 Hello. Good early afternoon from Geneva, Switzerland. A warm welcome to this session. A new compact for resilient economies and societies. My name is Mirek Dussek. I am with the World Economic Forum. And we are on the first day of the Sustainable Development Impact Summit. This session is part of that. It is a summit organized by the World Economic Forum digitally. Also in the context of the United Nations General Assembly that is taking place as we speak. Resilience is going to be the key or the light motive of our discussion today. We have 45 minutes together. It's an on-the-record session with four key leaders for this topic. Four authorities that I will introduce in a little bit that will give us some insights and perspectives on how we can build a shared understanding of resilience. What is resilience? What do we mean by it when we talk about it so much these days? But number two, what do we do to boost resilience to create a more sustainable and more resilient future for all of us? So those would be the two angles that I would like to look under the hood for a little bit with those four authorities. Resilience is something that I think there is a consensus now will require more investment for us to really transform our economies wherever they are and make them more resilient, new sources of investment and a new lift by all of us is needed on the investment side to overcome COVID but more crucially to really achieve the transformation that is required. Resilience I think will be a word that will be used a lot this week at the Sustainable Development Impact Summit and it really all about how governments, business, civil society and all individuals come together to find new pathways to achieve more resilience. Again, it is not something that is about today. Of course we are all watching and are part of the different recovery plans that are underway in different countries around the world but it's also about really the long term and the discussion today should be about the long term. How do we find those new pathways that can transform our systems to be more resilient? While we tend to focus particularly when it comes to these recovery packages these days on more the developed countries, it is so important that we address this holistically and that we talk about how do we boost resilience in the emerging and the frontier markets. It is just a fact that we live in a more risk prone world. So resilience is really about making sure that we continue to function and we progress in a world where we see increasing manifestations of different global risks be they pandemics or health related risks or of course related to climate change or any other risk that we by the way we track in the global risk report. So going back to the panel I'm really honored and delighted to be joined here by four outstanding leaders from different walks of life but they're all related and have been working on this for a while. I'd like first to go to Peter Maurer, I'll go to you in a bit. Peter Maurer is of course president of ICRC but also so involved with the World Economic Forum on a number of initiatives that are looking particularly at how we can drive public-private cooperation around humanitarian assistance but also around fragility at large. We'll be also joined by John Haley, Chief Executive Officer of Willis Tower Watson, welcome. We will be joined by Mari Elka Pangestu, Managing Director Development Policy and Partnerships at the World Bank. A big welcome to you to DC and last but not least we're joined by Sara Pantulliano, Chief Executive of the Overseas Development Institute of London, a big authority on this topic and also it's a pleasure to be working with you Sara on so many strands of this issue over the past few years. So without further ado let me go first to Peter Maurer. Your organization operates in one of the most challenging corners of the world, high risk environments where people really are facing not only a manifestation of one risk but it's usually a cascade of shocks, a cascade of different risks from of course security emergencies to food emergencies and any other risks in a different situation. How in the corners like this Peter Maurer, how can public-private cooperation really support and strengthen resilience in these vulnerable communities given the complex picture there and what is ICRC practically doing in that respect? Over to you Peter. Thanks a lot Mirek for the question and the introduction. From my side may be the following. I think over the last 10 years we recognize that we have seen an expanding numbers of situations of fragility in which as you rightly alluded in your question where poverty, conflict, violence, climate change, the pandemic most recently have created layers of fragility which led to displacement and to uprootment of communities and which has increased the number of people dependent on humanitarian assistance. The longevity of crisis has gone exploding by 10, 20, 30, 40 years in which we are now as a humanitarian actor active in those situations of hyper fragility. So what to do? And I think in order to think in an innovative way about fragility what we propose increasingly is to put people at the center of how we build a response. There is resilience in communities and people are extremely resilient also how they cope themselves with those difficult situations. I think the shift the mindset shift that we need is from coming with prefabricated solutions to designing responses on the basis of the resilience of people and communities. We are still divided and fragmented as actors in multiple ways and we work in silos. We are either private or public, humanitarian or development, national or international. And we work in those silos. And I think resilience building is very much building bridges and building multi stakeholder responses between the private, the public, the humanitarian development and the international and national. So that is what we have tried to do for instance, if I name an example in Goma, where we have in Eastern Congo where we have done 10 years of water trucking till at a certain moment we said it doesn't make sense that we do another 10 years of substitution for a dysfunctioning water system. And we brought the banks, the World Bank, the bilateral donors, the engineers, the technicians, the humanitarian workers for locals and the international around one table to design a more sustainable water supply system for Goma, which more than ever is economically viable in the context in which we work. Second, to bring an example from actually from the present moment as we speak, we are working several UN agencies, the World Bank, financial experts to find ways to stabilize the health, water and sanitation sector in Afghanistan. The international, the private and the public, the financial experts, the economic experts, the health experts, we need to create those multi stakeholder solutions. And I think these are ways to come to a new approach in resilience building. We all know and this is maybe to conclude the experience over the last couple of years in which we tried such innovative approaches has been that we have to be to look at our standards and to be more flexible in how we interpret them. We have to look at regulatory obstacles to cooperate. We have to look at financial modalities, which makes these new innovative forms of cooperation viable. And we have to negotiate risk sharing arrangements, which allow us to de-risk activities for more sustainability in hyper fragile contexts. So these are just a couple of pathways in the example I wanted to bring in to make us think how we could further scale and speed projects that I mentioned along approaches that I have tried to briefly explain. Thank you so much. If I could move to John Haley at Willis Towers Watson. So Peter Maurer mentioned also the private sector and the different experimentation or the different examples of the different projects that we have on the ground. Or his organization has on the ground and others with the private sector. But John, we are talking about a transformation. COVID-19, of course, make people think. What is it? How can we really step up to make sure that the next pandemic or the next manifestation of another type of risk, we can better be prepared for better weather that storm. And the private sector is usually mentioned as part of the solution. Many companies are now really stepping into ESG as a vehicle also to become more resilient. But from where you sit, and given the transformation that we need to all achieve, that is at hand, what do you think could be the concrete actions on the private sector side to enable and promote this kind of step change in resilience? Over to you. Thanks very much, Mirick. And let me mention I'll share some thoughts today, not just from my perspective as the CEO of Willis Towers Watson, but I'm chairman of the Coalition for Climate Resilient Investment. And that coalition that we've put together is really a partnership between governments, between multilateral institutions, and between the private sector. And so in some ways it models a lot of what we're talking about today. What I would say the first thing that we want to look at is in terms of thinking about how do we promote resilience and how do we really effectively build that into everything we're doing. First is an analytical framework that's shared. And we want an analytical framework that is really shared. It's a global view and it's irrespective of, say, region or industry or institution. So in my own business, we're involved with risk and insurance. And I think back to the 1990s, the insurance industry was really quite devastated by a series of earthquakes. And it was hard to price it. One of the things they did was they came together and they built this global earthquake model. And that ended up being used consistently. And having a consistent framework in which everybody could agree on what risks were and what the price of them was, and then that gave signals as to how best to build in resilience against them. Total transformation in the project. That's what I think is needed here. That's one of the things that at CCRI we're working on. We want something that gives us a consistent view of exposure, you know, 5, 10, 15, 30 years or more. And for that, we need also something that has it's a transparent global risk modeling that platform really that everyone agrees on. The next step is, and Peter referred to this of different folks having different views and different approaches they're bringing together. We need to interpret that model and we need to interpret it in terms of the materiality for the different types of decision makers. So government with multilateral institutions, private capital, they respond to different incentives, but they're all always trying to maximize value in their own way. And so what we need to do is to work together as to how we interpret that to identify where we can get the maximum value for those. So by using I think a common analytical foundation, something that's interpreted in a bespoke manner, we can incentivize capital and decisions to be driven to where the most value is at risk. And when I say where the most value is at risk, I'm not talking about just really dollars of assets, but most importantly, lives and livelihoods. Thank you so much. I may still go back to you, John. Let me move to Mario Capanguescu, managing director, development policy and partnerships at the World Bank. Mr. Capanguescu, I've mentioned that we are obviously in the middle of still responding to the COVID-19 pandemic and your organization has played an important role, a key role in that respect globally. But your organization is also involved in really, again, figuring out ways for the global economy to become more resilient, to find new pathways to sustainable economic growth. So how do you, when you work with the different geographies and markets, how do you embed resilience in the new recovery agenda as you work with the different countries over to you? Thanks for that question. Just following on the other two speakers, I think what we are doing is actually thinking about resilience, even as we are designing our response to the current pandemic. And as Peter mentioned, learning that multi-stakeholder partnerships is very important, including with UN agencies, including with local governments and communities. And just to give you a few examples of what does resilience mean in the current response, and then I'll talk a little bit about the future response. I think, first of all, you know, when we are doing the health and emergency response, we are also thinking about strengthening the health system. When we are designing the social protection systems, we are also working with governments to use digital technologies and making the systems more adaptable and easily monitored for effectiveness given budget constraint. And, you know, the future crisis, you will still need social protection system. And in designing fiscal stimulus program, we look at how can we have income support, climate action and future improved livelihoods at the same time, such as cash for work programs for farmers and fishermen to restore degraded land and seascapes. Just as an example, that will restore natural capital but improve the productivity and incomes for farmers and fishermen in the future. In moving forward, given uneven recovery and potential increased inequalities, we are designing the recovery and growth agenda by adopting a green and resilient and inclusive development approach. So resilience is in the middle of that, which recognizes that we need to respond to the twin crisis, which is the development challenges accentuated by the COVID-19 crisis and the climate crisis, which is happening at the same, which is already being experienced. So an integrated approach is needed, which looks at the interlinkages between planet people and the economy. So we are really focusing on how to do this and resilience is about investing to prevent and prepare for future crisis and how to get countries to and societies to build resilient systems that will reduce the likelihood of crisis. And when you have to respond, you can do it in a flexible and effective way. And it tends to be country specific, whether you're in fragile conflict states or whether you're in the poorest countries and middle income countries and so on. So for the other countries, we have a big theme of crisis preparedness. So just to give you an example of what this means very quickly on the health side, it means that we have to focus on building out the one health system, given that the interaction between humans and animals is one of the causes of the main causes of these pandemics. And at the same time, you're strengthening the health systems. And for climate, we are in our new climate action plan. We are really focusing on 35% of financing for climate and development. And it must not just focus on mitigation, but also resilience and adaptation and the transformation of key systems such as energy, food and land use, transportation, urban infrastructure and manufacturing. So that's kind of in a nutshell the future way of looking, of moving forward. But I think to John's point, I just wanted to emphasize also that we know that investing in prevention and preparedness will reduce the cost and the damage when the crisis hits. But how do we build incentives for whether it's governments or private sector to invest in that. I think the big question that we're having, we are working with governments on their fiscal policy, but there are many other issues that we need to discuss here. Thank you so much. And I'll also come back to you for some follow up. Sarah Pantuliano, Chief Executive of ODI. Sarah, we've, as I said at the beginning, we've worked, we've been working with you on issues that are related to resilience for a while and of course predates COVID. So particularly we've been looking with you at really how we can unlock this public-private momentum around resilience. But with COVID now and the big wake up call to the general public I think about how severe can manifestations of risks be for the global economy. What are the actions that you think, again kind of the stepped up actions that we can take to really unlock this, what seems to be an important axis, the public-private to get us to the step change. Over to you, Sarah. Thanks, Meric. Let me put this into context a little bit. So when the pandemic started, I wrote a blog that was, you know, the title for which was, we can't go back to normal because normal was the problem. And that was really indicating, you know, the deep fractures, the inequalities that were characterizing the system in a way the pandemic offered an opportunity to finally tackle. So, you know, we have a global crisis that actually came on the heels of a very fragile and incomplete recovery from the 2008-2009, you know, global financial crisis where we saw, you know, the initial stimulus shift very quickly to austerity and you know, really impacting them and working people, you know, basically undermined progress very quickly. And at the beginning of the pandemic, that meant that we had really structurally, you know, downward indicators in terms of inequality, in terms of environmental degradation, in terms of well-being, which the pandemic has really laid there, you know, these inequalities, these deep city inequalities. And so we really need now to not think about build back better that's become the mantra, but build back fairer to really think how we can really challenge these, you know, pre-crisis policy inequalities. Now, we've seen some positive signs with what governments in particular have done over in the past year. We've seen something quite unprecedented in terms of, you know, fiscal policy responses really broken with past practices. We've seen, you know, a number of social protection measures that have been really encouraging. But the problem there is the sustainability because we are really seeing a very quick reversal of those policies. We've seen, you know, the challenges, for instance, in terms of vaccine inequality that doesn't make, you know, this economic recovery sustainable on a global scale. And really the policy reversal as a result of, you know, growing fiscal pressure. So in many ways, you know, we're seeing actually a widening financing gap, particularly around social protection from the beginning of the pandemic. So you asked me, you know, what we can do. I think we need to really take this opportunity to develop a universal agenda that brings together the public and the private around some critical elements, which is decent work, gender inequality, social protection and climate environmental sustainability, as well as other activities, which are really critical to address, you know, the structural roots of this crisis. So from the public, we need, you know, my economic policies that will encompass their employment that will encompass climate climate objectives that are basically not just focusing on macroeconomic stability and growth has been the case until now. We need patient long term public capital that can fund, you know, sustainable investments, something they've been asking more and more. And particularly after the pandemic is really critical, you know, to help sort of, you know, secure a more sustainable future, especially to de-risk the private investment in more challenging context. I think both from the public and the private, we need actually to find a new centrality for, you know, human rights, economic and social rights, if we really want to make, you know, meaningful progress in tackling inequality, which means from the private sector, actually, you know, find a real partnership in shifting that mindset. So I was talking about, you know, to recognize and value unpaid and low paid care work or, you know, labor in global value chains, really ensuring the, you know, regulations and work conditions are adequate, you know, how to deliver better services and social protection and the financing, including, you know, through paying adequate taxes and contribution. So it has to be a genuine partnership. And I really feel that we have almost a vanishing window of opportunity right now to rise to this informational change, you know, confronting these policies and structures and change course that if we're not careful, we're going to miss. And I think that will lead to very serious consequences also in social terms. Great. No, thank you so much. And the inclusion imperative bringing everyone along. I think it's so important. Sarah, I'll still come back to you too. John Haley, if I could go back to you now. You're, as you said, in the insurance industry. How prepared you think are the chief risk officers of companies for the new era? Obviously, companies do have risk officers or many of them do. They've been looking a lot internally in the past few years. I think increasingly they've been looking at ESG and climate. But what do you think COVID-19 means for companies and particularly the risk officers and do they have all the tools they need to really assess the risk exposure of their business going forward again in an era that is arguably more risk prone going forward? Thanks, Eric. And I think that the last point you made in an era that is more risk prone is really at the top of the problem. So risk officers are very good about taking the traditional developments and the traditional risks that we've seen and assessing them and putting together action plans to deal with them. What I think we're seeing today, though, and it's certainly true in climate where something that was a once in 100 year occurrence 20 years ago is now maybe a once in a 50 or maybe a once in a 25 year occurrence today. So the basic risk profile is shifting before them and they have to move from a framework where they take traditional data, model it, understand what the risks are and just apply that to the future. They now have to be extrapolating how these risks are changing. And that's one of the reasons why in climate I talked about having a shared analytical framework because this is hard to develop. And it's hard to get to that kind of consensus. It's hard to deal with it. COVID gives us another good example. It's not that we haven't had models of pandemic possibilities of risks of those in the past. It's that it may be that the risks of that are changing and changing much faster than we have. So again, we have to be extrapolating how those risks are. And when I think about us being in a more risk prone world, what occurs to me is it's not so much that we have the long tail risk for anything is all that different, but we have so many more long tail risks today than we used to. You know, just think of COVID. We think of cyber risks. We think of climate. The list goes on. That's not what the case was 20 years ago. So I would say risk officers and answer your question risk officers are prepared for the traditional world the way it was that world is changing on them. They have to get prepared for a new world. I think they're in transition to that. Thank you, John. And if I could just a quick follow up on that. Do you see this shared analytical framework being developed more within the industries or do you what would be the possible ways we could the engaged citizens could actually imagine this happening and and and helping us all be a little more informed about the different risks and they tend to be cross disciplinary. That's where, for example, an organization like the CCRI dealing with the climate with with resilient infrastructure. I think we can be very helpful there in providing the right kind of analytical framework. But I think Mary referred to the importance of collaboration among the different actors here. And I think one of the things that sometimes impedes progress is you have too many people all trying to do the same thing. And one of the in the in this issue of resilient infrastructure. I think we've been successful over the last couple of years because we've had a lot of good coordination among different actors there. And so as I said CCRI itself is a group of private companies but also governments and also multilateral institutions. We've worked with the CDRI Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure that was formed by India and some other governments very good partnership with them. The modeling work that we thought we needed instead of trying to develop it ourselves. We work with the insurance development forum and they are coming out and this will be unveiled at COP 26. They're coming out with a global risk index which we think can be the basis for all of this modeling. So I think if the community can come together identify the models and then work together to develop them and you know not be stepping on one another's toes. That will be important. I think a similar kind of thing is probably true for COVID but I think each risk has its own bespoke approach that's needed. No thank you so much John. If I could go back to Mari Pangestu the private sector and this collaboration that John just mentioned. Of course the World Bank is very strong in working with governments. Yet of course you have IFC and you are increasingly working with the private sector. So again going back to that we really need to transform the way we're doing things. What do you think? What are the unrealized opportunities for the private sector to really be part of the solution here? And particularly I think what's on my mind is how do we crowd in more private sector engagement and investment into helping vulnerable communities, frontier markets. A patient capital was mentioned but are there are there new ways we could do this and maybe the World Bank has things in its place already that are going in this direction. So I'll be curious to hear from you on that. Over to you Miss Pangestu. Yeah thanks for that. Let me just begin by saying that I think what Sarah was saying is extremely important that it really cannot be business as usual anymore because the intensity and frequency of shocks and crisis is going to increase. This is one of our really major concerns and it really impacts the poorest and vulnerable countries and the poorest and vulnerable in countries the most. So that's why we are very much putting this on our priority how to have resilience built into the developing countries and you know there are different types of typologies of developing countries but really we are coming up with a paper in coming as annual meetings on prevention, preparedness and response to crisis and shocks and they tend to be related right. A health crisis leads to economic shock and so on. So therefore you need to have strengthening health and social protection systems is part of it. Enhancing disaster risk management and also improving that management and building sustainable private sector solutions. And to the point of how do we invest in prevention and preparedness because we all know that this is the way you can reduce the huge costs that happens when the crisis hits as we are learning now. And there are so many things that we need to invest in but how do you have the incentive to invest upfront in the event of a shock is really the key. So we are working on several fronts one is how to help countries implement counter cyclical fiscal policies and create mechanisms that ensure that they accumulate savings and buffers over the cycle. And then how to increase integrate crisis risks within government fiscal risk management framework such as catastrophe bonds. The missing part is the insurance part which is what Peter what sorry what John was mentioning earlier. So how do we get the private sector to come in crowd in the private sector to also enter into insuring against a risk you know what what's the market out there for that. And this is the way I think we would approach it is we would come in with trying to help. I think I think two things I agree with John. We need to come up with the knowledge and the analytics to be able to model these risks better. We're talking about countries or with certain types of shocks and that we are working on. And secondly how do you develop the financing structures and the World Bank can come in by whether it's patient capital or you know the initial capital to invest. For instance we are working with in the poorest countries to work on crisis preparedness. This can be a crowding in a private sector and guarantees. We can also provide you know some kind of the risking instruments. These are some of the things things things that we are thinking about with IFC and MIGA guarantees and the risking instruments that will enable a private sector to come in to this very difficult market. And but at the end of the day I think I agree with John that we need to collaborate together to come up with the analytics the standards the risk measurements and then together also collaborate on how we can structure the financing because it will require a lot of resources. Thank you so much and it really really that that that how you've built on on on John I think it's so important there really is just so much work to be done on this public private access both around the analytics and the financing. And and it seems to be quite urgent to put it in place in the near future. If I could now go back to Sarah Pantulliano. You've you talked about how important it is to be inclusive. So for these systems that we build for the future to really be inclusive because we are and the pandemic is showing it still we're as only as strong as the most vulnerable communities. And so we need to make sure that we really support everyone on this planet to be more resilient toward these manifestations of different risks. On the inclusiveness part. I know you've also looked at the role of technology. And so I just would be curious to hear from you. Where do you see the priorities around the role of technology. We we talk about the fourth industrial revolution at the World Economic Forum and and how important it is for again every single individual on this planet to be on the front foot in terms of shaping these technologies. So how do you see from where you sit at ODI the role of these technologies impossibly helping us be more resilient. And again I have more in mind the more vulnerable the frontier markets the fragile countries over to Sarah. As Mike I think that is going to be fundamental to really help the most vulnerable within rich societies but also in poorer countries really advanced. But even then we need to be very mindful of the digital divide. I think technology has an incredibly unique potential to transform the economy to transform the ability of people for instance to bank to be financially included. But we need to make progress on the infrastructures on the digital skills that many don't have. You know if you don't invest technology by itself is not going to be able to allow the progress that it has the potential to unlock to deliver. So there has to be a concerted effort to make sure that we use technology that we harness technology you know in a way that really allows you know this leap both you know within richer societies and of course you know in in a number of middle income countries. I see very promising things but I see them only where there is a real collaboration between the public and the private with the private is really you know working hard to to help particularly on the infrastructure side. I think actually if you want to make progress I see more and more that we need to go beyond the current model not just under technology but in general the current model of collaborations that we have you know I've heard a lot about incentives this morning and I think that is the critical thing I think we probably need to start moving towards you know coalition of like-minded partners between the public and the private they work on specific issues to really take forward you know progress towards an agreed goal and I see that for instance you know as part of a number of the initiatives that the forum has been promoting you know on technology where there are a few champions both from the public and the private they want to work together and from academia things and so forth want to make progress so where we are doing work together to you know look at the analytics do the research identify particular options you know to go forward I think that's the key because the current structures multilateral structures are not delivering I'm not functioning the type of collaborations you know that we have a distribution level globally are not going to be able to allow us to unlock the potential of technology so we have to look more and more you know specific sort of yeah coalitions as I was saying that allow us to use the transformative power of technology towards a specific goal. Thank you so much these more agile coalitions purpose driven. We're slowly coming to an end of the allocated time and I'd like to go to Peter Maure with quite a big question. So you could say the cynics or maybe the more practical people would say well we have an unique window of opportunity right now when we're still dealing with this enormous crisis of the COVID-19. And then of course the we're in the decade of delivery around addressing the climate change issue. But you could argue there is a really this unique moment when we could really change things before we would maybe have the or some would have the inclination to go back to business as usual. And so I'll be interested to see what would be the push that you would make as as really a seasoned leader in this in this field. But also with an angle of what would make a difference on the ground because I know you travel extensively to the different mandates that I see RC has geographically. So I'm interested is what would be your priorities if you were to use this window of opportunity on the architecture piece. How do we get more momentum around resilience. But again what would make what would make a difference on the ground over to you Peter with this big question. Thanks a lot. I'll try to have a short answer for a big question. I have heard four points this morning in what John Murray and Sarah have mentioned which I find particularly resonate with an organization working in the most fragile context. First I couldn't agree more with John about the analytical framework about the common grammar that we need to develop around risk. And I would add a second pillar here around impact measurement. If we can't measure impact in a sort of a globally acceptable way we won't be able to attract neither patient nor inpatient capital. So I think these are two pillars in creating a common grammar which are because the indicators at the present moment are disturbing. The indicators are that we are adding and we have added another two to three hundred million people basically in hyper fragile context at the bottom billion or billion and a half. And so the test of all of what we are saying is whether we will be able to converge these different strands into real impact for people which will basically translate into those living in hyper fragile context at the bottom of the pyramid will have another type of life. So these are just from my side a couple of takeaways listening what resonates most when you look from the field towards the policy and multi stakeholder efforts that we are engaged. Thanks. Thank you so much. I learned quite a great deal during these 45 minutes time flies were at the end of this session. I just wanted to thank all the four panelists that were with us today and just to say that at the World Economic Forum together with all of you. We are thinking hard about those complementarities. Peter we we as you may know we're looking at the different strands of our work across the different industries. There is a lot of work that is being done of course on climate but also on energy also on food financial services. So we're taking a wider look at how we can build these complement complementarities across these disciplines to have at least a shot at the common grammar. And we think it's really an important moment right now. So thank you for joining us for this and I hope it will give us a jolt to continue our work together. So thank you so much until next time.