There are various regional and interregional institutions in the Greater Eurasia: European Union, Eurasian Economic Union (Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia, Kyrgyzstan), New Silk Road, Shanghai Cooperation Organization (China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan), Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (ASEAN members: Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam; Australia, China, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea). How can their cooperation contribute to strong, sustainable economic development that respects people and the environment? Can their strategies work together to overcome the global crisis, bring about economic and social development, ease tensions between East and West, and find a new multipolar geopolitical, social, and economic order?
Natural gas is crucial to accompany the energy industry towards its decarbonization by supporting the development of green gas and by digitalizing infrastructures.
How will global demand for natural gas evolve? What are the prospects for the introduction of hydrogen as an energy carrier? What is the strategy of the leading energy companies and what changes do they intend to make in their development?
The current economic system of intensive production and consumption based on capital accumulation and infinite growth is no longer sustainable in terms of resource use. Therefore, there is a need to support a system based on sustainable development, environmental, social, and economic pillars. The aim is to revive the economy and the manufacturing industries, focusing on environmental protection and appreciation of nature. This will enable an effective response to the climate crisis which has developed into a phase of emergency and urgency, with tragic reductions in biodiversity, with deep inequalities between different hemispheres, peoples, and generations.
This is a challenging task to be performed gradually: you should neither panic, nor be overly optimistic.
The health and economic pandemics that have engulfed much of the globe admit expecting that they will not be overcome too quickly, which could accelerate processes likely to dramatically alter the underlying social and economic conditions. How will the financial and banking sector respond to deglobalization, the demand to accelerate FinTech and the financial development to achieve sustainable growth? How do banks see the mid-term and long-term future of their industry? What role will the financial and banking sector take on in the green economy transition?
What impact do these technologies have on manufacturing processes and hard infrastructure, what is their role in trade and economic cooperation between Europe and Greater Eurasia? Transport, infrastructure, manufacturing, energy, tourism will change. The industry is moving from hard-to-abate sectors to electrification.
The pandemic and the global economic slowdown have questioned priorities for economic development. Some sectors are expanding rapidly in the environment that has changed, while others are struggling. How sustainable are these trends? How are different economic sectors responding to the new challenges? Which industries are set to change fundamentally as economic growth recovers? What is the future of economic interdependence between countries and regions? How can we build a new, human-centered economy?
Going back to development after the COVID-19 emergency and its containment measures can pose the danger of falling into the trap of merely restoring a neoliberal economic model, with little improvement in the health system, insufficient to tackle the next pandemic.
There is an urgent need to understand that a pandemic is not a black swan, nor is it an unexpected or unpredictable event. Nor is it an exogenous shock.
Unfortunately, this is one of the inevitable consequences of the Anthropocene, the modern geological epoch during which the Earth has been experiencing heavy impact, globally and regionally, by human activities. The consequences have been amplified greatly by the neoliberal system which has shaped economic and political life in the vast majority of the world for over 50 years, producing inhuman megacities and growing endemic social inequality.
There is now widespread demand for an alternative model to neoliberalism, which is considered to be trumped even by the world’s biggest multinational corporations and the organizers of the World Economic Forum in Davos, including Klaus Schwab, its Founder and President. In his latest book, COVID-19: The Great Reset, he proposes overcoming shareholder capitalism in favor of new capitalism focused on private corporations as trustees of society, instead of shareholders. Corporations should become custodians of society, protect human and workers’ rights, promote sustainable economic development, and create value for all their shareholders: employees, customers, suppliers, local communities. Even multinational corporations must not only follow the interests of their immediate stakeholders but behave as shareholders of our global future — in cooperation with governments and society.
How convincing is the alternative to neoliberalism proposed by Klaus Schwab? Is there an actual deep connection between the collective good and responsibility and the ability of the system of major companies to achieve this? How reasonable is it to entrust the management of post-neoliberalism to the players responsible for the collapse of the neoliberal economic order? What role does the state play in this process?
Since such a perspective remains embedded in a unipolar concept of international governance, what chances does it have for worldwide success, with recent demands for multipolar governance being heard?