It is still early to see who has dealt with the coronavirus crisis better. It may take several years before it can be declared which government was more accurate in its strategy, warned the Head of Global Risk and Geopolitical Agenda of the World Economic Forum (WEF, for its acronym in English), Emilio González Franco.
What we can see from now on is that whoever had the broadest fiscal bag and the social protection systems with the greatest coverage had more tools to face the shock of the pandemic, he stated.
Interviewed by El Economista, he explains that without a joint strategy to address the pandemic involving governments, businessmen and society, it will be much more difficult to contain the severity of the health situation and its economic impact.
Mexican of origin, understands the difficulty of disseminating public support in a population where the majority of people of working age are in the informal sector, far from the social protection mechanisms that a labor market grants to the best qualified workers and with greater educational and digital preparation.
From Geneva, Switzerland, where he develops his responsibility in the WEF, he warns that “it is unreal to think that a country alone or that a single government in the world will be able to control the virus without the cooperation of the private sector to share the costs.”
The sample is in the development of vaccines. Without the knowledge of scientists and biologists, or without the push of the private sector, we simply would not have vaccines available in the record time that we have achieved it, he warned.
The challenge now, and the risk, is to ensure that all countries have the same access to vaccines because “no one in the world will be immune to the coronavirus until we are all immune.”
Vaccines, inequality and recovery
In the global race for access to vaccines, it is necessary to be clear that the time it takes to access them will widen the inequality gap between advanced and underdeveloped countries, prolong the crisis and delay the economic recovery.
As we have seen, pandemics do not respect borders, political systems, or socio-economic stratum. The speed of global spread merited a global response that was not achieved given the diversity of capacities that countries had, either due to economic conditions, availability of savings and the adequacy of health systems, he said.
The official comments that in October, they presented a report on risks to do regional business.
In the case of Latin America, 12,000 business leaders indicated that there are five particular risks, which are failures in national governance; unemployment, social instability, the fiscal crisis and infectious diseases.
“The relevance of reports like this one is that it allows us to identify risks, learn lessons and develop strategies to respond in a timely manner. So you can limit the effect of the blow, so that it is not so soon or so serious.
They are not predictions, they are trend analysis
The risks identified in the “Global Risk Report” that the WEF publishes annually, prior to its Davos Forum and for which González Franco is one of those responsible, are not forecasts or projections, much less predictions.
They are warnings of what may come, the product of an annual review by multidisciplinary experts on trends in the natural, political, economic, social, technological and health environment.
An analysis that could allow the development of strategies to face trend challenges if governments had, as suggested by the WEF, a national risk chief similar to the Chief Risk Officer of large corporations. An idea that has already taken shape in countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom and Israel, he said.
It is about understanding that a risk management strategy helps build resilience for an entire country, and for each of the people who inhabit it. And given the interconnection between countries, the advance of one is the advance of all.
–
