Evolution happens in most circumstances in the absence of strong ‘anti-evolution” measures, and often even then, generally there is stuff happening at the fringes.
However, rigid barriers hold back change, until like the boy in the dyke, you run out of fingers, and then all hell breaks loose.
Allowing, even encouraging evolution acts as a pressure relief valve.
For some years I worked in the regulated milk industry, it was pretty obvious that the regulations protected a small number of people to the detriment of many, were a barrier to growth, and had no rational economic or social base at all. The problem was politics, not economics, there were a small number of electorates that could swing on the votes of dairy farmers, and we all effectively paid a price to keep them in business.
It was pretty obvious it would end badly, as indeed it did. The costs to everyone were far greater than necessary when the regulations were removed, particularly to those who had survived only because of the barriers. Instead of having time to adjust, those farmers were “killed off” overnight, a tragedy for them, but an inevitable outcome of the sudden removal of significant protection.
In effect, the evolution that was happening on the fringes of the market, and in other regulatory jurisdictions, was disregarded, and it required a bloody revolution, with all the associated pain, to get change.
Just think how much less pain would have been felt in the Middle East had the various autocrats in the region allowed change to evolve, rather than supressing it for years. It is much easier in the long run to encourage evolution.
StrategyAudit 