On Monday, presentation-sharing website SlideShare.net announced the winners of its World's Best Presentation Contest. The 1st-place winner is Shift Happens, a startling slideshow about how economic globalization, demographics, and rapid technological changes are shifting the status quo of our world. If the change excites you in the way it enthuses Thomas Friedman, you'll probably enjoy this presentation. If you're worried about offshoring and the rise of India and China, it will scare you further. (After all, "shift happens" isn't nearly as exciting if the shift happens to you.) Some interesting tidbits from the presentation:

• If every job in the United States were sent to China, the Middle Kingdom would still have a shortage of jobs.
• If MySpace were a country, it would be the 11th largest (between Japan and Mexico). 
• China will soon be the number one English-speaking country in the world.
• The top 10 in-demand jobs in the United States in 2010 will not have existed in 2004.

I encourage you to view this winning presentation, but please keep in mind my disclaimer: I haven't personally verified the accuracy of every fact in this presentation, so feel welcome to doubt it. The creator of the presentation's content, Karl Fisch, does link to his sources on his blog, though.

Editor's note: This post originally credited Fisch as the "creator of the presentation." It was actually authored by Fisch and then spruced up by Jeff Brenman and submitted to the contest, with Fisch's permission.

STR/AFP/Getty Images

Despite efforts to stem the global trade in narcotics—indeed, often because of them—new trade routes are emerging around the world, posing challenges to authorities and local populations alike. In this week's List, FP takes a look at the newest battlegrounds in the global war on drugs.

They include new transit points for cocaine bound for the United States and Europe, such as Venezuela and West Africa, new production locales for methamphetamines in Mexico, and a familiar foe that's using the heroin trade to regain a foothold in Afghanistan. All these new fronts are leaving a trail of addiction and violence in their wake. And all exemplify one of the most frustrating dilemmas of international counter-drug efforts: Just as one area seems safe from the cartels, another battle is always around the corner. Check it out.

Today's Tuesday Map is mesmerizing, but I'm still not sure if it's useful or meaningful. It's twittervision, a Google Maps mashup of Twitter posts, in real time. So what's Twitter, then? It's the latest bizarre Internet craze, a "Web 2.0" site (or MoSoSo application) that allows you to post short blurbs—called "tweets" by those in the know—from your phone or computer updating your friends (and/or everyone else) on the latest thought in your head or minutiae in your life.

Twittervision adds the geographic dimension, and the result is much more interesting: a moving map that never stops telling what people are doing RIGHT NOW, around the world. The about page on twittervision boasts: "Samuel Morse, meet Carl Jung," but I prefer to think of it as the pulse of the global digerati. Click on the map below to check it out for yourself.

SANDRA MU/Getty Images

Tomorrow, March 17th, is St. Patrick's Day. To commemorate, many in the United States—both those of Irish descent those merely Irish for the day—will gather in that quintessential neighborhood watering hole, the Irish pub. But, in one of the great ironies of globalization, it turns out that the outpost of traditional Irish culture on the corner is actually a finely-tuned corporate creation. In 1991, the Dublin-based Irish Pub Company (IPCo) hit on a profitable model for fabricating and selling "authentic Irishness." Slate's Austin Kelly made the revelation last year:

In the last 15 years, Dublin-based IPCo and its competitors have fabricated and installed more than 1,800 watering holes in more than 50 countries. Guinness threw its weight (and that of its global parent Diageo) behind the movement, and an industry was built around the reproduction of "Irishness" on every continent.

Yes, that's right. Ireland exports pubs the way the United States does T.G.I. Friday's.

IPCo provides its customers with five choices of theme: Country Cottage, Gaelic, Brewery, Traditional, and Victorian Dublin. Evidently, the Irish themselves have not traditionally been wont to spend their time quaffing brews with antique farm implements lying around or pictures of James Joyce staring down from the walls. Those touches of "authenticity" were devised to make the Guinness go down more naturally in Minneapolis, Shanghai or Dubai.

Of course, in this wired-together world, it was only a matter of time until the craze for Irish pubs worked its way back to Eire herself. After proselytizing for the pub abroad, IPCo has been able to turn its sights back to the home market, and now sells its version of traditional Irishness to the Irish themselves:

IPCo has built 40 ersatz pubs on the Emerald Isle, opening them beside the long-standing establishments on which they were based.

ELIZABETH GLASSANOS/FP Original

The International Herald Tribune sent its reporters to seven different cities to find out where the garbage goes. My favorite recycling story? Reporter Andréa R. Vaucher found that Los Angeles' trash sometimes ends up as carpets in Alabama and T-shirts in China.

And Meg Bortin raises a good question: "[W]hat will happen when Asian manufacturing powerhouses like India and China begin to produce even a fraction of the trash produced in the West[?]"

Yesterday, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, FP's parent organization, launched its new vision for a global think tank centered in Washington, but with local offices in Moscow, Beijing, Beirut, and (soon) Brussels. The difference between a think tank that deals with international issues—those are a dime a dozen in this town—and a think tank that is itself international may sound like a fine distinction at first. But being based locally and working in the language is key to understanding other countries as they see themselves. With a dangerous political situation and the world's view of United States foreign policy lower than ever, it's vital that high-quality dialogue flow between places like Beijing and Washington. Carnegie's new global vision will help that tremendously.

But there are broader changes afoot that cross other boundaries. Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, spoke about how technology is transforming the world (and simultaneously being transformed by it) in yesterday's riveting keynote address at Carnegie's launch event for the new vision.

One particularly intriguing question Schmidt asked was, What happens when the next billion Internet users go online? What are the implications for freedom of speech?

One billion is a lot of people. How will they communicate with each other?

Washington Post columnist Jim Hoagland popped up to ask an interesting question: Are intellectual property rights a thing of the past in the Internet age? Schmidt responded by explaining how "intellectual property rights are fundamental to how we operate." Google Books, for instance, is raising all kinds of new and interesting questions about intellectual property.  

To another questioner worried about how dictatorships or other forces could seize control of the Web, Schmidt was reassuring. Kind of: 

I'm not as worried about it as you might be, because I understand how difficult it is to go in and impose your bias on a single node in the Internet .... You have to be able to shut down the borders .... Anyone who can do that on the Internet is quite dangerous .... The good news about the Internet is it's structured to make that extremely difficult .... Unless you're able to get control of all of the interconnection points, which is essentially impossible in most, at least, democratic countries, it's very very difficult to see how the kind of manipulation you're describing would occur."

Check out his response for yourself: 

ADRIAN DENNIS/AFP/Getty

After weeks of haggling and speculation, Tata Steel has finally won its bid to become the fifth largest steelmaker in the world. For $12 billion, the Indian firm beat out a Brazilian rival to acquire Corus, the Anglo-Dutch steel company. Tata Steel's capacity will triple as a result of the deal, the latest in a string of major foreign acquisitions by the steelmaker over the last few years.

Tata's acquisition of Corus epitomizes the new, "aggressive" face of Indian business that's being championed by the Indian government. This Indian business confidence was also demonstrated last year when Mittal Steel finally acquired its rival, Arcelor, to create the world's largest steelmaker.

The global success of India's steel giants lends weight to Antoine van Agtmael's argument in the Jan/Feb 2007 issue of FP:

Superior execution and an obsession with quality are now hallmarks of virtually all of the world-class companies based in emerging markets. That has helped feed a mind-set in which emerging multinationals are no longer content with being viewed as leading Chinese, Korean, Mexican, or Taiwanese companies. They aspire to be global, and this aspiration is rapidly becoming a reality.

You can add "Indian" to that list.

McDonald's is looking to tap into the growing appetites of consumers in rapidly developing China and India. The fast-food chain has 785 outlets in China and hopes to have 1,000 in place by the 2008 Beijing Olympics. In India, it serves up meals at 110 locations in Mumbai and New Delhi, with 25 more restaurants scheduled to open during the next year.

The challenge: customizing menus for local tastes. In India, beef is a no-no, so traditional burgers won't fly. Instead, McDonald's is counting on the success of vegetarian creations such as the McCurry Pan and others.

But locally-tailored menus bring another challenge: developing foods that can be distributed globally throughout the McDonald's chain. One local offering that has gone global has been the McArabia (guess which market it was created for). The flatbread sandwich with spicy chicken and garlic mayonnaise now pleases palates in Malaysia and South Africa.

Perhaps with local menus, we shouldn't fear the cultural homogenization that anti-globalization activists warn us about. On the other hand, China and India had better prepare for the obesity, heart disease and other health problems the West is already facing as a result of a culture of high-fat foods available at rock-bottom prices.

JOEL SAGET/AFP

The star of the first day of Davos was a homely middle-aged woman from a declining region of the world. Not very stylishly dressed in a burgundy blazer, looking vaguely professorial, thoughtfully and without pretext staring off into the half-distance as she framed her thoughts, she nevertheless held 1,000 people in the Congress Center's main hall rapt as she spoke about globalization, her own experiences, the relationship between the developed and the developing world, and her sense of Europe's role.

Addressed by session chairman Klaus Schwab as "Frau Bundeskanzler", Angela Merkel is an unlikely focus for such a glamorous event—or rather she would be if not for the fact that she leads Europe's most important country, and that she is doing such a good job of it.

I overheard two American CEOs discussing her, hints of envy filtering into their assessment. "She was good," said one, "Substantive. Impressive but not flashy." "Yes," replied the other, "I especially liked the slow way she spoke, enunciating her German. It was easier for me to understand." "Ah," said the first, "You are a real globalist. But for us who were listening to the translation ... she was good. Though she did say, 'we're Europe, our role is changing, don't look at us for solutions." "Still," said the other, "at least I didn't cringe when she spoke. Full sentences. Complete ideas." (more after the jump)

It's time for me to head for the airport. I arrive in Davos tomorrow morning, and will report once or twice a day through the following weekend. Hopefully, what you find here will be the hidden side of the meeting, the part that doesn't make it into the press, with a look at whatever implications may emerge in the areas most important to the readers of FOREIGN POLICY. Remember as you read that while Davos is a gathering of world leaders, it does not necessarily reflect the real world. There is a staggering divide between the perspectives of the Davoisie and the rest of us. Admirably, it is the Forum itself, working with Gallup International*, that has underscored this point with two studies. The first, released on Monday, January 22, is called "The Voice of the Leaders" and is an annual poll of Davos participants. The second study, released a week earlier, is called "The Voice of the People" and reflects the input of 53,000 people in 60 countries. As the Forum's managing director admits:

It is clear from this survey that the leaders who will be gathering in Davos view the world and its problems in a different way than the wider global population.”

Now, I understand why some of you may not think it would take a new study to arrive at that conclusion. But the contrasting views are interesting. For example, while about two-thirds of the leaders are optimistic about the economic prospects of the next generation, it is only a minority of the "people" who feel the same way (about 40 percent). Perhaps not surprisingly, only 8 percent of the leaders feel it is a priority to "restore trust and honesty in government, in business and in international institutions." That's down from 14 percent last year, as though matters were improving. Over a third of the people, meanwhile, view business leaders as dishonest, and a similar number said they had too much power and responsibility and that they were unethical. Forty-three percent of the people say that politicians are dishonest, and over half criticize them for being too responsive to people "more powerful than themselves." The study's authors also note, in a sort of wry juxtaposition, that while about six out of ten respondents among leaders seek "greater transparency and governance," people are not so interested, with only about a third citing it. On the other hand, the popular survey saw 30 percent of respondents seeking "more punishment of fraudulent behavior by officials" while, perhaps unsurprisingly, only 7 percent of the leaders agreed. So, perhaps the place to end this opening day is to note that while some of what it is interesting about Davos is the conclusions that are reached there, equally interesting is the degree to which those conclusions connect or diverge from the views of the rest of the world—all the rest of us who are unaccustomed to the rarified altitudes of global summitry.

*Editor's note: The initial version of this post incorrectly identified the Gallup Organization as a partner of the World Economic Forum. It was actually a different entity, a loosely-affiliated network of disparate market research houses called Gallup International, that conducted the poll in question. Passport regrets the error.

That high-pitched whine you hear is the sound of corporate jets revving their engines in preparation for their annual trip to Zurich, where they will deposit their passengers into fleets of waiting Mercedes, BMWs and Audis to take them up into the Alps and to the Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Or perhaps it is coming from the chorus of critics who, each year, offer their full-throated denunciations of the global conspiracies they envision are hatched over cocktails and canapés in lavish hotel lounges. Or, even more likely, it is coming from the regular participants in the Annual Meeting, who know that Davos is neither the hotbed of intrigue that critics fear, nor is it quite the lavish spectacle that everyone imagines. They keep coming back because Davos still attracts an array of world leaders and business titans unlike that of any other meeting on the planet. They will do business there, and renew old contacts and friendships. But they will also shiver on the frozen streets of Davos, slip on its unshoveled sidewalks, eat its mediocre food, and endure endless speeches containing very little that is new at all.

We get a hint about what the speeches do contain on a page on the Davos members-only website. It asserts that last year, participants in the annual meeting produced 7,000 tons of CO2 equivalents. The page, part of a Forum climate initiative seeking to make the entire event carbon neutral, goes on to suggest that most of these emissions are from air travel and energy use, but I will reserve judgment, reporting to you what I observe and hear over the next few days for FP’s second annual Davos Diary.

A recent piece in the New York Times offers a fascinating look at rising investment in cotton growing in Africa. Dunavant, an American agricultural firm, has been pouring money into Uganda, Mozambique, and Zambia. They're helping small farmers improve their productivity, fronting cash and seeds to anyone willing to plant, and making long-term buying commitments. And they're making money doing it:

Part of the good news is that the Dunavants and the Cargills will be in Africa for a long time,” says John Baffes, an economist and cotton analyst at the World Bank. “Those guys are willing to invest a lot of money and to buy in good years and bad years.”

DANIEL PEPPER/Getty Images

Of course, all is not rosy. African farmers have long been engaged in bitter competition with heavily-subsidized American cotton growers. Economists and NGOs alike find the U.S. subsidies obscene—they lower the world cotton price to the point that many African farmers can't compete, despite being able to grow the stuff far more cheaply than Americans. The dispute has led to WTO action from Brazil (which also has a large cotton sector) and is a prime cause of the breakdown in trade talks at Doha. The real news in the Times story is that the Doha talks may now get going again, as American agricultural firms move into African markets:

Though no one predicts a quick demise to American cotton subsidies, support of farmers with taxpayer dollars will have to be renewed by Congress before the Farm Bill expires this year. Mr. Laurin says he believes that it is “only a matter of time” before the subsidies disappear and that Dunavant’s entry into Africa is partly motivated by such possibilities. If the subsidies go, the price of African cotton, produced with lower costs for land and labor, will become more attractive — leaving Dunavant well-positioned to reap the benefits of working with loyal farmers like Mr. Okelo.

If Dunavant, Cargill, and others become more heavily involved in Africa, they'll become less dependent on the U.S. subsidies, and more concerned that African agriculture remain viable. Ironically, it could be Big Ag itself that finally solves the subsidy problem. And that's good news for Africans.

Six years ago, just a few months after FP transformed from a staid academic journal to a glossy magazine, we published a story called How Sushi Went Global. But long before raw fish became popular everywhere, there was a culinary trend from Japan that gathered steam all around the world: instant noodles. I'm sad to say that Momofuku Ando, the inventor of instant ramen noodles and the chairman of Japan's Nissin Food Products Company (maker of Top Ramen and Cup O' Noodles) passed away last Friday at the age of 96.

According to the New York Times, Ando wanted to make food for the people -- something that was fast and easy to prepare, inexpensive, and would provide sustenance for the poor and hungry around the world. 

Chicken was the prime ingredient in Nissin's global success. "By using chicken soup, instant ramen managed to circumvent religious taboos when it was introduced in different countries," Mr. Ando wrote [in his autobiography]. "Hindus may not eat beef and Muslims may not eat pork, but there is not a single culture, religion or country that forbids the eating of chicken."

Ramen noodles have given me comfort many a night, and not just when I was a poor college student. I'm proud to say that I've had them twice in the past week. Boil 'em up, throw in some vegetables, a few pieces of meat, perhaps an egg — and voila! — a perfect meal in just a few minutes. Thanks, Momofuku Ando! I'll remember you with every slurp.

Unlike other giant multinationals, Swedish home furnishings retailer IKEA has largely insulated itself from the criticisms of labor, environmental, and human rights watchdogs. In fact, the firm's environmental and labor record are at the core of its success. While shopping at evil Wal-Mart conjures up a guilty feeling that all those "rolled back" prices have come at the expense of peasants in China who work for 30 cents a day and no bathroom breaks, IKEA is supposed to be different. From its children's playroom to its happy blue buildings, IKEA is supposed to be, well, nice. But is it?

The folks over at Le Monde Diplomatique were rightly skeptical. Can you really sell millions of birch veneered bookshelves for 30 bucks a pop without exploiting a few third world workers? To find out, three LMD reporters visited IKEA's factories and suppliers in poor countries. The answer, sadly, appears to be no:

In practice Ikea merely sands off some of the rough edges of exploitation. Employees have access to filtered water, gloves and separate toilets. They sometimes have tea breaks. But tea is no help in making ends meet. As soon as social issues such as wages, union representation and overtime raise their head, the tune changes."