In this ambitious, challenging, yet superbly readable book, Jean-François Rischard first tells us what constitutes a "global" problem and then offers a brief overview of the twenty most important. He finds they all have two things in They're getting worse, not better, and the standard strategies for dealing with them, such as international treaties, are woefully inadequate to the task. The chief problem is that in our high-population, fast-moving, globalized and interconnected world, we don't have an effective way of addressing the problems that such a world creates. Our difficulties belong to the present and the future, but our means of solving them belong to the past.Rischard proposes a new institution for global governance that would be recognized and supported by governments but would function as extra-governmental bodies devoted to particular problems. The powers of these "global issues networks" would not be legal but They would monitor compliance with various globally recognized standards and would single out the nations and organizations that were not co-operating. Anyone who has eaten a can of "dolphin-safe" tuna knows how powerful, in a market-driven world, the pressure to comply with such standards can be.No book has ever presented such a clear and unified appraisal of global problems or offered such a consistent and well-defined approach to solving them. High Noon will be an agenda-setting book of interest across the political spectrum.
It's amazing what passes for 'revolutionary' thinking. I read this book because I started working at an 'impact' consultancy firm that works in affordable housing in the developing world and I needed a primer on neoliberal thinking. I suppose Rischard (a World Bank official) provided that. In the end he comes up with a fucking flow chart.
I don't doubt Rischard's sincerity when it comes to recognizing serious global threats and his desire to solve them, but he is utterly incapable of understanding how his own views are firmly lodged in the sweltering ass hole of radical centrism. Whenever someone prefaces a book by saying his analysis will not be ideologically based, then they're automatically disingenuous about at least that much.
Best/worst passage:
"Enterprises increasingly need to make enormous investment decisions in a context where their industries and business concepts are changing almost month to month. The result can be mega-mistakes that create major ripples. Example: telecommunications firms paid over $100 billion over the last few years for European 3G licenses, which would enable the Internet to come to cellular phones. But recent surveys show that only 4 percent of cellular customers may be really interested in this. It is still not clear what this haste will do to the firms and their banks."
A very short take on what is wrong with the world written in the early 00s. It’s a decent introduction to problems but a little light for my tastes. Maybe it is meant to be that way. Similar length books could be written about each of the 20 problems. There was a lot to do 15 years ago and it doesn’t seem like things have gotten much better since then. We’ve made some progress in some areas but the stronger case for global climate change is making some of these problems more difficult to combat. There’s always a reason for hope but, at the same time, one must be realistic – which of these need to be solved now, which can wait a bit?
A little out of date, but it is interesting to compare the fact that we’re 20 years from his date. His ideas about the lack of an international governance policy are true till now. Interesting reading.
This book lacks any sort of eloquence but that's not why anyone would read it. Rishard has a unique perspective on the world's problems and offers compelling evidence for the urgency of his 20 most important issues. His solution (yep just one) seems idealistic and simplistic from my laymans perspective.
Still, I feel I benefitted from this book on two fronts. First, I gained an awareness of problems and enough of an understanding of some of them to want to learn more. Second, I found myself questioning my assumptions and beliefs about authority and even government. Rishard opens the book with a call for less top down governing and more networking. He also males the bold claim that human institutions of governing are failing on the global level and thooughrout the book one can perceive rishards frustration with governments and their ability to work together. This is not surprising coming from am executive of the world bank. I wasn't convinced of his position in thsee areas and that made me skeptical of the rest of the book, particularly the solution offered in part 3. How do we limit power in a networked government and avoid a sort of media mob rule? Is the solution gridlocked global discussion really more committees?
Finally this book is in need of an addendum or a second edition as it is rather dated now; no reference to the economic crash of 2008.
So far, an excellent book about the near term future, akin to Toffler's Third Wave and Knoke's Bold New World, among many others. Just about everyone recognizes that we are on the verge of entering a new era (with one promoting the idea that we have already entered a new epoch). I'm one of them. As a reader, my fun job is finding ways to merge all the works of these smart people into a world view with a past, a now, and a future. I have done this and continue to modify it with books like this. In the end, one walks away confident and unafraid of the future, even though it will be dicey and, potentially, quite dangerous indeed. Beats living in Europe duing the year 1000 AD, that's for sure.
JF Rischard discussed the problems are planet faces and put forth a common sense systematic way of dealing with them. The unfortunate part is it doesn't seem likely to happen.