n 2017, I wrote in a quarterly trends digest [p. 8]: “A number of high-visibility tech leaders are offering visions for collective action and prototypes of global governance that bypass traditional intergovernmental models. Do these offer a challenge or an opportunity for the UN?” This trend has only grown since. And proposals have gained in sophistication. This week, Facebook unveiled the membership of its new Oversight Board. The board will make decisions on what content should be allowed or not on Facebook and Instagram. The set-up looks great: the creation process was consultative, the board is independently run and funded, and the membership is of high caliber and diverse. Some, like Casey Newton, questions whether the group of 40 people – each working 15 hours a month in their board member capacity – will be equipped to deal with complex issues affecting 2.37 billion people. For me, the main problem is that content disputes are only symptoms of more fundamental issues that this board will not tackle. Indeed, global digital platform content-related disputes bring up issues of rights, inequalities and democracy. They are also products of how these digital platforms are designed and operated. If the new Oversight Board does not have a say on these fundamentals, then who does? I would still argue that because this is about universal rights and global governance, this is UN core mandate. So my 2017 question remains valid: where is the UN?  

Blake Ashforth and al.’s “All in a day’s work: boundaries and micro role transitions” put the finger on a key issue for me while working from home during confinement: the loss of micro transitions between the role of worker, parent, educator, and partner. The article [paywall, sorry] gives a theoretical framework and shows how micro-transitions create helpful boundaries between roles, making it easier to do it all and deal with trade-offs. In regular times, these transitions might materialize through a change of physical location, specific times, or different dress codes. When confined, it all gets blurred so one needs to re-create micro-transitions artificially to operate. I still struggled but reading and thinking about it helps me adjust.  

My graph this week is from the Spring Update of the Edelman Trust Barometer 2020 which surveyed 13,200 people in 11 countries in April. Two numbers surprised me. First, trust is at its highest level since 2012, even gaining 6 points since January. Second, 64% of people think that the crisis will lead to positive innovations and change for the better. I was not expecting such optimism.  

My quote this week is from Tim Bray who resigned from Amazon Web Services where he was VP and Distinguished Engineer: “Firing whistleblowers isn’t just a side-effect of macroeconomic forces, nor is it intrinsic to the function of free markets. It’s evidence of a vein of toxicity running through the company culture. I choose neither to serve nor drink that poison.” Wow.

On the 50^th anniversary of Earth Day, many explored the links between COVID-19 and climate change. When I posted about it, some asked “who cares?”. So, it got me thinking about how to better make the case. If you have some good reads, please send them my way.

There has been a lot of talk about air pollution and the pandemic. Two recent studies in the US and Europe show correlations between air pollution and COVID-19 mortality. Xiao Wu et al from the Harvard School of Health used data from 3000 US counties and showed that a small increase in long-term fine particle matter exposure leads to a 15% increase in COVID-19 death rate.  Yaron Ogen from the Halle University Institute of Geosciences and Geography used data from 66 regions in France, Germany, Italy and Spain and showed that 83% of all COVID-19 fatalities where located in the most polluted areas. Ok…but we know that correlation does not mean causality.

In “Addressing climate change in a post-pandemic world” Dickon Pinner and his two McKinsey colleagues do a good job at listing COVID-19 and climate change links, and reviewing what could support or hamper climate action in the recovery context. Widespread teleworking, supply chain shortening, improved risk pricing, increased resilience strengthening, and low-interest-rate boosted infrastructure investments could help the climate transition. Low oil price, limited investors’ capital, and national rivalries could stand in the way. They also make recommendations to governments, businesses and people. What we can all do: raise awareness about the huge economic costs a climate crisis could bring, and maintain those behaviors adopted during confinement that help the planet.

My graph this week is from an Ipsos poll conducted between April 16-19 with 28,000 adults in 14 countries. 71% agree that climate change is as serious a crisis as COVID-19 in the long term and 65% support government actions that prioritize climate change in the economic recovery. That surprised me. In a good way.  

My quote this week is from Hannah Malcom the granddaughter of Nobel Prized climate scientist John Houghton who died from COVID-19: “When I was younger, my consistent memory of him was warnings over the devastation waiting us if we didn’t act on climate change. And I remember thinking how glad I was that scientists like him were in charge. But of course, it isn’t the scientists in charge.”

The World Bank and IMF Spring Meetings typically bring hundreds of people to Washington, D.C. Last week, COVID-19 oblige, they were held virtually. During the 15 April G20 meeting, Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors agreed to  “a time-bound suspension of debt service payments for the poorest countries that request forbearance”. This means that the 76 countries eligible to concessional loans from the World Bank’s International Development Association  (40 of them African) will have a debt service payments freeze for the rest of the year. They will still have to pay, but later. This also means that indebted middle-income countries severely hit by Covid-19 and GDP drops do not get debt relief. Several of these countries are in Latin America and some such as Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and South Africa, are in Africa. So the influential COVID-19 special envoys recently appointed by the African Union are asking for more financial assistance. The G20 Finance will reconvene in July.

Reading David Mwambari’s “The pandemic can be a catalyst for decolonization in Africa” reminded me, yet again, to not look at global issues only through a Western lens. So I was happy to find Oxfam Duncan Green’s recent compilations of African and Indian viewpoints on the COVID-19 crisis.

My graph this week is from the IMF April 2020 Global Economic Outlook showing that the world is facing the worst economic downturn since the great depression with global growth projected to fall to -3 percent in 2020. I am left wondering what that would look like if the outlook also accounted for losses in human and social capital.

My quotes this week are from two women I listened to on the same day and who give the same advice on how to change mindsets. Jane Goodall [1 02’ 58”]: “If you point fingers, if you are argumentative, if you are blaming, you don’t see change. Change has to come from within. So, you need to reach for the heart”. Christiana Figueres [44’14”]: “First, understand what is important to them and then educate and share your knowledge through the channels of what is important to them.”