EDUCATIVO | Aprende algo nuevo todos los días

Inspírate, crea nuevos proyectos y expande tu conocimiento en http://www.newmedia.ufm.edu

Organizado por:

Centro Henry Hazlitt

https://chh.ufm.edu/

Facebook @UFM.CHH

Una producción de UFM Studios

http://newmedia.ufm.edu

Inspírate, crea nuevos proyectos y expande tu conocimiento en http://www.newmedia.ufm.edu

Organizado por:

Centro Henry Hazlitt

https://chh.ufm.edu/

Facebook @UFM.CHH

Una producción de UFM Studios

http://newmedia.ufm.edu

Economist Rosolino Candela analyzes in the conference The Fallacy of Socialist Calculation the implications of artificial intelligence for the debate on economic calculation under socialism. The presentation, delivered in the academic context of Universidad Francisco Marroquín, revisits a twentieth-century economic discussion among authors such as Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Oskar Lange, and Abba Lerner, and raises its relevance in light of new computational technologies. The central point of the conference is to determine whether an increasing capacity to process data can solve the problem that Mises and Hayek identified in economic planning: how to allocate scarce resources to their most valued uses when the knowledge needed to make those decisions is not previously available.

Candela begins by recalling a statement by socialist economist Robert Heilbroner, who acknowledged that Mises had been correct in arguing that a centrally planned economy could not allocate resources to their most valued uses without private property and market prices. The speaker points out that the rise of computational technology and artificial intelligence has revived this discussion. One contemporary idea he examines is the possibility that, through access to large amounts of data, technology could make it possible to find what has traditionally been called the “invisible hand” of the market. However, Candela argues that this interpretation confuses two different problems: processing information that already exists and discovering knowledge that only emerges under specific economic circumstances.

The distinction between data and knowledge is one of the central themes of the presentation. For Candela, the information needed to solve the problem of economic calculation does not simply consist of stored data that a computer can collect and process. It is contextual knowledge, related to specific circumstances of time, place, and competition, which can only emerge through the interactions of market participants. In this sense, increasing computational capacity does not necessarily produce the knowledge that a planner would need in order to decide how all available resources should be used.

“The calculation problem is one of discovering context-specific knowledge that even the individuals themselves don’t know independent of that process.” — Rosolino Candela

To explain Mises’s original argument, Candela clarifies that he did not claim socialism was impossible as a political system, nor that it was impossible to abolish private ownership of the means of production. His argument was more specific: without private ownership of the means of production, there can be no market for those means, and without that market, prices that reflect their relative scarcity cannot be formed. As a result, those responsible for economic decisions would lack a basis for rationally comparing the alternative uses of capital goods such as land, labor, and machinery. Therefore, the problem does not concern the existence of a particularly competent or well-intentioned planner, but rather the mechanisms necessary to generate the required information.

Candela illustrates this difficulty through the example of railroad construction. From a purely technological perspective, it might seem convenient to use platinum because of its durability; however, railroads are built with iron because resources must be compared according to their alternative uses and relative scarcity. The point of the example is to show that economic efficiency does not depend solely on knowing the physical properties of materials, but on having prices that make it possible to evaluate opportunity costs.

“We know that railroads are built with iron because they’re cheaper. But how do we know that? We know that because the price of iron is lower compared to platinum.” — Rosolino Candela

The conference connects the historical debate on socialist calculation with current discussions about artificial intelligence, planning, and the limits of centralized decision-making. Candela’s analysis suggests that the central question is not only whether machines can process information more efficiently, but whether they can replace the institutional conditions that allow dispersed knowledge to emerge through private property, prices, profit, loss, and competition.

Expand your knowledge and learn new skills in http://www.newmedia.ufm.edu

Organized by:

Centro Henry Hazlitt

https://chh.ufm.edu/

A production by UFM Studios

http://newmedia.ufm.edu

Follow us on social media

Facebook @ufmvideos

Twitter @newmediaufm

En esta conferencia organizada por el Centro Henry Hazlitt de la Universidad Francisco Marroquín, el economista Edgar Fernández Vidal explica cómo funciona la bolsa de valores y por qué el precio de una acción no responde a un cálculo objetivo, sino a la teoría subjetiva del valor formulada por Carl Menger. A partir de ejemplos cotidianos y de su propia experiencia, propone entender la inversión en la bolsa como un mecanismo de descubrimiento de precios sostenido por decisiones individuales de inversión a largo plazo.

“La bolsa, como hoy explicaré, no es una ruleta rusa o un casino”.— Edgar Fernández Vidal

El conferencista inicia definiendo una acción como una representación de derechos económicos y políticos sobre la propiedad de una empresa. Explica que ser accionista de una compañía como Apple significa poseer una fracción de sus beneficios futuros y el derecho a participar en sus decisiones a través de la junta de accionistas.

Posteriormente, Fernández introduce el aporte central de Carl Menger a la economía: la revolución marginalista, que sustituyó la teoría del valor-trabajo de Adam Smith, David Ricardo y Karl Marx por la idea de que el valor de un bien depende de las necesidades subjetivas de quien lo demanda. Ilustra este principio con el clásico ejemplo de la botella de agua, cuyo precio cambia drásticamente según el contexto, y lo traslada al mundo bursátil para argumentar que el valor de una empresa cotizada también es subjetivo, ya que depende de las expectativas de cada inversionista sobre sus beneficios futuros.

A partir de esta premisa, el ponente distingue entre mercados de commodities, donde los bienes son homogéneos y el precio lo fija el costo marginal del último productor, y mercados de nicho, donde la diferenciación, como el prestigio de marcas como Rolex o Apple, permite a las empresas cobrar precios muy por encima de su costo de producción. Sin embargo, señala que ese prestigio no es permanente, citando el ejemplo de Apple, cuyo crecimiento se ha estancado porque las nuevas generaciones ya no perciben el mismo valor simbólico en sus productos, a diferencia de Rolex, que mantiene su exclusividad mediante listas de espera y producción limitada.

Fernández también comparte un caso concreto de su cartera personal, la cadena de restaurantes Tortilla Mexican Grill, para mostrar cómo identificar oportunidades de inversión que el mercado subestima por mirar solo el corto plazo. Explica el concepto de reversión a la media, según el cual las industrias que generan altos beneficios atraen competencia que erosiona esos márgenes, mientras que las empresas que atraviesan dificultades temporales pueden representar oportunidades si dichas dificultades no son estructurales.

“Los inversores buenos miramos lo que va a pasar después y no solemos invertir en empresas que lo están haciendo bien”. — Edgar Fernández Vidal

Finalmente, el conferencista advierte sobre los sesgos psicológicos que afectan a la mayoría de los inversionistas, quienes, según él, reaccionan emocionalmente ante las caídas y subidas del mercado en lugar de evaluar el valor real a largo plazo de una compañía. Cierra su intervención subrayando que comprender el pensamiento de economistas como Menger y Hayek es esencial para tomar decisiones racionales de inversión y para apreciar el funcionamiento genuino del sistema de mercado.

Si te interesa seguir explorando temas relacionados con la economía, el libre mercado y la bolsa de valores, te invitamos a ver ¿Qué es la bolsa de valores? | Edgar Vidal.

Organizado por:

Centro Henry Hazlitt

https://chh.ufm.edu/

Facebook @UFM.CHH

Una producción de UFM Studios

http://newmedia.ufm.edu

In this compelling lecture organized by Centro Henry Hazlitt of the Universidad Francisco Marroquín, senior research fellow at the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER), Ryan M. Yonk, examines the philosophical foundations of modern environmentalism and challenges the widespread assumption that government intervention is the only effective way to protect nature. Yonk introduces free market environmentalism as an alternative framework, emphasizing property rights, voluntary cooperation, and entrepreneurship as mechanisms capable of promoting environmental conservation.

“Part of the reason why this topic resonates at least with me has to do with the places I grew up and the things that I care deeply about, but also because we often fail at trying to save the environment.”—Ryan M. Yonk

Yonk begins by exploring the origins of the modern environmental movement through the ideas of John Muir, whose efforts to preserve places such as Yosemite National Park profoundly influenced environmental policy in the United States. According to Yonk, Muir’s philosophy established the belief that protecting nature requires government authority to restrict human activity. While acknowledging Muir’s contribution to conservation, Yonk argues that this perspective has shaped environmental debates for more than a century by encouraging policymakers to rely primarily on regulation rather than considering alternative institutional arrangements.

The lecture then examines why Yonk describes environmentalism as resembling a religion. He argues that many environmental advocates approach policy with the conviction that there is only one morally acceptable solution, making government coercion appear justified whenever it advances environmental goals. Rather than criticizing environmental protection itself, Yonk questions the assumption that state intervention should always take precedence over other forms of social organization.

“There are ways to think about these things that don't just leave us where the government is our only option. It doesn't have to be a yes or no religious style question; it's not just do this or don't do it, there are lots of possibilities.”—Ryan M. Yonk

To broaden the discussion, Yonk presents four institutional approaches to solving environmental problems. The first is public law, based on government regulation. The second is private law, which requires those responsible for environmental damage to compensate those affected. The third relies on civil society, where social norms and persuasion encourage responsible behavior. Finally, he highlights market exchange, arguing that voluntary agreements and entrepreneurial innovation often generate solutions that balance environmental protection with economic development.

Throughout the lecture, Yonk supports his argument with practical examples, including wilderness conservation, mining disputes, and the successful reintroduction of wolves into Yellowstone National Park. He explains how conservation organizations compensated ranchers for livestock losses caused by wolves, reducing conflict through voluntary agreements instead of government mandates. For Yonk, this case demonstrates how incentives and entrepreneurship can produce durable environmental outcomes while respecting individual rights and encouraging cooperation among stakeholders.

Finally, Yonk encourages students to rethink environmental policy beyond the traditional debate of regulation versus inaction. He argues that societies can achieve meaningful environmental conservation while preserving liberty and individual responsibility.

To learn more about environmentalism, liberty, and human rights, explore additional lectures and resources available through New Media UFM.

Organized by:

Centro Henry Hazlitt

https://chh.ufm.edu/

A production by UFM Studios

http://newmedia.ufm.edu

Follow us on social media

Facebook @ufmvideos

Twitter @newmediaufm

En esta conferencia organizada por el Centro Henry Hazlitt de la Universidad Francisco Marroquín, el politólogo Eduardo Fernández abordó los dilemas éticos que plantea la inteligencia artificial, analizando cómo esta tecnología impacta la libertad y los derechos humanos. Desde una postura favorable al uso de la inteligencia artificial como herramienta de aprendizaje y trabajo, el ponente advierte sobre los dilemas éticos, como los riesgos de la vigilancia masiva y el reconocimiento facial.

Fernández ilustra los riesgos de los errores algorítmicos con el caso de Robert Julian-Borchak Williams, ciudadano de Detroit detenido injustamente en 2020 frente a su familia tras una falla del sistema de reconocimiento facial utilizado por la policía. El ponente explica que este tipo de fallas, sumadas a la discriminación algorítmica que afecta de forma desigual a distintos grupos raciales o étnicos, exigen mayor transparencia y responsabilidad por parte de los desarrolladores de estas herramientas tecnológicas, pues un error puede traducirse en consecuencias judiciales graves para personas inocentes.

“No hay libertad sin responsabilidad, son caras de la misma moneda”. — Eduardo Fernández

El ponente profundiza en el concepto de panoptismo digital, retomando la figura del panóptico de Jeremy Bentham y su interpretación filosófica por Michel Foucault, para explicar cómo la percepción constante de vigilancia modifica el comportamiento humano. Según Fernández, las herramientas de inteligencia artificial pueden sustituir a los guardianes humanos del panóptico tradicional, generando una autodisciplina que erosiona la autonomía y la libertad de las personas.

Como ejemplo extremo de esta dinámica, Fernández analiza el sistema de crédito social de la República Popular China, que monitorea y evalúa a los ciudadanos mediante más de 200 millones de cámaras equipadas con reconocimiento facial. El ponente explica que este modelo de vigilancia masiva castiga la disidencia y crea una ciudadanía de primera y de segunda clase, restringiendo el acceso a empleos, viajes y educación según el comportamiento social registrado por el régimen comunista, considerado por el conferencista como la dictadura tecnológica más sofisticada del planeta.

Apoyándose en autores como Friedrich Hayek e Isaiah Berlin, Fernández distingue entre libertad negativa y libertad positiva para evaluar el impacto de la inteligencia artificial sobre los derechos individuales. Señala que la vigilancia constante interfiere de forma arbitraria en la libertad negativa, mientras que fenómenos como el "empujoncito algorítmico" de plataformas como Amazon o Spotify condicionan la capacidad de decisión autónoma vinculada a la libertad positiva.

“La inteligencia artificial a día de hoy no es ni puede ser políticamente neutral”. — Eduardo Fernández

Finalmente, pese a los riesgos señalados, Fernández concluye que los beneficios de la inteligencia artificial superan a sus defectos, destacando su capacidad para mejorar la accesibilidad de personas con discapacidad y fortalecer la autonomía mediante información personalizada. De este modo, cierra llamando a fomentar la transparencia, la rendición de cuentas y la conciencia ciudadana como ejes fundamentales para garantizar que la innovación tecnológica conviva con la defensa de la libertad y los derechos humanos.

Si te interesa seguir explorando temas relacionados con la libertad, la ética y el impacto de la tecnología en la sociedad, te invitamos a ver Emprendimiento e inteligencia artificial | Rafael Tamames y Ronald Flores.

Organizado por:

Centro Henry Hazlitt

https://chh.ufm.edu/

Facebook @UFM.CHH

Una producción de UFM Studios

http://newmedia.ufm.edu

This compelling lecture, organized by the Faculty of Architecture of the Universidad Francisco Marroquín, features Machteld Oosterbaan, creative director, who draws on 15 years of professional experience to explain what it truly means to build a career in interior design without a formal architecture background. Oosterbaan walks through her personal portfolio, using each project to illustrate a lesson learned. By blending practical advice with personal reflection, she offers a grounded look at creativity, entrepreneurship, and resilience in the design profession.

Oosterbaan begins by tracing her own path into design, explaining that she originally studied business administration and worked in advertising and fashion before an Oscar Wilde quote inspired her to pursue what she truly loved. After moving to Guatemala and becoming a mother, she decided to formally start her interior design practice, despite lacking architectural training.

“I really love creating and working with other people that create from this love and this passion.” — Machteld Oosterbaan

Subsequently, the Oosterbaan remarks on the importance of curation in design. She explains that being a good designer means constantly studying art, architecture, and photography, and staying aware of new creators and movements in order to bring authentic value into every project. She also stresses contrast, both stylistic and tactile, as a way to give spaces depth, citing examples where spiky and soft textures, or warm and industrial materials, were placed side by side deliberately.

Another important aspect Oosterbaan discusses is the practical and often unglamorous side of the profession, including the value of hiring skilled photographers to document finished work, the need to verify architectural measurements repeatedly during construction, and the reality that most projects require far more revisions than initially expected. She describes one ambitious lighting and textile project that took dozens of failed iterations before succeeding, underscoring patience and craftsmanship as core professional values.

“Make sure that you keep on being inspired, not only because it makes you a better designer, but also because it makes your job a whole lot more fun.” — Machteld Oosterbaan

Furthermore, according to Oosterbaan, personalization is a major theme. She mentions that her strongest projects, from a Victorian-style home in Los Angeles to a custom-built house in Denver, were built around deep conversations with clients about their identity and story, translating personal narratives into design concepts before any physical work began. She also speaks about working within real budget constraints, encouraging designers to mix high-cost statement pieces with affordable finds rather than assuming quality requires unlimited resources.

Finally, Oosterbaan reflects on imposter syndrome, admitting that for years she doubted her legitimacy as a designer without formal architectural credentials, but eventually learned to trust her instincts and creative vision. She closes by encouraging designers to remain curious, describing her habit of marking hundreds of locations on maps whenever she travels, simply to absorb new sources of inspiration.

To continue exploring how creativity, freedom, and personal initiative shape professional life, we invite you to watch The Architecture Language | Oliver Uszkurat.

Organized by:

Facultad de Arquitectura

https://arquitectura.ufm.edu/

A production by UFM Studios

http://newmedia.ufm.edu

Follow us on social media

Facebook @ufmvideos

Twitter @newmediaufm

Facebook @UFMArquitectura | @UFMDesign

Instagram @ufmdesign

This compelling lecture, hosted by UFM, features Oliver Uszkurat, architect and creator of an international YouTube platform dedicated to architectural visualization, who delivered a lecture on the essential role of visual communication in architectural practice. The conference explores how mastering representation tools, from realistic renders to abstract collages and technical diagrams, is not a finishing step in the design process but an integral part of how architects think, develop ideas, and connect with their audiences.

Firstly, Uszkurat establishes why visual communication matters so deeply to the architectural profession. He explains that architecture occupies a rare space between the technical and the emotional; it involves precise dimensions and construction logic, but also light, sensation, and spatial experience. He argues that words are rarely sufficient to convey what a new building will become, and images and drawings must speak for themselves.

“Mastering this visual communication tool as Architects is how you can fully express yourself, otherwise it's just like maybe a writer that is not really good at writing.” — Oliver Uszkurat

To ground these Ideas, Uszkurat presents three case studies that challenge conventional approaches to representation and creative vision. The first was an ongoing international health facilities competition in Oman, where his team had only 72 hours and very preliminary plans. Rather than forcing a realistic render, they adopted a physical model aesthetic-maquette-style imagery that communicated volume, proportion, and landscape intent without committing to unresolved details.

The second case study presented a dystopian-realistic project visualizing rising levels in Santos, Brazil, where a Google Earth base image manipulated in Photoshop created a far more impactful result than a full 3D model could have delivered under time constraints The third was Uszkurat's own award-winning national competition entry for a cultural itinerary pavilion, where isometric diagrams across two boards told a precise structural story and earned him first place.

“It's not only about the beautiful renderers but how they are going to help you communicate what you're thinking.” — Oliver Uszkurat

Another important aspect, according to Uszkurat, is to know your audience. He highlights four primary contexts architects work within: academic, clients, competitions, and contractors. Each demands a different visual strategy. Academic environments reward experimentation and process visibility. Clients typically need clarity and realism to visualize themselves in a future space. Competition juries require self-explanatory boards that communicate without verbal support. Contractors rely on precise, well-organized technical drawings built on strong fundamentals. Uszkurat emphasizes that matching the representational approach to the audience is as important as the quality of the design itself.

Additionally, Uszkurat addresses the broader spectrum of visual styles available to architects. He proposes thinking of representation not as a binary switch between realistic and artistic, but as a sliding scale. Firms like Nord Architects blend photographic realism with a collage sensibility; Yellow Office builds compositions that feel more like spatial paintings than technical documents; BDR Bureau layers hand sketches over textured isometrics. Each voice is distinct, and each communicates something that a default render engine output cannot.

Furthermore, Uszkurat reviews the full ecosystem available to architects and gives particular emphasis to Photoshop as one of the most versatile tools in the architectural workflow. On the other hand, he warns about relying too much on AI filters in render engines, arguing that indiscriminate use leads to generic outputs that fail to distinguish the architect's creative voice.

“It's no use having an amazing idea that solves your project in a unique way if the audience can't understand it.” — Oliver Uszkurat

Finally, Uszkurat closes with a reflection on time management and creative development. He encourages students to treat representation not as a last-minute task but as a parallel process-one that informs and strengthens the design itself. He also urges them to look beyond architecture for creative inspiration: art, photography, film, and other visual disciplines build the internal library of references that separates technically competent architects from visually fluent ones.

To further explore topics related to creativity and education, and to expand your understanding of architectural thinking, we invite you to watch Reframing Design in a Complex World | Joel Putnam.

Organized by:

Facultad de Arquitectura

https://arquitectura.ufm.edu/

A production by UFM Studios

http://newmedia.ufm.edu

Follow us on social media

Facebook @ufmvideos

Twitter @newmediaufm

Facebook @UFMArquitectura | @UFMDesign

Instagram @ufmdesign

This compelling lecture, organized by the Faculty of Architecture of the Universidad Francisco Marroquín, features Joel Putnam, architectural designer and Professor at the Illinois Institute of Technology, who challenges how architects understand their own discipline. Putnam explores how design thinking and civic responsibility can transform cities and improve people’s quality of life.

Putnam opens the lecture by reading from his essay entitled Reframing Design in a Complex World, in which he explains that architecture can no longer focus only on aesthetics or functionality. Rather than acting as creators of static forms, designers must now function as active mediators of dynamic processes. This shift from object-centric to system-centric thinking changes how architects approach form, beauty, and aesthetics. According to Putnam, sustainable architecture and social justice are now essential ethical dimensions of contemporary design practice, not optional additions.

“Art plays a crucial role in pushing the boundaries of design, acting as a critical intervention that challenges conventional practices and provokes new ways of thinking.” — Joel Putnam

To illustrate his Ideas, Putnam presents several real projects where design became a tool for social engagement. The most striking example is the redevelopment of the Thompson Center in Chicago, a postmodern building designed by Helmut Jahn in the 1980s with the explicit intention of making government power accessible to citizens. After decades of underfunding, the State of Illinois sought to sell the building. Putnam's development group acquired it and partnered with Google to relocate its Chicago headquarters there.

Putnam argued that a corporation claiming to be a community citizen has a social responsibility to help revitalize neglected civic spaces, not just occupy trendy neighborhoods. The project required that the building's public concourse remain open to all, and that the historic plaza, the site of Chicago's most significant public protests, be preserved as a generous, accessible space.

The lecture also examines a healthcare project developed with Rush Medical Center in Chicago. Putnam explains that in some Chicago neighborhoods, life expectancy is twenty years lower than in others. Rather than designing a conventional hospital, the studio proposed replacing the existing building with a healthcare-oriented park that integrates senior housing, medical offices, a community grocery store, and a pet shelter, reframing healthcare design as a system that addresses education, nutrition, and social connection.

Another key moment in the lecture is Putnam's discussion of the Chicago White Sox stadium proposal. When a developer proposed using one billion dollars in public funding to build a new stadium in a poorly connected location, Putnam and his partner used their own resources to propose an alternative: investing that same money to renovate the existing stadium and rebuild the surrounding community in Bronzeville, a historically underinvested Black neighborhood, prioritizing community well-being.

“It's not enough to just make something, but you've got to make something with meaning.” — Joel Putnam

Furthermore, Putnam also presents the Forum, an architectural installation created for the Chicago Architecture Biennial at the Thompson Center. Built using digital fabrication and computational design, the piece was assembled on-site from components produced in different locations with no physical testing beforehand. He demonstrates how parametric design and collaborative technology can produce meaningful architecture that invites public dialogue, especially around issues like the privatization of civic spaces.

Putnam also reflected on a Dallas Zoo project, where Putnam proposed rethinking the zoo's identity in the context of climate change and urban ecology. Rather than accepting a conventional expansion plan that included a large parking structure adjacent to a new park, he encouraged the institution to reimagine itself as a center for environmental research, life sciences, and ecological innovation. By integrating offices, animal hospitals, educational bridges, and butterfly exhibits into the park, the proposal transformed a standard infrastructure project into a civic vision for the future.

Finally, Putnam challenges architecture students and professionals to see themselves not as passive observers of urban change, but as active participants in shaping cities, communities, and public life. Design, in his view, is most powerful when it connects form, meaning, and social responsibility.

Follow more analysis through New Media UFM and expand your understanding of current challenges.

Organized by:

Facultad de Arquitectura

https://arquitectura.ufm.edu/

A production by UFM Studios

http://newmedia.ufm.edu

Follow us on social media

Facebook @ufmvideos

Twitter @newmediaufm

Facebook @UFMArquitectura | @UFMDesign

Instagram @ufmdesign

En esta conferencia organizada por la Universidad Francisco Marroquín, el Vicerrector de la Universidad de las Hespérides Gonzalo Melián, examina dos visiones radicalmente opuestas sobre el futuro de la humanidad: un mundo de escasez y colapso al estilo de Mad Max, o uno de abundancia e innovación como el universo de Star Trek. Busca argumentar contra las ideas que responsabilizan al crecimiento poblacional y a la riqueza económica de la destrucción del planeta, defendiendo, en su lugar, la importancia de la libertad económica y de las instituciones sólidas como condiciones esenciales del desarrollo humano.

Melián comienza exponiendo un conjunto de declaraciones que convergen en dos ideas: la necesidad de decrecer económicamente para salvar el planeta y la creencia de que la sobrepoblación constituye el principal problema global. El conferencista cita voces como las del filósofo marxista japonés Kohei Saito y el senador Bernie Sanders, quienes sostienen que el control de la natalidad y la reducción de la riqueza son necesarios para enfrentar el cambio climático y preservar los recursos naturales.

Si lo ve a nivel histórico, cada vez que ha habido un periodo de estanflación enseguida salen académicos o políticos diciendo que somos muchas personas y la población es un problema”.— Gonzalo Melián

Melián pone a prueba estas ideas y recurre a una comparación empírica entre cuatro territorios: Canarias, Jersey, Guatemala y Singapur. Los datos revelan que no existe correlación entre densidad poblacional y riqueza: Singapur tiene la mayor densidad y también el PIB per cápita más alto, mientras que Guatemala, con una densidad moderada, presenta los niveles más bajos de ingreso. Esta evidencia cuestiona directamente la afirmación de que "cuantos más seamos, más pobres seremos".

Asimismo, el conferencista revisa la historia del pensamiento malthusiano para mostrar que las predicciones catastrofistas sobre la población y los recursos no llegaron a cumplirse. En contraste, los datos muestran que en 1990 el 35 % de la población mundial vivía bajo el umbral de la pobreza, y para 2013 esa cifra había caído al 10,7 %, pese a que la población mundial había crecido considerablemente durante ese período. La tasa de alfabetización global pasó del 12 % en 1800 a más del 80 % en la actualidad, evidenciando el progreso sostenido que las teorías del decrecimiento ignoran.

Nadie puede negar que hay menos personas pobres en términos absolutos y en términos relativos, siendo muchas más personas las que viven en este planeta”. — Gonzalo Melián

Frente a la noción biológica de "capacidad de carga", aplicada por algunos pensadores a la especie humana, Melián presenta el argumento del economista Julian Simon y del libro Superabundancia de Mario Tupy y Gale Pooley. Estos autores sostienen que los recursos no disminuyen con el crecimiento poblacional, sino que se vuelven más abundantes gracias a él. El conferencista también enfatiza que a diferencia de los animales, los seres humanos intercambian, cooperan y generan valor a través del comercio y la creatividad, lo que hace inválida la aplicación del concepto biológico de capacidad de carga a las sociedades humanas.

Melián sostiene además que los países más ricos del mundo también son los que presentan mejores indicadores medioambientales. Al comparar el mapa de renta per cápita con el Índice de Desempeño Ambiental, se observa que el 99 % de los indicadores ambientales, calidad del aire, ecosistemas, gestión del cambio climático, son superiores en las naciones con mayor ingreso. Según Melián, esto contradice directamente la narrativa de que el crecimiento económico destruye el planeta y sugiere, en línea con la pirámide de Maslow, que las sociedades que superan la pobreza pueden dedicar más recursos y atención a la sostenibilidad ambiental.

Finalmente, Melián cierra señalando que para avanzar hacia un mundo de abundancia se requiere una combinación de factores: educación, capital humano, libertad empresarial, estado de derecho, propiedad privada, dinero estable, energía asequible y un sistema financiero eficiente. Sin estas condiciones institucionales, ni la abundancia de recursos naturales ni el tamaño de la población garantizan el desarrollo.

Si te interesa seguir aprendiendo sobre crecimiento, impacto humano y libertad económica, te invitamos a explorar la conferencia ¿Cómo el enfoque antropocéntrico mejora la gestión de recursos y el bienestar humano? | Eduardo Fernández Luiña.

Organizado por:

Centro Henry Hazlitt

https://chh.ufm.edu/

Facebook @UFM.CHH

Una producción de UFM Studios

http://newmedia.ufm.edu