If by Tech you only mean "software", then what I am about to say it is not relevant.
In my case, I believe "drugs and devices" are also technology.
One of the most important untold stories is the important role that Europe plays still today in the Pharmaceutical and Medical Technology (MedTech) global markets. This story is untold. Two of the very few industries where Europe is still playing a leading role. (For another post: in how many industries is Europe still a relevant actor at the global level?)
Pharma (pharmaceutical-only, worldwide prescription drug sales):
5 of the world's top10 pharma companies are European (not EU): Sanofi (France), Novartis (Switzerland), Roche (Switzerland), AstraZeneca (UK), GlaxoSmithKline (UK).
It's definitely more than software—but non-software success stories can make ground for success stories in software, which I think are critical for long-term prosperity (like growing car manufacturers in the 20th century).
Considering the massive jump of American technology post WW2,
and starting from the axiom that the electroshock of WW2 was the beginning.
What was the incentive then?
A- The designation of the enemy (i.e. communism) and so « Patriotism».
B-An entrepreneurship spirit with an evident willingness to make big things and create wealth.
C-Both.
From a current perspective, if patriotism were essential, maybe politics would have to push this leverage to come back to these incredible times(with all the kind of risk that we unfortunately know 😱😱😱).
And maybe that’s one of the main reason why in Europe we struggle so deeply for that :
Is multilateralism compatible with innovation? Or Do we need a (designed) enemy to be more creative?
Thanks Florent. I think it's true that we need to feel at war, and a war is more easily waged with an enemy. That being said, the shape and form of that enemy can vary a lot. And maybe the dynamics of war mobilization can be reverse-engineered so that we emulate then without a formal, well-identified enemy! Two things about that:
• A forthcoming conversation on that topic between Laetitia and Mariana Mazzucato for the "Building Bridges" podcast, which will be syndicated here on "European Straits" :-)
This would definitely be a great next book!
If by Tech you only mean "software", then what I am about to say it is not relevant.
In my case, I believe "drugs and devices" are also technology.
One of the most important untold stories is the important role that Europe plays still today in the Pharmaceutical and Medical Technology (MedTech) global markets. This story is untold. Two of the very few industries where Europe is still playing a leading role. (For another post: in how many industries is Europe still a relevant actor at the global level?)
Pharma (pharmaceutical-only, worldwide prescription drug sales):
5 of the world's top10 pharma companies are European (not EU): Sanofi (France), Novartis (Switzerland), Roche (Switzerland), AstraZeneca (UK), GlaxoSmithKline (UK).
Source: https://www.evaluate.com/thought-leadership/pharma/evaluatepharma-world-preview-2020-outlook-2026
MedTech:
5 of the world's top 15 medtech companies are European: Philips (Netherlands), Siemens Healthineers (Germany), Roche Diagnostics (Switzerland), B.Braun (Germany), Essilor (France).
Source: https://www.evaluate.com/thought-leadership/medtech/evaluatemedtech-world-preview-2018-outlook-2024
It's definitely more than software—but non-software success stories can make ground for success stories in software, which I think are critical for long-term prosperity (like growing car manufacturers in the 20th century).
Considering the massive jump of American technology post WW2,
and starting from the axiom that the electroshock of WW2 was the beginning.
What was the incentive then?
A- The designation of the enemy (i.e. communism) and so « Patriotism».
B-An entrepreneurship spirit with an evident willingness to make big things and create wealth.
C-Both.
From a current perspective, if patriotism were essential, maybe politics would have to push this leverage to come back to these incredible times(with all the kind of risk that we unfortunately know 😱😱😱).
And maybe that’s one of the main reason why in Europe we struggle so deeply for that :
Is multilateralism compatible with innovation? Or Do we need a (designed) enemy to be more creative?
Thanks Florent. I think it's true that we need to feel at war, and a war is more easily waged with an enemy. That being said, the shape and form of that enemy can vary a lot. And maybe the dynamics of war mobilization can be reverse-engineered so that we emulate then without a formal, well-identified enemy! Two things about that:
• My piece about COVID policy, written earlier this year: https://europeanstraits.substack.com/p/what-if-were-at-war
• A forthcoming conversation on that topic between Laetitia and Mariana Mazzucato for the "Building Bridges" podcast, which will be syndicated here on "European Straits" :-)