Mariana Mazzucato: Government -- investor, risk-taker, innovator

Prevoditelj: Igor Pureta Recezent: Jelena Maric

Have you ever asked yourselves why it is that

Jeste li se ikad zapitali

companies, the really cool companies,

zašto poduzeća, stvarno cool poduzeća,

the innovative ones, the creative,

inovativna, kreativna,

new economy-type companies --

poduzeća novog tipa ekonomije --

Apple, Google, Facebook --

Apple, Google, Facebook --

are coming out of one particular country,

sva dolaze iz jedne specifične države,

the United States of America?

Sjedinjenih Američkih Država?

Usually when I say this, someone says, "Spotify!

Obično kad to kažem, netko kaže: "Spotify!

That's Europe." But, yeah.

Oni su iz Europe!" Jesu, ali...

It has not had the impact that these other companies have had.

nemaju utjecaj kakav imaju ova ostala poduzeća.

Now what I do is I'm an economist,

Ja sam ekonomistica

and I actually study the relationship

i proučavam odnos

between innovation and economic growth

između inovacija i ekonomskog rasta

at the level of the company, the industry and the nation,

na razini poduzeća, industrije i države.

and I work with policymakers worldwide,

Radim s kreatorima politika širom svijeta,

especially in the European Commission,

posebno s Europskom komisijom,

but recently also in interesting places like China,

a odnedavno i sa zanimljivim mjestima poput Kine.

and I can tell you that that question

Mogu reći da im je svima

is on the tip of all of their tongues:

isto pitanje na vrhu jezika:

Where are the European Googles?

Gdje su europski Googlevi?

What is the secret behind the Silicon Valley growth model,

Koja je tajna rasta modela Silicijske doline,

which they understand is different

za koju smatraju da je drugačija

from this old economy growth model?

od starog modela ekonomskog rasta?

And what is interesting is that often,

Zanimljivo je da mi često,

even if we're in the 21st century,

čak i sada u 21. stoljeću,

we kind of come down in the end to these ideas

završimo na idejama poput

of market versus state.

tržište protiv države.

It's talked about in these modern ways,

O tome se razgovara na suvremene načine,

but the idea is that somehow, behind places like Silicon Valley,

ali ideja je da, nekako, iza mjesta poput Silicijske doline,

the secret have been different types of market-making mechanisms,

stoje tajnovite, drugačije vrste marketinških mehanizama,

the private initiative, whether this be about

privatne inicijative, bile one

a dynamic venture capital sector

dinamičan sektor ulagatelja kapitala,

that's actually able to provide that high-risk finance

koji je sposoban financirati takve visoke rizike

to these innovative companies,

ili inovativna poduzeća,

the gazelles as we often call them,

gazele, kako ih često zovemo,

which traditional banks are scared of,

kojih se tradicionalne banke boje,

or different types of really successful

ili različiti načini

commercialization policies which actually allow these companies

prikupljanja sredstava koji omogućavaju tim poduzećima

to bring these great inventions, their products,

da predstave te velike izume, njihove proizvode

to the market and actually get over this

tržištu i prevladaju

really scary Death Valley period

zastrašujuće razdoblje

in which many companies instead fail.

u kojem mnoga poduzeća propadaju.

But what really interests me, especially nowadays

Ono što me posebno zanima ovih dana,

and because of what's happening politically around the world,

zbog onog što se u politici dešava širom svijeta,

is the language that's used, the narrative,

je priča koja se plete, rječnik koji se koristi, nameće,

the discourse, the images, the actual words.

slike koje se stvaraju, stvarne riječi.

So we often are presented

Često nam se predstavlja riječima

with the kind of words like that the private sector

koje oslikavaju da je privatni sektor

is also much more innovative because it's able to

puno inovativniji jer je sposoban

think out of the box.

razmišljati kreativno.

They are more dynamic.

Dinamičniji su.

Think of Steve Jobs' really inspirational speech

Sjetite se zaista inspirativnog govora Stevea Jobsa

to the 2005 graduating class at Stanford,

diplomcima Sveučilišta Stanford 2005.

where he said to be innovative,

kada je rekao da moramo biti gladni

you've got to stay hungry, stay foolish.

i ostati zaigrani da bismo bili inovativni.

Right? So these guys are kind of the hungry

Dakle ovi tipovi su kao gladni,

and foolish and colorful guys, right?

zaigrani i simpatični, zar ne?

And in places like Europe,

I na mjestima kao što je Europa,

it might be more equitable,

gdje smo više nepristrani,

we might even be a bit better dressed

možda smo i bolje odjeveni

and eat better than the U.S.,

i jedemo bolje nego u SAD-u,

but the problem is this damn public sector.

jedini je problem taj prokleti javni sektor.

It's a bit too big, and it hasn't actually allowed

Malo je prevelik i nije dozvolio

these things like dynamic venture capital

takve stvari poput dinamičnog ulaganja kapitala

and commercialization to actually be able to really

i komercijalizacije kako bi bili

be as fruitful as it could.

još profitabilniji.

And even really respectable newspapers,

Pa čak i vrlo cijenjene novine,

some that I'm actually subscribed to,

na neke od njih sam i pretplaćena,

the words they use are, you know,

riječi koje koriste, znate,

the state as this Leviathan. Right?

država je kao Levijatan.

This monster with big tentacles.

To čudovište s velikim ticalima.

They're very explicit in these editorials.

Vrlo su izražajni u svojim uvodnicima.

They say, "You know, the state, it's necessary

Kažu: "Znate, država je nužna

to fix these little market failures

da popravi greške tržišta

when you have public goods

ili kad postoji javno dobro

or different types of negative externalities like pollution,

ili različiti tipovi negativnih utjecaja poput zagađenja,

but you know what, what is the next big revolution

ali znate što, koja će sljedeća velika revolucija

going to be after the Internet?

doći nakon interneta?

We all hope it might be something green,

Svi se nadamo da bi to moglo biti nešto zeleno,

or all of this nanotech stuff, and in order for that stuff to happen," they say --

ili sva ta nanotehnološka čuda. Da bi se tako nešto dogodilo, oni kažu --

this was a special issue on the next industrial revolution --

ovo je bilo posebno izdanje u vezi sa sljedećom industrijskom revolucijom --

they say, "the state, just stick to the basics, right?

oni dodaju, "država neka se drži osnova, dobro?"

Fund the infrastructure. Fund the schools.

Financirajte infrastrukturu. Škole.

Even fund the basic research, because this is

Financirajte temeljna istraživanja

popularly recognized, in fact, as a big public good

jer je to široko prihvaćeno. Zapravo, kao veliko javno dobro

which private companies don't want to invest in,

koje privatna poduzeća ne žele investirati,

do that, but you know what?

vi se bavite time, ali znate što?

Leave the rest to the revolutionaries."

Prepustite ostalo revolucionarima."

Those colorful, out-of-the-box kind of thinkers.

Ti raznobojni, inovativni mislioci,

They're often called garage tinkerers,

često ih nazivamo izumiteljima iz garaže,

because some of them actually did some things in garages,

jer su neki od njih nešto i napravili u garaži,

even though that's partly a myth.

iako je većina toga mit.

And so what I want to do with you in, oh God,

Ono što zaista želim napraviti s vama,

only 10 minutes,

o Bože, još samo deset minuta,

is to really think again this juxtaposition,

da još jednom razmislite o toj situaciji,

because it actually has massive, massive implications

jer ona ima vrlo značajne posljedice

beyond innovation policy,

veće od politike inovacija,

which just happens to be the area

što je područje

that I often talk with with policymakers.

o kojem često razgovaram s političarima.

It has huge implications, even with this whole notion

Ima značajne posljedice, čak i uz čitavu tu ideju

that we have on where, when and why

koju imamo o tome gdje, kada i zašto

we should actually be cutting back on public spending

bismo trebali smanjiti javnu potrošnju

and different types of public services which,

i različite oblike javnih usluga

of course, as we know, are increasingly being

koje su, kao što znamo, sve više

outsourced because of this juxtaposition.

izdvojene zbog takvog pogleda na situaciju.

Right? I mean, the reason that we need to maybe have free schools or charter schools

Razlog zbog kojeg trebamo besplatno školstvo, škole koje financira država

is in order to make them more innovative without being emburdened

jest da ljudi budu inovativniji, a ne opterećeni

by this heavy hand of the state curriculum, or something.

teškom rukom kurikuluma ili nečeg sličnog.

So these kind of words are constantly,

Takvo korištenje riječi se ponavlja,

these juxtapositions come up everywhere,

takvi pogledi na situaciju su svugdje,

not just with innovation policy.

ne samo u vezi inovacija.

And so to think again,

Kako bismo to promislili još jednom,

there's no reason that you should believe me,

a nema razloga da mi vjerujete,

so just think of some of the smartest

razmislite o nekima od najpametnijih,

revolutionary things that you have in your pockets

revolucionarnih stvari koje imate u džepovima

and do not turn it on, but you might want to take it out, your iPhone.

i ne, nemojte ih uključivati, iako ih želite uzeti u ruku, vaš iPhone.

Ask who actually funded the really cool,

Zapitajte se tko je financirao stvarno fora,

revolutionary thinking-out-of-the-box

revolucionarne, izvan okvira,

things in the iPhone.

dijelove u iPhoneu.

What actually makes your phone

One koji vaš telefon čine pametnim,

a smartphone, basically, instead of a stupid phone?

za razliku od glupog?

So the Internet, which you can surf the web

Internet, koji omogućava kretanje mrežom

anywhere you are in the world;

bilo gdje u svijetu;

GPS, where you can actually know where you are

GPS, uz pomoć kojeg znate gdje ste

anywhere in the world;

bilo gdje u svijetu;

the touchscreen display, which makes it also

ekran na dodir, koji omogućava

a really easy-to-use phone for anybody.

da svi lako koristimo telefon.

These are the very smart, revolutionary bits about the iPhone,

To su pametni, revolucionarni dijelovi iPhonea

and they're all government-funded.

i sve ih je financirala vlada.

And the point is that the Internet

Stvar je da je internet financirala

was funded by DARPA, U.S. Department of Defense.

DARPA, Američko ministarstvo obrane.

GPS was funded by the military's Navstar program.

GPS je financirao vojni Navstar program.

Even Siri was actually funded by DARPA.

Čak i Siri je financirala DARPA.

The touchscreen display was funded

Ekran na dodir su financirale

by two public grants by the CIA and the NSF

CIA i NSF s dvije potpore

to two public university researchers at the University of Delaware.

dvama istraživačima na javnom sveučilištu Delaware.

Now, you might be thinking, "Well, she's just said

Vi sad možete pomisliti: "Upravo je puno puta rekla

the word 'defense' and 'military' an awful lot,"

riječi "obrana" i "vojska".

but what's really interesting is that this is actually true

Ono što je zaista zanimljivo,

to je istina za mnoge sektore, industrije i odjele.

in sector after sector and department after department.

So the pharmaceutical industry, which I am personally

Farmaceutska industrija, za koju sam osobno

very interested in because I've actually had the fortune

vrlo zainteresirana jer sam imala sreću

to study it in quite some depth,

jako je dobro proučavati,

is wonderful to be asking this question

je odličan primjer za pitanje

about the revolutionary versus non-revolutionary bits,

o revolucionarnim i nerevolucionarnim pomacima

because each and every medicine can actually be

jer svaki lijek može biti promatran

divided up on whether it really is revolutionary or incremental.

ovisno o tome je li revolucionaran ili je donio samo malu promjenu.

So the new molecular entities with priority rating

Novi molekularni spojevi s vrhunskom ocjenom

are the revolutionary new drugs,

su revolucionarni novi lijekovi,

whereas the slight variations of existing drugs --

a male varijacije postojećih lijekova --

Viagra, different color, different dosage --

Viagra, različita boja, različita količina --

are the less revolutionary ones.

su malo manje revolucionarni.

And it turns out that a full 75 percent

A važno je znati da se čitavih 75 posto

of the new molecular entities with priority rating

novih molekularnih spojeva s vrhunskom ocjenom

are actually funded in boring, Kafka-ian public sector labs.

stvaraju u dosadnim, kafkijanskim laboratorijima javnog sektora.

This doesn't mean that Big Pharma is not spending on innovation.

To ne znači da velika farmaceutska poduzeća ne troše na inovacije.

They do. They spend on the marketing part.

Troše. Oni troše za njihovo reklamiranje.

They spend on the D part of R&D.

Oni troše na dio "razvoj" u "istraživanje i razvoj",

They spend an awful lot on buying back their stock,

troše jako puno na otkup vlastitih dionica,

which is quite problematic.

što je prilično problematično.

In fact, companies like Pfizer and Amgen recently

Poduzeća poput Pfizera i Amgena su nedavno

have spent more money in buying back their shares

potrošile više novca na otkup vlastitih dionica

to boost their stock price than on R&D,

kako bi im podigle cijenu nego na istraživanje i razvoj.

but that's a whole different TED Talk which one day

To je jedan poseban TED govor

koji ću vam jednog dana rado održati.

I'd be fascinated to tell you about.

Now, what's interesting in all of this

Zanimljivo je da je u svemu tome država,

is the state, in all these examples,

u svim ovim primjerima,

was doing so much more than just fixing market failures.

radila puno više od samog popravljanja tržišta.

It was actually shaping and creating markets.

Ona ga je oblikovala i kreirala.

It was funding not only the basic research,

Ona je financirala ne samo temeljna istraživanja

which again is a typical public good,

koja su tipično javno dobro,

but even the applied research.

nego i primjenjena istraživanja.

It was even, God forbid, being a venture capitalist.

Ona je čak, Bože sačuvaj, i ulagač kapitala.

So these SBIR and SDTR programs,

Ovi SBIR i SDTR programi,

which give small companies early-stage finance

kojima se financiraju mala poduzeća u ranim fazama razvoja,

have not only been extremely important

su ne samo izuzetno važni

compared to private venture capital,

u usporedbi s privatnim ulagačkim kapitalom,

but also have become increasingly important.

nego su postali još važniji.

Why? Because, as many of us know,

Zašto? Zato što, kao što mnogi od vas znaju,

V.C. is actually quite short-term.

privatni ulagači razmišljaju kratkoročno.

They want their returns in three to five years.

Oni žele povrat ulaganja unutar tri do pet godina.

Innovation takes a much longer time than that,

Inovacije traju puno duže od toga,

15 to 20 years.

15 do 20 godina.

And so this whole notion -- I mean, this is the point, right?

Cijeli taj pojam - u tome je stvar, zar ne?

Who's actually funding the hard stuff?

Tko financira zahtjevne projekte?

Of course, it's not just the state.

Naravno, to nije samo država.

The private sector does a lot.

Privatni sektor radi mnogo.

But the narrative that we've always been told

Ali način na koji nam se to predstavlja

is the state is important for the basics,

je da je država važna za temeljna istraživanja

but not really providing that sort of high-risk,

i nije uključena u visoko rizično

revolutionary thinking out of the box.

revolucionarno razmišljanje izvan okvira.

In all these sectors, from funding the Internet

U svim tim sektorima, od financiranja interneta,

to doing the spending, but also the envisioning,

davanja novaca, ali i osmišljavanja

the strategic vision, for these investments,

strateške vizije za ta istraživanja,

it was actually coming within the state.

financiranje je radila država.

The nanotechnology sector is actually fascinating

Nanotehnološki sektor je fascinantni primjer

to study this, because the word itself, nanotechnology,

za to, jer sama riječ, nanotehnologija

came from within government.

je stigla iz Vlade.

And so there's huge implications of this.

To ima velike posljedice.

First of all, of course I'm not someone,

Prije svega, ja nisam neka

this old-fashioned person, market versus state.

staromodna osoba koja zagovara različitost tržišta i države.

What we all know in dynamic capitalism

Ono što svi znamo u dinamičnom kapitalizmu

is that what we actually need are public-private partnerships.

je da trebamo javno privatna partnerstva.

But the point is, by constantly depicting

No, zato što opisujemo

the state part as necessary

državni dio kao nužan,

but actually -- pffff -- a bit boring

ali zapravo -- pomalo dosadno

and often a bit dangerous kind of Leviathan,

i često opasno čudovište Levijatana,

I think we've actually really stunted the possibility

mi sprečavamo mogućnost

to build these public-private partnerships

stvaranja javno-privatnog partnerstva

in a really dynamic way.

na zaista dinamičan način.

Even the words that we often use to justify the "P" part,

Čak i riječi koje često koristimo za opravdanje javnog dijela

the public part -- well, they're both P's --

with public-private partnerships

u javno-privatnim partnerstvima

is in terms of de-risking.

služe za smanjenje rizika.

What the public sector did in all these examples

Ono što je javni sektor učinio u svim tim primjerima

I just gave you, and there's many more,

koje sam upravo opisala, a primjera ima puno više,

which myself and other colleagues have been looking at,

a moje kolege i ja ih proučavamo,

is doing much more than de-risking.

oni služe za puno važnije svrhe od smanjenja rizika.

It's kind of been taking on that risk. Bring it on.

Više je to preuzimanje rizika. Suočimo se s njim.

It's actually been the one thinking out of the box.

To je stvarno razmišljanje izvan okvira.

But also, I'm sure you all have had experience

Sigurna sam da imate iskustva

with local, regional, national governments,

s lokalnom, regionalnom i državnom upravom

and you're kind of like, "You know what, that Kafka-ian bureaucrat, I've met him."

i mislite kao: "Znaš, taj kafkijanski birokrat kojeg sam srela."

That whole juxtaposition thing, it's kind of there.

Takva usporedba nam se nameće

Well, there's a self-fulfilling prophecy.

pa postoji samoispunjavajuće proročanstvo.

By talking about the state as kind of irrelevant,

Govoreći da je država nevažna,

boring, it's sometimes

dosadna, mi ponekad

that we actually create those organizations in that way.

oblikujemo javnu upravu takvom.

So what we have to actually do is build

Ono što trebamo raditi je graditi

these entrepreneurial state organizations.

te poduzetničke državne organizacije.

DARPA, that funded the Internet and Siri,

DARPA koja je financirala internet i Siri,

actually thought really hard about this,

naporno je razmišljala o tome

how to welcome failure, because you will fail.

kako se nositi s greškama jer greške će se dogoditi.

You will fail when you innovative.

Griješite kad ste inovativni.

One out of 10 experiments has any success.

Jedan od 10 pokusa ima nekog uspjeha.

And the V.C. guys know this,

I ulagači kapitala to znaju,

and they're able to actually fund the other losses

i sposobni su financirati sve te gubitke

from that one success.

iz tog jednog uspjeha.

And this brings me, actually, probably,

I to me dovodi

to the biggest implication,

do najveće posljedice

and this has huge implications beyond innovation.

koja nadmašuje inovaciju.

If the state is more than just a market fixer,

Ako je država nešto više od čuvara tržišnih odnosa,

if it actually is a market shaper,

ako, zapravo, oblikuje tržište,

and in doing that has had to take on this massive risk,

i radeći to mora preuzeti taj ogroman rizik,

what happened to the reward?

gdje je nestala nagrada?

We all know, if you've ever taken a finance course,

Svi znamo, ako ste ikad bili na financijskom tečaju,

the first thing you're taught is sort of the risk-reward relationship,

prva stvar koju vas nauče je povezanost rizika i nagrade.

and so some people are foolish enough

Neki su ljudi dovoljno ludi

or probably smart enough if they have time to wait,

ili možda dovoljno pametni pa imaju vremena čekati

to actually invest in stocks, because they're higher risk

pa investiraju u dionice koje imaju veći rizik

which over time will make a greater reward than bonds,

koji će s vremenom donijeti veću nagradu od obveznica,

that whole risk-reward thing.

to je čitava priča o nagradi za preuzimanje rizika.

Well, where's the reward for the state

Pa gdje je onda nagrada za državu

of having taken on these massive risks

koja je preuzela taj ogroman rizik

and actually been foolish enough to have done the Internet?

i bila dovoljno luda da osmisli internet?

The Internet was crazy.

Internet je bio ludost.

It really was. I mean, the probability of failure was massive.

Zaista! Mogućnost propasti je bila ogromna.

You had to be completely nuts to do it,

Trebali ste biti potpuno ludi da krenete u to,

and luckily, they were.

a srećom su i bili..

Now, we don't even get to this question about rewards

Mi niti ne dođemo do pitanja nagrađivanja,

unless you actually depict the state as this risk-taker.

osim ako državu ne opišete kao nekog tko preuzima rizik.

And the problem is that economists often think,

Problem je što ekonomisti često misle

well, there is a reward back to the state. It's tax.

da postoji nagrada za državu i ona je u obliku poreza.

You know, the companies will pay tax,

Znate, poduzeća će platiti porez,

the jobs they create will create growth

radna mjesta koje će stvoriti će kreirati rast

so people who get those jobs and their incomes rise

pa će ljudi koji će početi raditi i kojima će narasti plaća

will come back to the state through the tax mechanism.

će uplaćivati natrag državi kroz porezni mehanizam.

Well, unfortunately, that's not true.

Nažalost, to je laž.

Okay, it's not true because many of the jobs that are created go abroad.

Laž je, jer se mnoga radna mjesta otvaraju u inozemstvu.

Globalization, and that's fine. We shouldn't be nationalistic.

Globalizacija je pa je to u redu. Ne bismo smjeli biti nacionalisti.

Let the jobs go where they have to go, perhaps.

Pretpostavljam da radna mjesta treba pustiti da idu kud hoće.

I mean, one can take a position on that.

Mislim, o tome možete zauzeti stav,

But also these companies

ali ta poduzeća

that have actually had this massive benefit from the state --

koja su imala ogromnu korist od države --

Apple's a great example.

Apple je odličan primjer.

They even got the first -- well, not the first,

Dobili su prvu -- ne baš prvu,

but 500,000 dollars actually went to Apple, the company,

ali 500.000 dolara je dobilo poduzeće Apple

through this SBIC program,

kroz SBIC program,

which predated the SBIR program,

koji je prethodio SBIR programu

as well as, as I said before, all the technologies behind the iPhone.

za sve tehnologije potrebne za iPhone.

And yet we know they legally,

A mi znamo da oni legalno,

as many other companies, pay very little tax back.

kao i mnoga druga poduzeća, plaćaju vrlo malo poreza.

So what we really need to actually rethink

Stoga trebamo razmisliti treba li nam možda

is should there perhaps be a return-generating mechanism

mehanizam povrata novca

that's much more direct than tax. Why not?

koji je puno izravniji od poreza. Zašto ne?

It could happen perhaps through equity.

To može biti udio u vlasništvu.

This, by the way, in the countries

To u zemljama koje o tome strateški promišljaju,

that are actually thinking about this strategically,

countries like Finland in Scandinavia,

zemljama poput Finske u Skandinaviji,

but also in China and Brazil,

ali i Kini i Brazilu,

they're retaining equity in these investments.

one zadržavaju vlasništvo u tim investicijama.

Sitra funded Nokia, kept equity, made a lot of money,

Sitra je financirala Nokiu,

zadržala udio u vlasništvu, zaradila puno novca,

it's a public funding agency in Finland,

to je javna agencije za financiranje,

koja je onda financirala novu generaciju Nokija.

which then funded the next round of Nokias.

The Brazilian Development Bank,

Brazilska razvojna banka,

which is providing huge amounts of funds today

koja danas daje na raspolaganje velika sredstva

to clean technology, they just announced

za čistu tehnologiju, upravo je najavila

a $56 billion program for the future on this,

program vrijedan $56 milijardi u tu svrhu

is retaining equity in these investments.

i zadržat će udio u vlasništvu u tim investicijama.

So to put it provocatively,

Da to postavim provokativno,

had the U.S. government thought about this,

je li Vlada SAD-a mislila o tome

and maybe just brought back

da vrati dio novca

just something called an innovation fund,

kroz neki inovacijski fond?

you can bet that, you know, if even just .05 percent

Možemo se kladiti da bi samo 0,05% profita

of the profits from what the Internet produced

od onoga što je proizvedeno zahvaljujući internetu

had come back to that innovation fund,

koje bi se vratilo u taj inovacijski fond,

there would be so much more money

iznosilo toliko puno novca

to spend today on green technology.

kojeg bi mogli potrošiti na zelenu tehnologiju,

Instead, many of the state budgets

umjesto da to financiramo iz državnog proračuna

which in theory are trying to do that

koji u teoriji pokušava to učiniti

are being constrained.

unutar svojih ograničenja.

But perhaps even more important,

I nešto, možda, još važnije,

we heard before about the one percent,

čuli smo prije za taj jedan posto

the 99 percent.

i 99 posto.

If the state is thought about in this more strategic way,

Da je država o tome mislila na strateški način

as one of the lead players in the value creation mechanism,

kao jedan od ključnih igrača

u mehanizmu stvaranja vrijednosti,

because that's what we're talking about, right?

jer o tome se zapravo radi, zar ne?

Who are the different players in creating value

Tko su različiti igrači u stvaranju vrijednosti

in the economy, and is the state's role,

u nekoj ekonomiji i je li uloga države

has it been sort of dismissed as being a backseat player?

postavljena da ona bude rezervni igrač?

If we can actually have a broader theory

Ako imamo širu teoriju kreiranja vrijednosti

of value creation and allow us to actually admit

i dozvolimo si priznati što država radi

what the state has been doing and reap something back,

i da bi trebala od toga nešto dobiti,

it might just be that in the next round,

možda ćemo u sljedećem krugu,

and I hope that we all hope that the next big revolution

i nadam se da se svi nadamo da će sljedeća velika revolucija

will in fact be green,

biti zelena,

that that period of growth

da će to razdoblje rasta

will not only be smart, innovation-led,

biti ne samo pametno, vođeno inovacijama,

not only green, but also more inclusive,

ili zeleno, već i uključujuće,

so that the public schools in places like Silicon Valley

tako da će škole u mjestima kao što je Silicijska dolina

can actually also benefit from that growth,

imati pogodnosti od tog rasta,

because they have not.

jer sad nemaju.

Thank you.

Hvala vam.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)