 OK, thank you very much for people joining us here at the World Economic Forum in Davos and for people joining us online for this really important, wide-ranging panel on the end of development. A critical issue. A critical issue, because when I was kindly asked by colleagues here at Davos to chair this, so I should introduce myself, I'm Faisal Islam. I'm the BBC's Economics Editor. When I was asked, I thought it was one of those great questions that would take two entirely different ways. Is it the end of development bad news? Because in the sense that we're processes that have led to the rising living standards around the world, shared prosperity, are going into reverse. Or is it the end of development not so bad news? Because actually many developing countries are now way along the path that anybody might have even expected 20 or 30 years ago when these sorts of issues were being discussed at this forum and others. And we're going to discuss a whole series of related issues around this sort of what has been called the kind of de-globalisation theme, fatigue of course with globalisation. I always think coming from Britain, the globalisation itself is a word that has failed to globalise because we spell it with an S and here they spell it with a Z. A Z even, I should say. The shocks, geo-economically, that of course cast a shadow over this event just at the point when people felt we were coming out of three years of rolling, kind of interacting shocks. Another one or two come along. The role of industrial policy in advanced economies, the sort of refusal if you like from some of the Western economies newly to accept that globalisation will just raise everybody's living standards and wanting to... And this is fascinating, isn't it? Who would have thought at this forum 20 years ago that the Western G7 nations would be copying the policies of the emerging economies? But that's what we've got. It shows that futurology is rather difficult. Rapid technological risks as well, transforming the world economy, but also maybe changing some of the dynamics around economic convergence. So what practical solutions can continue the progress in rising living standards? It just in terms of some of the housekeeping, we're going to be talking for about 25 minutes up here. We'll have questions 15 minutes. I'm going to introduce the participants in a second. The online audience or indeed people here is the hashtag Wef24. Let me introduce this great panel. From close to me here, we have Ann Bethe Tvenehrim, the Minister of International Development for Norway. We have Ibrahim Patel, the Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition of South Africa. We have Rebecca Greenspan, the Secretary-General of the UN Conference on Trade and Development, Anktad from Geneva. And Simon Freakley, Chief Executive Officer of Alex Partners from America, a really good insight. He has, in terms of the private sectors, views on all of this. Let's just have a show of hands on this issue from the audience here. Is the rapid rise of convergence in emerging economies living standards with the advanced economies, something we've taken for granted, is it now coming to an end? Yes or no? Yes. Who thinks it is? I think that's a total consensus. There is no question there. Let's move on. Let's bring in Rebecca first, OK? OK, you pump out a whole load of reports and statistics and what is the evidence as regards some of these processes that we've taken for granted of globalization and emerging economies, rapid rise in living standards of whether it's slowing in some way or changing its pattern and its nature? Well, what we see in the numbers, yes, in the prospects and what we saw in 23, it seems the pandemic, let's say, is two different divergence. So we see within the developed countries also a divergence between the growth rates of the US and the growth rates of Europe. And in the developing countries, we see also a divergence between the growth rate of the emerging big economies and the rest. So in a way, there is this... We can say we have the rich, the big and the rest. And the emerging economies, the big emerging economies are doing very well, yes, and the prospects for this year are also good. They will be growing much more than the developed countries. So there, there is a convergence, yes? But the rest is not following the path of the big... It's quite remarkable, really, given... You know, even last year at this event, when you think about what's happened in the global economy, run-up of debt service through the crisis, the pandemic crisis, then almost the worst possible thing, interest rates whacked up immediately afterwards, many people here were predicting kind of rolling emerging market crises that haven't materialized. No? They're just simply... They are not growing at the same rate they were growing before the pandemic. Let's be clear. Yes, we haven't recovered from the pandemic in terms of growth rates. And part of what worries us is that the slow growth indicator that we have is because we have very weak trade growth and very weak investment growth. And that's what affects the rest of the developing countries. Yes? If you don't have, you know, to push the engine of trade, if you don't have the engine of investment, what are the growth prospects for the rest of the developing countries? But the big ones are doing well. They are doing well in trade and they are doing well in investment. And they have their own resilience and, you know, a capacity precisely because of their size. OK, and then just unpack that slow down in trade growth just lastly. Is that, as far as you can see, part of a policy of rolling back freer trade, maybe more regional trade, a bit of skepticism about the benefits of totally free trade around the world? Yeah, especially in the North. Yeah. You know, I don't think that the fatigue with globalization is so clear in the South. Yeah, interesting. Because they need trade and they need investment, yes? So what we see is nationalist policies or industrial policies going, you know, in the rich countries, yes? And they have the fiscal space to do that. They can use the subsidies. But the developing countries, the rest of the developing countries, yes, these small and medium-sized countries don't have the fiscal space to do that and to run industrial policy in the same way. They will need other instruments and that's where the multilateral system has to come in. You know, we need much more financing from the international system to crowd in private investment into these countries and we need also trade rules that will allow these countries to add value to their own raw materials and critical minerals so they can follow an industrial policy that will be sustainable but also faster growth, much faster growth. Okay. That's a great vista. Thanks for that, Rebecca. Let's bring in Ibrahim Patel now on, you know, one of the most important economies in the world now. I remember the G20 assessing itself on the world stage. Do you see a change in the weather in terms of how global trade works? Do you see this actually tangibly in some of the trade deals we're doing and the trade pattern South Africa enjoys? Faisal, you made an interesting observation and you put it provocatively. Could one imagine developed countries copying the model of development of developing countries? And let me perhaps start with that observation. The path that China and the number of fast-growing Asian economies followed in turn copied and much earlier model of development in Europe and in the United States. And so historically, if you think about trade, countries bolt, I mean the whole history of trade is replete with examples of developed countries having quite high barriers as they built industrial capability. As specialization, as the benefits of competition became more evident, they were able to reduce that trade. And in the colourful language of one development economist, they then kicked away the ladder of development. Asian countries followed that. Within this new rules-based system they found opportunity and advantage. And here's the issue for us. We are living in a world that's more fractious, in a world that's more volatile. I think volatility is being baked into the system. The division that we're seeing though need not be. The argument for multilateralism is strong. Think about global history, not only the period of the WTO or even the period of GATT. If you think over the last many hundreds of years, human development has been enhanced by greater flow of trade, more ideas flowing, people travelling and so on. But at the same time, those rules need rebalancing. Those rules themselves need rebalancing. We need rules. We don't need the strongest to be able to assert itself. But the rules need rebalancing. And so what I see now in the discussions we have with countries on the African continent, as well as the discussions among BRICS countries, is a real sense that many in the global south need a different set of rules. I'll give an example perhaps of this. In a Bloomberg-moderated discussion this morning, I quoted some statistics and just permit me, Faisal, to briefly repeat them. If I think about it as an African, Africa accounts for 17% of the world's population today. It only generates 3% of global GDP. And if you take as the metric of, let's say, significant growth, growth that adds value across society, which is industrialisation, not just raw material exports, then Africa accounts for perhaps in autos and in steel output 1%, or just under 1% of global output. So that needs to be changed. So coming back to your question then, there is certainly a sense on the African continent that we need to become the defenders of a multilateral system, a rules-making system that works, but we need to question whether those rules have always been well-balanced. And that is what I think in the ministerial conference at the end of February is going to be a big issue. Later I hope we'll have an opportunity to talk about this in the context of climate change. Yes, we definitely will get on to the issue of climate change. Just unpack that, the idea that the south-south needs a different set of rules. That's quite interesting. Is that in the context of, say, the Americans have chucking tens of billions of pounds, well, not just green industry, but the chips industry, you see that your country has a fantastic science base. It could be home for some of these industries, but now that the Americans are doing it and the Europeans are doing it, which is understandable in their own world, do you feel like some of these understandable decisions are kind of cutting off the global south from some paths of development? You've put it so beautifully that I want to illustrate it. I'm going to illustrate it using green industrialization. This is the next big wave. It will happen. It has to happen. The world has to make the transition from coal-based high carbon emission to a greener future. But there's an enormous competition about who's going to dominate these technologies. On the one side, the United States is throwing enormous sums of money through the Inflation Reduction Act into building competitiveness and capability in that, something that we can't match, as was mentioned by Rebecca. We don't have the fiscal space to do so. On the other end, the European Union is using, this is my view of it, and it's the view of many in the global south, the carbon border adjustment mechanism to build an advantage for European firms. And so we sit with this challenge of how we navigate also getting into green industrialization when we can't match either the amounts of dollars thrown into it on the one hand or the closing of markets, which is an important instrument of development on the other hand. And this is what the discussion is about. Okay, great. Let's bring in Alex from a private sector perspective. What are you hearing? Are the business people that you speak to and advise every day, do they feel that some of the rules of the road, the inherent automatic kind of free market kind of basis for how things have been run is fundamentally changing and they're having to adapt to it? Thanks, Farz. Well, obviously, I live in the world of business and what I see is that we've all got so used over the last 30 years of this super cycle and we've convinced ourselves it's usual, lower barriers of trade, global capital markets, global supply chains. And of course, the pandemic came and gave us an awful shock that actually things weren't as seamless as we got used to. And then of course, multiple crises have followed. So one almost wonders whether it's a business person, one's going from a poly crisis to a perma crisis because whether it's geopolitical events that continue to not just shock the world but comprehensively disrupt supply chains, whether it's the fact we have almost 80 elections in the world this year with 40% of the world's population voting, a rise in nationalism which makes, for instance, an American first philosophy in the US quite attractive from an electoral point of view. We come to the end of this super cycle of 30 years and the rules are changing and people are having to pivot and adjust. Now, Rebecca, you mentioned about the difference between Europe and America. It's interesting. If you look at the total population of Europe and the total population of the States, it's about the same, about 330 million people. If you look at the number of large companies in the global 500, it's about the same. So why is it that the US has grown so much faster? Well, part of it's to do with a contiguous landmass of people speaking largely the same language. That actually is one of the reasons. But also because some of the frictions of trading around Europe were not there in the States. And so I think that, to your question, Faisal, I think that business leaders have found that the strategies that used to work no longer work, they have to remain very agile indeed. We do a survey every year. As you know, we've just published the most recent Alex Partners Disruption Survey, 3,000 interviews with business leaders around the world. And I expected to see in that that generative AI was their biggest concern. It actually came out as their number one opportunity. They felt that this was an opportunity to drive growth in their businesses, but also to drive growth in our economies because what's good for business, growth is also good for economies in terms of lifting the living standards of so many. And so I think if I've got one takeaway, Faisal, from all the conversations I have with business leaders around the world, not just in America, is that there are so many things to focus on. The most stressful thing is deciding which ones to focus on. And ultimately because so many of these things are out of their control, just deciding what are the things they can control to try and maximize their outcomes. OK, the prime example here in terms of this process has been China's growth over the past 20, 30 years, which has obviously underpinned this globalization story. I was amazed over the past 12 months to see kind of Western leaders and executives kind of...they weren't feigning it because it was genuine. It's a surprise that suddenly China had the world's biggest electric vehicle industry and it was about to arrive in Europe and eat everybody's lunch. It was like they hadn't noticed. How had they not noticed? It was publicly kind of megaphoneed out by the Chinese authorities 20 years ago. They started buying up the critical minerals and started buying all of that. And I just wonder sometimes, despite coming to events like this, there's a sort of certain lack of intellectual engagement with what is going on and what is transforming the world before our eyes. Of course, and so 40% of the global world's growth has come from China since 2010 but people have had this dislocated view as to that sort of macro stat and exactly what it means in terms of the practical example you've just given. What I was shocked about... I live in New York, I live in the U.S. What I was shocked about actually in the last 18 months is how one of the few things that Democrats and Republicans could seem to agree on was a toxic narrative about the relationship between the West and China. And I thought it was rather alarming that actually that China was being demonized, people had got so used to China as a power of the world, producing goods to discount global supply change meant that it was just in time rather than just in case delivery. And then all of a sudden people are shocked about the economic significance and clout that China has. I'm very relieved to find that certainly led by business leaders, some of whom are here, have actually put a much more realistic narrative into the relationship between China and the West. But I think there is still some anxiety about whether actually China is the sleeping giant here and maybe that their economic power will actually affect a change in security power as well which itself of course is another disruption that business leaders have to plan around and manage. Let's look at another dimension of this in terms of development and part of this piece of people looking more inwardly in the West has been a rowback in some nations in terms of development spending, maybe the development agenda, I don't know, what do you feel and I'm always doing more now put that in context in terms of what you see elsewhere in the West in terms of development and aid funding. Well, there are some megatrends that Rebecca mentioned that really should worry us all because we have all signed up to leaving no one behind and we only have a few years left to delivering on sustainable development goals but what we see right now is that the inequalities between countries and globally are increasing and the financial streams to the least developed countries are really lagging much further behind and we see that donor strategies are changing more focus on security migration climate which is understandable but it shouldn't come at the cost of getting finance and development finance out to the least developed countries as well. We see that one of the strategies that Norway and many other countries are applying is to leverage private capital. That's why I am as a minister of international development at Davos because I need to discuss with private sector how can we take some of the risk of your investments making sure that you are also interested in the slightly more complex markets and we see especially on climate finance that we have a lot of success on getting investments, you know private investments into the big emerging economies like Rebecca said but it's very very difficult to get the appetite for private investments into least developed countries which is understandable but you know I think that one of the key issues for future development assistance is to take the risk of some of those investments the problem of course if we are to it would be a huge opportunity to get these countries that have millions of people lacking energy that need to get into where we need to create value chains to get those leapfrogging some of the fossil technology for example that we are stuck in in our part of the world imagine what it would do a benefit for the battle for climate if we are to leapfrog these economies but then we need to work together and get the financial flows running also in these countries and right now it's really going in the wrong direction and that's a huge concern So are you finding that your strategies have changed and you're refocusing some of your investments on the least developed countries as opposed to the emerging economies which aren't so troubled in accessing private capital Well we're doing both and we find that it's a lot easier to leverage private finance for the emerging economies now the renewable sector in Vietnam and India and South Africa it's exploding and in the least developed countries there are international aids but I think that's not going to get us there and that's why we need to develop mechanisms guarantee schemes way to leverage private capital where we can take some risk of private investments and we are able to do it in some places I recently visited by Doa in Somalia you know close to you know the where Alshabab is is we have been able to get private companies invest in solar panels and solar solar panel factory what do you say solar parks in Somalia investing in renewable energy for refugee camps and hospitals in very very difficult circumstances it is possible what we need to have a more active dialogue with private companies on how can we work together Minister Patel and you may want to come in on this as well there's been a big change hasn't there past 20-30 years which is the role of sovereign wealth funds in terms of their investments, their strategies that has changed the nature of how emerging economies least developed countries are being supported to some extent I think that there's the scope to do a lot more we've been working with some of the sovereign wealth funds in the Middle East and of course Norway's one of the world's biggest sovereign wealth funds what we find is on climate change there's a growing appetite to do more but very often the terms of that doesn't sufficiently incentivize what is required domestically I want to pivot to the combination of investment and trade as really what we need to do we're busy at the moment putting in place the final modalities for the roll out of what is really the most significant action on the trade front which is the development of an African continental free trade area it will bring together eventually 54 countries of which 49 have already ratified the treaty and we busy now putting the final bits into place and what that will do is it opens up the opportunity for the emergence of strong regional value chains bringing in least developed and developing economies South Africa exports large numbers of vehicles to other parts of the world we sell it here in Europe if you see a Ford light delivery vehicle range of vehicle chances are it's made in South Africa if you see a Mercedes Benz C class vehicle chances are it's made in South Africa but what we do is the rubber that goes into the tyre comes from Cote d'Ivoire and from Nigeria and from Malawi the copper comes from Zambia the seats that are made from Lesotho the wire harnesses that holds the electronics together is manufactured in Botswana and it's then all integrated in South African exported to other parts of the world so it's a model of development that relies on both trade and investment and finding that connection and deepening that connection so our goal is that by getting lower trade barriers between African countries we can facilitate more of those regional value chains we are continent that have exported historically raw materials to the factories of the world we want to become the factory of the world and there's a demographic argument we should raise and that is the action on population growth is going to be largely in the next in the period between now and 2050 is projected to be an African action 1.4 billion people we destined to be it's projected to be 2.8 billion people and one out of every two young babies born over the next two decades will be born on the African continent so it underlies the urgency of a development model that is not simply reliant on selling moral materials but that benefits processes on the African continent but is your plan here is the strategy to draw up a wall around that regional trade block this has been maybe the pattern Rebecca will be able to speak better or do you want to connect a little bit like after do you want to be able to connect this new African free trade block with the rest of the world let this thrive there's no question about it that our development can't be based only on us trading with each other capability and competitive strength we need access to the American market we have it at the moment through the Africa Growth and Opportunities Act South Africa and four other neighbouring countries have a free trade agreement with the European Union and with the United Kingdom we need that too but we need the policy space that many others have used in the past on trade policy to be able to work out ways that appropriate evidence and being very pragmatic where do you need to have some protection where do you need to open up and it's the mix of those that constitutes an effective development model could I build on that one of the consequences of the pandemic which is now the rear view mirror is that businesses around the world found that they couldn't rely on global supply chains they couldn't rely on just in time supply chains supply chains used to be things that were given to head of procurement to worry about it's now on board agendas because it brings businesses to a standstill so the point you make about the interplay of regional supply chains I think is not just an issue in a development sense it's an issue in a business sense as well sure they'll carry on with their global supply chains but they'll complement it with regional supply chains and local supply chains and they will need to take a higher cost as a result of that so I think there's an adjacency here between the interest of business and the interest of government and development Rebecca is it realistic we need to go to some questions but just quickly the idea of an African free trade area absolutely I am envious of Africa and this energy that you can feel in the continent coming from Latin America we have promised ourselves to have a common market forever and we haven't done it so when I look at Africa and the numbers that we have in terms of and bring in terms of growth and prosperity for Africa is enormous so let me just say one thing it's going to take time and perseverance and these things are not from one day to the other but what we see is we are very optimistic I have to say and absolutely it's about regional supply chains too and here let me just say one thing Faisal here going to your point too you know in a way we are going from what we called hyper-globalization to poly-globalization where regionalism will play a very important role and it's the type of regionalism not to get away from the global market but to be able to participate in the global market in a better way and it's true that it will require the discussion of the rules of the game also in trade and here one example that I can give you is the treaty on trims you know if you in your investment policy include provisions to have value more than value added than what the investor wants to buy is against trims but this is what we need to be able to go up in the ladder Indonesia is a good example with the NICO and the provision that you took but you were taken to court in the WTO so in a way we need to put this on the balance because if not developing countries will have a real problem for example to have industrial policy and development and the divergence will grow instead of 5 minutes I want some questions on climate change and why don't you answer that point and just will the west do this would the west as far as you can see change the rules of the global trade game to accommodate this fundamental engine of development we should and we must and I think Mr Patel is making some great points and I also the development opportunities for less developed countries than South Africa on the African continent is immense if we could invest in value chains in other countries getting into the regional trade that is it's such a lost opportunity for example when we see that African countries are importing food stuff worth 75 billion US dollars a year I mean we could invest in value chains in the agricultural sector within Africa and get regional trade up and running to become the African bread basket but the world's bread basket and one more example you know the the events after the what pandemic taught us about the distribution of vaccines now we are investing in MRNI a technology in South Africa for example connecting the dots on the African continent getting medical supplies production of vaccines etc to the African continent of course why should the African continent be reliant on imports of vaccine and having to wait for vaccines when we can invest in that production on the African continent there's a range of being quite optimistic here so this is taking an unexpected turn let's take some questions we haven't addressed climate change yet so I'm keen on some questions but we've got a range of experience I can just see with my eyes here of tangible examples of some of these quite kind of high weather systems of the global economy give us your own experiences put some questions to the panel we just identify ourselves my name is Roshani and I run a microfinance program in Pakistan we were talking about inequality of trade and growth among countries but within countries there's a lot of inequality and that's really one of the big questions is trade or is economic development really delivering to all so I'd like a response from any of the panelists on this you want to take that? Rebecca? well if we continue to be commodity dependent no because you cannot generate the employment and the opportunities that the rest of the population needs and that's why this conversation is so important because we have to drive inclusive development within the countries if you are concentrating in only a few products that you sell and only on the extractive economy so you won't be able to get the inclusive growth that you need now there are many other things that have to be done development is a complex thing to be inclusive you need education and you need health and you have to invest in people you have to create the capacities you have to be able to give the opportunities to the small businesses and to women yes in terms of their agency in society so there are a lot of things that have to be done in development but maybe what I will say you need the most is to have a long-term view yes if you want quick fixes we won't get anyway you know I say many times that when you have a complex problem only complexity can save you if you are reductionist if you think that one there is one bullet or one you know one solution you won't be able to get it you have to persevere you have to have the long-term and you have to have society it has to be a project of society and you can do that only with inclusive policies and dialogue Minister Patela I'll add a little bit of my own shine to it which is obviously you have the normal development process which can be redistributed within a country then you also have technology now that's growing into sort of growing exponentially with all the AI being advertised around Davos which is an even bigger factor which maybe redistributed between people with high education and people with no education is that causing you challenges within your country yes it is but it's also an enormous opportunity and I would respond to the Pakistan question first I like Rebecca's response there are three issues within a country and then there's the technology challenge the first one for us is being the demographics in South Africa's case it's been more exaggerated given our own history that Black South Africans have been excluded from economic participation but we found also when you stretch the demographic lens women youth-owned businesses and it's trying to find a commercially sustainable way in which you can bring greater inclusion and the second part is special that you have all over the world the challenge of where growth takes place in our case it takes place around major mining deposits and it takes place in the big urban areas and so it encourages enormous urbanization rates with real challenges in managing it and so it's how to find because it's easier to find a job in urban areas it's less expensive how do you manage all of that carefully and then the third gap is between large and small how to bring smaller players into markets and the technology areas particularly challenging because in online platforms in the big tech markets size counts even more than in traditional markets and so how do you find an ecosystem and I must say we've had some incredibly interesting partnerships with the private sector and if I can do a shout out just on one example where businesses as part of the arrangements in our legal system when they acquire another firm there's normally a public interest that's applied to it and they've created these supplier development funds to bring smaller players into their ecosystems Walmart did that they came to us subsequently and they said they did it because they were required to do it they now like it so much that they want to take that model to other parts of the world where Walmart is present and companies like PepsiCo and Coca-Cola and Heineken have helped now to encourage a much greater employee share ownership in firms in South Africa so there's lots that can be done with the right world with the right partnership we need not see development as a challenge that should depress us and you ask the question you said end of development I was happy that the WEF team had put a question mark rather than an exclamation mark and I think it's it's this constant recognising that while there are a lot of benefits from the way in which technology and economies work it does need active measures measures in partnership, measures by the public sector to ensure that we have inclusive outcomes let's take a question that was my that was the question I wanted to ask is this the end of development from what you've said this is not maybe it's a different type of development but this is not the end of development okay that's fair enough occasionally it's the job of a headline to provoke apparently according to some journalist I once met let's have some more questions don't be shy, we've got a great audience here I'm going to start picking on people in a minute there we go, yes at the very beginning you said that it was the big economies that were growing really well but it seems like China is maybe not doing so well so I'd love to hear your thoughts on that and then simultaneously the gulf seems to be just exploding which is maybe in a good economic way in a number of countries so that seems maybe like a part that you said was left behind but actually it's growing incredibly quickly so we'd love to understand that a little better I said that they are growing better they are not growing like they used to grow but I think that with the size that China has today it will be very difficult to get back to where they were they are a big economy now and so we have to expect that the rates of growth of China it is very difficult that we'll get back to the two digits that we had in the past but they are growing more than the rest so I was making a relative argument that we are in a world of slower growth than we had before but within that world the big economies are doing better than the rest of the developing countries and doing also better than the developed world I think that the eight big emerging economies will grow more or less 4.2% during this year that's more or less the projection that is much more than the 1.2% that probably the rich countries will grow but I guess is China offering a different development model I mean the western world bank IMF kind of structures there's an alternative pathway now is there not a contrasting one? I think that in general I would say that the rise of the global south what meant is that there is no one size fits all that there is no one model of development that we have to deal with the possibilities and the different opportunities that the countries have and there is no one model you know this idea that the south has to graduate to become the north it's over maybe that's what the end of development means maybe that's what it means it can mean what it wants you to mean I'm going to do a wrap up question in a moment but obviously with the climate change agenda we've seen interesting negotiations the idea of a loss in damage fund which I kind of thought I didn't imagine it would be agreed has been agreed albeit at a modest level let's discuss that I mean you were in favour of that weren't you and where do you think that that will go and what was your response to that well it's super exciting it came into place and you know got capital on board much quicker than we hoped to this in Dubai so that was one of the great outcomes from Dubai but of course and you put money in we did and many other countries did and there's a way we'd need lots more funding but the fact that it's up and running with capital is great and World Bank is setting it up it will be functioning within a few months we hope the good thing about loss in damage shares that it's focusing also on not only the mitigation agenda but also the adaptation agenda because we need to invest in you know preparing for climate change as well so that's a positive outcome but it's not enough but there is this sort of fair transition point that the bricks have led on the idea that hang on a moment don't expect us not to develop in certain ways that are energy intensive obviously we'll do it in a clean way but we are doesn't really apply to South Africa but you know we are going to connect 800 million people across the globe to electricity that is going to happen I mean do you feel those issues of a fair just climate transition have been fully addressed in the current negotiations if I use the metaphor of a glass half full or half empty the good news is this water in this glass the bad news is there's still a lot of space here so the size of the challenge and the size of the resources being put on the table don't match each other we need a lot more think about the African challenge just if I look at the African continent we will be having large numbers of people going into cities moving away from rural areas and we need the opportunity to provide electricity water housing all of that we can do it in a green way or we can try to do it in the traditional way we want to do it in the green way but it will be hugely costly and so we'll need some pragmatic space to be able to combine these the more resources on the table the greener the faster the green growth path can take place that for me is really the most significant thing in this equation okay it's been a really quite positive session but I want to end on a really positive note which is just like give us very briefly some best practice we've talked about the end of development and then we agree it hasn't ended but maybe it's evolving but in this phase you know I am shocked I consider myself still to be relatively young I know that people will say that's nonsense but I can't believe even in my career as an economics journalist when I started studying economics at university and development the progress of a country like Bangladesh has been absolutely extraordinary you know I didn't even notice the time that it overtook some debate about this in doing GDP per capita but that would have been absurd even from when I started studying economics which was in 1995 and it's happened and I think people see that as a success of development give us some best practice in development that you have seen you can't say South Africa I can't say South Africa I won't even say the African continent let me take Indonesia as an example so Indonesia started off it's got enormous deposits of nickel and it sold the raw nickel to the world and it remained underdeveloped it then took a decision that there's an opportunity to process that nickel it took some tough decisions it was taken to the World Trade Organization by developed countries but what it was able to do is transform a $3 billion export industry to a $30 billion stainless steel industry creating well-paid jobs attracting capital diversifying the economy creating more complexity in industrial development all of the good things that industrial strategists and policy makers seek to do they had to take a tough decision in the face of resistance from those who historically benefited from simply Indonesia's position great example I think India is a real dark horse we talk a lot about China but look at India, more than 90% of the population of India have digital identities the average in Europe is just over 30% look at the 20 years ago over 90% of the graduates of the leading technology schools in India actually emigrated to the US or Europe now less than 10% I think India is so well positioned to be an engine of economic growth for the world and I think that's a great example of how technology is going to be a game-changer for not just for companies but also for economies and development Rebecca? Vietnam is a great example and nobody thought that Vietnam will develop and diversify so quickly and it's a middle size country and so that's why it's important also to bring it to the floor because they have been able to take the best and change the policy as they go along because there is no one policy that will be eternal you need to adapt and they have been able to adapt to the new conditions in a very flexible manner That's worth Costa Rica There are many good examples The best one example Then I'm going to do a nitty gritty one not one of the big huge large scale because we need to bring everyone on board I'm going to give you one example from Malawi where we invested in the dairy sector where local companies were able to take big shares of production instead of importing dairy they were able to take off milk from small scale farmers 10,000 small scale farmers in Malawi getting them that extra added value giving them income for feeding the children sending the children to school etc while getting those long value chains from the small scale farmer to the local markets and the cities in Malawi working That's bottom up development but we need to make sure that the international trade system allows that kind of solution I just think that's a brilliant way to end a session in the sense that you've just been given a kind of tour of the world of positive best practice and from my perspective with the title, with the caveat that it was maybe meant to provoke it clearly isn't the end of development maybe it's the end of a phase of development that we've gotten used to as I think Rebecca stole my line which I was like this is the way I'm going to end this session but she got to it first it's the start of development one might argue so thank you online for joining us and thank you for a great audience and a brilliant panel I'd say probably the best panel at Davos but thanks very much for joining us