Christof Niederwieser (2015) - One of the most discussed prognosis models of modern futures studies is the Kondratiev Cycle. It postulates a regular pattern of upswings and downswings in the economy, ranging over 50 to 60 years. This cycle is based on collective paradigm shifts, caused by the emergence of new technologies that revolutionize both the economy and society at large.
[...] To this day the Kondratiev model has remained popular. It’s one of the very rare macroeconomic theories that allow concrete long-term forecasts. And it vividly explains the major growth drivers of the last 200 years. There are different opinions about details like the exact time when the cycles start or end or the exact names of the leitmotifs. But many researchers agree that there is something behind these cycles. Nevertheless there are some critical points, especially methodological ones.
Thus, there is still controversy as to whether or not the wave pattern really shows up in empirical data. Statistics from different decades and countries are not directly comparable. They have to be smoothed out first. Methods of data aggregation change over the years. Different countries use different formulas to calculate indicators. The definition of industry sectors and market baskets are modified in the course of time. Nominal data have to be adjusted according to inflation rate or currency changes. The methods of data processing thereby significantly determine the final shape of the curve. And depending on the method used, the Kondratiev Wave may or may not be revealed.
Kondratiev’s followers elegantly evade this problem. When presenting a graphical chart of the cycle, they usually put the decades on the x-axis. But the y-axis remains unlabelled. Carlota Perez, Professor of Technology and Socio-economic Development, is one of the most renowned contemporary Kondratiev experts. She admits that “Indeed, the Long Waves actually cannot be verified at the macro-economic level. But if we look at the level of innovations and also include social aspects, the Long Waves are clearly visible – even if these changes don’t necessarily reflect in macro-economic data like the GDP or large waves overlap.”
[...] let’s scan astrology for a long wave planetary cycle that indicates the following pattern: new core technologies trigger a radical transformation of the economy and society, a revolution of power systems and thinking models, a profound collective paradigm shift. This pattern is typical for the Uranus-Pluto Cycle: New ideas and technical innovations (Uranus) disrupt established power systems and ideologies (Pluto) and become the new leitmotif for the masses (Pluto).
[...] The Astro-Kondratiev not only explains the major technical and social developments of the past centuries. It also allows for a concrete look into the future. What will come next after the Information Cycle has reached its climax? What socio-political implications can be expected in the forthcoming years? What current technical innovations might become the core technology of the Fifth Astro-Kondratiev that will start in the 2040s? In what larger pattern is the Astro-Kondratiev embedded and how can its morphology be described in more detail? These questions are highly significant for areas such as politics, corporate governance, strategic planning, innovation management and investments.
[...] To this day the Kondratiev model has remained popular. It’s one of the very rare macroeconomic theories that allow concrete long-term forecasts. And it vividly explains the major growth drivers of the last 200 years. There are different opinions about details like the exact time when the cycles start or end or the exact names of the leitmotifs. But many researchers agree that there is something behind these cycles. Nevertheless there are some critical points, especially methodological ones.
Thus, there is still controversy as to whether or not the wave pattern really shows up in empirical data. Statistics from different decades and countries are not directly comparable. They have to be smoothed out first. Methods of data aggregation change over the years. Different countries use different formulas to calculate indicators. The definition of industry sectors and market baskets are modified in the course of time. Nominal data have to be adjusted according to inflation rate or currency changes. The methods of data processing thereby significantly determine the final shape of the curve. And depending on the method used, the Kondratiev Wave may or may not be revealed.
Kondratiev’s followers elegantly evade this problem. When presenting a graphical chart of the cycle, they usually put the decades on the x-axis. But the y-axis remains unlabelled. Carlota Perez, Professor of Technology and Socio-economic Development, is one of the most renowned contemporary Kondratiev experts. She admits that “Indeed, the Long Waves actually cannot be verified at the macro-economic level. But if we look at the level of innovations and also include social aspects, the Long Waves are clearly visible – even if these changes don’t necessarily reflect in macro-economic data like the GDP or large waves overlap.”
[...] let’s scan astrology for a long wave planetary cycle that indicates the following pattern: new core technologies trigger a radical transformation of the economy and society, a revolution of power systems and thinking models, a profound collective paradigm shift. This pattern is typical for the Uranus-Pluto Cycle: New ideas and technical innovations (Uranus) disrupt established power systems and ideologies (Pluto) and become the new leitmotif for the masses (Pluto).
[...] The Astro-Kondratiev not only explains the major technical and social developments of the past centuries. It also allows for a concrete look into the future. What will come next after the Information Cycle has reached its climax? What socio-political implications can be expected in the forthcoming years? What current technical innovations might become the core technology of the Fifth Astro-Kondratiev that will start in the 2040s? In what larger pattern is the Astro-Kondratiev embedded and how can its morphology be described in more detail? These questions are highly significant for areas such as politics, corporate governance, strategic planning, innovation management and investments.