 Good morning, and I am a bearer of bad news. There is a lot to worry about. No lack of confrontation and conflicts. We have Gaza, Ukraine, we have the Red Sea, and now we have Pakistan, Iran, persistent tensions between the US and China, potential flashpoint in Taiwan, and of course the South China Sea. About 50 elections throughout the world this year, billions will go to the polls making it the biggest election year in history. A lot can go wrong. Economically, malaise in China, global growth set for its slowest stretch in about 30 years. Then we have the looming climate crisis, and of course it is AI and the disruption. Are we depressed already? So collectively, what can we do? What are the new ideas, innovation that can be tapped to overcome all these problems? I'm privileged to introduce our speakers today, Doug Peterson, President and Chief Executive Officer, SMP Global, Amani Abu Zed, Commissioner for Infrastructure, Energy and Digitalization, Agnes Kalemah, Secretary General, Amnesty International, Andrew McAfee, Co-Director and Co-Founder, MIT Initiative under Digital Economy. Doug, let's start with you. As we reflect and consider the conversations we've had this week in Davos, what are the biggest risks for the global economy? Well first of all, thank you for having me here and let me reflect on your opening comments. I'm going to start with the macroeconomy. We spent a lot of time here last week and this week talking about it, but I want to go back to last year. A year ago, we were talking about the economy the way that we were depressed. We were waiting for hyperinflation, we were waiting for interest rates to skyrocket, we had issues with labor, and everybody's waiting for the recession to come. This year, interest rates are going down, people are saying, well when are interest rates going to go down? Even though economies are slowing down, it looks like we're going to avoid the recession and have a soft landing. Second topic, geopolitics. This is one we're going to have to talk about. This is where some of the biggest risks are. We have risks with the wars going on, there's conflict around the world, we're going to have a political year, so we're going to be coming back to that. Third topic that this week has been everywhere I've gone, it's about generative AI. And generative AI is such a huge opportunity for productivity, for change of the way we can extract and evaluate and analyze information and data. But it's also going to bring social change, business change. If you think about what it's going to mean for the labor markets, we don't know yet what kind of disruption there's going to be from generative AI. And then the fourth topic which has been very important for a long time is green finance. It's the environmental impact, it's the change that we need to look at around the world. I spent a lot of time this week talking about the importance of thinking about financial resources going to where we need them to come up with an energy transition. So those are the things I've been spending my time on in Davos this week. So lots of big issues Agnes, the thing is all these things are happening at the time and the world is increasingly fragmented. How worried are you? Thank you. I'm going to take a position, I'm going to speak on behalf of the large billions of people who have not been represented at Davos. I'm going to try to present the perspective of the most vulnerable groups around the world and try to present the world from their perspective. I'm going to begin by COVID that is being described around in Davos as one of the greatest form of policymaking and innovation and so on and so forth. However, if you take the standpoint of people in the developing world, if you take the standpoint of developing countries all together, COVID was the greatest example of vaccine nationalism, of the Western world completely disregarding principles of universality and looking for global solution, for global problems. The thing that we need to understand about COVID is that we had the solution. We knew that we could have been serving the entire planet. We did not. We actually made a political policy choice, not to. And that resulted in an imaginable number of deaths, particularly in countries that did not have the same capacities. So why did we make that choice? And what does it tell us about the world we inhabit? What does it tell us about the powerful of that world? When they add the tools, the means, the resources to serve the world and they chose not to in the name of greed, in the name of interest, in the name of geopolitics. Is that a unique example? I don't think so. If you look at the treatment of refugees and migrants around the world, it is a clear demonstration that life is not viewed and assessed in the same way. It is a clear demonstration that racism is embedded in the way we deliver international policymaking and inequality. It's a clear demonstration that we, at the privilege of the world, determined that some lives are less important than others. They can be in Gaza right now, those lives. 24,000 people dead. In three months, the greatest number of casualties ever since World War II over such a short period of time. Those lives don't matter. We are walking, throwing away the principle of universalism that we built in our international system in 1948. So from the standpoint of the vulnerable people around the world, particularly in low-income countries, but also in high-income countries, we are not delivering and inequality is rising. We know that. We have the data. Let's look at COP. We know what needs to be done in order to protect the planet, in order to protect people against preventable death, linked to climate change, linked to the rising temperature, linked to the rising sea water. We don't handle those policies. So the people making those decisions are determining in their mind that some lives are not worth saving. That's, you know, if you want to bring it down to the basic level, when at COP 28 the decisions were made, they agreed and the Pacific Island have said it. That decision that has been held now was a test is putting the Pacific Island on death row. Agnes, let me just jump in here. Commissioner is not all gloom. The path to prosperity, especially for your continent, is still open. Exactly. I mean, we are taking... I mean, we do recognize that there are challenges. And yes, there are majorists and... And the conflicts, the disruptions of supply chain, health issues, the pandemic that occurred, energy crisis. For us, it's an opportunity. And I'm going to use the exact same example that Agnes talked about, which is COVID. COVID, and here I'm betting everybody not to think of the developing world, especially in Africa, as just recipients. And we are just, you know, waiting for someone to give us something. It's true that the vaccines were developed in Northern countries or not in Africa anyway. But we came together from day one. We established our own fund for supporting each other. The PPEs were produced in Africa, for Africa indiscriminately. And we, to get the vaccines, were purchased. We had our CDC purchase for the whole continent as one. Our financial institutions, Ephraim Bank and AFTB, they are the ones who paid for us. I mean, so we came together as one, and we did not see the division in Africa that we've seen maybe in other parts of the world. And we also established a powerful digital tool to allow our transport, especially for landlocked countries, to move safely and so on and so forth. That has not been one minute during, you know, the 2020, 2021, where a country was saying, I, I, I, it was always us and Africa and growing together as an institution. But let me go back to things like climate and like transition and for us, it's access, not just transition, it's also access to electricity. Now, what does it say? And how is this an opportunity for Africa? We have abundance of renewable energy resources and also actually renewable resources, which means that we have, there is a possibility more than ever. And let me just say that energy crisis existed in Africa for 20, 30 years. So what's happened, what happened since 2022 to a large extent is an excellent opportunity for Africa. Because for the first time, the world is talking about energy and is topping the agenda and everyone wants to do something about it. Good for us. We want, we are using this opportunity and that's how we went into COP 26, 27 and 28 and made sure that our, you know, our needs are topping the agenda. The way we wanted, including clean protein, includes the recognition of the transition fuel and so on and so forth. So it depends where you are. What I'm trying to say is that the world also, let us also not think of developing countries as just at the receiving end, last but not least, digital is a fantastic opportunity for us in the continent. We have been leaf-throgging and those of you who have been in our path to the world, you know that we are probably, you know, doing much more with digitalization that most developing economies. Because it offers us a different developing development path and no one in Africa is dealing with cash anymore. No one in Africa, you know, everyone is going around with their mobile and standing that QR codes. That's not what you see maybe in other parts of the world. Even in the market, you know. So it's AI, yes, AI has a very powerful way of also improving and offering possibilities. That said, we also countering that with a strong cybersecurity policy for the continent as well. Last but not least, but let me finish with that. It's a regional integration and for the supply chain disruption, Africa came together to establish the African Free Trade Area in order to benefit from our shared resources. And we do believe that within Africa we can be self-sufficient in so many ways that will also lessen our dependence on any importance. Let's pick up on tag and AI. The commission is talking about all the opportunities, all the good bits, but there are issues, there are risks. How do you ensure AI is a solution for most of the world, if not all of the world? In your opening remarks, you asked all of us, are you depressed yet? And I'm not. For exactly the reason that you highlight, we are entering a period of profound technological progress that's gonna happen by historical standards quite quickly. And for those of us who study technology and for those of us who are committed to improving the state of the world, this is incredibly good news. Tech progress is how we improve the human condition and it's how we learn to tread more lightly on our planet. So I am extremely optimistic in lots of ways, not about everything, but about how technology is going to improve the world. Oh, we talked about... That said, this is not a panel about techno-optimism, this is a panel about risks. And every powerful technology has brought a new bundle of risks with it. This is no exception. We spent a lot of time this week talking about misinformation, absolutely. I wanna talk about a separate set of risks, more closely related to economics and geopolitics. And the ground rule is that when a bundle of technologies, this powerful comes along, the incumbents very often stumble. And I mean that at at least three different levels. I mean the incumbent countries very often stumble when a very powerful bundle of technologies comes around the leading countries in the world sometimes change, that torch passes. Will that happen again? We have to stay tuned. I'm even more concerned about the incumbent companies. Because history tells us pretty quickly the companies that are on top at the start of a transition are not the ones on top at the end of the transition. Okay, so what? That's creative destruction. The so what is for example, we're sitting here in a continent with a very, very large auto industry that employs tons of people. The so far, the companies that are leading the transition into the next round of transportation are not the European incumbents. If that continues, that is gonna bring some real strains and stresses to a lot of countries in this continent. Then the third level is just at the level of the individual human being. Every powerful technology changes to labor force. It makes some skills obsolete. It increases demand for new one. And for the incumbent job holders a lot of time, this is a period of challenge and confrontation. A generative AI and the AI toolkit is gonna be new exception to that. I think it's a transition we can manage, but it is a transition because it upsets the status quo so much. It is a transition that brings risks and challenges, particularly to the incumbents. We talk about the need for coordination when it comes to AI regulations and so forth. Where are we with that? Where are the gaps that need to be filled? I do not wanna slow down the innovators to the pace of the bureaucrats. I think that's a lousy strategy for improving the state of the world via technology. Now, at the risk of repeating myself, powerful new technologies require new regulations. They require new safeguards. I don't like the approach of sitting around and trying to anticipate all of them in advance and make sure they can never happen. I would rather have an agile response to the harms and the risks that come up and deal with them quite quickly. Agnes, we have been talking about how AI tech will be an equalizer. Not necessarily the case, right? I mean, those who have access to it, great. Those who do not. We have seen this happen again and again. Yeah. Look, you know, the entire week I have felt I lived in a different world than most of the speakers and I am experiencing it again. I don't know how the audience feel. The world has become more unequal, more unjust, more violent and I see nothing reflected in that assessment. How is AI going to address this? It's gonna increase all of those characteristics. It's gonna increase inequality. It's gonna increase injustice. It's gonna increase the number of people who live on the edge or fall off the edge unless, unless we have intervention now. Now, I don't want to shut down innovation but I want us to be realistic. We live in a world right now where authoritarian practices are increasing everywhere, where anger is increasing everywhere, radicalization is increasing everywhere, insecurity is increasing everywhere and you want to add artificial intelligence which is gonna put millions of people out of work without intervention, without preparedness. But this is a recipe for complete upheaval. So when you talk about, what kind of intervention? We need intervention. I do believe that actually we need some and I'm not very fond of bureaucracy but we need intervention now. We need training, we need understanding of how this artificial intelligence is gonna push people off the labor force and they will have no other recourse but to use, you know, enter into criminal activities. You see that already around the world. So absolutely we need preparedness whether it's coming from the private sector or from the bureaucrats, I don't care but we do need preparedness and we cannot believe that the market is gonna be the solution or that innovation is gonna be the sole solution. That's where being optimistic to me seems to be actually inaction, we let the market and all those brilliant, super brilliant minds all over Davos run the show. I am a pessimist because I want to be bold, because I want to be courageous, because I want to be realistic, because I see the state of the world and I know that if we don't intervene now we're gonna face even more disaster than we are confronting now. If I may, just on this point, I think we are mixing here the innovation side, which yes, I mean, if you over-regulate any innovation then there would be no innovation. It's crippling, that's for sure. But I think to Agnes's point, there's the issue of ethics of AI and cybersecurity, yes. These are two, definitely these are two very critical issues and I'm sure in every government and we are not excluded from that. I mean, we're doing that also for our continent. Issues of ethics of AI and cybersecurity are two very critical elements or components that go hand in hand with the deployment of AI or the use of AI. So let's not mix the innovation part with some of the downside. As for the human pushing people out of labor force, it also depends where you are. And I'm going to take again the example of Africa. Most of our countries, we don't have a legacy. So when we start afresh in that digital space we, our young people who are now doing fantastically well are being trained directly into these new jobs. And that again, that's why I'm saying whether it's renewable energy, whether it's a digital economy at large, not just AI, it offers us new possibilities to, they use the term leap forward. I don't always like it, but to jump ahead in front. And for us, it's a fantastic opportunity for jobs. One of the other things that we happen that we know happens with very powerful technologies is that there's creative destruction. And it's always easier to see the destruction than the creation. And with every previous very powerful bundle of technologies there's been this very reliable chorus of voices saying, oh my heavens, the era of massive technological unemployment is right around the corner. We are at full employment in many regions of the world. If anything, there's a looming labor shortage, especially in very important occupations like medicine, as opposed to this giant surplus of people who can't find work. So I was at a session earlier this week with a senior member of the Ukrainian government who said something really interesting. He said, pessimists don't win wars. I think that's a great motto to carry around. I also think pessimists have trouble seeing the creation part of creative destruction and trouble, and have trouble imagining how the world could become better. But the thing is, it is about preparedness, right? I mean, how do you invest in preparedness? How do you ensure that your people are ready? So there's two things. I wanna follow up on the conversation about profound technological or new changes. You can go back to the railroad, to the automobile, to the internet, to the mobile phone. And we've seen over time that there's an incredible creation that comes out of that. But let me shift to the question about developmental economics. One of the things that we see right now is a lot of dialogue about environmental change, about energy transition, and the need for the finance on it. That's something that I'm spending a lot of time on. But to take a step back, we need to look beyond that. We also need to look at human infrastructure, healthcare, schools, how we're gonna think about the ability for people that are gonna use technology and have a clean energy transition that they also have a healthy life and a safe life. So we can't just be focused on a single channel. We have to think about human aspects of development. We have to think about the human aspects of how we're gonna bring finance or bring opportunities. We also, you were mentioning trade. And trade is something that I did some work here at the World Economic Forum earlier this week. We had a data wall here. And we looked at all of the global trade patterns. And number one conclusion is trade is actually good. It helps with development. And unfortunately, Africa on the map isn't connected to the world trade. It's not even connected regionally. So I think that there's a big opportunity in many parts of the world, Africa being one of them, to continue with the trade agenda, to connect regions more quickly. So innovation's gonna bring opportunity. We need to think about a human aspect for development, including basic human rights around education, healthcare. But then trade is still gonna be something that's gonna provide great opportunities. And I worry about the fragmentation. And that is why also, that's exactly to this point that we are developing the regional transport infrastructure. We do have now, for instance, 37 countries coming together for a single African air transport market. We are connecting Africa through a single electricity market. The EU is here. We are working together with the EU. So for us, regional integration is one of the most powerful tools for us also to, for resilience, not only be for prosperity, but also for resilience. And I add to that that sometimes these challenges come with a blessing. When COVID hit, we found out, and I'm sorry and really ashamed to say, we found out that only 25% of health facilities in Africa have reliable energy sources. Within two years since then, we made sure that all health facilities in Africa have reliable sources of energy. We now have the AMA, which is medicine for Africa, to develop vaccines locally. So sometimes we all have to go through these very tough times to show the vulnerabilities. And that's not only in Africa to show the vulnerabilities in the health systems. I think we were all exposed as a world, not just Africa. We were all exposed on how our health systems almost were failing to respond to a major, major crisis. And now the world is exposed also when it comes to energy. I know, as I said, this has always been Africa's problem, but unfortunately, the world had to go through tough times to realize that we were right all the time and that energy tops the agenda and should be a major concern for everyone. And the real risk here, I mean, again, the real risk is not anything that we said, and I'm not on their mind, the real risk is inaction. If there's one thing I want to say, the real risk is inaction. We're not going to, it's not like we don't know where are the problems or what are the problems. We know them, I think we spent three years now quantifying, analyzing, going through major summits across the world. Now the real risk is inaction. We have to act now on all these fronts. And this is where I'm not seeing the same zeal and commitment and courage coming forward. And I did mention this to you that in the room, but again, the risk profiling of countries is not helping. The ESG that is being prevailing now that was developed, I don't know, 30, 40 years is no longer valid for our times. We are going through major technological shifts, major issues and major risks around the world. So this ESG is not valid. This risk profiling are not valid and they're just crippling our countries. They have to change if we really are keen to do action, one that is effective. I want to bring up another risk, election risk. Huge, huge critical year for the world. How are we assessing the election risk? There is a risk, the wrong leaders will get elected. There is a risk that the world will get even more fragmented. How are you looking at it at S&P? It's one of the most important aspects of what we look at when we look at credit risk, we look at country risk in our research and analytics. It's one of the top risks for this year. We're discussing what could be some of the implications of the different elections, but it's also in light of the environment we're in. If we had some of the election outcomes and it was a benign macroeconomic and geopolitical environment, we might not worry about it, but we have wars, we have dislocation, we have fragmentation. We have to see what the outcomes are in the elections, but we could end up with more fragmentation. The direction could be more pulling apart. Fortunately, the United States has very strong institutions, the Congress and the courts. We're going to have to rely on them, depending on what the outcome of the election is. And we also need to make sure that we stay engaged through the global institutions like the United Nations, like NATO, other organizations around the world that I add into that also trade packs. So it's on our radar screen when we look at risk and we do projections, and so this is going to be the year we got to watch. Where is the biggest election risk you see rich countries? Well, it's all of the elections globally. There's four million people this year that are going to be voting on elections. All of them are going to matter. I mean, democracy is a difficult gift. Democracy is a difficult gift, right? There is always the chance that we're going to elect the wrong person, that we're going to elect an authoritarian or demagogue, and we see those pressures. But think about what you said at the start. There are more people voting in a democratic, a real democratic election this year than ever before in human history. That's a little bit hard for me to reconcile with the notion that the world is becoming ever more unjust. If more people than ever have a voice in their own government, that seems like a more just world to me. Again, imperfect, maybe not improving quickly enough, but I don't see this one direction of increasing injustice. I think we need to be factual here. There are organizations that are monitoring democratic indicators over time, 20, 30 years, and the indicators are very clear. So let's be factual. Let's not create ideological position that are not factually based. If you look at, for instance, the report from VDEM, one of the latest report they said, we're back to 1986, in terms of democratic indicators. Look at the indicators from Freedom House, same thing. Let's be factually based. If I said the world is becoming more unjust and less democratic, that is grounded on empirical data. So it's four billion people voting in an election this year. But election is only one indicator of what democracy is all about. And frankly, it's becoming a less and less important indicator of what democracy is all about. What are you most focused on? Freedom, freedom of expression, freedom of association, the capacity of people to dissent. You know, number of people being arrested because they dare say something that the rulers did not like. Those are the indicators of the health of a democracy. And around the world, including in the Western world, including in the United States, including in Europe, those indicators are falling apart. This is what the fact are telling us. And we really need, you know, if we want to counter the so-called disinformation and misinformation, we here have a responsibility to push, to be grounded on fact. Commissioner, South Africa, hosting elections this year. How do you see that playing out? Actually, it's not about only South Africa hosting elections. Yes, there have been, there are and there will always be elections across the continent. Imperfect, yes. Some are better than others. Yes, but there are elections. There are a transition of powers. I mean, there has been in Nigeria. I mean, largest, most populous country in Africa. They will be in Senegal. They will be so. And then going back to digital, let's remind ourselves that the smallest and probably the poorest country in the world, Sierra Leone, had its elections using blockchain technology. And in a perfect example of what technology can do, zero rigging. African Union, the first ever international organization having its elections also using blockchain technology. Zero mistake. That's a powerful tool. How can we not talk about what technology can give us? So even for democracy, digital is offered in a space. I know that sometimes it's turned off the internet. But remember how the internet has allowed millions, if not billions of people of voice in their dreams, concerns, good, bad information, disinformation. On tiff.com you too. How can we ignore what's happening? The governance in the world is no longer in the real world. I dare say that governance is happening online. We are all, maybe some of us are not seeing that or we are stuck maybe in a different world. The real governance, and especially for the younger generation, is happening online. We have to be acknowledging these tools. They are extremely powerful. And we have to think and rethink how we look at governance, democracy, freedom of expression on what is going online. Because that is what they are using. Before I open the discussion to the floor, I just want one call to action from our speakers. It is an uncertain world with lots of risk. What would you like to see? What is your call to action? Whether it is for the government, companies, people? Keep innovating. Pessimists don't win wars. Pessimists don't win tomorrow. Implement now. Energy, digital research, now. For us, Africa now. Now. And doing that will help the world. I'm sure you heard this from the IMF. Africa is front and center in these debates, especially about transition. What is good for Africa is good for the world. The action is now, Doug. We need to move fast. We need to be bold. We need to think with a human approach. And we need to vote. Agnes, I will strongly encourage politicians, decision makers to endorse the courageous value-based form of leadership by value. I mean, taking not just their class, social class, not their corporate interest, but the global interest at stake. I don't believe that we will be able to tackle all of those risks as long as we are being driven by policymaking that is self-interested, that is driven a certain idea about capitals, about profit, and neglect the large majority of the population. I will encourage the global leaders to listen to what's coming as well within the UN General Assembly, not the Security Council, which has become so dysfunctional. I will encourage the United States to listen to the GA resolution on Gaza and to abide by the call for a ceasefire. I will encourage Russia to listen to the General Assembly resolution on Ukraine and to withdraw from territories. Look, the rules are there. The policies are there on climate change. We know what needs doing. People engage in handless negotiation at COP in order to avoid implementing or endorsing the policies that every single expert has said is required in order to prevent the world from melting. And we still don't do it. So that's what I will encourage people. At heart, it's about being courageous, but being value-driven, with value being global. Let's take questions from the floor. And if you're engaging in social media, it's hashtag WEF2024. There is a question, please. Thank you for this very interesting discussion. But I'm a little bit puzzled. If you look at this edition of World Economics forums report on global risks, at the 10-year perspective, five of the 10 most important risks are related to green topics like extreme weather events, biodiversity loss, pollution. And I didn't hear a word in this round. So are we forgetting the important things for the urgent things? I think Doug did mention. I did mention. Yeah, I think we did speak about it. Sorry, I don't know. But maybe we didn't spend a lot of time. We talked a little bit about it. But this is on the 10-year view, five of the top risks. In fact, sorry to go back to the two-year view. The number one risk in the World Economic Forum risk report this year is misinformation. And we just talked a little bit about that as we're going into voting cycles for 4 million people. Where will they get the information? How will we make sure that they're getting accurate information? But environmental climate change, those are really critical risks. They're at the top of the 10-year view of risk from the World Economic Forum. I was in a couple of risk sessions earlier this week, and we spent the entire meeting talking about those. And there is a lot of emphasis on it. I mentioned at the beginning that one of the important transitions is how do you get the financial resources to match up where you're going to be able to finance that energy change? We estimate right now that there's somewhere around $2 trillion a year needed for financial resources to come up with an approach to climate change, to infrastructure for climate change. But the financial markets only have about $700 billion available right now. So there's a very large gap. And it is one of the most important dialogues that we started here at the World Economic Forum. It's also discussed at COP. And it will be one of the most important priorities of the financial markets over the next few years. And it is about getting that private capital to play that big role. The public sector doesn't have enough capital to fill that gap. And we're going to need to come up with new solutions, whether it's using multilateral development banks, it's rethinking the ways you need to securitization. Let's start taxing carbon. And corporate interest, not just carbon, not just carbon tax. Again, the UN General Assembly has adopted a resolution led by the Africa Group, thank you very much, on the necessity to have a global tax regime so that actually we can raise the money required for all those changes. Who has voted against? All of the OECD countries, which are the greatest benefactor of this very unequal tax regime right now. Let's tax the corporate interest. I mean, even the richest people in the world are begging us to be taxed. They are begging us to be taxed. That's why I also mentioned the ESG profile is not really fair one, and it's not actually correct in terms of even showing that it risks when it comes to environment. And I did mention that about investment, Africa is the hardest hit region of the world when it comes to climate disasters. And how much do we receive from climate finance? 2%. 2%. So that's why I'm saying that inaction is the biggest risk, including investment. But let me say about another risk. I mean, when it comes to transition, because it concerns us and this is going to be and should be topping your next report for risk. Transition would come with also 500% increase, almost, of many of the critical minerals. And the critical 80% of them are in Africa. So the real risk now is that destroying, again, Africa, so in order to extract those minerals, unless we do something about it. And that's why for us, we are developing policies and strategies so as to benefit our countries from what is going to happen and to prevent a major disaster for the world from happening. So instead of extracting one or two minerals in terms of oil, now we're going into extracting 50 minerals, if not more. So this should be now on our radar for next year for the real risk, you know, going into energy transition. At the start, I said that tech progress lets us tread more lightly on the planet, to your point. Let me try to make that concrete. Over about the past 40 years, the, I'll talk about my home country, America, we're an agricultural powerhouse, the tonnage of our agricultural production has gone up very steadily over the past 40 years. The amount of cropland we need to generate that tonnage has gone down by a lot. It's gone down by an area equal in size to the state of Washington, not Washington DC, the state of Washington. At the same time, we use less water to generate all that tonnage of output. We use less fertilizer. So the beauty of tech progress is that it literally lets us get more from less and it doesn't make us face this harsh trade-off between improving the human condition and the state of nature. We can do both if we innovate. We'll take the next question. Amitabh Bihar, Oxfam. And thank you, Aniyaz, for what you said. I think we need to locate this conversation. You know, we assume that we live in a homogenized world, but it appears we do not. As in there's this, the perspective that I hear are risks for the privileged, elites, and entitled. This is the world where you have 800 million people now sleeping hungry every night. You have five billion people who have become poorer. Whereas the corporates, the billionaires have added three trillion in the last three years. So whose risk are we talking about? As in I feel very concerned. And when you can't get your next meal on your table, we are still not being able to talk about poverty, hunger, injustice, war, that's the reality and that's the global majority's reality. And we live in this absolute bubble. All of us feel extremely comfortable here talking about our bubble. And just on India, it's an electoral autocracy now. And that's how it's been classified. So these numbers of four billion voting is also problematic. In 30 minutes, maybe we can't really get into this but we need to nuance it. This conversation has to be rooted in the global majority. Let's not appropriate the voice of the global poor. Any response? Yeah, I mean I totally agree. And that's what I also tried to say here is that the discussion should not be Eurocentric and we should not even the 800 million people that you are talking about, let's not assume that they are just sitting there. These 800 million people are very hardworking people and they are trying to make ends meet and their struggle is every day. Yet, yet they are fighting, yet they are fighting. And the only way for us, I'm talking about at least, I mean I'm talking about my continent about Africa, is that what we are trying to do together as Africans is to, I mean we face the situation where we couldn't even find food because we found out that we are importing the majority of our food after the, when the Russia-Ukraine war hit. So food security is number one for us in Africa. And mind you, Africa can feed, not only itself can feed the world four times. So the tragedy is that for a very long time agriculture was pushed back for many other reasons. Now agriculture, energy also. 600 million Africans do not have access to energy, have never had access to energy. No one was talking about that, except of course when we came to 2022. 900 million Africans still use firewood and primitive animal waste for cooking and 500,000 Africans die prematurely every year because of lack of clean cooking. It took 28 rounds of crop to just put clean cooking on the screen. So it's, yes, it is unfair, but the thing is that not to stop. It's to tea fighting, we get there, I know it's harsh stuff. And the thing is that now everyone has heard all the analysis, they know the facts, let them invest and just action now. Agnes, quick response. Oh well, I completely agree with the analysis. And I want to insist on the fact that to be pessimistic about the state of the world is because I'm factually based, I can see the evolution of the last 10 years and it doesn't give me ground for a pink version of the world, but it does not mean that we are falling into inaction at all. Pessimism means also being realistic. Pessimism requires to be courageous and the state of the world demand that we are being courageous, that we understand that if we continue, if the trends continue in terms of injustice, in terms of inequality, in terms of the number of armed conflict, in terms of the number of people of dying of preventable diseases, which we are now witnessing a fall back. If the trends continues, where is this world going but falling off the abyss? So of course we need to be pessimistic about where we are now, but in order to act and we need to act with keeping the global majority in our head. We cannot all escape to mass, you know, to recreate a world of privilege. No, we've got to take the poverty and the people dying of preventable diseases and the people begging for work. That should be at the heart of our policies and the selfishness of the Western world right now is beyond shameful. The selfishness of people being driven by greed, corporate interests that are pushing the world of the abyss, that is shameful. That's what we need to fight against. We need the action, we absolutely need action. We need to resist and we need to disrupt. We need to disrupt the construction of the world that is grounded on greater inequalities. And unless we do that, we will all fall off the abyss. On that very sobering note, we have to wrap up the discussion. Please join me in thanking our panelists today, Agnes, Doug, Commissioner Andrew. Thank you.