Issue 3 Infrastructure Justice Mar 2010

Infrastructure Challenge

In Gates We Trust

The Southeastern Digital Society: Speed and Space Dilemmas

Infrastructure investment and equity: interview with Dr. Krissanapong Kirtikara

Trend Tools: Forecasting, Chaos and Non-Linear Dynamics Bibliometrics

INFRASTRUCTURE JUSTICE

3rdISSUEMarch 2010

3rdISSUEMarch 2010

www.trendsoutheast.org

Welcome to this 3rd issue of TrendNovation Southeast, a monthly platform for horizon scanning, focusing on emerging trends relevant to human development across the Southeast Asian region. Our main aim is to identify emerging signals for change, at the same time raising awareness and interest in socially signifi-cant “megatrends” among opinion leaders, thinkers, researchers, planners, the private sector and the international development community.

The theme of this issue, “Infrastructure justice” focuses on three distinct dimen-sions- macro-level infrastructure, access to IT services, and urban communities. Southeast Asia has seen dramatic changes in all three domains, and this issue considers their many implications for equity, and particularly their impact on rural dwellers and low-income earners.

The first article, “Infrastructure Challenges” by Prof. Lim Teck Ghee (Professo-rial Fellow at UCSI University, Kuala Lumpur) examines trends in investment in transport infrastructure in Southeast Asia, and offers a perspective on the pros-pects for more effective integration and benefits for the poor.

The second article, by Dr. Pun-Arj Chairatana (CEO, Noviscape Consulting Group) considers the ICT revolution in Southeast Asia, and the potential of ICTs to enrich society and advance development, e.g. through technology leap-frog-ging, social networking and democratization of knowledge. Although the devel-opment community has recognized the potential of ICTs for poverty alleviation and rural development, Dr Pun-Arj highlights the sharp divide between rural and urban dwellers in their access to ICT infrastructure, and the social challenges and implications of breakthrough technologies such as Next Generation Net-works (NGN).

The third article, “In Gates We Trust” by Asst. Prof. Dr. Apiwat Ratanawaraha, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Chulalongkorn University, Bang-kok, has nothing to do with Windows! Asst Prof Apiwat describes the prolifera-tion of gated communities in Asia’s megacities as a private sector response to enhance quality of life for urban dwellers. Aside from their role as oases of peace and security, offering respite from the madness and stress of city life, gated com-munities have emerged as a symbol of social status. Dr. Apiwat concludes by noting the urban planning challenges inherent in the development of large, ex-clusive, self-contained gated communities, particularly for transport connectivity, and in the provision of public goods.

This issue also features an exclusive interview with Dr. Krissanapong Kirtikara, Adviser and former President of King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thon-buri (KMUTT), Thailand. With a lifetime at the forefront of technology policy, and a broad range of research interests covering education, energy, S&T, and indig-enous wisdom, Prof Krissanapong offers a wealth of insight into the science-society nexus, and also of the impact of infrastructural investments on equity.

This issue’s ‘Trend Tools’ section considers the unique challenges of predicting the behaviour of seemingly disorganized, random systems, and the emergence of chaos theory and non-linear dynamics as a forecasting tool.

This issue is also available online at http://www.trendsoutheast.org,and we value your feedback and comments.

LEADER

By Wyn Ellis

Chief Editor

TRENDNOVATION SOUTHEAST NEWSLETTER ISSUE 3 - INFRASTRUCTURE JUSTICE2

INFRASTRUCTURE JUSTICE - ISSUE 3 TRENDNOVATION SOUTHEAST NEWSLETTER3

ports, and rail infrastructure) in Southeast Asia is pro-jected to grow by an average rate of 3.5 percent per annum from 2010 to 2014, taking total 2014 expen-diture to over US$32 billion. However, the majority of this investment is expected to be concentrated in the current ‘big four’ countries - Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand - which together currently represent over 80 percent of total Southeast Asian transport investment. Indonesia, with its population of 225 million from the region’s 550 million, offers the largest infrastructure opportunities, since Indonesia alone is projected to spend over $48 billion, or 32 percent of the Southeast Asian total, between 2010 and 2014.

The rush to build is driven not only by new growth in previously isolated and inaccessible areas which have recently opened up to the markets. It is also driven by the need to maintain and upgrade exist-ing infrastructure. Three sub-trends in growth in in-frastructure investment are discernible within the overall trend.

The four established markets (Indonesia, • Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand) with high expenditures will experience medium growth.

The emerging countries of Laos, Cambodia, • Vietnam and Myanmar, which currently have low expenditures, will strive towards higher

TREND A: CONSTRUCTING AND REVITALIzING REGIONAL MObILITy

As the global economy continues its tentative recov-ery, the Southeast Asian region is experiencing an infrastructure boom that is quite unprecedented. This is especially the case for the poorer countries such as Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar, whose development has lagged behind those of other countries in the past but, where we will likely see the highest average annual expenditure on transport infrastructure over the coming five years (2010-2014). According to a recently developed econometric model, expenditure on transport infrastructure investment (both public and private sector investment in airport, port, roads,

INFRASTRUCTURE CHALLENGES

ByProf. Lim Teck Ghee, Professorial Fellow, UCSI University,Kuala Lumpur

Disclaimer : The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official positions of Noviscape Consulting Group or the Rockefeller Foundation.Copyright © Trendsoutheast 2009 - 2010. All Rights Reserved.


tutions to fund infrastructure development is likely to continue. Nevertheless, there is a growing consen-sus for greater private sector investment to make up the shortfall. In recent years, various countries such as Vietnam have developed frameworks and mecha-nisms to applying ‘public-private sector partnerships’ (PPP) to encourage private sector investment. Prog-ress, however, has been slow and there appears to be little consensus on the way forward.

Other research has highlighted the following trends in the marketplace.

Stimulus money in infrastructure programs • have been geared mainly towards generating economic activity. This means that new-build projects with long-term impacts may be accorded a lower priority compared with upgrade and refurbishment projects. However, the next few years will also likely see an upturn in the building of new transport infrastructure.

The success of new infrastructure projects • in the region will be in part determined by the extent of their integration within existing infrastructures. Multimodal connectivity is a crucial concept, and there are many examples of leading practice in Southeast Asia, especially in Singapore, which is ranked 4th in the world in terms of transport infrastructure competitiveness.

TREND b: PEOPLE-FOCUSED INFRASTRUCTURE

But in what ways will this infrastructure boom impact the poor, who represent a substantial proportion of the region’s population? Access to markets to sell and buy goods and produce, and transportation to non-farm employment, are both lifelines for the ru-ral poor. Efficient transport infrastructure is therefore crucial to stimulate economic growth, boost incomes and contribute to poverty alleviation in rural areas. Transport also facilitates access to economic and so-

growth as they attempt to correct past under-investment.

The Philippines and Brunei are expected to • experience low growth rates.

The ability of governments to meet the burgeoning demand for infrastructure hinges on a number of fac-tors. Although government revenues are rising, they are expected to cover only a minor proportion of total expenditure. In some countries, past construction has been funded via bond issues and development assistance from international agencies such as the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. This dependence on bilateral assistance and international financing insti-



ports, and landing stages at the district and provincial levels to link poorer and more distant producer communities to the main supply corridors.

cial services critical to raising living standards. One study on road development and poverty reduction in Lao PDR found that approximately 13 per cent of the decline in rural poverty between 1997–98 and 2002–2003 could be attributed to improved road ac-cess alone.

At the same time, it is widely accepted that develop-ments in infrastructure development, especially in the transport sector, can have an adverse impact on the poor, who tend to be more vulnerable to poor policy and investment decisions. Increasing the opportuni-ties for all stakeholders to participate in debates and decisions on infrastructure investment should there-fore be a key component of future planning. This is especially so since investments in infrastructure of any kind, tend to be “lumpy” rather than incremental. A continuation of top-down decision-making and poor governance systems will inevitably worsen existing inefficiencies and inequities that currently plague infrastructural development across the region, and hinder the accomplishment of targets for economic growth and poverty reduction expected from such investments.

Finally, it may often be necessary for national plan-ners to look beyond their borders in maximizing the socio-economic benefits of infrastructure investment projects. The Mekong Delta Transport Infrastructure Development Project exemplifies a structural ap-proach to improving the transport system to reduce rural poverty. The development objective of the proj-ect is to improve access to markets by businesses, farmers and the poor through reduced logistics costs resulting from alleviation of key physical and institu-tional bottlenecks of the main transport corridors in the Mekong Delta region. The project has three main components:

National Road Corridors, which aim to • improve the standard of national trunk roads connecting the main economic hub of the Mekong Delta;

National Waterway Corridors which aim to • improve the standard of trunk waterways connecting the Northern and Coastal Delta areas to Can Tho and Ho Chi Minh City;

Improvement of the feeder waterways, roads, •




ByDr Pun-Arj Chairatana, Managing Director – Noviscape Consulting Group

ICT architecture, served by high quality equipment and software, generates efficiencies that help to drive down service charges. It seems inevitable that the region will continue its movement towards ubiquitous wireless coverage (e.g. with Wimax and its succes-sors) with higher speeds and transmission quality.

Broadband remains highly competitive in North Asia with next generation deployments already commodi-fied in markets such as Korea, and in Singapore for Southeast Asia. According to Media Partner Asia (MPA), Southeast Asian markets in 2014 will signifi-cantly grow through satellite technology platform ap-plications, especially in direct-to-home (DTH) satellite for pay-TV in Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Vietnam. The urban ICT markets in Southeast Asia will continue its rapid growth, driving the emer-gence of new services that place increasing demands on infrastructure and bandwidths. The proliferation of low-cost internet-enabled mobile devices will add

The revolution in information and communication technologies (ICTs) since the mid 1990s facilitated the flow of information at a rate and scale never before witnessed. The Asia Pacific region has em-braced these emerging technologies, recognizing their importance as an engine for economic growth, regional harmonization, and new opportunities for all. The term “ICT infrastructure” has come into usage to define a set of enabling platforms linked together to drive supply chains, communications, and appli-cations. An effective, low-cost ICT infrastructure has become acknowledged as a prerequisite to achieving “digital prosperity”. As with any technology, a facilita-tive regulatory environment is needed that encour-ages competition, technology-neutrality, investment and innovation in markets driven by rapid changes in technology, business models and services (APEC, 2009). As such, the regulatory context must con-stantly play catch-up as it must deal with a constantly changing technological landscape.

TREND C:SPEEDING A SMART NETwORk FOR ALL

In developing countries, access to ICT infrastructure tends to remain expensive, and both standards and costs have emerged as critical constraints to eco-nomic development in developing nations. A suitable

THE SOUTHEASTERN DIGITAL SOCIETy: SPEED AND SPACE DILEMMAS



further momentum as ICT infrastructures based on current technologies approach their limits.

A Next Generation Network (NGN) may offer a breakthrough solution to this problem, and has been described as a revolution in telecommunications core and access networks. NGNs are unique because they are (a) designed to accommodate a range of previously incompatible internet protocols, creating economies of scale through overcoming compatibil-ity barriers; and (b) facilitate separation of services from the underlying data transport (networks). Such a structure allows services to be independent of networks. Whilst this facilitates development of in-novative services and applications because such ac-tivities need no longer consider underlying transport protocols.

Five major technology areas are expected to affect the capability of end-users to exploit NGNs, as follows:

Digital literacy;• including e-learning plat-forms, natural language processing (Khmer, Lao, Thai, and Myanmar), text to speech and machine translation.

Multi-media:• Universal Multimedia Access (UMA) ,

Digital health:• wireless network for health-care and e-health, personal health systems for monitoring and point-of-care diagnostics.

web technologies:• including web-design & development, e-commerce, ICT in support of the networked enterprise,

Hardware technologies: • including computer maintenance and upgrading, electrical & electronic engineering, storage technologies, and small scale remote power generation.

Without doubt, these areas offer immense poten-tial for socio-economic development. However, the separation of services from networks presents de-veloping countries with a dilemma, for example, if service providers are willing to provide services but no network operator is willing to invest in building a rural network. Will NGN deepen the digital divide? If the focus of both service providers and network

operators will be to deliver novel service packages to densely-populated urban areas, leaving the public sector to service less densely populated and unprof-itable rural areas, maybe so.



activities among social groups and local innovators, as efforts continue around Asia to harness the po-tential of ICTs for development. Research programs on ICT for rural connectivity have been launched in most of Southeast Asian nations. In Thailand, such initiatives build on the prescient vision of His Majesty the King in his introduction of distance learning via satellite, to increase rural connectivity for rural devel-opment. In future, ICT -based wireless networks and services offer powerful tools for innovation intermedi-ary agents, particularly social enterprises and local research and technology organizations (RTOs).

TREND D:GROwING RURAL CONNECTIVITy

In Southeast Asia there has been a subtle but real broadening in perceptions of the potential of ICTs. No longer considered as one of many factors contribut-ing to economic growth, ICTs have moved to cen-ter stage as we see new and promising avenues for broader socio-economic development, e.g. through technology leap-frogging, social networking and de-mocratization of knowledge. The development com-munity has responded by investing major efforts in ICTs for poverty alleviation and rural development around the region. As mentioned earlier, the NGN infrastructure, by reducing access costs, increasing area coverage and stimulating development of new applications and services, offers these development efforts an important tool to help narrow the equity gap.

In Southeast Asia, the rollout of NGN is expected to begin around 2015. In the meantime, the NGN buzz has driven a surge of local capacity-building training

References

Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (2009), Bangkok Declara-tion - Digital Prosperity: Turning Challenges into Achievement, Liberalization Steering Group Meeting, Cancun, Mexico, 28-29 September 2009.

http://www.media-partners-asia.com

SEACOOP (2010) Southeast Asian excellence research cen-ters in ICT (2010)

UNESCAP (2009) Regional progress and strategies towards building the information society in Asia and Pacific, Bangkok.



As Southeast Asian nations continue to urbanize, cit-ies keep expanding beyond the suburbs to the ex-urbs. Population increases at higher rates in the out-er, compared with inner areas of Bangkok and other megacities. Without enforceable land-use controls, urban sprawl occurs everywhere in any megacity, be it Manila, Bangkok, Jakarta, or even in fast-growing secondary cities, such as Cebu City, Chiang Mai, and Bandung. In the midst of this megatrend of suburban-ization and sprawl, we see an emerging micro-trend: the proliferation of gated communities, a type of resi-dential development that controls entry of outsiders, usually through a combination of gates and closed perimeters.

TREND E:CITIES OF SPRAwL AND wALLS

According to a 2010 survey by Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Chulalongkorn University, more than 90 percent of residential subdivision projects along a new ring road in the northwest suburbs of Bangkok are gated and walled in one way or another. Although there were gated projects in the past, they were few in number and limited to high-end luxurious housing for expatriates and the local wealthy. The current trend is that even medium-end projects offer this physical exclusivity. In the Philippines, another survey in 2001 finds a similar trend. From the total of 615 residential subdivisions in Quezon City, Metro Manila, as many as 239 are gated communities. The same phenom-enon is also widespread in Malaysia and Indonesia.

IN GATES wE TRUST

ByAsst Prof Dr. Apiwat Ratanawaraha, Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Chulalongkorn University



TREND F:SOCIAL STRATIFICATION THROUGH PHySICAL DEMARCATION

The phenomenon of gated communities is by no means new to the world. American suburbs are full of gated communities of different types and scales. Social enclaves of people of different classes and ethnicities have long existed in Asian cities. Predomi-nantly Chinese and Muslim communities were not uncommon in Bangkok and Manila. These enclaves may be physically separated from other areas in the same city by natural features, such as canals and riv-ers, but not by the high walls and tall gates of today’s gated communities.

Gated communities are a response to the growing congestion, deteriorating quality of life and general stress associated with big cities. It is as much a life-style choice as a status symbol. People choose to move to gated communities because they are quiet-er. They can have their own gardens, hear birdsong in the mornings instead of traffic and the neighbors’ screaming, and never have to worry about where to park their cars. The desire for security, safety, privacy, and prestige lures people with sufficient means into these walled villages. Gates and walls are therefore physical tools used to satisfy specific physiological, psychological and social needs.

The rise of the urban middle class in Southeast Asia has been accompanied by fervent consumerism and a love for anything Western, as well as increased sta-tus-consciousness. Real estate developers created and positioned gated communities to respond to the increasing demand for social stratification and physi-cal demarcation. Very much like personal cars, gated communities signal social status. In fact, a house in a gated village is usually accompanied by at least one personal car. As gated communities are often located in suburban and exurban areas with limited access to public transportation, residents need to be able to af-ford both personal cars and gated communities.



TREND G:PRIVATIzING URbAN LANDSCAPE FOR CLUb GOODS

As more housing development projects are servic-ing specific groups of the rich and middle-class con-sumers, urban space is being privatized by and for people who desire exclusivity and the perceptions of security created by walls, guards and gates. Such spatial privatization creates new problems for urban planners. In cities with a dire need for well-connected networks of roads and other utilities, the widespread development of gated communities is a serious ob-stacle to efficient and effective service provision. Roads within gated communities are often exclusive and connected to main streets at only one or two ac-cess points. Such piecemeal development negatively affects the overall connectivity of road networks. For any other type of infrastructure provision, it is more difficult to reach a minimum efficient scale, as service areas are segregated by gated communities.

This important trend in urban landscape has other ramifications beyond physical segregation and so-cial cohesion. Urban governance and management is difficult when rich and middle-class taxpayers opt for club goods within their walls in suburban loca-tions, instead of supporting provision of public goods for everyone in the city. There may be even political implications. During a recent local election in Bang-kok, a political party complains that their candidates cannot reach their potential supporters in gated com-munities, because security guards do not allow them entry to meet with and distribute flyers to residents. With gates and guards, politicians and canvassers can no longer knock on doors and shake hands with voters.

Gated communities are already a real trend in South-east Asia, which is highly likely to continue for quite some time. Rising incomes combined with widening gaps between rich and poor in these countries mean that walls will continue to segregate economic class-es both physically and socially. Urban managers and planners have to find ways to strike a balance between individual pursuit for happiness that comes with physical exclusivity and the effects on the overall provision of public goods and social cohesion.



INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND EqUITy:

INTERVIEwwITHDR. kRISSANAPONG kIRTIkARA

THERE HAS bEEN ENORMOUS INVESTMENT IN INFRASTRUCTURE ACROSS THE SOUTHEAST ASIAN REGION OVER THE PAST DECADE, bUT THERE IS MUCH DISCUSSION OVER HOw SUCH INVESTMENT HASbENEFITTED THE POOR.

LET ME START by ASkING yOUwHAT IS yOUR PERCEPTION OF THE bENEFITS OF INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT ON EMPLOyMENTFOR THE RURAL POOR?One challenge with infrastructure development in developing countries in Southeast Asia and I am sure in other regions too, is the weakness of link-ages between infrastructure policies with production and employment policies. As a result, existing infra-structure policies often tend to overlook opportuni-ties for employment generation in rural areas, and the benefits tend to accrue mainly to city dwellers, especially Bangkok. We should remind ourselves of the ultimate goal of such projects, which is to improve quality of life for all. Policymakers should therefore learn from past lessons and implement infrastructure policies and projects that lead to rural production and employment, and that help to narrow social inequity.

AbOUT DR. kRISSANAPONG

kIRTIkARAHaving completed two terms as President of King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi (KMUTT), Dr. Krissanapong currently serves as an advisor to the University. He is a regional expert in policy studies, with research interests in education policy, energy policy, science and technology manpower, information technology, science and technology policy, indigenous wisdom and scientific knowledge, and energy technology research. He was formerly Deputy Director of The National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC) and co-founding member of APEC Centre for Technology Foresight (APEC CTF)

APART FROM INEqUITIES IN SHARING THE bENEFITS OF INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT PROJECTS, ON wHAT OTHER POLICy ISSUES SHOULD wE bE FOCUSING?Although we claim a policy of equal opportunity, in reality the rich have better access to infrastructure and facilities. If we are sincere in our goal of an eq-uitable society, we need to start thinking differently and change the way we consider infrastructure. For instance, instead of focusing on expensive, state of the art health infrastructure and facilities that aim to cure (rich) people, we might consider increas-ing spending on basic infrastructure that promotes better health. Such investment would benefit many



more needy people at the base of the pyramid. In other words, preventive and primary healthcare at community level should be accorded a greater prior-ity. Improved rural community health services would surely help stem rural-urban migration, which in turn would relieve pressure to invest so much on urban infrastructure.

Another area of infrastructure injustice that I see is in our education systems. Currently, provision of edu-cational services around Southeast Asia is highly in-equitable. Whilst capital cities in the region are well-served by educational facilities and infrastructure, in rural areas, low standards of public educational facili-ties are very much the norm, which means that the poor enjoy very limited access to proper educational facilities and services.

Public health offers a further example. In Thailand, we have a system called the “Gold Card”, which gives poor people access to healthcare at public hospitals, for a nominal 30 Baht per visit fee. Though this represents a major step forward, this card has limitations in that it does not cover indirect expenses such as transportation, which can be substantial. Also, the card does not cover some serious diseases and illness, and in some cases also limits access to more expensive drugs and therapies. So, in principle, the idea may be praiseworthy, but in reality, a large majority of people still are unable to reach the point of delivery. Increasing the number of health service access points should therefore be urgently prioritized on the policy agenda.

HOw HAS ICT INFRASTRUCTURE CONTRIbUTED TO bROADENING OF PERSPECTIVES?Although ICT has enhanced and facilitated access to information, in many cases such information is un-verified, and of low quality. Because of our natural tendency to seek information that resonates with our existing perspectives and values, internet searches make it all too easy to find information that actu-ally reinforces our existing bias and prejudice. Thus the lop-sided information we mine from the internet might actually fuel prejudice by offering supporting rationales, instead of broadening our perspective to accommodate alternative viewpoints. The phenom-enon of social networking allows persuasively ar-gued views to spread globally in hours, and gather a significant following. Thus in Southeast Asia, as elsewhere in the world, ICT is radically changing the social rubric. I like to refer to this trend as “ICT-rein-forced prejudice”.



In a world as complex and chaotic as ours, how can we predict the future? The problem of finding order in seemingly disorganized systems first garnered serious academic attention in 1961, when Edward Lorentz began a study of the chaotic behavior of non-linear systems then used for weather forecasting. He repeatedly ran an algorithm using mean output val-ues from the previous iteration, and to his surprise the generated outputs fluctuated wildly. Even very small differences in primary conditions resulted in ex-treme fluctuations in the end-points. Lorentz named this extreme sensitivity to primary conditions “the but-terfly effect” (by which the flutter of wings of a butter-fly in Nicaragua leads to a tornado in Texas).

Lorentz’s seminal work gave rise to the modern study of chaos and non-linear systems, as an analytical tool used to identify principal order in apparently random or disorganized systems. His work led to the sur-prising revelation that many systems that appear to behave randomly, in fact obey laws that can be math-ematically described, characterized and modeled. In this sense, unpredictability appears as an emergent property of systems that are predictable on a lower level. This finding opened up enormous possibilities for forecasting the behavior of highly complex and poorly-understood systems- climate change being a prime case in point.

According to Gordon (2008), nonlinear systems can be stable (i.e. converge towards a state of equilib-rium). They may also oscillate stably, diverge un-stably, or demonstrate persistent chaotic behavior within predictable limits. Whilst in relatively simple

TREND TOOLSFORECASTING, CHAOS AND NON-LINEAR DyNAMICS bIbLIOMETRICS



non-linear systems, it may be possible to determine regimes of behavior, in more complex systems the exact values of a variable within such a chaotic or unstable domain may not be measurable. Moreover, minor changes in initial conditions can cause large and unpredictable changes in output conditions.

Gordon also found that systems once considered to behave in an orderly manner may be simply be-having within a regime that may transition to a cha-otic or unstable state over time. Systems exhibiting outwardly disorderly and unpredictable behaviour may, nonetheless, subscribe to an underlying order, permitting at least some level of predictability. For futures research, the implications of this last obser-vation are indeed profound. According to Gordon (2008), ‘chaotic’ systems that chaos often exhibit per-plexing properties that seem to defy rationality. For example, chaotic systems may exhibit repeating form at all levels of expansion and demonstrate uniform complexity (that is they have fractal characteristics. This is because conventional mathematical models and simulations of those systems normally use lin-ear assumptions for reasons of simplicity, while most physical and social systems are non-linear.

Gordon’s work showed that it is possible to forecast the behaviour of complex non-linear systems, and also to use forecasting techniques to develop poli-cies to guide such systems towards a stable state. For example, he posits that slowing down feedback in chaotic or oscillating systems can actually contrib-ute to a reversion to an equilibrium state- i.e. sleep-ing on the problem might be indeed be good advice.

References:Gordon, T. J., “Management of Systems in Chaos”, Futures, Summer 2008

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaos_theory

worapolPaiboonbudsrakum

Project co-ordinator

william wyn EllisChief Editor

Chaiwat VainipleePinchathana Atthiwatthana

Graphic Designer

Dr. Pun-Arj ChairatanaAsst Prof Dr. Apiwat RatanawarahaMr. william wyn EllisWriters / Information Specialist

Noviscape Consulting Group (NCG) www.noviscape.com

Contact us [email protected] http://twitter.com/trendsoutheast http://facebook.com/trendsoutheast

Trendnovation Southeast Newsletteris published by

Regional Horizon / Environment - Scanning (HS/ES)

and trend monitoring for issues relevant to people, life, and

regional transformation across the Southeast Asian region.

Issue 3 Infrastructure Justice Mar 2010

Documents