Unfortunately Florida's assessment is again one-sided and superficial.  He conveniently leaves out that those behind the Global Financial Crisis were graduates of the 'great' universities, those who designed the wars in Iraq and Afghanastan also came from 'great universities, also those who design the social policies that cause so much international harship and misery, then there are those graduates who have managed to wreck the environment and kill its occupants either as large corporates or through government policy, then there is white collar crime and a whole host of other downsides to this planet that have been orchestrated by human capital from 'great' universities.  The same can be said about innovation and technology.  Until some moral and ethical yardstick is used to assess the outputs of universities then we cannot be certain that the outcomes resulting from them will also be great.  When we talk about human capital, innovation, engagement and so on we need to ask the question...'for what?'

Thanks Paul

The point of what I am saying above is that while unethical behaviour might generate considerable private benefit for a few there is invariably a public cost that results.  The GFC and environmental degradation are easy examples of this where the public costs have been horrendous.

Mostly, universities are publicy funded institutions and therefore have an obligation to ensure, as much as they are able, to minimise the public costs due to private unethical behaviour by ensuring their learning programs and innovation initiatives are designed with a moral purpose and are ethical in their undertaking . 

There is indeed, I believe, a real opportunity here for Pascal in working with places and universities through their existing products (PURE, PUMR, PIE, etc) to address issues of moral importance that have global significance that also resonate locally. Indeed, this is the best level in which to pursue these globally important initiatives as they are more readily recognisable and manageable (you know the saying: 'From little things big things grow').  I have raised this with Pascal several times and written about it in publications but it doesn't seem to resonate with them.  Maybe Larry's conference in October might tackle some of it.

Steve

Dear Steve, Paul, Chris et al

I hope your comments on moral imperatives, which I agree with, will carry over to your contribution to PIE's struggle to grapple with the enormopus human problems, growing inequality and social dislocation existing in cities in Africa, Asia, and elsewhere consequent on the pressures from globalisation, urbanisation, and current manifestations of capitalism.

With the massive drift of people from villages to cities in Africa and Asia, cities afford the context and battlefield to address what are fundamentally moral issues, with new ideas urgently needed. As OECD recently observed "key stakeholders are calling for new policy agendas, and new economic and social models that focus not only on groiwth but openness, fainess and inclusion".

While universities can make a contribution, does PASCAL need a shift in perspective from what universities can do, to ideas that emerge from the grassroots up, with many forms of deepened partnerships, to see issues in different ways so as to contribute to the new economic and social models so urgently needed. I do hope you will all contribute actively to aligning PIE so as to contribute to ideas that address the environmental, social, and economic pillars of sustainability in cities that are fundamentally democratic, moral, committed to social justice, and good places to live in.

But perhaps Martin Yarnit was right.