Score one for humility.

The self-anointed Masters of the Universe who gather at Davos every year claim to have all the answers to all the world’s problems. But this year, with the economy in tatters, environmental missions in doubt, and the most vile forms of terrorism on the rise, this once confident collection of wealthy Westerners who gave Davos its prestige are eating humble pie.

To be sure, left-wing windbags like the billionaire investor George Soros – who decades ago nearly destroyed the British economy with his ruthless currency bets – still drift in and out of the WEF’s Congress Hall and make stern pontifications as to how they think the world should be. But the reality that’s set in for most of the forum’s participants is that the world’s markets have transformed over the past year – and that entrepreneurs need to change with the times, too.

“I’ve always asked myself what caused this great recession and values are always part of the answer we come up with,” the chief executive officer of Deloitte, James Quigley, said. “I don’t want to continue the blame game. Let’s have a forward look instead of an autopsy. What broad values do we need to re-think?”

Davos participants took a sober assessment of the economic slump’s effect on the markets. If there were a consensus on any point, it was that there was an overriding hope that investors were less reckless because of the financial fallout.

Jim Wallis, the editor-in-chief of “Sojourners,” a religious publication, said that it’s up to business and political leaders to shape a moral compass for the new economy. Maxims like ‘Greed is good’ and ‘I want it now’ wrought havoc with the culture and should be replaced with ‘Enough is enough,’ according to Wallis. “We are indeed at a populist moment,” he said. “Either it will be dark with anger and fear or one of optimism. This is a structural crisis but also a spiritual crisis that calls for a new accountability. If we go back to business as usual then all the pain will have been in vain.”

That pain might be what helped usher in a new era of personal responsibility, according to the chief executive officer of Thomson Reuters, Tom Glocer. “Many individual Americans filled out mortgage applications and lied about their income. Nobody forced them to lie. Nobody has a constitutional right to live in a house he can’t afford. Yet people are saying: If we only had a better regulation of our compensation system. But in the end, personal responsibility is key,” he said.

Muhammad Yunus, the managing director of Grameen Bank in Bangladesh, won a Nobel Peace Price and the Presidential Medal of Freedom proving that when people take responsibility for their actions – especially their financial ones – society wins. Grameen Bank has lent more than $8 billion to the poorest citizens of Bangladesh and boats a 100 percent repayment rate.

What follows are more candid thoughts from Davos participants on how the world could change for the better…

Well, to be honest, the one that has seen an explosion here is television. The whole region has basically moved from, in a decade, from one, maybe two channels, state-owned and operated, to this diversity of 300 channels today. And in that respect, it’s a pretty free region. … There are many societies on earth where you cannot own a satellite dish. Iran comes to mind, certainly China.

So who do you see as your competition?

We have two operations for the region. One is radio Sawa, and the other one is the Alhurra TV channel. Who do you compete with when you are in the mass media business? Everybody. Who is specifically in your category? It’s obviously Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, and now there are many others joining the parade. You know, BBC has an Arabic service, France has announced its own, Russia has announced its own.

So you see these other national broadcasters as your direct competition?

No, I don’t see the other broadcasters as our competition. No. I was just describing the landscape of the people that are in the business of news and information, and that includes Al Jazeera and Al Arabia. And in that respect, you could say that the main competitors, if you were to define it in commercial terms, which you can’t, would be Al Jazeera and Al Arabia. But we think we have a niche and we have a role to play that is different to what they do.

Across the Middle East, from Cairo and Istanbul to Damascus and Tehran, abandoned churches, schools and social clubs, wrought in the neoclassical style that was in vogue during the 19th century, lie abandoned.

Few efforts are made to revive them by the surviving octogenarian patriarchies. Instead, fossilized boards of directors meet once or twice a year inside these crumbling buildings, for extended procrastination sessions. They are surrounded by thick walls, their plaster peeling off. The dim roar of 21st century traffic peters through as a reminder of besieging modernity.

For Benghazi, a dusty Mediterranean city just 200 kilometers south of the Greek island of Crete, its Greek community reached the point of extinction in the 1980s, as an international embargo was slapped on Gadhafi’s Libya for its alleged role in the bombing of a Pan Am flight over Scotland.

Flocks of Greek businessmen departed as opportunities dried up. After a century of commercial back and forth that mirrored millennia of trade in this corner of the Mediterranean, socialist policies and a crippling bar on trade with the outside world dwindled a once-thriving community to a few families. 2004 was the last year the Greek community school functioned. That year, six teachers taught the two remaining students.

”In the name of maintaining Greekness we led ourselves into seclusion, even though Greece is in the European Union and most Greeks no longer live in homogenous ethnic states,” said Kanakis Mandolios, who is the president of Benghazi’s Greek community. “So we decided to create here in Libya a multicultural community of the type the EU is striving to replicate.”

Acarabee Alley, just off 26 of July Street in bustling downtown Cairo, opens onto a small courtyard surrounded by bars. Up the stairs at the end of the courtyard a belly dancer shakes her hips and smiles at the mostly empty tables in Club Miami. She turns and sways in her bright yellow costume in front of a five-piece band belting out Arabic songs. At 11 pm on Thursday night the place is quiet, with the exception of a few middle-aged men sipping beer at a table near the bar.While belly dancing has become popular abroad, and for foreign visitors to Egypt, many here have feared its demise as a result of the increasing observance of conservative Islam. Over the last several decades, traditionalist ideals have been gaining ground in the country once known for its cosmopolitan ways. In the 1990s, when violent Islamist groups weresmost active in Egypt, the haram (forbidden) combination of alcohol and shaking, skimpily dressed women made belly-dancing cabarets a target.

Nabil Abdel Fattah, head of the sociological research unit at Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies and editor-in-chief of the center’s “State of Religion Report,” says businesses like bars and belly-dancing clubs have suffered because of the Islamization of both the public and private spheres in Egypt. “Belly dancing is outside of Islamic values,” says Fattah, adding that increasing conservatism in Egypt has led to reforms in the role and dress of women and fewer customers for establishments that serve alcohol.

However, in the last few years the country has undergone a soft revolution, where a surge in conservatism for many has coincided with an increasing movement toward Western lifestyles and liberal practices for others.

”There is a new soft revolution in Egyptian society. You can see this trend of new magazines and shops and people returning to belly dancing. There is also a Westernization of the way of life, of the new upper-middle class and businessmen,” says Fattah, who maintains this has happened in tandem with increasing observance of conservative Islam.

Looking back. Belly dancing is the English name given to the art of raqs sharqi (oriental dance) or raqs baladi (country dance). The practice spread throughout the Middle East but took a greater hold in Egypt than the rest of the Arab world, finding its place in wedding celebrations, private and public performances and, most recently, in tourist establishments. 

Around midnight, customers begin to take seats near the stage at Club Miami. The clientele remains the same, mostly middle-aged Egyptian men. The band continues to play as the second dancer, Suhayla, takes the stage under a small disco ball. Tamer, Club Miami’s manager, who asked that his real name not be used, says in the winter the club attracts foreigners and in the summer it fills with Gulf Arabs. But most of their clientele is Egyptian.

That all changed at the start of May, thanks to Decree 79 of 2009. The new law, announced by Bahrain’s Minister of Labour Majeed al-Alawai, is aimed at doing away with a sponsorship system for foreign workers that many have claimed is antiquated and open to abuse by the employer.

The sponsorship system common across the Gulf, known by its Arabic name, kafala, is the legal basis for residency and employment. Migrant workers receive an entry visa and a residence permit only if a GCC citizen or a GCC institution employs them. In turn, sponsors exercise full economic and legal responsibility for their employees. The sponsorship system, in use for over three decades, has long been subject to allegations of employee exploitation and abuse.

Bahrain’s new labor law, which will come into effect in August, will allow foreign workers to switch jobs without the consent of their employer. According to al-Alawai, the law will stop the practice of Bahrainis sponsoring several, sometimes hundreds of foreigners, and charging them a ‘

visa fee’ to work with another employer. In effect, the sponsorship system would no longer be open to abuse.

”The end of the sponsor system is the most important aspect of this law, because in my opinion that phenomena does not differ much from the system of slavery and it is not something suitable for a modern country like Bahrain,” said al-Alawai. “That system will be broken and eradicated under the new law, because it will end the absolute power which the employer had over the foreign worker.”

The reforms put Bahrain at the leading edge of reform. They will also help slow the flow of foreign workers into Bahrain and increase the percentage of Bahrainis working in the private sector, according to the country’s government.

But what also depends on these elections is the kind of relationship Lebanon will have with Syria, often dubbed its “big sister.” The enmity between the two countries’ governments has been strong since the assassination of billionaire and former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri in February 2005, openly blamed by March 14 on Syria, then Lebanon’s power broker for 15 years. Although Syrian troops withdrew from its small neighbor following the murder, Syria remains very influential in Lebanon, not only through its staunch allies, among whom Hezbollah stands strong, but also by way of a series of agreements that were mostly signed during Syria’s reign over Lebanon.

One example of this is the Fraternity, Cooperation and Coordination Treaty (FCCT) signed in 1991, that codifies cooperation between Lebanon and Syria in all fields from media policy to defense strategy. Another is the Syrian-Lebanese Higher Council, established in 1991 under the FCCT, whose purpose is to “set up the general policy of coordination and cooperation between the two states.”

Their validity and legitimacy could be questioned once embassies are formally up and running between Syria and Lebanon. Or, on the contrary, they could prevail, stripping the embassies of all meaning. Although Nasri Khoury, secretary general of the Syrian Lebanese Higher Council, declared that “the FCCT and the agreements it produced are established truths,” Syrian President Bashar al-Assad declared that “Syria is ready to annul the Higher Council if the Lebanese demand it.”

While March 14 may well demand just that, these agreements are not only binding at a political level, they also have a vast economic dimension, and give Syria a strong hold over Lebanon. One example is the sharing of the Assi river waters, giving a maximum 80 million cubic meters (MCM) to Lebanon out of its total of 400 MCM. Depending on who leads Lebanon, agreements on trade, customs, and telecoms between the two countries will be tackled or left alone.

Maybe more importantly, other decisive aspects of these relations lie in crucial issues that are still left pending: what position will the new parliamentary majority adopt regarding the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), established by the UN to try the killers of Hariri? The Lebanese Parliament hasn’t yet ratified the Memorandum of Understanding that will define the capacity of the STL, and the opposition is still reviewing the power it would give the international community over Lebanese institutions and indicted individuals. If anything, March 8 will continue to pugnaciously oppose the legitimacy of the STL.

Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah responded almost a week later in an interview with Kuwait Arabic newspaper al-Seyyasah in a conciliatory manner. Considering the politeness that came with the UAE’s withdrawal, the king believes this step is not intractable. “The atmosphere for reviewing the monetary union agreement is open and the UAE has an alert leadership … We do not doubt they are keen to maintain a strong Gulf (Cooperation) Council.”

”The coming review before the implementation would resolve what had been disputed,” he said.

The decision to pull out reflects the fact that centralizing and unifying elements of the GCC will be fraught with such problems in the future. Much of this stems from creating an equitable framework for each nation, a hard-to-balance task. The single currency is seen by observers and politicians as a means of creating greater interdependence among the GCC states - the basis for improving political unity.

It also mirrors the formation of the EU single currency, when Germany and France wished to foment greater unity and mutual reliance. Nevertheless, while monetary union is an economic objective, it is also an optional tickbox on the political checklist of goals designed to form greater unity within the GCC, says Marios Ma-ratheftis, chief economist of Standard Chartered Middle East. “No matter what happens to the common currency, we’re still part of the GCC and we’re willing to cooperate with our GCC neighbors - and that’s the right way to go,” he says. “Political cooperation is essential, and monetary union is not necessary to achieve that.”

There is also the issue that most of the GCC states have parity with each other on exchange rates anyway, as all (except Kuwait) are pegged to the greenback. Kuwait removed the dinar from the dollar peg in favor of a basket of currencies in 2007, creating further wobbles over monetary union at the time. Yet this is a tactic other Arab nations would do well to adopt, argues Paul Krugman, professor of economics at Princeton University and Nobel laureate in economics.

The four had been arrested in 2005 in connection with former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri’s murder, and at the recommendation of the UN’s International Independent Investigation Commission (IIIC) they had been jailed for three years and seven months without being charged.

By mid-April, Lebanese judge Sakr Sakr had already lifted arrest warrants against the four, but had ordered they remain in jail pending a decision on their fate by the Hague-based Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), which had been handed authority on the case by Lebanon in early April. This decision by pre-trial judge Daniel Fransen at the recommendation of prosecutor Daniel Bellemare, came two weeks later with immediate effect, sparking much media and public fanfare. 

Although, as Bellemare wrote in his submission to Fransen, they could still be indicted later on if evidence implicated them, the pretrial judge declared that at this stage, the generals “cannot be considered as either suspects or accused persons. … The evidence collected thus far is not sufficiently credible to maintain the detention,” said Fransen. 

Since then, the four - who always claimed their innocence - have been hailed as heroes.

The night of the generals’ release, Hezbollah released a statement welcoming Fransen’s decision, after the “arbitrary detention imposed by the [majority] and which took place by politicizing the judicial system.” The apparatchik described the generals’ arrest as a “charade and a big scandal.” More importantly, Hezbollah said that this ” important event” would allow for a “decisive revision of the nation.”

Upon his release, Sayyed - who rumors say could be asked to step up as a minister if the opposition were to win the polls - denounced a “conspiracy.”

To contain the wave of condemnation and prove its own credibility, the Higher Judicial Council expressed “its willingness to bear its responsibility in facing any deficiency committed during judicial practices.”

But as election day looms closer, this release may have a serious impact on how the Lebanese will vote. “Our detention was politically motivated and was exploited for four years by the majority [the pro-Western ruling parliamentary coalition]. So it is perfectly normal that the tables are turned now,” said Sayyed. No wonder political reconciliation is at a nadir.

For his part, majority leader Hariri declared that this decision was “a step toward achieving justice” and that “this is a response to those who said that the tribunal was politicized,” referring to accusations from the opposition that the STL was a pawn in the hands of the United States.

Lebanese Forces leader Samir Geagea said that the release of the four generals scored a point for the majority and not the opposition, because the opposition “has been marketing for years that the tribunal was politicized.”

However, without the STL as a central point of its electoral platform, and faced with virulent accusations of having misled the Lebanese public, the majority coalition now more than ever needs arguments to rally swing voters and reassure its own troops. Hezbollah, on the other hand, which repeatedly asked for the release of the generals, can further mobilize its constituencies because of this victory.

Amid electoral fever, few realize the STL is back to square one, without suspects or any prospect of identifying any. It seems justice for the victims will not take place anytime soon.             

Every company, every individual, needs recognition for whatever he does. An award is one way the market, customers, or specialized institutions recognize your efforts in reaching a certain level of professionalism.

How do you view the difficulties facing your business in 2009?

It has been challenging, but in every depressed market there is an opportunity. It is an opportunity for us now to go back to the basics, to go back to normality. Everything went berserk at once - prices, rates, salaries, costs. Everything was hitting the roof and for no reason.

But even before that set in you had started moving into Abu Dhabi, which is comparatively better off. Was that anticipation or calculation on your part?

We actually didn’t move, we started in Abu Dhabi. But obviously the demand three to four years ago was mainly in Dubai; Abu Dhabi was somehow stagnant. Around four to five years ago, Abu Dhabi started picking up. So we didn’t shift gear and go to Abu Dhabi, we were in Abu Dhabi, but we opened our eyes to the opportunities that existed - the low-hanging fruit was in Abu Dhabi.

The world is in a big shift now from manufacturer-centered innovation, which has been the paradigm since the industrial revolution, to user-centered innovation. Business models have to adapt to this, and the policies of governments have to adapt to it, too.

You have these manufacturers following the traditional ‘

find a need and fill it’ model, the idea that the manufacturer’s job is to go out and look for user needs, come back and develop the products for the users. Market researchers go out to find needs, and then the internal R&D department develops the solution. They spend money doing that, and out of it comes the need for intellectual property. This is because the only way a company can benefit from spending R&D and market research money is by selling whatever they develop at a profit. User innovators are different. When innovation switches to users, users actually benefit from an innovation by using it.

Can you give an example of user innovation to illustrate this?

Take the heart-lung machine that was developed by a surgeon. He benefited because he used it. He built it for his practice. The inventors of the mountain bike were also users, and so were windsurfers. The guy who builds an innovative mountain bike gets to ride it.

On the other hand, a manufacturer doesn’t get any profit from innovation unless he sells it. So if a medical equipment company built the heart-lung machine, they wouldn’t benefit until they sold it. The user has in-house use, and the user can be an organization like a hospital, a company making equipment for itself to use, or it can be an individual, somebody who’s building a bit of sports or cooking equipment for their own needs. They build it to solve their own problem.

What’s driving this change in the way designs develop? Is it that people have access to more technology?

Users are more connected on the Internet. They have design tools that are digitally-based, so what’s happening is that the cost of user innovation is going down. Also, the cost of collaboration among groups of users is going down. When that happens, users start to collaborate, they start to innovate together, to share without IP - like open-source software. And the result is that in many areas, they’re showing they can actually drive manufacturers out of design - they can do so much better than manufacturers at designing. The user is the center of the story here; he innovates in collaboration with others.