17 September 2021

(English below)

It has been a while since I was in your midst, and that was partly linked to my conscious reluctance in the political field. However, I said yes immediately when your President Jaap Smit asked me to speak here today. That has two causes. First of all, you don't say no to a request from Jaap Smit. Secondly, we are talking about the content of this Prince's Day Breakfast. Get back to the New Guinea. We are confronted daily with the consequences of the pandemic, what lessons have we learned, what is new, what should we do and what is the connection to the even bigger issues that lie behind Corona? The theme has been named with this . . Back to the New -, I work that out in three points and about the application we can discuss further. You will notice, it takes no effort to return to the pattern of the classical Reformed sermon.

The three points I want to make today are: 1. Think in coherence and integral and always opt for architectural social criticism, 2. Always provide moral reflection and be open to dialogue and 3. Take credible, concrete and measurable steps. This last point also deals with the future of the market economy. The holiday period is over and maybe you have been inspired by several books, like me.

1.
Which brings us to point 1. Those who have heard me before can not have escaped the fact that I regularly refer to the book Why Nations Fail by American professors Acemoglu and Robinson. A beautiful book about 3000 years of world history with the central question: when are countries successful and when are they not? The answer of these writers is crystal clear. There are three factors involved. There must always be innovation and sometimes certain activities must be stopped. We need a legal community, the rule of law, a good legal system, including the fight against corruption. And the third factor is there must be "inclusive institutions," allowing people to share in the fruits of economic development and not just the elite, whether they be capitalists or communists. These professors wrote a new book, The Narrow Corridor, translated into Dutch as Wankel Balance. The eternal struggle between state and society. This was 640 pages of holiday reading for me. A fascinating book that convincingly indicates that the state benefits from a powerful society in its functioning. There must always be a search for a good balance and the right counterweight of social forces. They outline the perspective of the tamed Leviathan, which is far preferable to the dictatorial Leviathan or the absent Leviathan.

Corona has shown how important it is to see things in conjunction. A very serious and extremely tough health issue appears to have everything to do with the free provision of information with cooperation between governments, medical, science and companies and with solidarity in the immediate environment, both nationally and internationally. Geopolitical dimensions are also at stake. Dependencies on a global scale - medical, technological, economic - are clearly exposed. Then it turns out how vulnerable we are. It is phenomenal how quickly new vaccines have been developed, but at the same time it is hard to see how uneven distribution is in the world. The United Kingdom, Israel and Dubai were best placed to take care of themselves. Western countries followed. However, large parts of the world, especially the developing countries, were deprived of vaccines. This inequality is a major source of risk in terms of health, well-being and economic development. Solidarity is inadequate and ethically speaking we cannot speak at all of our common house. This term is central to the Papal encyclical Laudato Si. I find this encyclical very inspiring and at the same time compelling. The human root of the ecological crisis is considered in all its sharpness. One Integral Ecology environmental, economic and social needs. It is about justice between generations, about ecological conversion. "Make our lives whole again, that we may call upon the world

Van Laudato It is only a small step towards the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In the midst of all geopolitical struggles and purely self-interest, these 17 goals offer a binding perspective to address the major issues of today and tomorrow, climate change, the need for a circular economy, the fight against inequality. Fortunately, many governments, civil society organisations, companies, schools and universities are beginning to embrace the SDGs. However, the key question is: are we able to meet the targets by 2030? Internationally I also notice that the question is being asked ever more sharply: "Are we on track?" Well, we're not. There's not enough going on. There is too much retention on what is there, on existing interests, and there is too little thought from future orientation. Fundamental choices need to be made.

It reminds me of what Abraham Kuyper said at the Social Congress of 1891: Only this is one thing, there will be a social quaestation for you, necessary, that is to say, that you see the unsustainability of the present state, and this insustainability does not explain its secondary causes but a fault in the very foundation of our social cohabitation. Architectural criticism is needed on the .
Corona, Laudato Sisé and the SDGs show that things need to be considered in coherence and integral and that there is every reason for architectural social criticism. The analyses of Acemoglu and Robinson are very helpful. The Prince's Day Breakfast has always been an expression of the will to moral reflection. This reflection and the dialogue on it are urgently needed.

2.
That brings us to point 2. My second vacation book was out faster. There was no other way to do that, because it was 128 pages. Fred Matser wrote Beyond Us. A clear view of human values and ways of life. A very inspiring argument and an example of moral reflection. Matser speaks deeply about the dysfunctional action of man and about the mission to live together in dynamic harmony with the other and nature. He writes: "We oppose the past through feelings of guilt and regret, against the future through fears, against our deepest feelings through compulsive thoughts..." We are always trying to achieve something, to do something, rather than simply allowing ourselves to be: to be thoughts, to be feelings, with less or even no resistance at all. We are the instrument, a true businessman is only God.

So take time for moral reflection. In the past I have often worked with the cultural sociologist Anton Zijderveld. I remember him talking decades ago about our Staccato culture, an unbridled culture of moving from one development to another, from one trend to another, and all without rest points. However, I have the feeling that the unsustainability of this drift is becoming more and more felt. More and more we hear the questions like: What is the DNA of our organization, what are our hindered values, how do we answer the hampered question? Where do you want to stand as a human being, where do you want to stand as an organization?

When I visited Japan in 2009 with a few fellow executives and the members of the Innovation Platform, we visited many companies there. At each company I noticed that the presentations began with a reference to the company's history, to the founders and their family and especially to the values that were bearing and guiding the company. When I mentioned this at an international conference, a Japanese professor, Funabashi Haruo, came to me and said that he had written a book about this theme: The Wisdom of Our Ancestors. Applying Age-Old Thought to Contemporary Japanese Business. Much attention is currently being paid to the future of work in a world of artificial intelligence, robotization and big data, which is needed. A century ago, it was about scientific management by Frederick Winslow Taylor. As a student of Economic and Social History at the VU, I was working on this and on Protestant Christian reactions to it. During the Second Christian Social Congress in 1919 there was a critical discussion of the human vision behind Taylor's approach and never allowed labour to become a meat machine. So look for moral backgrounds. The creation of my party, the CDA, and the principles of Public Justice, Spread Responsibility, Solidarity and Rent Mastery are directly linked to re-bronning: back to the inspiration of the social doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church and the PC ideas as expressed in So

When Corona broke out, it was striking how much attention there was to solidarity: Attention to the elderly and the lonely, the care staff were rightly appreciated, the awareness of the unsustainability of current production and consumption styles increased, more attention was paid to the quality of life and good human relations. So it is possible, this reflection. Unfortunately, the tide has turned: There is a lot of social grumpy, self-interest is often paramount, the common seems to be far away. Corona takes us back to the question of what life essentially pertains to, the relationships between people within and outside the borders of the country and the relationship with nature, now and later. Social vulnerability increases when one doesn't reach one another, lives side by side, loses sight of the common home. It is now difficult to estimate the precise social consequences of Corona for the longer term, but it is certain that thorough moral reflection is needed. Core values such as charity, mercy, being open to the other, looking to what is vulnerable, caring for Creation and justice may be traditional and centuries-old, they have not lost touch with topicality, and they need to be refilled and concrete. In the words of former CNV foreman and later Vice-President of the Council of State Ruppert, from a Christian-social point of view, the states and relationships must always be measured by justice.

It also shows how innovative and meaningful such core values are. Jos van Gennip recently alerted me to a recently published article in The New York Times by Matthew Walther, "This is why America needs Catholicism." The author is concerned about the political discourse in the United States and points to the inspiration of the social doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church. That inspiration is not new. Franklin D. Roosevelt read, at a time of great errors of the laissez-fair economy and the threats of totalitarianism, with enthusiasm the Papal encyclicals. Walther even talks about the perspective of a relived Christian democracy in the United States. That's right.

I would add that moral reflection presupposes the will to engage in dialogue with other forces. A number of years ago, Steve Young, the very inspiring Executive Director of the Caux Round Table for Moral Capitalism, invited me to a conference in Thailand where people with very different backgrounds, such as Rooms-Catholic, Buddhist, Humanistic, Islamic, Protestant-Christian, Hindustani, reflected together how from a wide variety of traditions can contribute to the realization of the SDGs. It was extremely stimulating. Of course, that raises the pressing question of what is really changing. Coherent and integral thinking and moral reflection should lead to credible, concrete and measurable steps. With greenwashing or SDG-washing, we can't make any progress.

3.
So we arrived at point 3. The third book of my vacation is from Rob de Wijk. The battle for Europe. How China and Russia play our continent apart (381 pages). A very sharp analysis of geopolitical developments and all the threats associated with them. The striking conclusion is that Europe is much stronger than is often thought. Social progress, equality ideals and the western belief in science, which led to phenomenal technological breakthroughs, have all made this possible [the breathtaking economic development since the industrial revolution]. For me, this dynamic is the heart of Europe... which has allowed Europe to reinvent itself over and over again. .

It is good and necessary that in the midst of all Euroscepticism or outright negativity about Europe this sound sounds. Because there's a lot at stake right now. If you would ask me what was my best geopolitical experience during my presidency, I would refer directly to the G20 meeting in London in March 2009. We were in a severe financial and economic crisis and the G20 was aware that we needed each other to develop a new financial architecture, that the climate summit in Copenhagen should be successful later that year and that WTO negotiations should be successfully concluded within a year. Unfortunately, the actual developments after that were different from the climate conference in Copenhagen, for example, was not successful - but it was a time when the need for cooperation was felt.

When Corona began, the world was already marked by sharp divisions: America First versus China's increasing assertiveness, Russia's infiltration in several areas, Europe as a battlefield of superpowers with all kinds of sanctions, torturing multilateral organisations. Corona has intensified some of these developments. Blame over and over again, mouth cover diplomacy, magnification of Chinese and Russian influence in other parts of the world, linking aid to raw material procurement. In the European Union, two things are at the forefront: The Green Deal and pursuing Strategic Autonomy. It is necessary to transcend today's geopolitical struggle. I know it is extremely difficult and we should not be naive about the political developments of power, especially after recent dramatic developments in Afghanistan. And yet there is a need to work towards a perspective in which the SDGs and Laudato Si hindered concretely and measurablely.

It is encouraging when many cities work on the realization of the SDGs, it is inspiring that all HBOs in the Netherlands have included the SDGs in their curricula and that all universities are doing their best to take matters seriously around the SDGs, it is good that many companies embrace the SDGs and integrate them into the business strategy. However, much more needs to be done. For this reason, it is good that the Bertelsmann Stiftung countries compares their SDG performance, that countries are required to report annually on compliance with the Paris agreements, that the importance of Integrated Reporting among auditors is rapidly increasing, that tools are being developed to measure their own SDG performance (MAEX is an example), that the definition of the Gross National Product is being reconsidered and that the broad concept of prosperity is becoming more prominent.

It is all expressed that there are serious doubts about the sustainability of current socio-economic development and the morality behind it. We see this in the international debate on capitalism or the future of the market economy. The last edition of the World Economic Forum was dedicated to Stakeholder Capitalism, which is a different story than Shareholder Capitalism. The Nobel Prize winner of the economy Joseph Stiglitz mentioned it in his book People, Power and Profits about . The Caux Round Table continues to hammer on Moral Capitalism and Raj Sisodia and others argue for Conscious Capitalism. We're hearing about Responsible Capitalism and Inclusive Capitalism. Of course, there are many differences between these approaches, but it is always about long-term thinking, the interests of all stakeholders and the coherence between economic, social and environmental development. With VU professor Govert Buijs and many others we are working on a project on the future of the market economy in Europe. A project that started with a starting document, 10 dialogues between economists, reports from young economists, an essay contest, consultation with political-scientific agencies. All this in the belief that new perspectives are needed and that much more attention must be paid to the well-being economy, an inclusive and sustainable market economy. This autumn we hope to publish the report, and I hope you will also take part in this. Interest in this project is increasing, for example

It is all expressed that there are serious doubts about the sustainability of current socio-economic development and the morality behind it. We see this in the international debate on capitalism or the future of the market economy. The last edition of the World Economic Forum was dedicated to Stakeholder Capitalism, which is a different story than Shareholder Capitalism. The Nobel Prize winner of the economy Joseph Stiglitz mentioned it in his book People, Power and Profits about . The Caux Round Table continues to hammer on Moral Capitalism and Raj Sisodia and others argue for Conscious Capitalism. We're hearing about Responsible Capitalism and Inclusive Capitalism. Of course, there are many differences between these approaches, but it is always about long-term thinking, the interests of all stakeholders and the coherence between economic, social and environmental development. With VU professor Govert Buijs and many others we are working on a project on the future of the market economy in Europe. A project that started with a starting document, 10 dialogues between economists, reports from young economists, an essay contest, consultation with political-scientific agencies. All this in the belief that new perspectives are needed and that much more attention must be paid to the well-being economy, an inclusive and sustainable market economy. This autumn we hope to publish the report, and I hope you will also take part in this. Interest in this project is increasing, for example

Get back to the New Guinea. That's what today is about. A long time ago, Peter Drucker stated that responsibility would become the guiding principle in the knowledge society of the 21st century. He went back to a classical understanding that is completely topical. I share this view. At the 1991 Christian-Social Congress, pleas were made for a transition from functional responsibility to substantial responsibility. Corona and all the other major issues that lie behind it bring us back to what really matters in life: Leave no one behind, have an eye for Creation and shift the focus of me and now to us and later. Make the SDGs and Laudato Si... a reality. Put the SDGs at the heart of the policy, also in a new coalition agreement, opt for clear actions and make things measurable. Cross politics and put our future first. Listen to the voice of young generations. Invest in multilateral approach and support multilateral organisations. Refine Europe's position and give Europe a soul. Choose radically a socio-ecological market economy and provide instruments that bring these perspectives closer to public policy, the strategy of enterprises and the role of civil society. Give concrete content to long-term value creation, to ESG criteria and the broad concept of prosperity. And consider all these matters not just as policy-based questions but also as moral questions. We're not empty-handed on that assignment. In the words of John (14:

Jan Peter Balkende is former Prime Minister (2002-2010) and professor at Erasmus University Rotterdam. He is a member of the Club de Madrid, External Senior Adviser for Ernst & Young, Associate Partner at Hague Corporate Affairs, Chairman of the Dutch Sustainable Growth Coalition, and Chairman of Noaber Foundation.

. Responsibility as guiding principle in the 21st century

This Prince's Day Breakfast, a moment of reflection which precedes the start of the new parliamentary year in the Netherlands, focuses on the theme "Back to the New'. We are confronted daily with the consequences of the pandemic, what lessons have we learned, what is new, what needs to be changed and what is the connection with the much bigger issues that lie behind Corona? For me, the theme "Back to the New Guinea is associated with responsibility as a guiding principle in the 21st century." I elaborate this in three points: 1. Think in a coherent and integral way and always opt for architectural social criticism, 2. Always enable moral reflection and be open to dialogue and 3. Take credible, concrete and measureable steps. This last point also addresses the future of the market economy. The holiday season is over and maybe you, like me, have been inspired by several books.

1.
That brings us to point 1. If you have heard me before, it cannot have escalated your notice that I regularly refer to the book Why Nations Fail. The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty by American professors Acemoglu and Robinson. A beautiful book about 3000 years of world history with the central question: when are countries successful and when not? The answer from these writers is crystal clear. It involves three factors. There must always be innovation and sometimes certain activities have to be stopped. A legal community is needed, the "rule of law', a good legal system including the fight against corruption. And the third factor "there must be "inclusive institutions" through which people can share in the fruits of economic development and not just the elites, be they capitalists or communists. These professors wrote a new book, The Narrow Corridor. States, Societies, and the Fate of Liberty. This was 576 pages of holiday literature for me. A fascinating book that convincingly indicates that the functioning of the state benefits from a powerful society. There must always be a search for a good balance and the right counterlance of social forces. They sketch the perspective of the tamed Leviathan, who is far preferable to the dictatorial Leviathan or the absent Leviathan.

Corona has shown how important it is to see things in context. A very serious and extremely unusual health issue appears to have everything to do with the free provision of information, with cooperation between governments, the medical sector, science and companies and with solidarity in the immediate living environment, nationally and internationally. Geopolitical dimensions are also at stake. Dependencies on a global scale . . . medical, technological, economic . . . are clearly exposed. It also shows how volnerable we are. It is phenomenal how quickly new vaccines have been developed, but at the same time it is bitter to notice how unequal the distribution in the world is. The United Kingdom, Israel and Dubai had best arranged things for themselves. Western countries followed. However, large parts of the world are especially the developing countries have been deprived of the vaccines. This inequality poses major risks in terms of health, well-being and economic development. Solidity falls short and from an ethical point of view we cannot speak of our hampered home at all. I find this encyclical very inspiration and at the same time obligatory. The focus is on the human root of the ecological crisis. An integral ecology of the environment, economy and society is needed. It is about intergenerational justice, about ecological conversion. "Restore our lives, that we may protect the world and not plunder it, that we sow beauty and not pollution and destruction."

It is only a small step from Laudato Si hindered to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the United Nations. Amid all the geopolitical struggles and pure self-interest, these 17 goals offer a unifying perspective to tackle the major issues of today and tomorrow . Fortunately, many . . governments, civil society, businesses, schools and universities . . are beginning to embrace the SDGs. The key question, however, is: will we be able to achieve the goals by 2030? Internationally, too, I notice that the question is increasingly being asked: #Are we on track? # Well, we're not. Too little is happening. There is too much adherence to existing interests, and too little thinking is done from a future orientation. Fundamental choices have to be made.

It reminds me of what Dr Abraham Kuyper "The Founder of the Anti-Revolutionary Party," the Free University and the Reformed Churches of the Netherlands and later Prime Minister "Said at the Social Congress of 1891: "If there exists a social question for you, it is necessary that you see the untenability of the present situation, and this untenability is explained not by secondary causes, but by an error in the very foundation of our social coexistence. Architectural criticism is necessary of the "human society itself."

Corona, Laudato Si hindered and the SDGs show that matters must be viewed in context and integrated and that there is every reason for architectural social criticism. Acemoglu and Robinson's analysis are very helpful in this regard. The Prince's Day Breakfast has always been an expression of the will to moral reflection. That reflection and the dialogue about it are desperately needed.

2.
That brings us to point 2. I finished my second holiday book faster. There was no other way, because now it was 128 pages. Fred Matser wrote Beyond Us. A Clear View on Human Values and Ways of Life. A very inspiration book and a full example of moral reflection. Matser spokes penetratingly about the dysfunctional behaviour of humans and about the task of living together in dynamic harmony with the other and with nature. He writes: "We resist the past through feelings of guild and regret, the future through feelings, our innermost feelings through obsessions... We are always trying to achieve something, to do something, instead of simply allowing ourselves to be: to be thought, to be feeling, with less or no resistance at all. We are the instrument, a real manager is only God."

So take time for moral reflection. In the past I have often collaborated with cultural sociologist Anton Zijderveld. I can still remember that decades ago he talked about our "Staccato Culture," a restless culture of running from one development to another, from one trend to another, and all without resting points. Yet I have the feeling that the untenability of this rushing on is being felt more and more. More and more often we hear questions such as: what is the DNA of our organization, what are our values. Where do you want to be as a person, where do you want to be as an organization?

When I visited Japan in 2009 with some fellow ministers and the members of the Innovation Platform, we visited many companies there. In every company I noted that the presentations invariably started with a reference to the history of the company, to the founders and their families and especially to the values that supported and directed the company. Once, when I mentioned this at an international conference, a Japanese professor, Funabashi Haruo, came up to me afterwards and said that he had written a book on the subject: The Wisdom of Our Ancestors. Applying Age-Old Thought to Contemporary Japanese Business. A lot of attention is currently being paid to the future of work in a world of artificial intelligence, robotization and big data, and that is necessary. A century ago it was Frederick Winslow Taylor's Scientific Management. As a student of Economic and Social History at the Free University, I was concerned with this and Protestant-Christian responses to it. During the Second Christian Social Congress in 1919, there was critical discussion about the human vision behind Taylor's approach and work should never become a . So keep an eye out for moral backgrounds. The establishment of my party, the CDA, and the principles of Public Justice, Differentiated Responsibility, Solidarity and Stewardship are directly related to resourcing: back to the inspiration of the social teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and Protestant Christian ideas such as expressed in Sphere Sovereignty. On this basis, a new concept of a responsible society could be developed. If thi

When I visited Japan in 2009 with some fellow ministers and the members of the Innovation Platform, we visited many companies there. In every company I noted that the presentations invariably started with a reference to the history of the company, to the founders and their families and especially to the values that supported and directed the company. Once, when I mentioned this at an international conference, a Japanese professor, Funabashi Haruo, came up to me afterwards and said that he had written a book on the subject: The Wisdom of Our Ancestors. Applying Age-Old Thought to Contemporary Japanese Business. A lot of attention is currently being paid to the future of work in a world of artificial intelligence, robotization and big data, and that is necessary. A century ago it was Frederick Winslow Taylor's Scientific Management. As a student of Economic and Social History at the Free University, I was concerned with this and Protestant-Christian responses to it. During the Second Christian Social Congress in 1919, there was critical discussion about the human vision behind Taylor's approach and work should never become a . So keep an eye out for moral backgrounds. The establishment of my party, the CDA, and the principles of Public Justice, Differentiated Responsibility, Solidarity and Stewardship are directly related to resourcing: back to the inspiration of the social teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and Protestant Christian ideas such as expressed in Sphere Sovereignty. On this basis, a new concept of a responsible society could be developed. If thi

When Corona broke out, it was striking how much attention was paid to solidarity: attention to the olderly and the lonely, employees in care were rightly appreciated, awareness of the unustainability of current production and consumption styles increased, more attention was paid to quality of life and for good human relations. So it's possible, this reflection. Unfortunately, the tide has turned: There is a lot of social chagrin, self-interest often comes first, what is common sometimes seems far-fetched. Corona throws us back to the question of what life is most deeply about, the relationship between people . . . within and beyond national borders . . . and the relationship with nature, now and later. Social vulnerability increases when people do not reach each other, live past each other, lose sight of the . It is now different to estimate what the exact social consequences of Corona will be in the longer term, but it is certain that through moral reflection is necessary. Core values such as charity, mercy, being open to others, an eye for what is vulnerable, care for Creation and justice may be traditional and centuries old, they have not lost any of their topicality and require new interpretation and realization. In the words of the former leader of the Christian trade union movement CNV and later Vice-President of the Council of State Ruppert, situations and relationships must always be measured against justice from a Christian-social perspective.

I would add that moral reflection presupposes the will to enter into a dialogue with other currents. Several years ago, Steve Young, the very inspiration Executive Director of the Caux Round Table for Moral Capitalism, invited me to a conference in Thailand where people from very different backgrounds hindered Roman Catholic, Buddhist, Humanist, Islamic, Protestant Christian, Hindusani . It was extremely stimulating. But that naturally raises the pressing question of what is really changing. Cohesive and integrated thinking and moral reflection should lead to credible, concrete and measureable steps. We don't get any further with greenwashing or SDG washing.

3.
This brings us to point 3. The third book of my holiday is written by Rob de Wijk: The Battle for Europe. How China and Russia are Playing our Continent Apart (381 pages). A very sharp analysis of geopolitical developments and all related threats. The striking conclusion is that Europe is much stronger than is likely. "Social progress, equality ideals and the Western belief in science, which led to phenomenal technological breakthroughs, have all made this [the breathtaking economic development since the industrial revolution] possible. For me, that dynamicism is the heart of Europe...that dynamicism has allowed Europe to reinvent itself time and time again."

It is good and necessary that in the middle of all the Euroscepticism or downright negativism about Europe this sound can be heard. Because there is a lot at stake right now. If you were to ask me what my best geopolitical experience was during my premiership I would refer directly to the G20 meeting in London in March 2009. We were in a deep financial and economic crisis and at this G20 meeting Heads of Government realized was that we needed each other in developing a new financial architecture, that the Copenhagen climate Summit should be made a success later that year and that the WTO negotiations should be successfully concluded within a year. Unfortunately, the actual developments subsequently took a different turn . . the climate conference in Copenhagen, for example, was not a success . . but it was a moment when the need for cooperation was felt.

When Corona started, the world was already marked by harp divisions: America First against the sharply increasing assertivity of China, infiltration by Russia in several areas, Europe as the battleground of the superpowers with all kind of sanctions, and intervening with multilateral organisations. Corona has increased some of these developments. Reproaching both sides, mask diplomacy, increasing Chinese and Russian influence in other parts of the world, linking aid to the procurement of raw materials. Two things are currently paramount in the European Union: the Green Deal and the pursuit of Strategic Autonomy. It is necessary to transcend the geopolitical struggle of today. I know it is extremely different and we should not be naive about the power politics developments, especially after the recent dramatic developments in Afghanistan. And yet it is necessary to work on a prospective in which the SDGs and Laudato Si hindered in a concrete and measureable way.

It is encouraging when many cities are working towards the realization of the SDGs. It is inspiring that all Universities of Applied Sciences in the Netherlands have included the SDGs in their curricula and that all universities are taking things seriously around the SDGs. It is good that many companies are embracing the SDGs and integrating them into their business strategy. However, much more needs to be done. That is why it is good that the Bertelsmann Foundation compares countries on their SDG performance, that countries are obliged to report every five years on the fulfillment of the Paris agreements, that the significance of Integrated Reporting among accountants is increasing rapidly, that tools are being developed to measure its own SDG performance (the MAEX organization is a good example), that the definition of the Gross National Product is reconsidered and that more attention is paid to the broad concept of prosperity (‘well being’).

These are all expressions of serious doubts about the sustainability of current socio-economic development and the morality that lies behind it. We see this in the international debate about capitalism or the future of the market economy. The last edition of the World Economic Forum focused on Stakeholder Capitalism, which is a different story than Shareholder Capitalism. The Nobel laureate of economics Joseph Stiglitz talks in his book People, Power and Profits about ‘Progressive Capitalism for an Age of Discontent’. The Caux Round Table continues to hammer on Moral Capitalism and Raj Sisodia and others advocate Conscious Capitalism. We hear about Responsible Capitalism and Inclusive Capitalism. Of course, there are many differences between these approaches, but it is always about long-term thinking, the interests of all stakeholders and the connection between economic, social and ecological development. Together with Free University professor Govert Buijs and many others, we are working on a project about the future of the market economy in Europe. A project that started with a starting document, ten dialogues between economists, reports by young economists, an essay contest, consultation with the political science bureaus. All this based on the conviction that new perspectives are required and that much more attention should be paid to the well-being economy, an inclusive and sustainable market economy. We hope to publish the report later this year and I hope that you will also contribute ideas.

“Back to the New”. That’s what today is about. Some time ago, Peter Drucker argued that responsibility would become the guiding principle in the knowledge society of the 21st century. He went back to a classic concept that is fully current. I share this view. At the 1991 Christian Social Congress in The Netherlands pleas were made for a transition from functional responsibility to substantial responsibility. Corona and all the other big issues that lie behind it throw us back to what matters most deeply in life: leave no one behind, have an eye for Creation and shift the focus from ‘me and now’ to ‘us and later’. Make the SDGs and Laudato Si’ a reality. Place the SDGs at the heart of policy, including in a new coalition agreement, opt for clear actions and make things measurable. Go beyond political squabbles and put our future first. Listen to the voice of young generations. Invest in a multilateral approach and support multilateral organisations. Redefine the position of Europe and give Europe a soul. Choose radically for a socio-ecological market economy and provide instruments that bring these perspectives closer, in government policy, in the strategy of companies and in the role of civil society. Give concrete substance to long-term value creation, to ESG criteria and the broad concept of prosperity. And consider all these matters not merely as policy-instrumental questions, but also as moral questions. We are not empty-handed in this assignment. I am thinking in particular of the words in the Gospel of John (14:27): “I leave peace with you; I give my peace to you: not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it fear.”

Prof.dr. Jan Peter Balkenende
Prime Minister of the Kingdom of the Netherlands (2002-2010), Professor at Erasmus University Rotterdam, Member of the Club de Madrid, External Senior Advisor to EY, Associate Partner at Hague Corporate Affairs, Chairman Dutch Sustainable Growth Coalition, Chairman Noaber Foundation

September 17, 2021