The World Economic Forum points to a grim 2034

TORONT—The World Economic Forum has once again published its Global Risks Report, which outlines the major uncertainties that experts and decision-makers from around the world see for the next two years and, as well, for 2034, a decade from now. What the report shows is that there is a much higher level of pessimism about the risks to the world for a major disruption in 2034 than between now and 2026. That doesn’t mean there is complacency about the near term, as the world struggles with conflict in Ukraine and growing tensions in the Middle East, concerns over the current economic recovery, growing impacts from climate change, and social polarization making solutions to many challenges much more difficult to achieve. In the report, a global risk is defined as “the possibility of the occurrence of an event or condition which, if it occurs, would negatively impact a significant proportion of global GDP, population, or natural resources.” Over the next two years, 29 per cent of those surveyed expect either a stormy world where catastrophic risks are looming, or a turbulent world of upheavals and elevated threat of global catastrophes. But these fears worsen over the decade so that by 2034 some 62 per cent of those surveyed expect to live in a stormy or turbulent world. These concerns are higher among younger respondents. To 2026, the most severe global dangers come from growing misinformation and disinformation, which could influence the outcome of elections around the world this year, extreme weather events, social polarization, cyber insecurity, and interstate armed conflict. But the uncertainties seen for 2034 will bring on a more difficult period of significant change, “stretching our adaptive capacity to the limit,” the report says. By then, the leading risks will come from extreme weather events, critical changes to Earth systems, biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse, natural resource shortages and misinformation and disinformation. Clearly, climate and the planet's carrying capacity as population grows and needs increase are increasingly in the minds of those who think seriously about the future. How things have changed. During the first decade of the 21st century we were often told that dealing with the environment and sustaining economic growth were at odds with each other. Now we know that addressing environmental issues is essential for economic growth. In the report, extreme weather events are defined as “loss of human life, damage to ecosystems, destruction of property, and/or financial loss due to extreme weather events.” They are “inclusive of land-based (e.g. wildfires), water-based (e.g. floods), and atmospheric and temperature-related (e.g. heat-waves) events, including those exacerbated by climate change.” Critical changes to Earth systems include “long-term, potentially irreversible and self-perpetuating changes to critical planetary systems, as a result of breaching a critical threshold, or ‘tipping point,’ at a regional, or global level, that have abrupt and severe impacts on planet health or human welfare.” This “includes, but is not limited to sea-level rise from collapsing ice sheets, carbon release from thawing permafrost, and disruption of ocean or atmospheric currents.” Biodiversity loss and ecosystem collapse are defined as “severe consequences for the environment, humankind and economic activity due to destruction of natural capital stemming from a result of species extinction or reduction, spanning both terrestrial and marine ecosystems.” Natural resource shortages are defined as “supply shortages of food or water for human, industry, or ecosystem use.” They can manifest as food and water insecurity at a local, regional, or global level as a result of human exploitation and mismanagement of critical natural resources, climate change (including drought, desertification) and/or lack of suitable infrastructure.” The report focuses on four structural forces that will drive change and raise global risks. These include: technological acceleration—including AI—which could spark multiple trajectories; geo-strategic shifts which reflect changing geopolitical power; climate change, which includes many possible trajectories including migration, infectious diseases, threats to food and water, human health and rising sea levels; and demographic bifurcation from the growth and structure of populations worldwide, including aging and even shrinking populations in some parts of the world such as Europe, Japan, China, and Africa. There will no doubt be surprises over the next decade— in 2005, who foresaw the 2008 global financial crisis, the COVID-19 crisis of 2020, or the current conflagration in Gaza? Could thawing of the Arctic’s permafrost, for example, unleash long buried new viruses and another pandemic? So the really important question is how to better prepare for crises—including how to avert potential calamities such as those identified in the World Economic Forum report. This is, in many ways, a political question because, ultimately, we will need political leadership that can look beyond the immediacy of today, and create the institutions that will enable us to head off the risks we face years from now and even turn them—when possible—into opportunities. As the report makes clear, environmental peril could hit a point of no return; growing polarization and technological potential for misinformation mean perceptions of reality could also become more polarized; simmering geopolitical tensions combined with technology will drive new security risks; entrenched market concentration among global giants could grow; artificial intelligence, quantum computing and other new technologies will have sweeping impact; living standards could stall, and cyber vulnerabilities may increase. Today, our biggest problem is at the political level where opportunistic and short-term initiatives too often brush problems under the rug for others to solve. In Canada, for example, we have decided that escalating housing prices and rents, overcrowded and burdened healthcare system, and stagnating per capita GDP are all the fault of too many immigrant students, not our long-term failure to plan for a growing population’s needs and impacts. The World Economic Forum points to a grim 2034. It doesn’t have to be that way, but it will be unless we develop the institutions, capacities, and will for a different future. That is a political choice. David Crane can be reached at crane@interlog.com. The Hill Times