What I Read

Fréderic Thomas’ “L’abominable secret du cancer” offers a new way of looking at cancer: through evolutionary biology. Born half a billion years ago when life moved from unicellular to multicellular organisms, cancer has always lived in and evolved with us. This is only problematic when biological errors occur – ie when somatic cells meant to serve our organism by acting collectively go rogue, act alone, and replicate themselves endlessly (metastasis). From an evolutionary point of view, we are programmed for reproduction. So such errors are highly controlled during our reproductive years. But as our non-reproductive life and exposure to DNA-deteriorating pollutants grow, so do chances of errors. And cancer is also programmed to reproduce itself including through mutation and resistance; it evolves. Looking at cancer through this lens helps us understand why traditional treatments focusing on eradicating one form of cancer at a given time are not adapted. Thomas argues that treatments assisting humans to live with a cancer that evolves over time would be more appropriate. He also reviews the latest research on such treatments. This book gives hope. I only wish it were in English for a broader reach. 

I typically read books (eg Anand Giridharadas’ “Winners take all”) and essays (eg Tariq Fancy’s “The secret diary of a sustainable investor”) criticizing corporate and philanthropic attempts at saving the world. The well-argued cynic is often entertaining. Arguments made are often valid. These reads keep me on my toes. But I am always disappointed when their recommendations are limited to arguing that only government and intergovernmental organizations can save the world. To be sure, I will never dispute that their roles are key. But those of us who spent time working for either or both, know that politics, self-interest, big egos, amateurism, abuse etc also exist in public institutions. The grass is not greener. So while i enjoy those reads, I  do not find them particularly constructive. And I am always amazed at the lasting attention and press coverage they get.

My graph this week is from the Peterson Institute for International Economics’ ”Globalization is in retreat from the first time since the Second World War” which I actually found in Lyn Alden’s excellent “Supply chains woes” showing that the current price inflation is not only due to COVID-stressed supply chains but also to fiscal and monetary policies as well as deglobalization patterns which are very similar to those of the 1940ies.

My quote this week is from Angela Merkel: “For me the word feminism is indeed also connected with a certain movement that has fought very hard to put these things on the social agenda. And that’s why I mentioned praise which I did not want to claim for myself. Queen Maxima of the Netherlands opened the door for me by saying: in principle it’s about men and women being equal in the sense of participating in social life, in life as a whole. And in this sense, today I can affirmatively say: I am a feminist […] yes we should all be feminists.”

[Thank you for taking the survey! 87% of you said that WIR was always or mostly useful. So here I am again. Will move to bi-weekly. And increase the font.]

Nature tops the global agenda for this second half of 2021. It started with the IUCN Congress – the biggest global gathering of environmental experts – early September. Commitments are captured in the 6-page Marseille Manifesto. The highlight, for me, was IUCN’s first CEO summit. Companies showing up at tree-huggers’ events is a trend. But multi-nationals defining targets to restore biodiversity through their operations and supply chains and committing to report on progress is rather new. The space to watch now is how this will build up at the biodiversity COP15 next month and the climate change COP26 right after.

“A “silent spring” for the financial system? Exploring biodiversity-related financial risks in France” evaluates the dependencies and impacts of the French financial system on biodiversity. Unusually combining the expertise of environmentalists and central bankers, it estimates that 42% of national financial assets are highly dependent on ecosystem services. The methodology builds on last year’s similar effort conducted by the Dutch Central Bank as well as on risk models developed for climate change. But biodiversity is more complex than climate change. So much research is still needed to develop a comprehensive financial risk assessment system.

Generation Investment Management’s “Sustainability Trends Report 2021” shows that European sustainability flows have increased tenfold since 2015. The Al Gore-founded investment firm also estimates that 78% of global GDP is now covered by net zero commitments.

My quote this week is from George Saunders’ interview “What it means to be kind in a cruel world”: “Moral transformation when it happens, happens not through the total remaking of the center or the replacement of its habitual energy with some pure new energy but by a redirection of its same old energy.” [23’41”]

#whatiread takes a break for the summer…or more. To decide whether I continue after the summer, it would be super useful if you could take this 3-question survey. It is anonymous so please be honest. Thanks
 
Based on clicks, your two favorite themes have been working-from-home and gender for the first part of 2021. And Manu’s TOC cartoon. Below is your top 5.
 
Jeremy Bailenson’s “Nonverbal overload: A theoretical argument for the causes of zoom fatigue” argues that some of the zoom fatigue comes from nonverbal behaviors typically not associated with days in the office: close-up eye gaze, cognitive load, staring at videos of oneself, and constraints on physical mobility. Based on these, Bailenson and his colleagues developed a scale to monitor “Zoom Exhaustion and Fatigue (ZEF)”. To lower our ZEF scores, they recommend moving the camera far from our faces, turning off our video, switching back to phone calls, and walking around while on zoom meetings. Good luck!
 
I enjoyed Julia Gillard & Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala’s “Women and leadership”. It describes the itineraries of 10 women having reached the top of national governments and international organizations – where women make up less than 10% of leaders worldwide.  It is not an academic book and does not overuse statistics. Rather it offers eight lessons based on these stories and decades of peer observations. None of them are particularly new. What I liked was the candor with which these female politicians shared their struggles and practical tips. The chapter on how women are judged based on their hairstyles and physical appearances disturbed me. The chapter unpacking the guilt experienced by working mothers (and comments making it more vivid) spoke to me. So many times, as I travelled for work was I asked who was taking care of the kids…including by a UNICEF child rights expert and an INSEAD professor seasoned in ethics and social innovation…I thought the professional journeys of Malawian Joyce Banda and Liberian Ellen Johnson Sirleaf were mind-blowing considering all the hardships they had to overcome to become top politicians. It struck me that most women featured in the book were offered leadership “opportunities” when situations were incredibly complex, desperate or prone to failure. I also noted that none of them were initially seeking power and often asked to step in the top jobs. The book ends with a “GO FOR IT” call to action. But honestly, after reading this book, I would not run.    
 
My graph this week is from Statista’s “The countries with the most women in national parliament” because, for once, Nordic countries do not make the top of the list. I only knew Rwanda was at the top and would never have guessed which were others in the top five.

John Levy’s “The hybrid workplace probably won’t last”  identifies strong factors playing against the long-term success of hybrid teams. Communication and trust decrease with distance. Lack of breaks, transitions, and commutes affects reflective capacity. Creating a remote culture of belonging is hard work. Levy, an expert of connection, trust and belonging, predicts that all white collars will go back to the office.

The WEF’s “Building back broader” asks its six Global Future Councils how to build back a more inclusive global economy. The to-do list will not surprise you: progressive fiscal policies, social protection and decent jobs, 21st century skills for all, more social justice, and public-private partnerships 2.0. The last chapter argues for more foresight in decision making (yes!) and identifies current “frontier risks” — ie risks that emerge at a frontier as technologies surface or human and societal forces shift (p.59). Three caught my attention because I have not read enough about them and should: the militarization of space, a permafrost methane release, and human-engineered pandemics. Last we heard from minority shareholder activism and sustainability it was not good news: Emmanuel Faber got kicked out of Danone. There is now a trend of such activists pushing for more sustainability in large companies.  Jessica Camille Aguirre tells the story of “the little hedge fund taking down big oil”, or how Engine No1, a small investment firm managed to place two climate experts in the board of Exxon Mobil. Traditionally, activist investors have worked to influence the management of companies with the view to increase the value of companies’ stocks – to make money. The same strategy and tactics are increasingly used to have more positive impact on the planet. Watch this space.    The Pew Research Center shows that 61% of the public in OECD countries think that their country is more divided now than before the pandemic. This number goes down in the Asia-Pacific with Singapore, Taiwan and New Zealand feeling more united. To note that these optimistic countries are those with the lowest number of deaths and the best crisis management according to their populations.

Megan Rapinoe [34:55] thinks that “everybody should live in their full individuality. We live in a society that values individual over the greater good but we require that individual to fit in this tiny box of what we deem as a society acceptable.”

The Global Peace Index (GPI) consists of 23 indicators and covers 99.7% of the world population. The 2021 GPI report shows that global peacefulness has deteriorated by 2% since 2008, calculates that the global violence price tag is $14.96 trillion dollars per year, and says that its latest increase comes from growth in military expenditures. The three indicators with the largest deterioration in 2021 are violent demonstrations, political instability and militarization. The three with the largest improvement are deaths from internal conflict, number and intensity of internal conflicts, and deaths from terrorism. A poll with 150,000 people in 142 countries shows that 15% of people globally feel that crime, violence, or terrorism is the greatest risk to their daily safety. Only road accidents are cited as a bigger risk (19%).

Sunita Sah’s “Mental health: pressure to return to the office could be making employees more anxious” [H/T Anthony Renshaw] shows that nearly all employees are anxious about returning to the office. They fear being exposed to COVID-19 and dread loosing flexibility, commuting, wearing a mask at work and needing childcare. What is preoccupying is that many employers have not consulted their staff when drafting return-to-work policies adding to the overall stress of their workers. 

The “Sustainable Development Report 2021” shows that for the first time since the adoption of the SDGs in 2015, the global SDG Index score – assessing each country’s performance against the 17 SDGs – decreased in 2020. The drop was driven by growing poverty and unemployment globally, including in OECD countries. The three countries that have progressed most on the SDG Index score since 2015 are Bangladesh, Côte d’Ivoire, and Afghanistan; and the three that have declined the most are Venezuela, Tuvalu, and Brazil. The regions that have seen most progress are East and South Asia.

My [edited] quote is from Pink Floyd Roger Waters: “How did [Mark Zuckerberg] – who started off by saying, ‘She is pretty, we’ll give her a four out of five,’ ‘She’s ugly, we’ll give her a one’ – how did he get any power in anything? And yet here he is, one of the most powerful [person] in the world.”

Happy World Environment Day!

UNEP and FAO’s “Ecosystem restoration for people, nature and climate” launches the latest UN campaign: The UN decade on ecosystem restoration. The report pulls together the literature and data on ecosystem degradation and the benefits of its restoration for the economy, people and nature. It is a very useful reference document. And I saw three weaknesses on the call-to-action front. First, the chapter on trade-offs is too general. Indeed, companies which are pro-active on climate change, need specific guidance on how to weave biodiversity in their action plans. Second, the report points to the lack of exhaustive data on restoration costs – essential to make the case for return on investment. Third, the final chapter is overwhelming as it shows how the campaign relates to environmental conventions and the SDGs, and presents the 5 task forces, advisory board, hub and playbook that will help execute.

Netflix’ sustainability commitments are reaching net zero by 2022 and investing in nature-based solutions. Their new head of sustainability who took the job in October 2020 recently said that her position had been the most sought after in the history of the company. What got me excited: A bold plan; a woman scientist leading the job; and the use of the platform to promote the cause.  

The Economist Intelligence Unit’s “An eco-awakening: measuring global awareness, engagement and action for nature” measures the awareness, engagement, and action for nature using social media data. The popularity of nature and biodiversity has increased by 16% worldwide since 2016 driven by growth in Asia, and primarily in India (190%), Pakistan (88%) and Indonesia (53%).

UNEP Executive Director Inger Anderson tells INSEAD students: “Preaching to the converted isn’t going to make the difference we need in our societies. So, we need brave and fearless people inside corporates. We need strong and young voices, not worn down or subsumed by a company’s culture, to be the flea in the ear, the conscience, the voice of reason that forces corporates to move beyond lip service to sustainability and start doing something meaningful.”