(Ian Goldin) Great, thank you: it's wonderful to be with educators
who care about the intersection of learning and technology,
because that's going to shape the future.
Whether we're able to get this right or not
will determine whether we have a glorious 21st century
or a period of unmitigated risks.
The walls are coming down everywhere and it's difficult to not think about this,
being so close to it, here in Berlin,
25 years ago, these walls coming down.
But it's not just about physical walls coming down,
it's about mental walls, it's about financial walls,
it's about technological walls.
All the walls are coming down, and it's that
which makes this the most exciting century in the history of humanity.
It changes all of our lives in surprising ways.
And it's certainly changed mine.
I was living in Paris when this wall came down.
I didn't imagine that it would touch me personally.
I thought it was about Eastern Europe, about the Cold War, about something else.
But within 6 months, I would, much to my surprise,
I was invited to have dinner with President Mandela in Paris.
He wasn't president then, he had just been released from prison.
But he was released because the Cold War ended.
And the defining feature of this period we live in, our lives,
is that what happens elsewhere will dramatically affect us in new ways.
It's this change that results from the walls coming down.
And it's this change that will shape education going forward
and technological progress.
And of course, the other fundamental period of -- in this time --
is technology, technology which got off the ground
at the same time as the Berlin Wall came down, over 25 years,
this exponential growth in virtual connectivity.
And now we have a world of 5 billion literate, educated people
whereas we had a world, only 30 years ago,
of well less than a billion connected people.
Four billion more literate connected people in the world,
and this is the engine of change,
where the people in the slums of Mumbai, Soweto's Sao Paulo (check)
or in apartments in Berlin,
they will contribute to change in surprising new ways.
And they're coming together.
There is a release of individual genius.
If you believe in the random distribution of exceptional capabilities, which I do,
there is just more people out there, educated, connected, giving, learning.
But I also believe in collective genius,
the capabilities of people coming together,
to form teams, to learn from each other
through the methods that we heard about this morning.
and in other ways.
So new cures for cancer being developed on 24-hour cycles around the world.
My lab in Oxford, doing this with people in Beijing and San Francisco and Palo Alto
and all over, in real time.
There is no sleep on innovation any more.
And that's the power, the engine, which brings change.
So if you think you've seen a lot of change
be ready for much more surprises.
This is the slowest time in history you will know.
It's going to get faster, the pace of change greater,
the surprises more intense.
It's always going to be
more and more difficult to predict what's next.
Uncertainty will grow because the pace of change is growing.
Because the walls have come down,
there are two billion more people in the world since 1990.
And that's because ideas have traveled, simple ideas,
like washing your hands prevents contagious diseases;
really complicated ideas like those embedded in vaccines
in new cures for cancer and many other things.
Two billion more people coming together, most of them now urbanized,
and even those that aren't physically together,
virtually together.
A quite extraordinary moment in human history,
one where we've come together as a community,
like we were 150,000 years ago, when we lived in villages together,
our ancestors in East Africa, and then dispersed around the world
and now, reconnected.
And it's this reconnection, which I believe, gives us the potential.
But do we learn from it?
And are we able to think of ourselves in new ways,
because we're connecting in new ways?
Is this wall coming down changing the way we are and we think?
Or do we still think like individualists in our nation states,
pursuing our own self-interest and those of our countries,
not realizing that now, we are in a different game?
Now we're in a game in which we have to cooperate,
where we have to think about others,
where our actions, for the first time, spill over in dramatic new ways
and affect people on the other side of the planet.
This pace of education means that not only are we liberating ourselves,
but we're liberating people from all sorts of past habits.
And this change is leading to quick changes in social norms.
Acceptance of gay marriage is one of those,
but there'll be many, many, many others.
And so, what we think about as normal today
will seem very strange in a few years' time:
this pace of change driven by education,
more doctorates being created in China now
than in the rest of the world put together every year,
more scientists alive today
than all the scientists that ever lived in history,
more literate people alive today
than all the literate people that ever lived in history.
This is the engine of change.
But it's not simply about more and more progress.
It's not simply that we know
that this is going to get better and better.
It's about what's next.
We don't know what the future holds.
We live in this extraordinary moment of our lives
where we've seen exponential growth in incomes: that's red.
And we seen this most rapid increase in populations,
and income growth, even more rapid than population growth, which is why
people have escaped poverty at a pace that has never happened in history.
Despite the world's population increasing by two billion over the last 25 years,
the number of desperately poor people has gone down by about 300 million.
This has never happened before.
This is an incredible time, by far the best time to be alive.
Just while you're here, your average life expectancy should increase
by about 10 hours.
That's the pace of progress:
what you're learning, and what's happening in the labs.
And it's that which makes me incredibly optimistic.
This is the age of discovery, this is the new Renaissance.
This is a period of creativity and technological change
which hasn't been seen for 500 years.
This is from my stem cell lab in the Oxford Martin School:
the lab technician's skin turned into a heart cell.
And this is one of the extraordinary things that's happening
that makes one so excited about the future.
A future of rising life expectancy, so children being born today
in Berlin or elsewhere in Europe, will have life expectancies well over 100,
and not having to worry about the things that I worry about,
like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and dementia.
But what skills are they learning today that will help them shape this future,
prepare for it, and will still be relevant in a hundred years time?
It's those skills that you have the responsibility to help shape.
We can imagine this glorious future, an extraordinary time in human history.
But we can also realize
that it could come very, very badly at stuck.
I looked at the Renaissance for inspiration
to try and understand how people interpreted these choices.
That was a period of creative exceptionalism,
scientific exceptionalism.
And we think today of the iconic figures, the Michelangelos, the Da Vincis,
the Copernicuses,
discovering the earth went round the sun, not the other way round,
fundamentally changing our understanding of ourselves in the universe
in ways that will happen in our lifetimes.
Fundamental changes which lead to Humanism,
Enlightenment and many, many other things,
spurred by technologies.
Then, it was the Gutenberg press.
Simple ideas travel very rapidly.
Until then only monks could read and write,
in Latin, in their monasteries.
Less than half of 1% of the world was literate.
There was nothing to read -- and it was in Latin.
And then, this invention lead to a whole new way of thinking.
Ideas traveled, people could learn in their own languages,
and we had the Renaissance.
We also had the development of nationalism
because people could identify.
and of course, massive technological push-back.
The Bonfire of the Vanities, the burning of books,
not far from here and across Europe.
Destruction of presses, religious fundamentalism,
extremism, religious wars for 150 years.
Now if you recall those curves I put up,
of the long trajectory of income growth and population growth,
but the Renaissance did not figure.
It was a non-event, it lead to no improvements
in people's welfare in Europe or beyond.
Are we different?
Can we embrace our technologies in ways that lead to sustained progress?
And there are two things I worry about in this respect.
First, while the walls have gone down between societies,
within societies, the walls are going up everywhere.
All countries are experiencing rising inequality.
Why is this?
It's because the pace of progress is so fast at the frontier
that this process of integration -- some call it globalization --
has led to such rapid change that if you aren't on the frontier,
if you don't have the skills, the mobility, the attitude to change,
to adapt, to grab new things, you're left further and further behind.
If you're in the wrong place, with the wrong skills at the wrong time,
or you're too old, you're left further and further behind.
And so we see in all societies rising inequality.
And some people have been able to capture the goods of globalization.
They've been able to park their money,
whether they are a corporation in Bermuda or somewhere,
or an individual in Monaco or Lichtenstein or Luxembourg.
And so governments are becoming less and less able
to tax their citizens and tax their corporates
and less able to fund education, health, infrastructure,
and the other things we need.
And the second big problem of this integration process
is when things connect.
Unfortunately, not only good stuff connects.
Rarely, bad stuff connects too.
And so the question is how do we have this complex, dense, intertwined system
without becoming overwhelmed by it?
Are we able to manage our interdependencies
in ways that will be sustained and benefit us,
or will they overwhelm us?
And this is both the intended consequences which lead
to unintended bads.
Our intended consequence of using more antibiotics around the world
leading to antibiotic resistance.
Or as our energy growth grows around the world
because people are escaping poverty, leading to climate change.
Or as our resource use increases because people are consuming more food,
leading to resource depletion.
And the unintended consequences, banks which spread around the globe
becoming centers of cascading risk and financial crisis.
Airports spreading pandemics, what I call the butterfly defect of globalization.
The spreading of risk is not a new idea.
We think in England that a rat coming off a ship in Liverpool
might have killed half the British population in the Black Death.
Early globalization leading to systemic risk.
But what's new is the pace and scale of the change.
So the swine flu that starts in Mexico City
in 160 countries in thirty days.
And the emerging infections group in the Oxford Martin School
has modeled spread of this with airline traffic
and shown it exactly replicates.
So the super-spreaders of the good of globalization
like JFK, Heathrow, Frankfurt, and other great airports
become the super-spreaders of the bads, in this case, pandemics.
And in the cybersphere, of course, we see this dramatically,
that anything can be instantaneously elsewhere, be it good or be it bad.
In finance, we've seen a dramatic indication of this,
this collapsing system starting from a subprime crisis in the US
leading to 100 million people laid off in work from work around the world.
So what happens somewhere dramatically affecting people
on the other side of the world in the same way that my life
was shaped, but sometimes with disastrous consequences.
And what the financial system also teaches us is the rising power of individuals.
These new technologies give individuals simply unprecedented powers.
Barings Bank had existed for 200 years.
It had withstood the most amazing technological, political, and other changes,
and one young man, Nick Leeson, having some fun, a bit of trading,
managed to bring it down.
And the same thing almost happened in Societe Generale with Jerome Kerviel,
JP Morgan, UBS, and many others.
We see that these individuals now have power in new ways.
And of course, individuals can also in new ways, develop biopathogens
using a DNA sequencing which is going down exponentially in price,
a single individual now can build something using
a technology like a drone to distribute it, and kill perhaps tens,
if not hundreds of millions of people.
This new capability, this new power of individuals has changed
so that nation states are becoming less and less powerful
relative to the power of individuals.
And there are seven billion of us growing to nine billion
over the next 35 years.
Within the cybersphere, we see this dramatically,
how small groups can cause mayhem, steal all our records,
open our bank accounts,
They'll be opening our front door locks, controlling our vehicle-to-vehicle
communication, etc.
Understanding how we build systems which liberate us, and yet
we do not become slaves or vulnerable to, is the central question.
Can we create interdependent systems where we are in control,
and what does that mean?
And that education process requires a new understanding of responsibility.
As these technologies pervade into our bodies and everything we do,
it becomes more and more important.
Trust, integrity, judgment, these old things become more
and more important.
The financial crisis was characterized by a number of remarkable things.
Over 250,000 extremely well-paid people in the central banks of the world
in the IMF and other institutions with this enormous amount of data
do not see it coming.
Too much data, too little integrity.
And as machines begin to take our jobs
-- and one of my groups in the Oxford Martin School has said that 47% of US jobs
will be lost to machine intelligence over the next 20 years --
people will increasingly see machine intelligence as a threat
not only to their bank accounts and other systems,
but to their jobs and their careers.
And so, how do we create education systems where we are not vulnerable
to automation taking our jobs? (16:33)
And the answer is, we need to do things which are not automatable.
What does that mean?
It means creativity, dexterity, empathy, judgment
and that's what will keep us different from machines
for at least the next 50 years.
So, creating an environment where machines complement our abilities,
help us, do many of the things
that are really, in many ways, inhumane for people to be doing,
dangerous and others;
help us be more effective, but don't supplant us.
Being in Germany, we're reminded always
that it's not that technologies exist that people decide to adopt them.
It's society's attitude.
Germany has banned nuclear power, It has banned GMOs.
Many other places embrace these technologies.
It's what we feel about these technologies that matters.
It's how we feel we can control them, whether we feel that we're on top,
which will shape the way that societies adopt them.
And so, in education, it seems absolutely vital that we understand them.
People need to understand what genetic modification is.
People need to understand what DNA sequencing is.
People need to understand these new, extremely powerful technologies,
which will change the way we are and the choices we face going forward.
There will be societal choices: do we want to create superhumans, or not?
And if others do it, what is our attitude to that?
These are choices that we will face, let alone the next generation.
So this handshake, this understanding of technology,
the literacy becomes more and more important,
as well as the interconnectivity.
As we will become wealthier, as we will become more connected,
the spillovers of our choices get stronger and stronger.
And we see this in many, many areas. We see --
-- sorry, I just want to go back to the slide before with the video, if I may --
(people arguing animatedly around a big tuna in Japanese, then clapping)
(Goldin) This is the tuna market in Tokyo.
This tuna was sold for about 1.5 million Euro.
This the market's response to the scarcity of a natural resource.
The price goes up, the tuna don't know how much they're worth, of course.
They don't reproduce more when they're worth more.
Hi-tech fishermen go and chase the remaining tuna
and you get extinction.
And the same thing, of course, with rhino and any natural resource.
Natural resources don't understand markets.
they are irrelevant to them.
and so, as we go forward and we have a market system which determines choice,
on the one hand,
and more and more people with more wealth
are claiming resources through this system.
But on the other hand, we have the supply of natural resources,
determined in totally different ways,
we have a very serious problem of extinction.
Governments are not very smart at this either.
Thinking short term, they extract resource,
often for the good of their people,
but collectively, in the long term, a disaster.
This is the Aral Sea.
Peop-- countries, six countries doing the right thing,
drawing water to feed their people.
Collectively, a disaster.
The examples of success -- and the Mediterranean is one --
where citizens, scientists, politicians, civil society movements came together
and saved this.
And with climate change, of course, we have this dramatic problem.
What's happening in Paris this week is of huge significance
to the future of the planet.
But it's not enough; we need to do much more.
And we need to do it in a way that allows people around the world
to benefit from the things that we have.
We've created 90% of the problem in the rich countries
but 80%, already 70% of the flows, (check) growing to 80 over the next 15 years,
will be coming from emerging markets.
So how do we let the rest of the world clime the energy curve,
while ensuring we keep global warming to below 2 degrees?
These collective decisions, increasingly, will shape the way that the planet moves.
Who's going to do this?
This set of institutions is totally unfit for purpose.
It was built in a different era, with different power structures.
It is unable to meet the challenges of our time,
and in some areas, like cyber (check) there is no institution at all.
Small changes, largely rearranging the furniture.
(laughter)
(Goldin) So I think of us as nations, like in a cabin within a big ocean liner,
each in our little cabin, drifting with no captain, on Planet Earth's deck.
Again, part of this is the result of extroardinarily positive changes.
We're no longer in a world where twelve white men, smoking cigars,
could sit in their room and decide the earth's future,
as they did after the Second World War.
New power balances mean we have to have a transition in power.
But we're in this dangerous time where the old powers no longer rule
and the new powers have not been able to step up to the plate.
So it's a time of transition, it's a time where the big institutions,
the best of them like the IMF, have proved themselves
totally unfit for purpose.
It requires citizens, it requires thinking in new ways
to overcome this problem.
Thinking which overcomes short-termism,
be it in business or be it in our own decisions.
We need to think long, because we're here for the long term
and the kids of today will be here for at least the next century.
How we do this and how we realize that our own decisions, increasingly,
are entangled with others' is of course the critical question.
What we see in the politics is a reversal.
People feel the future is scary, uncertain.
They feel that openness and connectivity makes them more vulnerable,
and they're right.
And so, we see this political revulsion with extremism growing
in all countries, but certainly in Europe and in the US.
People wanting to return to an age which they romanticize as being better:
protectionist, nationalist, xenophobic.
It's profoundly misguided.
In order to ensure that we can manage this world,
we need to be more connected, not less.
We need to ensure that we're able to come together, but be protected;
resilient, thinking together, and insuring that through our decisions
we not only protect our own futures but protect those of others, and the planet.
Thank you. (Applause)
If we can do all that, we can rock on to a happy old age.
(Moderator) (laughs) Thank you very much indeed.
There's (check) a lot of comments here but there is one theme that is emerging.
Let me just give you this one comment from Anastasia Brua (check), I think it was?
It's just nipped out as --
I want to pick up actually, really, on what David said right at the beginning
about "Don't be afraid, don't be in denial"
and this need for change,
and what you said about the new normal will feel very strange
in a few years' time,
because Jeff Kortenbush (check) makes this comment:
"A key skill set should be about adapting to rapid change,
"to learn, unlearn and relearn."
And the debate tonight is going to be about 21st century skills
are not being taught in schools and should be.
Now, much of the work in the Martin School is about behavior
and about understanding how the brain works
and adaptability and the fears of the second (check) generation
to be able to adapt to this new shift,
which is accelerating probably even faster than most realize.
How optimistic can we be that actually, our human capacity can cope with this?
(Goldin) Yes, this is the most difficult question.
My sense is that the world is moving at a revolutionary speed
and we and our institutions are evolutionary very slow adapters.
My hope is that this concentration of knowledge which is being unleashed
through the new connectivity and literacy will allow us to leapfrog.
And we do see that, and we see signs of this in so many ways.
So there's all sorts of exciting things,
like the things we heard about earlier today,
that are happening.
The big question, and I think it's going to be partly a question that's resolved
in Paris this week, is can we learn to cooperate on these big challenges.
Are we able to give up some independence and sovereignty
as individuals or as countries,
to ensure that collectively, we'll all have a bigger future.
Are we able take longer term-- (Moderator) What about the .... (check)
and the ability and -- we've only got about 3 minutes to run now --
but what about the ability of the human being
to cope with this enormity, particularly to adapt to the speed
that the next generation, through the education process,
will be expecting?
(Goldin) Humans can do anything.
In my college at Oxford Balliol, we had a third of the college giving their lives
in the First World War,
and about 20% of the college giving their lives in the Second World War
to defend ideals of freedom.
People are prepared to make the most extraordinary sacrifices,
to change their lives fundamentally,
if they believe that it's the right thing to do.
(Moderator) Can they do it? (Goldin), Yes, they can.
We've done it before, we can do it again: I'm absolutely convinced.
(Applause)
(Moderator) But again, I'm picking up and trying to bring together
a number of themes here, but that -- what David said right at the beginning:
"Don't be afraid, don't be in denial."
That is achievable, is it, that kind of reversal with this scale of change,
and the shift, the acceleration taking place?
(Goldin) Yes. I think one has to open one's eyes
before one can see what's happening around.
And this pace of change is really what it's about.
Are we able to appreciate
this extraordinary moment in history we're in?
This age of discovery, are we able to recognize it for what it is,
and seize the opportunities that come with it?
(Moderator) Yes, I'm going to stop there. I'm afraid you - because you ran too much,
25 minutes, so the 30 minutes is up, so I have to stop you at that point
because some people have begun to leave, there's coffee and everything else
and a very tight schedule.
Remember, this is going to be part of a big debate later tonight
and also, let me underscore that everyone here can talk more about it.
And indeed, David Price is signing his book,
"How will we work, live and learn in the future?" at 13:05,
and that's in Potsdam 3,
and "Information doesn't want to be free", Cory is going to be speaking about that
on copyright in the digital age, as well, at 12 o'clock.
So, plenty: we've really burdened you with an enormous number of concepts.
And David, can I tell you as well,
there are large numbers of people who sent messages, admiring your battle
and how you've won your battle on health.
Can I thank you all very much indeed, and also for contributing
some important comments and questions from the floor.
It's coffee time. (Applause)
[Recordings of this session will be uploaded to www.online-educa.com] 28:31