Daily Times

As mentioned during last week’s Terminator edition, the World Economic Forum (WEF) issued the Global Risk Report 2017 (the Report) which basically is a summary of events that can cause significant negative impacts for several countries in the next 10 years. Frankly, the bigger risk is that many might not be able to make senses of the Report in the first place. As I myself was rightly advised a while ago, if you want to convey a message, keep it simple. Or perhaps the Report is meant for a limited audience for discussions purposes when there is nothing else to do in Davos; which might be most of the time.

Curiously, the top risk by likelihood, and runner up by impact, was extreme weather events. In fact if you look at the top five risks by likelihood and by impact the off the cuff response in developing nations might by and large be a cynical, “So what else in new”; except for data fraud or theft which in the case of developing nations is not a concern since data is probably not reliable in any case, so why worry about fraud. Pakistan is already in the middle of extreme weather events, which by way of clarification, include water stress and while we procrastinate on Kalabagh Dam the situation worsens day by day. Our cities struggle with large scale migration and remain incapacitated to provide basic services for the growing population, Karachi being the prime example. We have more than our fair share of natural disasters in the form of floods and earthquakes. We have probably been the worst affected by terrorist attacks. And are horrendously within striking distance of weapons of mass destruction. Whether or not we are aware of the risks is a separate debate, the fact that we have decided not to do much about mitigating these risks is perhaps undeniable.

Somehow Mr. Trump winning the American election managed to irk WEF as well; evident from this extract from the report, “The highest-profile signs of disruption may have come in Western countries- with the United Kingdom’s vote to leave the European Union and President-elect Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election”. To venture a guess, Mr. Trump’s response, if he ever gets wind of the report, will be entertaining.

As expected, the Report asserts that economic concerns are paramount and influence the risk landscape. Foremost is the growing income and wealth disparity; according to Oxfam’s most recent broadcast, 8 people own more wealth than half of the world. This is absolutely astonishing; albeit unfortunately no Pakistani made the cut. On the other hand, income disparity is a growing problem in Pakistan as well, with the middle class fast receding into the upper poor class and an ever growing flood of have-nots in the urban areas. I cannot recall the source, but came across a snippet recently that more than 60 percent of Karachi is facing water shortage, lacking sewerage system and proper garbage disposal. While travelling around the city a few days ago, all this was quite evident even in the posh areas and main roads. Considering that Karachi is the biggest city and key economic hub, responsible for most of the taxes collected by the government, this level of laxity is rather amazing. The gist of the matter is that hollow electoral promises will not be able to keep the masses at bay for much longer.

Which brings me to the best section of the report that starts with ostensibly framing a pertinent question: Western Democracy in Crisis? Mr. Trump should definitely read the Report, since his victory is apparently at the heart of this concern over democracy’s inevitable demise. For my friends who stubbornly argue that democracy is the knight in shining armor for Pakistan, the Report’s conclusion should be enough to dampen their passions: “Nonetheless, there are clear reasons to worry about the health of democracy and challenges related to cultural polarization and economic dislocation have no straight forward answers”. The report finds that the situations requires courageous new thinking but strictly speaking has no clue on any solution; possibly since there is none. I have always maintained thatvotes are a commodity which can be sold to the highest bidder; and since the rich have the money to buy, it is not the people who choose the government.

Freedom of speech somehow the other also sneaked into the Report. Never thought of it this way, but it is right to say that 3.2 billion people live in countries where the freedoms of expression are repressed. Except that another 3.2 billion live their life believing that they enjoy freedom of speech, but unknowingly they live in countries where freedom of expression is clandestinely repressed. However jokes aside, the Report had an interesting observation that while civil society actors, NGOs in our case, are prohibited, or at least strictly monitored, from receiving foreign donations, businesses are encouraged to bring foreign investment. I also perhaps concur with the suggestion civil society has a role to play in protecting basic rights and that business leaders should assist the former through lobbying in meetings with government authorities.

The Report remains skeptical about the future of social protection systems; programs designed to reduce poverty and vulnerability by helping individual manage key economic and social risks. As discussed in last week’s article, automation is depriving more and more, especially unskilled, workers, out of jobs and governments don’t have the funds to provide basic health and income protection which could result in social unrest. The Report feels that there is an urgent need to develop options that respond to this particular risk; but does not elaborate what these options can look like.

And here in lies the problem. While the report, based on a survey of leaders from business, government, academia and others, highlights pertinent risks, it fails to give concrete solutions for mitigating these risks. I have always held that problems without solutions are not problems, they are a fact of life you live with. It would be useful if WEF sponsors a survey focused on solutions to these problems and perhaps someone out there might just have the right ideas. Without a blueprint to follow, the Report will probably end up in the archives very quickly, especially in case of countries such as Pakistan where the populous has an entirely different take on risk.

The risk that the landmark case currently with the Supreme Court can go the wrong way, with everyone having their own version of right and wrong. The risk that we may never get to watch Indian movies again. The risk that CPEC may bypass our province. Frankly, in our case the first thing we need to figure out is, what risk?

The writer is a chartered accountant based in Islamabad and can be reached at syed.bakhtiyarkazmi@gmail.com