Samuel Gregg

Why Davos only makes the world’s ‘polycrisis’ worse

The World Economic Forum thinks only in top-down, corporatist ways

The WEF's Klaus Schwab (photo: Getty)

‘Polycrisis’. If you haven’t heard of the word, it’s likely that you soon will, courtesy of the World Economic Forum, which is meeting this week in Davos, Switzerland, to discuss the theme ‘Cooperation in a Fragmented World’

The world, according to the just-released WEF Global Risks 2023 Report, has entered an era of ‘polycrisis’. Though the expression sounds like a buzzword designed by management consultants to persuade everyone that they are cleverest people in the room, the term was in fact coined by the French philosopher-sociologist Edgar Morin in the 1990s. It was Morin’s way of arguing that, instead of seeking monocausal explanations of major problems (capitalism, colonialism, etc.), the real causes were to be found in the complex relationships between these things.

One thing we know about crises is that they provide rationales for expansions and centralisations of state power 

Precisely why this was considered a radical insight escapes me. As a rule, historians like Thucydides or Alexis de Tocqueville, whose persuasive powers still carry weight today, generally shied away from single factor accounts of epochal crises such as the Peloponnesian war or the French revolution. It was largely Marxist theoreticians who tended to advance monocausal descriptions of upheavals such as the reformation or the first world war.

Over the past six months, however, ‘polycrisis’ has acquired traction as a way of describing a multitude of severe political, economic, social, and environmental problems that are entangled with each other and thus difficult for one actor or set of actors – governments, businesses, NGOs, etc. – to provide decisive solutions.

From this arises an imperative very dear to the WEF: closely-coordinated global cooperation – so that organisations, guided by the WEF, can collectively untangle and defuse today’s volatile conditions before a catastrophe ensues.

So far, the WEF report maintains, our world has dodged a July 1914-like bullet. But, runs the argument, such is the pace of ever-unfolding interrelated political, economic, and environmental crises that we disdain greater global coordination at our peril. 

There is, the WEF report states, ‘still a window to shape a more secure future.’ But that window is closing. ‘Some of the risks,’ it claims, ‘are close to a tipping point. This is the moment to act collectively, decisively and with a long-term lens to shape a pathway to a more positive, inclusive and stable world.’

But one thing we know about crises is that they provide rationales for expansions and centralisations of state power which become difficult to retract after the crisis. It

Already a subscriber? Log in

Keep reading with a free trial

Subscribe and get your first month of online and app access for free. After that it’s just £1 a week.

There’s no commitment, you can cancel any time.

Or

Unlock more articles

REGISTER

Written by
Samuel Gregg
Samuel Gregg is Distinguished Fellow in Political Economy at the American Institute for Economic Research and author, most recently, of The Next American Economy: Nation, State, and Markets in an Uncertain World (2022)

Topics in this article

Comments

Don't miss out

Join the conversation with other Spectator readers. Subscribe to leave a comment.

Already a subscriber? Log in