Views: 52
Modern instabilities in national and global political economy’s perspectives require urgent measures to mitigate complex and mounting challenges. Most vital remedies are grounded in modernised education policies, particularly, by introducing some new courses dealing with the crises’ prediction, better content’s understanding and means to mitigate crises; as well as in new approaches to decision-making.
Introduction
Presently, both the politico-economic and ideological components of any crisis, as well as the new connotation of polycrisis (as a series of overlapping “casualty’s layers”) are becoming integral parts of national/global governance’s structures. The latter is aimed at determining and “confronting” the general state of modern governance’s disfunctions in dealing with complex systematic challenges.
The term “polycrisis” has become a buzzword of the 2020s. It refers to the interconnected nature of the threats facing humanity today, from global warming, pandemics, and extreme inequality to democratic erosion and armed conflict. With few solutions on offer, experts and policymakers have reacted to this confluence of crises with dread and doom.
The periods in modern history, when some separate crises, e.g. energetic, environmental, geopolitical, social and/or technological appear almost at the same time, and “intensifying each other” (thus, creating a so-called cumulative disruption), some scholars call a polycrisis, and even speak about the process of a “normal state of polycrisis” in future.
Important element in present polycrisis structures is the complex and system-like remedy means: i.e. contemplating the system and setting mitigating components, economic, financial, educational, etc.
EU’s political community
During a recent meeting of the European Political Community, the issues of an “independent Europe” have been discussed with an idea of “reducing EU’s overdependencies in specific areas; the Commission President mentioned three main areas.
= The first is energy. We are too overdependent on imported fossil fuels and therefore always dependent on volatile global markets. We have to increase our assets at home in Europe. These are the renewable energies and nuclear energy because they are homegrown, they are cheaper, and they are reliable.
= The second topic where we need more independence is defence and security. We have to step up our military capabilities to be able to defend and protect ourselves. There is a vast amount of money that is available for investments. We now really have to step up and speed up the production process for military capabilities.
= And the third element is reliable supply chains. For that, we are reaching out to like-minded countries We have free trade agreements. We just concluded one with Latin America, but also with India, Australia and I will go to Mexico. Because with like-minded friends, you who have stable, reliable supply chains. And Europe has the biggest network of free trade agreements.
Source and citations from: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/da/statement_26_944
Background: polycrisis’ origin
The etymology of a crisis is rooted in ancient Greek medicine, as a turning ‘life-death’ point in a patient’s illness; this approach reflects two vital issues: a) an existential threat, and b) difficulty finding a “safe-all” solutions.
At the modern time, the concept could be picked-up through the approach made by the former European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker at the height of the euro-crisis in 2014-15,
The initial concept of so-called “general crises” in the political economy dates back to the Marxian “capital” argumentation revealing some basic interactions among economic, financial, ecologic, etc. factors, as well as in the period of “later capitalism”, and the J. Habermas’ historical sociology exploring the crisis’ tendencies in state-managed capitalism.
More in: Habermas J. Legitimation Crisis, – Beacon Press. 1975. -196 pp. In: https://www.saxo.com/dk/legitimation-crisis_jurgen-habermas_paperback_9780807015216?
Then, it is vital to get a handle on the core definition of a crisis: i.e.it is indeed helpful for thinking through what might be referred to as the Janus-face character of the concept. The idea of a crisis is both highly interpretive and in large part subjective; people are likely to argue over a crisis and its resolution. However, there are as well numerous references depicting “a sense of an overwhelming external force” inhibiting and disrupting popular approaches to modern events.
Thus, e.g. like Tooze (more about this historian below), Habermas discusses the medical definition, noting that its classical, biological basis lacks the interpretive element.
In one of Juncker’s classical statements of the polycrisis, a series of individual and collective actions that could reasonably be seen as ‘intentional’ actions were invoked – each of them politically contentious. Whereas Juncker framed the UK’s decision to leave the European Union as an example of the polycrisis. The decision of refugees from Syria to attempt to build new lives in Europe was likewise subject in his speech to the usual ‘crisis talk’.
Adam Tooze’s polycrisis’ vision
John Adam Tooze is an English-American historian, professor at Columbia University, director of the European Institute and non-resident scholar at Carnegie Europe. He popularised this term to describe a world in which crises are no longer isolated events but a wider, interconnected system of instability. The interaction of crises challenges societies’ ability to respond is, obviously, creating a sense of disorientation. He wrote: “What makes the crises of the past 15 years so disorientating is that it no longer seems plausible to point to a single cause and, by implication, a single fix.”
More about A. Tooze’s ideas on polycrisis in: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/crp/2025/09/11/defining-the-crisis-in-polycrisis-between-structural-force-and-perception/
General approach
The world is experiencing a “polycrisis,” a state where multiple, distinct, and interconnected crises—economic, geopolitical, environmental, and societal—are occurring simultaneously and interacting in ways that create a cumulative impact far exceeding the sum of their individual parts. This era, described as a “new age of global instability,” is characterized by “cascading effects” where a shock in one area triggers rapid, unpredictable consequences in others, leading to unprecedented levels of anxiety and a sense of being unable to cope.
Warning about the polycrisis, the World Economic Forum listed the “Top Ten Risks” that keep rich-world elites up at night. This framing reinforces the industrial mindset of “risk” (a potential future problem) and control.
However, modern civilization is actually full of additional uncertainties, such as unknown possibilities, which can be good or bad, as a concept distinct from risk – which should motivate adaptation and learning.
More in, e.g. “Doing development in the polycrisis”. December 2024. UNDP. In:
https://www.undp.org/blog/doing-development-polycrisis
“Adaptive” political economy
There are three opportunities for new thinking and actions in the modernised political economy: = First, we should replace machine-mode thinking with the paradigm of an “adaptive political economy.” This approach recognizes a basic fact: the natural and social worlds are not complicated objects (like toasters), but rather complex systems (like forests). Complex systems comprise many moving parts that are constantly adapting, learning, and connecting with one another within the context of a larger emergent order. Imposing mechanical models on such systems is misleading, if not destructive.
= Second, an adaptive paradigm must incorporate an inclusive and moral dimension. This means replacing the colonial logic of assimilation with the pithy maxim: “use what you have.” Every day in developing countries, people are improvising and creatively using whatever is available to them to solve problems. African farmers, e.g. inspired a new social movement in Ethiopia when revived traditional conservation techniques were aimed to regenerate the land. Similarly, China’s development since the 1980s was the result of “directed improvisation,” rather than top-down planning.
= Third, rather than oscillating between the two extremes of unfettered markets and command-and-control economies, governments in the twenty-first century should be directing adaptive processes. This involves coordinating and motivating a decentralized network of actors, discovering but not predetermining successful outcomes, and making ample use of experimentation and bottom-up feedback – actions that go beyond the scope of traditional industrial policies.
Thus, the polycrisis is paralyzing only for those who are attached to the old order. For those who are not, it offers what some researchers call a “polytunity” to usher in new paradigms that invert the way we think about the development process, the sources of solutions, and the role of the state.
Source and citations from:
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/new-economic-development-paradigm-needed-for-climate-change-inequality-pandemics-by-yuen-yuen-ang-2024-11
Digital transition and AI’s challenges crises’ assumptions
European regions are facing a growing number of overlapping crises. Climate change, volatile energy systems, demographic imbalances, geopolitical instability and global health shocks increasingly interact, creating uncertainty and pressures on places and communities (polycrisis). In this context, the question is no longer how well regions will face disruption to maintain business-as-usual, but how they can respond in ways that strengthen their long-term sustainability.
As some Nordic researchers postulate: “In such a ‘polycrisis’ context, the concept of territorial resilience is central to regional development. However, traditional understandings of resilience as a reactive strategy, and the policy tools linked to this view, fall short.”
Citation from: https://nordregio.org/news/territorial-resilience-in-a-time-of-polycrisis/
The arrival of generative AI, specifically ChatGPT, at the end of 2022, brought a different kind of disruption. It has challenged long-standing assumptions about learning, teaching and assessment, academic integrity and beyond.
AI tools capable of producing essays, code, music, infographics and many more in seconds forced universities to rethink curricula, what learning outcomes mean and how they can be measured. University leaders have become increasingly concerned about issues such as ethical considerations, AI integration complexity, plagiarism risk, resistance to change and lack of clarity on regulatory guidelines, among other concerns.
Universities have been required to articulate their purpose and value with renewed clarity and consistency.
Main source: https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20260306182736445
An international survey of university academics and students by Coursera, the massive online learning platform with 375 leading university and industry partners, has revealed highly positive attitudes towards generative AI and more than 95% make use of AI tools. But a weighty 56% fear that higher education is unprepared to handle AI.
More in: https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20260306064259345
thanks for this