I was in meetings recently surrounded by macro-economists, and the topic of discourse was systemic risk – whether or not a decade after the Asian financial crisis, there was still the chance of the same thing occurring again now.

Compared with the trade practitioners and entrepreneurs I’m more used to interviewing, economists can be a frustrating bunch for writers. They speak in such long sentences broken up by commas, use a lot of jargon, and generally repeat the same point several times. When you’re approaching an economist’s paragraph, you tend to find that it’s twice the length to everyone else.

To be fair, what they say does stick in your mind though. This time around, the conclusion was surprising to me. Despite stronger economies with robust Balance of Payments surpluses and stronger currencies than a decade ago, Asia did still face a set of economic imbalances that given a “trigger” – a major worldwide event on a SARS, trade war or 9-11 scale – might indeed set off Asian Contagion II - The Revenge.

Who was the main culprit in our economist’s eyes? Our new friend China. The practice of China, matched by a number of other Asian countries, to hold a semi-fixed exchange rate in the interests of its export economy is causing a “wall of liquidity” in the world’s capital markets. It is this wall that is leading to domestic inflation in some countries, and to “asset bubbles” markets like Singapore and Jakarta, making property markets swell out of proportion. It’s also contributing to big sell-offs of assets, such as the recent Hilton sale.

In turn, the imbalances are effecting the views in the US towards free trade – and heightening the likelihood of sanctions and trade wars if China does not eventually revalue.

Of course the conversation was much longer and more protracted, but it shifted my perspective. In times when the media tends to focus more on the "big sale or the disaster du jour", it’s gratifying to hear some reasoned views on the medium-term future.

It made me aware too that we are living in rather short sighted times. As we leverage ourselves up buying more hotels or private property, some of voices of balance like these long-winded economists would be a welcome note on our news front pages, travel conferences and investor gatherings.

Travel is a market massively depends on currency movements and macro-economic changes. Systemic risk is vitally important. Yet we are also an industry sometimes painfully lacking in economic data or reliable economic forecasting. As travel matures and gains its rightful status, this has to change. Data can be a valuable weapon when used well.

And welcome or otherwise, the big picture can definitely help us shift our gaze in healthier directions.