Summer weekend bike rides are fun. Jeanne is out pedaling here last Sunday, and you can see the farms fields surrounding our village of Tannay. While only 15 minutes down the freeway from central Geneva, it gets rural very quickly with the "small villages separated by farms" style of Europe.

I am reading The World is Flat: A brief History of the 21st Century, by Thomas L. Friedman, a gift from one of my work colleagues that found it a very thought provoking read. It's about the changes occurring across the globe brought about by both major technology advances (Internet) as well as large geo-political events. The result is the opening of China and India as new markets, but also the competition from these places for American jobs. Friedman postulates that this "Globalization 3.0" phase we are in will be better over all for America if we recognize what is happening and adjust accordingly, like improving our education system especially in science and technology, so we can compete effectively. Friedman jumps between many "ah hah!" revelations based on personal experiences as he has traveled the globe and met industry and government leaders in his roles as a foreign affairs columnist for the New York Times. He is certainly very well connected. There is lots of discussion on outsourcing and how jobs can be much more easily be made location independent through the use of technology. Overall he spends a lot of time "cheerleading" for Globalization 3.0 as being a good thing.

For the most part, I would agree with many of his observations and conclusions. An issue I have is where the "vectors of meaning" come into play in the discussion. There are many inflection points on these vectors that come from access to unique and personal experiences, and I don't see in his globalization wave how these are either protected or made accessible, much less improved.

Driving efficiency and productivity through location independence seems to have the side effect of homogenizing experiences. You can call this the "WalMart" effect. Yes, it is cheaper and more convenient, but all the stores are the same, big gray boxes. You drive through the suburbs of major American cities and you see the same strip malls and the same brands. The aesthetic qualities are washed out in the process of driving down costs, and increasing volume through mass marketing.

The French wine industry is feeling this globalization surge of going mass market as it competes with the New World wines that are sold as varietals, i.e. "Chardonnay". French wines are all marketed based on their unique location and regional production. Value is generated in the aesthetic of French wine due to the diversity and uniqueness of this model. Yet consumers are getting trained to "order a Merlot". You might say that if the world's consumers decide that's how they want to behave, then the French just have to suck it up, but I would argue there is the need to manage some of these forces of globalization so we dont throw the baby out with the bath water in the name of "productivity". We must be careful to not degrade the environment or diminish access to the aesthetic in our rush towards the mass market.

Although he mentions it a few times, this issue of value and meaning in the globalized economy deserves more attention in Friedman's book.