Collaboration and Education. p. 65–84. 2016. Springer International Publishing. [Cross Ref]

            6. Kotz David M.. The Financial and Economic Crisis of 2008: A Systemic Crisis of Neoliberal Capitalism. Review of Radical Political Economics. Vol. 41(3):305–317. 2009. SAGE Publications. [Cross Ref]

            7. . Global Economic Prospects, June 2020. 2020. Washington, DC: World Bank. [Cross Ref]

            8. Małecka Magdalena, Walsh Jason. Mariana Mazzucato, The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy. OEconomia. (10-2):369–373. 2020. OpenEdition. [Cross Ref]

            9. Mazzucato Mariana. Mission-oriented innovation policies: challenges and opportunities. Industrial and Corporate Change. Vol. 27(5):803–815. 2018. Oxford University Press (OUP). [Cross Ref]

            10. van Egmond N.D., de Vries H.J.M.. Sustainability: The search for the integral worldview. Futures. Vol. 43(8):853–867. 2011. Elsevier BV. [Cross Ref]

            Comments

            Comment on this article