Digital transformation in Denmark

We glanced at the fourteen System Initiatives under work at the World Economic Forum (WEF), intertwined with the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDGs).

The blog entry Future-proof Denmark? ended with a question mark.

If quick glances raised a question, could brief looks offer indications?

Digital Transformation Initiative (DTI)

The Digital Transformation Initiative by the World Economic Forum could offer one approach to future-proof. The title page of the 71-page DTI executive summary catches the reader’s attention by highlighting the potential to unlock $100 trillion for business and society. It offers an inspirational theme park of emerging technologies about to change life.

The societal implications start on page 22, but our themes really meet on page 25, when the Digital Transformation Initiative summary picks up work on unlocking digital potential in Denmark: more than $50 billion of value over the next decade (in a country with a 5.7 million population).

Even if there are considerable business gains to be made, e-commerce, connected travel services, the sharing economy and assisted driving seem to offer even more potential benefits to society.

The summary crystallises the choice with regard to sustainable development (page 60):

An important choice must be made: between a more open, inclusive and interconnected world, or one that is closed, siloed and unequal.

But the better choice requires overcoming the inhibitors to transformation, with implications for business leaders, as well as governments and policy-makers (from p. 62).

Europe’s Digital Progress Report 2017

How well is the digital transformation under way in Denmark?

It cannot be all bad, since the recently published Europe’s Digital Progress Report 2017 (EDPR) country profile (available in English and Danish) places Denmark first among the EU member states, according to the Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) 2017, ahead of Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Belgium, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Estonia and Austria.

The Digital Economy and Society Index 2017 rates connectivity, human capital, use of Internet, integration of digital technology and digital public services. DESI 2017 offers the following summary for EU members wanting to emulate success:

Denmark ranks 1st out of the 28 EU Member States and it progressed at a higher pace than the EU average. Denmark made progress in most dimensions. Denmark performed very well on Connectivity, thanks to the widest 4G coverage in Europe and the increase in take-up of fast connections. 94% of Danish citizens are online and the vast majority have at least basic digital skills. However, the share of ICT specialists stagnated. On the supply side, Denmark made outstanding progress in the use of digital technologies by enterprises, leading the EU and the world rankings. Denmark is strong in the delivery of online public services thanks to a consistent long-term national strategy.

Denmark belongs to the High performing cluster of countries.

Denmark is a world leader in digitisation and the new umbrella governmental digital plan, namely, Digital Strategy 2016-2020, presented in May 2016, aims at further enhancing close public sector collaboration to deliver good, efficient and coherent services to the public and businesses.

The individual factors are discussed in more detail on the rest of the eleven pages of the country profile.

Digital Denmark

The EU Commission already mentioned Denmark’s digital strategy.

Digitaliseringsstyrelsen (the Danish Agency for Digitisation) offers us an introduction and an opportunity to download A Stronger and More Secure Digital Denmark: Digital Strategy 2016-2020, agreed by the central government, regions and municipalities.  

Naturally, Nordic readers can find an introduction and the strategy in Danish: Et stærkere og mere trygt digitalt samfund: Den fællesoffentlige digitaliseringsstrategi 2016-2020 (Maj 2016).

Ralf Grahn

Future-proof Denmark?

Our latest blog entry about the Nordic EU member state, Two freedoms of competitive Denmark, highlighted the relative absence of poisonous corruption and media repression.

Here we are going to take a look at what what it takes to shape a future-proof society.  

WEF Annual Meeting 2017

According to the World Economic Forum (WEF) report from the Annual Meeting 2017, the gathering focused on five challenges: strengthening global collaboration, revitalising economic growth, reforming capitalism, preparing for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, and restoring a sense of shared identity.

Each theme is introduced in the report, against the background of remarkable retreats from globalisation and new protagonists of global cooperation, the framework for one humanity on our common planet.  

At a regional level, the European Union’s Europe 2020 strategy (EU2020) for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, the Political Guidelines of the Juncker Commission and the national reform programmes of the member states, such as Denmark’s NRP, contain many of the elements of the fourteen WEF System Initiatives.

WEF System Initiatives

However, if the EU and its members want to be at the cutting edge, they need to adapt to the emerging qualities the System Initiatives bring. The projects were introduced in the WEF meeting report and later briefly described (pages 41-42):

Leaders in Davos called for collaborative action to drive economic growth while safeguarding social inclusion. The 14 System Initiatives are the vehicles through which the Forum will respond to this call to action and drive change in the coming year. Two themes will be woven throughout the work of all of the systems. The first theme is responding to challenges of the Fourth Industrial Revolution through driving more accountable systems of control, mechanisms for policy development and space for public deliberation. The second is ensuring that the Forum’s work is complementary to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDGs), from mobilizing private capital, technology and know-how for inclusive and sustainable investments to the compelling economic case for business leadership and engagement. From increasing financial inclusion to defining the workforce of the future, from responding to epidemics to strengthening infrastructure, the System Initiatives will focus on driving lasting, systemic change through public-private cooperation.   

With the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDGs) omnipresent, here are just the  headlines of the reform agenda projects to follow:

Shaping the Future of Consumption

Shaping the Future of Education, Gender and Work

Shaping the Future of Digital Economy and Society

Shaping the Future of Energy

Shaping the Future of Growth and Social Inclusion

Shaping the Future of Environment and Natural Resource Security

Shaping the Future of Financial and Monetary Systems

Shaping the Future of Information and Entertainment

Shaping the Future of Mobility

Shaping the Future of Food Security and Agriculture

Shaping the Future of International Trade and Investment

Shaping the Future of Production

Shaping the Future of Health and Healthcare

Shaping the Future of Long-Term Investing, Infrastructure and Development  

EU and Denmark?  

Here, I believe, the European Commission should go beyond drafting recommendation to the member states, by using the European Semester process in order to inspire cutting edge responses to global challenges.

Is Denmark future-proof? After European Semester reading, the National Reform Programme and international comparisons, I venture that Denmark has a sound base for reform policies. But I am less sure about the qualitative aspects: if the actions under way are radical or forceful enough to improve Denmark’s competitiveness.

Do we need to eat more of the pudding containing the proof?

Ralf Grahn

Productive and sustainable Denmark

Three magic words: competitiveness, productivity, prosperity.

Studying innovative and competitive independent countries, or states of the USA, much of the Europe 2020 growth strategy (EU2020) is about learning from the best.

Before turning to the WEF pillars of competitiveness, we had already taken a peek at the economy and society of Denmark.

We have also seen that among the 142 countries and territories compared by the World Economic Forum, Denmark ranked eighth according in the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) 2011-2012 (table 3, page 15):

Klaus Schwab (Editor): The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012 (World Economic Forum WEF; 527 pages)

Tables 4 to 7 allow us to get a more detailed view of how competitive Denmark (or another country) is with regard to different groups of criteria or pillars, more fully explained on pages 47-49. According to the summary on page 24, Denmark has quality institutions, infrastructure and education like its Nordic neighbours, but its labour market flexibility is a distinguishing feature.

A fourth magic word is 'sustainability'.

The Sustainable Competitiveness Index (SCI; beta version) was presented by the WEF for the first time. The challenging and interesting SCI tries to determine the level of productivity while ensuring the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. The SCI is an effort to integrate factors of economic, social and environmental sustainability. Denmark came in eighth in the integrated GCI as well.

Country presentation

You find the country presentation of Denmark on the pages 162-163, including the most problematic factors for doing business, as well as the scores for about a hundred different factors.



Ralf Grahn

EU2020: Learning from the best

After the series about the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), I reported the publication of a new Digital Agenda for Sweden and then took a first look at policy outcomes in Denmark in the light of the competitiveness, growth and employment aims of the Europe 2020 strategy (EU2020). Next we looked at the twelve pillars of competitiveness wisdom, according to the World Economic Forum (WEF).


Learning from the best

We have just scratched the surface of the comparative report on productivity and growth potential globally:

Klaus Schwab (Editor): The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012 (World Economic Forum WEF; 527 pages)

Those who are interested in EU2020-related economic reform issues at national or EU level notice that among the 142 countries and territories ranked, the two top positions go to countries outside the European Union.

Switzerland remains the WEF World Champion, most notably with regard to innovation, technological readiness and labour market efficiency, but also due to its strong showing in practically every category (page 11 summary).

Singapore advanced to second place due to its excellent institutions, as well as its efficient goods, labour and financial markets (page 11-12 summary).

The following top ten emerged from the Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) 2011-2012 rankings (page 15):

1. Switzerland
2. Singapore
3. Sweden
4. Finland
5. United States
6. Germany
7. Netherlands
8. Denmark
9. Japan
10. United Kingdom

Instructive summaries follow for the individual countries.

ITIF

Between 2005 and 2011 the United States has declined from first to fifth position, but let us remember the big differences between the states. When the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation ITIF benchmarked innovation and competitiveness in the European Union and the United States, it found many worrying signs for both.

However, ITIF also found that Massachusetts and eight other states are on the top of the world:

Massachusetts, California, Connecticut, New Jersey, Washington, Delaware, Maryland, Colorado, and New Hampshire are more innovative than any nation in the world. Only Finland breaks into the top 10. In other words, nine states lead all nations in the world in terms of innovation-based competitiveness. If it were a nation, Massachusetts would lead the world by a large margin, scoring 18 points above California and 38 points higher than Finland. Massachusetts has set itself apart in several indicators, as the only state or country to have business R&D investment levels over 5 percent of domestic product, over 0.5 percent of domestic product in venture capital, and over two-thirds of its college aged population having a college degree. But even the ninth most innovative state, New Hampshire, leads the EU-25 on all measures but venture capital and broadband.

***

For those who work to turn their national reform programme (NRP) or the EU2020 aims into real progress, learning from the best is essential. The WEF top ten and the nine most competitive and innovative US states are among the places to look.



Ralf Grahn

EU2020 and WEF: Competitiveness

Just as the Europe 2020 strategy (EU2020) aims for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, the World Economic Forum (WEF) is increasingly trying to actually measure or assess ”quality growth”, especially sustainable growth.

The 527 pages of the global comparison The Global Competitiveness Report 2011-2012 from the WEF offer a cornucopia of questions of method about competitiveness factors (Part 1) and substantive information about how well prepared the countries are for the future (Part 2). In other words, we can learn from both the general and the country-specific parts of the comparative study.

The Global Competitiveness Index takes into account twelve interrelated groups or ”pillars” of competitiveness: institutions, infrastructure, macroeconomic environment, health and primary education, higher education and training, goods market efficiency, labour market efficiency, financial market development, technological readiness (ICT), market size, business sophistication and technological innovation.

As in previous years, this year’s top 10 remained dominated by a number of European countries, with Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Germany, and the Netherlands confirming their place among the most competitive economies. Singapore continued its upward trend to become the second-most competitive economy in the world, overtaking Sweden, while the United Kingdom returned to the top 10 as it recovers from the crisis, said the WEF.



Ralf Grahn

WEF: PIIGS competitiveness rankings

Thinking about the long term prospects for the eurozone and its members. The World Economic Forum offers us fresh insight.

The Global Competitiveness Index 2011-2012 rankings for the so called PIIGS are (out of 142 countries and territories):

Portugal 45
Ireland 29
Italy 43
Greece 90
Spain 36



Ralf Grahn

Nordic ICT competitiveness (INSEAD and WEF)

The tenth GITR from INSEAD and the World Economic Forum (WEF)was practically global, covering the ICT competitiveness of 138 countries or territories:

Soumitra Dutta, INSEAD, and Irene Mia, World Economic Forum (editors): The Global Information Technology Report 2010–2011 Transformations 2.0 (411 pages)

This is one of many wide competitiveness comparisons, where we see that the Nordic countries come out well. Here, three EU members were among the world elite. Sweden was seen as the most competitive economy, with Finland in third and Denmark in seventh place.

The EEA members Norway and Iceland were ranked ninth and sixteenth, respectively.

What can the European Union and the other EU member states learn in order to make the Europe 2020 strategy and its Digital Agenda success stories for European competitiveness?



Ralf Grahn



P.S. To remain globally competitive Europe must leverage its economies of scale and remove remaining barriers to the completion and growth of the single market, says GSMA Europe.

Competitiveness in the EU: Who finished where and why?

Somewhat uncharitably, as in earlier blog posts, in EU Reflection Group delivered report: Project Europe 2030 (10 May 2010) we spoke about the “lost decade” of the EU’s Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs, and the next day, in Mario Monti: A new strategy for the single market, we said that the European Union and especially the member states had “squandered” the decade of the Lisbon strategy.


No need to take my word for it, though. Others have looked at these matters in detail.




First let us recall, in Lisbon 23 and 24 March 2000 the heads of state or government had set the European Union the new strategic goal for the next decade:

to become the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion.

WEF




Now let us see what the World Economic Forum (WEF) has to say about goal attainment on the front page of The Lisbon Review. We find the following quote from senior economist Jennifer Blanke:

Ten yea[r]s after European leaders announced their intention of making the region the most competitive economy by 2010, Europe has not yet met that goal.

The headline of the detailed press release is to the point: The European Union failed to meet its goal to become the most competitive region in the world (9 May 2010).



Who finished where and why?


On the basis of the fifth and final assessment of the Lisbon strategy decade, just a few highlights and subjective remarks to set you thinking about competitiveness in the European Union:


• The Nordic countries Sweden, Finland and Denmark were the most competitive, followed by the Netherlands, Luxembourg and Germany. Is a social market economy based on equal opportunities the bane of competitiveness?

• Estonia, Cyprus, Slovenia and the Czech Republic, who were not yet EU members when the Lisbon decade started, finished ahead of many old member states. Dedicated reform efforts seem to pay off.

• PIGS: The old member states with less dynamics and competitiveness also happen to be among those with the bad enough public finances to have threatened the very existence of the eurozone: Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain (not in that order regarding lack of competitiveness). Are they going to wake up during the decade of the EU 2020 strategy and start on a virtuous circle?

• The latest EU entrants, Romania and Bulgaria, generally perceived to have the highest levels of crime and corruption and the greatest challenges to establish the rule of law, are at the bottom of the league table. Are the EU’s powers to intervene after accession too weak?



You can read the full report:



World Economic Forum: The Lisbon Review 2010 – Towards a More Competitive Europe? (32 pages)




Ralf Grahn