Good brainstorms are oft anticipated and rarely encountered. So I tend to get a little excited when I find myself in one that stimulates rather than stultifies.
Today at the World Economic Forum Summit on the Global Agenda had more than it’s fair share of frustrations – including what I can only describe as a masterful demonstration in the art of assisted group-think entropy (sense in, nonsense out). But rather than moan about the negatives, I want to emphasize one of the highlights of the meeting – the Global Agenda Council Fair.
The Global Agenda Council Fair is the part of the Summit where attendees are free to roam amongst the 76 councils, talking about common interests and sparking new ideas off other delegates. For me it’s like being a kid in a candy store – a chance to dip into seventy-six groups of people ready and willing to discuss everything from the Climate Change to the Future of Entertainment. Sadly, with only an hour or so available and an Emerging Technologies agenda to follow, I had to restrict myself to two Councils today. But it was still a lot of fun – and very worthwhile.
So let me give you a flavor of how things worked.
The first group I visited was the Catastrophic Risks Council. When I arrived, there was a discussion in full flow about the need to get a handle on distinguishing more likely/higher impact global catastrophic risks from those less likely to happen or cause serious harm. A more rational approach to risk identification and action – it was being argued – would help channel resources to where they could be used most effectively, while reducing anxiety from unwarranted speculation. The solution – a World Risk Organization.
I had come to the group in part to talk about a proposal from my own Council on a new global center to inform policies on developing safe, sustainable and successful emerging technologies, and was immediately struck by how well the two ideas meshed together. Emerging technologies have the potential to create serious problems if not developed appropriately. Yet they also provide possible solutions to dealing with problems from other sources. By taking an informed approach to weighing potential risks and benefits and taking action, I could see how the two ideas could be highly complimentary.
At this point, a delegate from the International Legal System Council entered the booth. And the immediate reaction to the idea of a World Risk Organization? “How about the risk-equivalent of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change?”
It transpired that the International Legal System Council had been working on the idea of an Intergovernmental Panel on Global Risks.
Who would have thought there would be such synergy between catastrophic risks, emerging technologies and international legal systems!
The second group I visited was the Food Security Council. Here the discussion was a little more diffuse, but stimulating nevertheless. The idea of using mobile phones and cellular networks to monitor and treat crops came up as an innovative intersection between emerging technologies and ensuring good food production. It’s not a new idea, but it is a great example of how new technologies can have unexpected benefits – if accompanied by some creative lateral thinking.
More interesting was a discussion about identifying counterfeit pesticides and fertilizers. A delegate from the Illicit Trade Council had raised the issue of how important it is to track the origin of food products, preventing illicit – and potentially harmful – products from entering the food chain. This led to an observation that counterfeit fertilizers and pesticides are a serious problem in some developing economies. Not only do they undermine legitimate trade, but they often jeopardize the health and safety of crops – with serious consequences to communities that rely on them. Apparently though – and this was news to me – the origins of fertilizers and pesticides in developing economies are often hard to identify.
There was a clear link here with the potential use of emerging technologies for enabling cost-effective and robust tagging of legitimate products. Using advances in complex chemicals, engineered nanomaterials or bioengineering, it should be possible to develop new ways to ensure the quality of agricultural products – supporting higher quality and higher volume crop yields, and improving the health and lives of people dependent on them.
In the space of an hour I had learned some new stuff, added value to other people’s concepts, and started formulating some new ideas of my own. And this was happening all around me – 700 people being exposed to dangerously high levels of mental stimulation!
For me, this was a highlight of today’s sessions. Okay so the two-hour meeting on reducing ten sharp ideas to eight woolly ones was a little tedious, and working out what we were supposed to be doing was challenging at times. But the sheer enjoyment and serendipity of the Council Fair more than made up for these.
The challenge now is seeing whether any of those sparks can be coaxed into a fully fledged fire!