Ten years ago, the social theorist and economist Jacques Attali predicted and warned of a global
pandemic in his book.
In a recent piece, Attali highlighted “the Economy of Life” and altruism as the
prescriptions for the social and economic crises humanity is facing.
What are the essential factors for a
sustainable future? How will clothing change?
Connecting Paris under curfew and Tokyo, the two thought
leaders held a two-hour discussion on what is needed in a post-corona world.
“The Economy of Life” and a “Positive Society”
AttaliThis is the second time I have met you, Mr. Yanai. I
am glad to have this opportunity to talk about important issues again.
YanaiSo am I, Dr. Attali. So, Dr. Attali, I believe one of
the biggest problems the world is facing right now is environmental destruction. Humanity is on the brink of
survival, and we must ask ourselves “how much time is there left for us?” This crisis has accelerated even
further considering the COVID-19 pandemic (hereinafter “the pandemic”).
AttaliEnvironmental issues are important, as you point
out. On that front, it goes without saying that the need to pursue sustainability is crucial, but I do not
think that is enough. We must not overlook social issues and issues of democracy. Aren’t our current
politics demoralizing people? Are workers treated properly? Are we not making grave mistakes in the way we
treat minorities? A sustainable society requires not only the ecological but the economic and political
aspects working properly. On top of that, society needs to act with the interests of the next generations in
mind. I call such a society a “Positive Society.”
YanaiIn “L'économie de la vie (The Economy of Life)”, the
book you just published, you wrote that “the Economy of Life” will be important in the post-corona world.
You have pointed out that areas such as wellness, education, hygiene, food, agriculture, and clean energy
will play a vital role for the next generation.
AttaliExactly. A society that values “the Economy of Life”
is a “Positive Society” that values the next generation. And in the area of clothing, clothes will be
included as a part of “the Economy of Life” by not only being made of sustainable materials, but also being
long-lasting and contributing to wellness and hygiene. Clothes that are discarded quickly will not benefit
the next generation. There will be more of a demand for clothing with respect for nature and humanity in the
future.
YanaiI feel that the pandemic is certainly changing our
lifestyles, as well as the type of clothing consumers seek. Clothing that feels more comfortable, healthy,
and that can allow us to express ourselves by wearing it, is becoming crucial. Needless to say, materials
and manufacturing processes must be sustainable. At the same time, it will be more important for clothing to
play a part in making the environment a better place to pass on to the next generation.
AttaliThat is exactly an action which is in the interests
of our next generations. We are the grandparents of all humanity, and we must act like grandparents of
humanity yet to be born. In any work, we need to ask ourselves the question: “Is what we are doing part of
‘the Economy of Life’?”
YanaiWith a crisis like the pandemic, we should think
positively and change our industries, including clothing, in solidarity with the world. However, the world
is even more divided socially and politically right now.
AttaliClimate change, the pandemic, and conflicts around
the world are all major risks hovering above us like black clouds. However, just like in football games, we
must analyze the strengths of the opposition and understand the risks when we play. If there is a country
politically opposing us, we should start by understanding its culture and respect it. That may provide a way
to rebuild a relationship without things quickly becoming hostile. It is paramount to understand the
opponent.
Altruism drives problem solving
YanaiAn inward-looking mindset is becoming a global trend,
and some only seem to care about their own country or the environment close to them. This is causing
problems in many regions in the world. If a country only pursues its own interests, it may lead to conflicts
or frictions. Also, there seems to be less compassion for others. Some view the differences in race and
ethnicity as a barrier, and do not try to see or think about the differences in culture. Without a relative
perspective, we would end up having a narrow-minded interpretation of the world that only respects our own
culture. No positive power will come from such an insular way of seeing. The pandemic hit us when this
situation was getting worse. This is an emergency that requires global solidarity, yet we cannot seem to
find the momentum for it. Another thing that worries me is that we are losing our willingness to look at
things in an historical perspective. The present is made up of an accumulation of what happened in the past.
If we do not know or care about the past, we cannot understand the present in a true sense.
AttaliIt was not as though no one could have ever foreseen
conflicts between human beings like WWII. Many people predicted the war, but failed to stop it. The United
Nations, the organization whose core mission is to prevent such conflicts, was not created during WWII, but
only after it. Humanity can only learn after experiencing a crisis and ending it in a devastating way. Such
a view, however, is too pessimistic. It is the role of rationality and intelligence to create the power to
stop devastation before it occurs. I believe that there are many ways to avoid conflicts and to start acting
in order to make the world a better place. This is the fundamental idea and attitude behind the “Positive
Society.” The same can be said for frictions caused by cultural differences or environmental issues, which
can be described as conflicts between humanity and the environment. Altruism, a fundamental requirement of
the “Positive Society,” is the starting point and drives us to action for solving these issues.
YanaiTurning the idea into actions—this becomes a big
barrier in Japan. Historically, Japanese tend to think that it is not for individuals but for the government
or the administration to choose the path and act for the future. There is an ingrained mentality among
Japanese that “higher-ups” should decide and solve difficult problems. I believe this is not good enough.
Individuals or companies must start acting on their own, otherwise, things that could be changed will not
change. Things may become too late to address if we just wait for the government or the state to make a
decision. We live in a highly globalized society. I believe that decisions and actions that transcend
national borders are more likely to spread quickly and reliably if started by individuals or
companies.
Attali Companies with the power and position to promote
their own values can become leaders in the “Positive Society” and move society forward. This trend may only
accelerate in the future, and I call such companies “Positive Companies.” Altruism must be placed at the
core of the corporate philosophy, and corporates must fulfill these responsibilities with their activities.
In my opinion, Fast Retailing is in a position to become one of these models. We, as consumers, should also
buy products from “Positive Companies” that apply altruism from now on. Shareholders will check to see if
they are “Positive Companies.” Investors will choose companies that contribute to the “Positive Society.”
Banks financing companies will preferentially choose altruistic companies. Such trends will gradually
permeate society and exert their influence on those around it.
Rules shared globally — is it possible?
Yanai I fully agree with the idea and action of altruism.
Do you think that altruism is the solution to all problems?
Attali It is worth considering, if we succeed in sharing
certain rules globally, to place altruism as the core of actions by people. The rule of law. This is
difficult to achieve, but one of the initiatives taken by the EU was this integration by law. The countries
in the EU cooperated to lay down a common set of rules. The population of the EU is under 450 million. This
may be less than one-tenth of the global population, but the integration cannot be considered small, and it
was realized by having a common set of rules. Our way of thinking and actions must be globalized in the
global market. Globalization of products alone is not enough to realize a sustainable and open
market.
Obviously, it is very difficult to share a legal system for all humanity. However, it may be
viable, for example, for Fast Retailing and competing global apparel companies to come together, make
agreements for the raw material handling, working conditions and so on, create shared rules based on them,
and conduct corporate activities. This starts with companies, not the state or the government.
Yanai I do not think that rules will provide a fundamental
solution. If only global apparel companies cooperate, we may end up only working within our conventional
perspectives and defending our own rights. However, Japanese tend to feel more comfortable working within
such a framework, and many managers may prefer a common set of rules in place. Since the Meiji Restoration,
Japanese have been good at following and working under the direction or guidance set by “higher-ups.”
Because you don’t need to think for yourself as long as you are working hard for the goals and conditions
provided by the government. The government also thinks about protecting and encouraging companies. However,
this may make it impossible for them to change their course if things go in the wrong direction.
Job freedom vs. lifetime employment
YanaiHow are French people trying to solve the problem of
inequality?
AttaliMainly by taxation. The tax rate in France is one of
the highest in Europe. People believe this is a worthwhile price to pay to solve inequality and improve
general wellbeing and welfare. The Scandinavian nations also have similarly high taxation rates. In return,
they provide education and medical care unconditionally. High taxes are a system of altruism, and are rules
of consideration for others. A contrasting country is the United States. They have a low tax rate. However,
in the United States, it is practically impossible to get advanced medical care if you do not have health
insurance. Carbon footprint is a major pressing issue, and it is necessary to introduce a carbon tax on
commodities to address this. Carbon footprint is not only a problem for manufacturing but also for importing
and exporting across countries. This cannot be solved by a single country, and the involvement of globally
operating companies is crucial, among other things. This is the reason why I believe that the various
problems Mr. Yanai pointed out cannot be solved entirely on a country basis, and global rules are
required.
YanaiIt is important not to end up with protectionism and
groupism. I believe it is crucial for individual companies around the world to freely engage in economic
activities. In my opinion, it is not right to make the rules first and then instruct them to go in the same
direction as a group. The tax rate was not so high in Japan in the past. However, as the birthrate declines
and the population ages, the country is shifting to higher taxes due to the scarcity of financial resources
for health and social welfare.
AttaliThere are 1.9 children per family on average in
France. It is 1.4 in Japan. Also, most women in Europe work. People typically do not work for the same
company until they retire—in several European countries, they change their jobs every three to five years.
People spend their entire lives being educated and trained, and improving their abilities. Just like
football, the team is important, but so is fully mobilizing each player’s abilities and potential.
Individual abilities can improve further by transferring to another team and expanding playing
opportunities. This is the same for workers. Society is also responsible for discovering things individuals
are good at and the skills they should improve throughout their lives. This is the idea that a flexible
society pays a salary and provides training opportunities at the same time. Individuals improving themselves
throughout their lives will eventually enrich society.
YanaiAs you mentioned, more and more people are thinking
that the role of lifetime employment may have come to an end. There is no denying that there is a chance for
an individual to develop their abilities by changing their job. However, I believe that lifetime employment,
not as a system but as a result, is good for both the company and the individual. If a company becomes a
group of individuals who repeatedly change their jobs, it is difficult to develop collective or tacit
knowledge. When it comes to working and creating something, I believe that deepening relationships and
communication with co-workers will develop individual skills and support the company. Even a talented
individual may not always perform well immediately. If you change companies, there will inevitably be some
tasks you need to learn from scratch, no matter how good you are. We may be able to fully utilize our
potential when our objectives and those of the company are aligned and work with a long-term view. Just like
a team play in football, I believe it is ideal when everyone works in the same direction as their manager
and aims for their goal. The idea of lifetime employment might be hard for people from Europe to understand,
though.
Attali I think some Europeans agree with your idea, Mr.
Yanai. On the other hand, there must be more and more Japanese people who want to be free from the system of
lifetime employment and work more freely—though it is dangerous to put the desire for freedom above
everything else. However, I think it has become a global consensus that individuals are free to choose how
and where they work. By the way, there is a question I want to ask. Do you think there can be such a thing
as a “lifetime consumer”?
Yanai I believe that we must aim to operate as a company
that creates lifelong consumers as a result of our actions. Of course, consumers are free to choose.
Regarding lifetime employment, I don't think it is unconditionally a good system, obviously. Lifetime
employment that has lost its substance is rather harmful. Individuals are free. Companies are free. These
are undeniable principles. However, I also believe we should aim for a corporate entity that utilizes the
accumulated collective knowledge of an employee. There is a power lifetime employment exerts in this sense.
The operations of a company cannot be successful with the power of a single individual. By the way, I had
the chance to speak with some people from France recently, and I found out that more of them are working
with a lot of enthusiasm in Japan these days.
Attali I think it is because they know the value of going
out from their country and gaining a unique experience. It would be nice if more Japanese people would come
and work in France.
Yanai Individuals live freely and work globally,
participating in local communities and contributing to society. This may be a first step to realize a world
without wars or conflicts. In that sense, the roles and responsibilities of companies are even
greater.
Attali It would be wonderful if we have another
opportunity to discuss the future of companies or the apparel space in the 21st century from a long-term
perspective. I’d love to see you again and talk to you.
