TED2005
Bjorn Lomborg: Global priorities bigger than climate change
比尤恩·隆伯格 談制定全球議題優先順序
Filmed:
Readability: 3.3
1,695,569 views
如果你有500億美元，首先你會先解決哪些問題，是愛滋病或全球暖化？丹麥政治科學家比尤恩·隆伯格提出了出人意表的答案。
Bjorn Lomborg - Global prioritizer
Danish political scientist Bjorn Lomborg heads the Copenhagen Consensus, which has prioritized the world's greatest problems -- global warming, world poverty, disease -- based on how effective our solutions might be. It's a thought-provoking, even provocative list. Full bio
Danish political scientist Bjorn Lomborg heads the Copenhagen Consensus, which has prioritized the world's greatest problems -- global warming, world poverty, disease -- based on how effective our solutions might be. It's a thought-provoking, even provocative list. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:24
What I'd like to talk about is really the biggest problems in the world.
0
0
4000
我想和大家談的是地球上最嚴重的問題。
00:28
I'm not going to talk about "The Skeptical Environmentalist" --
1
4000
2000
我不會談到＂多疑的環境保護論者＂這本書
00:30
probably that's also a good choice.
2
6000
2000
雖然那也是不錯的選擇。
00:32
(Laughter)
3
8000
1000
（笑聲）
00:33
But I am going talk about: what are the big problems in the world?
4
9000
3000
不過我要談的是，何謂地球上最嚴重的問題？
00:36
And I must say, before I go on, I should ask every one of you
5
12000
3000
在我開始之前，必須說的是，我先請在座的每一位
00:39
to try and get out pen and paper
6
15000
2000
拿出筆跟紙
00:41
because I'm actually going to ask you to help me to look at how we do that.
7
17000
3000
因為我將請各位和我一起來找找我們所要的答案
00:44
So get out your pen and paper.
8
20000
2000
所以請拿出筆和紙
00:46
Bottom line is, there is a lot of problems out there in the world.
9
22000
2000
最重要的是這世界上有很多的問題
00:48
I'm just going to list some of them.
10
24000
2000
我來舉些例子說明
00:50
There are 800 million people starving.
11
26000
2000
全球有八億人口處於飢餓當中
00:52
There's a billion people without clean drinking water.
12
28000
2000
十億人口沒有乾淨的水喝
00:54
Two billion people without sanitation.
13
30000
2000
二十億人口沒有基本衛生措施
00:56
There are several million people dying of HIV and AIDS.
14
32000
3000
幾百萬的人口因感染愛滋病毒和愛滋病而死亡
00:59
The lists go on and on.
15
35000
2000
有太多的例子列舉不完
01:01
There's two billions of people who will be severely affected by climate change -- so on.
16
37000
5000
全球有二十億人口嚴重受到氣候變遷的影響－－等等
01:06
There are many, many problems out there.
17
42000
2000
有許多許多的問題
01:08
In an ideal world, we would solve them all, but we don't.
18
44000
4000
在一個完美的世界，我們會解決所有的問題，可是實際上我們不會。
01:12
We don't actually solve all problems.
19
48000
2000
現實世界裡我們不會解決所有的問題。
01:14
And if we do not, the question I think we need to ask ourselves --
20
50000
4000
那麼如果我們不會，我想我們該問自己的是－－
01:18
and that's why it's on the economy session -- is to say,
21
54000
3000
這也是為什麼這場演講被安排在經濟議題的時段
01:21
if we don't do all things, we really have to start asking ourselves,
22
57000
3000
既然我們無法解決所有問題，我們應該開始自我省察
01:24
which ones should we solve first?
23
60000
2000
我們應該先解決哪些問題？
01:26
And that's the question I'd like to ask you.
24
62000
2000
這是今天我要問大家的問題
01:28
If we had say, 50 billion dollars over the next four years to spend
25
64000
5000
假設如果我們有500億美元，能夠在未來四年
01:33
to do good in this world, where should we spend it?
26
69000
3000
可以為這世界做些事，這些錢該用在哪裡?
01:36
We identified 10 of the biggest challenges in the world,
27
72000
3000
我們找出十項地球所面臨最嚴重的挑戰
01:39
and I will just briefly read them:
28
75000
2000
我很快的念出來。
01:41
climate change, communicable diseases, conflicts, education,
29
77000
2000
氣候變遷，傳染疾病，衝突
01:43
financial instability, governance and corruption,
30
79000
2000
金融波動，政府治理，貪汙
01:45
malnutrition and hunger, population migration,
31
81000
3000
營養失調及饑荒，人口遷移
01:48
sanitation and water, and subsidies and trade barriers.
32
84000
3000
衛生及水源，經濟資助及貿易保護
01:51
We believe that these in many ways
33
87000
2000
我們相信在很多的地方
01:53
encompass the biggest problems in the world.
34
89000
2000
涵蓋全球最嚴重的問題
01:55
The obvious question would be to ask,
35
91000
2000
我們要問的是
01:57
what do you think are the biggest things?
36
93000
2000
哪些是最重要的?
01:59
Where should we start on solving these problems?
37
95000
3000
我們該從哪些問題開始解決？
02:02
But that's a wrong problem to ask.
38
98000
2000
不過這問題問得不對
02:04
That was actually the problem that was asked in Davos in January.
39
100000
3000
今年一月這個問題早在瑞士達沃斯已被提出
02:07
But of course, there's a problem in asking people to focus on problems.
40
103000
3000
當然，把注意力集中在問題上，這本身就是個問題。
02:10
Because we can't solve problems.
41
106000
3000
因為總是有解決不了的問題。
02:13
Surely the biggest problem we have in the world is that we all die.
42
109000
3000
我們要面對的最大問題就是我們都會死
02:16
But we don't have a technology to solve that, right?
43
112000
2000
但卻沒有任何科技可以解決這問題，是吧？
02:18
So the point is not to prioritize problems,
44
114000
3000
因此重點不在於為問題訂出優先次序
02:21
but the point is to prioritize solutions to problems.
45
117000
4000
而是為解決方法訂出優先次序
02:25
And that would be -- of course that gets a little more complicated.
46
121000
3000
那就是說--當然事情沒有那麼簡單
02:28
To climate change that would be like Kyoto.
47
124000
2000
氣候變遷的解決方法可能是京都協議
02:30
To communicable diseases, it might be health clinics or mosquito nets.
48
126000
3000
傳染病的解決方法可能是醫療診所或蚊帳
02:33
To conflicts, it would be U.N.'s peacekeeping forces, and so on.
49
129000
3000
衝突的解決方法可能是聯合國維和部隊等等。
02:36
The point that I would like to ask you to try to do,
50
132000
5000
我想請大家一起嘗試做的是
02:41
is just in 30 seconds -- and I know this is in a sense
51
137000
3000
請在三十秒內－我知道這幾乎是
02:44
an impossible task -- write down what you think
52
140000
2000
不可能的任務－寫出你認為
02:46
is probably some of the top priorities.
53
142000
2000
應該最優先著手的項目
02:48
And also -- and that's, of course, where economics gets evil --
54
144000
3000
還有－這就是為什麼經濟學是很殘酷的--
02:51
to put down what are the things we should not do, first.
55
147000
3000
我們得列出哪些事是不需要最先被處理的
02:54
What should be at the bottom of the list?
56
150000
2000
哪些事是最後要處理的？
02:56
Please, just take 30 seconds, perhaps talk to your neighbor,
57
152000
3000
請你用三十秒的時間，或許和旁邊的人討論
02:59
and just figure out what should be the top priorities
58
155000
2000
想想我們有哪些解決方法
03:01
and the bottom priorities of the solutions that we have
59
157000
2000
與進行的優先次序來面對
03:03
to the world's biggest issues.
60
159000
2000
世界上最嚴重的問題
03:05
The amazing part of this process -- and of course, I mean,
61
161000
3000
這過程最奇妙的是－－當然
03:08
I would love to -- I only have 18 minutes,
62
164000
2000
我很樂意－但我只有十八分鐘
03:10
I've already given you quite a substantial amount of my time, right?
63
166000
2000
我已分給大家相當多的時間，是麼？
03:12
I'd love to go into, and get you to think about this process,
64
168000
4000
我想引導大家思考這個過程
03:16
and that's actually what we did.
65
172000
2000
這就是我們所做的
03:18
And I also strongly encourage you,
66
174000
2000
同時我也請大家認真想想
03:20
and I'm sure we'll also have these discussions afterwards,
67
176000
2000
我相信以後也會有類似的討論
03:22
to think about, how do we actually prioritize?
68
178000
2000
思考實際上我們如何訂定這先後順序？
03:24
Of course, you have to ask yourself,
69
180000
2000
當然各位也要問問自己
03:26
why on Earth was such a list never done before?
70
182000
2000
到底為什麼這樣的清單從來沒有人做過？
03:28
And one reason is that prioritization is incredibly uncomfortable.
71
184000
5000
其中一個原因是優先順序會讓人感到極度不適
03:33
Nobody wants to do this.
72
189000
2000
沒人想要這麼做
03:35
Of course, every organization would love to be on the top of such a list.
73
191000
3000
顯而易見的，每個組織都想成為清單上的最佳選項
03:38
But every organization would also hate to be not on the top of the list.
74
194000
3000
卻更不想成為清單上的非首要選項
03:41
And since there are many more not-number-one spots on the list
75
197000
4000
既然清單上非首要的項目，遠比首要項目
03:45
than there is number ones, it makes perfect sense
76
201000
3000
要來得多，理所當然地
03:48
not to want to do such a list.
77
204000
2000
沒有人想要做這清單
03:50
We've had the U.N. for almost 60 years,
78
206000
2000
聯合國成立了快六十年
03:52
yet we've never actually made a fundamental list
79
208000
3000
我們卻從未確實地做一份基本的清單
03:55
of all the big things that we can do in the world,
80
211000
2000
列出我們可以為世界做的所有重要事情
03:57
and said, which of them should we do first?
81
213000
3000
也就是說，哪些是我們應該先做的？
04:00
So it doesn't mean that we are not prioritizing --
82
216000
3000
這不是說我們沒有決定優先次序
04:03
any decision is a prioritization, so of course we are still prioritizing,
83
219000
4000
任何決定都包含了優先順序，所以我們仍然是決定了
04:07
if only implicitly -- and that's unlikely to be as good
84
223000
3000
假如有可能的話－－有很高的可能性是，
04:10
as if we actually did the prioritization,
85
226000
2000
沒有我們真正的訂出先後順序
04:12
and went in and talked about it.
86
228000
2000
坦白的說出來得好。
04:14
So what I'm proposing is really to say that we have,
87
230000
2000
所以我要提議的，是我們長久以來
04:16
for a very long time, had a situation when we've had a menu of choices.
88
232000
4000
在面對狀況時已有一張清單可供我們選擇
04:20
There are many, many things we can do out there,
89
236000
2000
我們可以做非常多的事
04:22
but we've not had the prices, nor the sizes.
90
238000
3000
但如果我們沒有參考的數值或規模
04:25
We have not had an idea.
91
241000
2000
是不會有什麼想法的。
04:27
Imagine going into a restaurant and getting this big menu card,
92
243000
3000
想像一下我們走進一家餐廳，拿起菜單
04:30
but you have no idea what the price is.
93
246000
2000
卻不知道價錢
04:32
You know, you have a pizza; you've no idea what the price is.
94
248000
2000
你想要個披薩，卻不知道多少錢
04:34
It could be at one dollar; it could be 1,000 dollars.
95
250000
2000
有可能是一塊錢，有可能是一千塊錢
04:36
It could be a family-size pizza;
96
252000
2000
有可能是個家庭號披薩
04:38
it could be a very individual-size pizza, right?
97
254000
2000
也有可能是一人份的披薩，不是麼？
04:40
We'd like to know these things.
98
256000
2000
我們需要知道這些事情
04:42
And that is what the Copenhagen Consensus is really trying to do --
99
258000
2000
而那就是哥本哈根共識想要做的
04:44
to try to put prices on these issues.
100
260000
3000
就是為這些議題訂定策略
04:47
And so basically, this has been the Copenhagen Consensus' process.
101
263000
3000
基本上，這些都是哥本哈根共識的過程
04:50
We got 30 of the world's best economists, three in each area.
102
266000
4000
我們找來三十位世界最頂尖的經濟學家，每個領域有三位，
04:54
So we have three of world's top economists write about climate change.
103
270000
3000
所以在氣候變遷的領域有三位最優秀的經濟學家
04:57
What can we do? What will be the cost
104
273000
3000
我們能做什麼？要付出哪些代價？
05:00
and what will be the benefit of that?
105
276000
1000
又會得到哪些效益？
05:01
Likewise in communicable diseases.
106
277000
2000
同樣的在傳染病的範疇中
05:03
Three of the world's top experts saying, what can we do?
107
279000
3000
我們有三位世界最頂尖的專家告訴我們，該怎麼做？
05:06
What would be the price?
108
282000
1000
要付出什麼?
05:07
What should we do about it, and what will be the outcome?
109
283000
3000
我們該怎麼做，結果又是如何？
05:10
And so on.
110
286000
1000
以此類推。
05:11
Then we had some of the world's top economists,
111
287000
2000
我們接著請世界最好的經濟學家
05:13
eight of the world's top economists, including three Nobel Laureates,
112
289000
4000
八位世界最佳經濟學家，包括三位諾貝爾獎得主，
05:17
meet in Copenhagen in May 2004.
113
293000
3000
2004年五月在哥本哈根相聚一堂
05:20
We called them the "dream team."
114
296000
2000
我們稱之為夢幻團隊
05:22
The Cambridge University prefects decided to call them
115
298000
3000
劍橋大學的督導長決定稱他們為
05:25
the Real Madrid of economics.
116
301000
2000
經濟學的皇家馬德里隊
05:27
That works very well in Europe, but it doesn't really work over here.
117
303000
2000
在歐洲很適合，但在這裡似乎不太行得通
05:29
And what they basically did was come out with a prioritized list.
118
305000
4000
他們基本上在做的是列出一張優先順序表
05:33
And then you ask, why economists?
119
309000
2000
然後你會問，那何必找經濟學家？
05:35
And of course, I'm very happy you asked that question -- (Laughter) --
120
311000
2000
當然，我很開心妳問這問題（笑聲）
05:37
because that's a very good question.
121
313000
2000
因為那是個非常好的問題
05:39
The point is, of course, if you want to know about malaria,
122
315000
3000
重點在於，如果你想了解瘧疾，
05:42
you ask a malaria expert.
123
318000
2000
妳會找瘧疾專家
05:44
If you want to know about climate, you ask a climatologist.
124
320000
2000
如果你想了解氣候，你會諮詢氣候學家
05:46
But if you want to know which of the two you should deal with first,
125
322000
3000
但如果你想知道兩者之間，何者應優先處理
05:49
you can't ask either of them, because that's not what they do.
126
325000
3000
你不能問他們任何一方，因為這不是他們的專長
05:52
That is what economists do.
127
328000
2000
那是經濟學家的工作
05:54
They prioritize.
128
330000
1000
負責制定優先次序。
05:55
They make that in some ways disgusting task of saying, which one should we do first,
129
331000
5000
他們為那些看起來挺擾人的項目制定優先順序，
06:00
and which one should we do afterwards?
130
336000
2000
評估哪些先做，哪些該稍後進行？
06:02
So this is the list, and this is the one I'd like to share with you.
131
338000
3000
因此這就是我要和大家分享的清單，
06:05
Of course, you can also see it on the website,
132
341000
2000
當然你也可以在網路上看到
06:07
and we'll also talk about it more, I'm sure, as the day goes on.
133
343000
3000
隨著時間我們也會更密集的談到
06:10
They basically came up with a list where they said
134
346000
2000
基本上他們完成了一份選單，
06:12
there were bad projects -- basically, projects
135
348000
3000
上頭有包含一些不良項目，簡單來說，
06:15
where if you invest a dollar, you get less than a dollar back.
136
351000
3000
假設你投資了一塊錢，回收會小於一塊錢，
06:18
Then there's fair projects, good projects and very good projects.
137
354000
4000
接著有些合理的項目，良好和優秀的項目
06:22
And of course, it's the very good projects we should start doing.
138
358000
2000
當然我們應該先發展優秀項目
06:24
I'm going to go from backwards
139
360000
2000
我會從清單的末尾開始
06:26
so that we end up with the best projects.
140
362000
2000
把最後的留到最後。
06:28
These were the bad projects.
141
364000
2000
這些是不良項目
06:30
As you might see the bottom of the list was climate change.
142
366000
4000
可以看見清單最末是氣候變遷
06:34
This offends a lot of people, and that's probably one of the things
143
370000
4000
這惹惱了許多人，那可能就是為什麼有些人會說
06:38
where people will say I shouldn't come back, either.
144
374000
2000
我不應該再來。
06:40
And I'd like to talk about that, because that's really curious.
145
376000
2000
這個我需要說明一下，因為看起來很奇怪
06:42
Why is it it came up?
146
378000
2000
為何是這樣？
06:44
And I'll actually also try to get back to this
147
380000
2000
我想要再回頭談談這件事
06:46
because it's probably one of the things
148
382000
2000
因為這可能是我們的清單中
06:48
that we'll disagree with on the list that you wrote down.
149
384000
2000
和你們的清單裡的項目不同之處
06:50
The reason why they came up with saying that Kyoto --
150
386000
3000
為什麼這些專家認為執行京都協議，
06:53
or doing something more than Kyoto -- is a bad deal
151
389000
2000
或者做得比京都會議要更多－並不是個好主意
06:55
is simply because it's very inefficient.
152
391000
2000
原因很簡單，因為成效不彰
06:57
It's not saying that global warming is not happening.
153
393000
2000
並不是說地球暖化沒有發生
06:59
It's not saying that it's not a big problem.
154
395000
2000
也不是說問題不嚴重
07:01
But it's saying that what we can do about it
155
397000
2000
而是說我們能做的
07:03
is very little, at a very high cost.
156
399000
3000
並不多，代價很高
07:06
What they basically show us, the average of all macroeconomic models,
157
402000
4000
這些專家基本上告訴我們，根據所有總體經濟學模組的平均估算
07:10
is that Kyoto, if everyone agreed, would cost about 150 billion dollars a year.
158
406000
5000
如果各國都同意執行京都協議，每年要花費大約一千五百億美元
07:15
That's a substantial amount of money.
159
411000
2000
這是筆龐大的數字
07:17
That's two to three times the global development aid
160
413000
2000
大約是我們每年援助第三世界發展
07:19
that we give the Third World every year.
161
415000
2000
所花費的兩到三倍
07:21
Yet it would do very little good.
162
417000
2000
但仍舊沒太大的幫助
07:23
All models show it will postpone warming for about six years in 2100.
163
419000
4000
所有的模組皆顯示這樣可以在二一零零年時將暖化問題延後六年
07:27
So the guy in Bangladesh who gets a flood in 2100 can wait until 2106.
164
423000
4000
因此本來二一零零年在孟加拉發生的水災，可以延至二零一六年
07:31
Which is a little good, but not very much good.
165
427000
2000
是可以改善，但不是全面性的成效
07:33
So the idea here really is to say, well, we've spent a lot of money doing a little good.
166
429000
5000
因此真正來講，我們花了很多錢，卻沒什麼成效。
07:38
And just to give you a sense of reference,
167
434000
2000
讓我給大家一些參考資料
07:40
the U.N. actually estimate that for half that amount,
168
436000
2000
根據聯合國的統計，只需使用一半的預算
07:42
for about 75 billion dollars a year,
169
438000
2000
大約每年七百五十億美元
07:44
we could solve all major basic problems in the world.
170
440000
3000
我們可以解決世界上所有重大問題
07:47
We could give clean drinking water, sanitation, basic healthcare
171
443000
3000
我們可以為地球上的所有人類，提供乾淨飲用水，衛生措施，
07:50
and education to every single human being on the planet.
172
446000
3000
基本醫療與教育措施。
07:53
So we have to ask ourselves, do we want to spend twice the amount
173
449000
4000
所以我們捫心自問，我們真的要花兩倍的代價
07:57
on doing very little good?
174
453000
1000
卻只能換來一點好處？
07:58
Or half the amount on doing an amazing amount of good?
175
454000
3000
或者只用一半的代價，達到出人意料的驚人成效？
08:01
And that is really why it becomes a bad project.
176
457000
3000
這也是氣候變遷計畫成效不彰。
08:04
It's not to say that if we had all the money in the world, we wouldn't want to do it.
177
460000
3000
並不是說，如果我們有了這些錢，就不會去處理這個問題，
08:07
But it's to say, when we don't, it's just simply not our first priority.
178
463000
4000
而是說，當我們沒有這些預算時，就不應該優先處理。
08:11
The fair projects -- notice I'm not going to comment on all these --
179
467000
3000
成效普通的計畫，我並不在這逐項評論，
08:14
but communicable diseases, scale of basic health services -- just made it,
180
470000
4000
但傳染病，基本健康服務－可以進行。
08:18
simply because, yes, scale of basic health services is a great thing.
181
474000
3000
原因在於，基本健康服務規模很大是件好事
08:21
It would do a lot of good, but it's also very, very costly.
182
477000
3000
會帶來很多效益，但是也相當昂貴。
08:24
Again, what it tells us is suddenly
183
480000
2000
我要強調的是，這突然提醒我們
08:26
we start thinking about both sides of the equation.
184
482000
2000
該開始思考問題的兩面。
08:28
If you look at the good projects, a lot of sanitation and water projects came in.
185
484000
4000
接著來看成效不錯的計畫，像是衛生和飲用水計畫
08:32
Again, sanitation and water is incredibly important,
186
488000
2000
這兩個計畫極為重要。
08:34
but it also costs a lot of infrastructure.
187
490000
3000
也需要許多基本措施的建造
08:37
So I'd like to show you the top four priorities
188
493000
2000
我們來看看為首的四項優先順序
08:39
which should be at least the first ones that we deal with
189
495000
3000
哪些步驟是我們談到如何處理世界性問題時
08:42
when we talk about how we should deal with the problems in the world.
190
498000
3000
必須優先處理的
08:45
The fourth best problem is malaria -- dealing with malaria.
191
501000
4000
第四個要優先處理的是瘧疾－面對瘧疾
08:49
The incidence of malaria is about a couple of [million] people get infected every year.
192
505000
4000
每年有幾百萬人因感染瘧疾而受影響
08:53
It might even cost up towards a percentage point of GDP
193
509000
4000
對受影響的國家來說，每年所需的費用
08:57
every year for affected nations.
194
513000
2000
可能激增至接近國民生產總值的百分之一
08:59
If we invested about 13 billion dollars over the next four years,
195
515000
4000
如果我們在未來四年投資了一百三十億美元
09:03
we could bring that incidence down to half.
196
519000
2000
我們可以把感染的人數減半
09:05
We could avoid about 500,000 people dying,
197
521000
3000
可以救回大約五十萬人的生命
09:08
but perhaps more importantly, we could avoid about a [million] people
198
524000
3000
但更重要的是，我們每年可以防止大約十億人
09:11
getting infected every year.
199
527000
1000
感染這類的疾病。
09:12
We would significantly increase their ability
200
528000
2000
這會很顯著的提高他們
09:14
to deal with many of the other problems that they have to deal with --
201
530000
3000
解決處理其它很多問題的能力。
09:17
of course, in the long run, also to deal with global warming.
202
533000
3000
當然，長遠來看，這包含了處理全球暖化的能力。
09:21
This third best one was free trade.
203
537000
3000
第三項要優先處理的是自由貿易。
09:24
Basically, the model showed that if we could get free trade,
204
540000
3000
基本上，我們的經濟模組告訴我們，
09:27
and especially cut subsidies in the U.S. and Europe,
205
543000
3000
如果我們有自由貿易，尤其是取消歐美國家的貿易津貼，
09:30
we could basically enliven the global economy
206
546000
4000
我們可以從根本活絡全球經濟。
09:34
to an astounding number of about 2,400 billion dollars a year,
207
550000
4000
每年可高達令人驚訝的兩萬四千億美元的數字。
09:38
half of which would accrue to the Third World.
208
554000
2000
半數會來自於第三世界。
09:40
Again, the point is to say that we could actually pull
209
556000
3000
再者，我們可以確實的在兩到五年內
09:43
two to three hundred million people out of poverty,
210
559000
3000
協助兩到三億的人口
09:46
very radically fast, in about two to five years.
211
562000
3000
快速的脫離貧困。
09:49
That would be the third best thing we could do.
212
565000
2000
這是第三件我們最應該做的事。
09:51
The second best thing would be to focus on malnutrition.
213
567000
4000
第二件我們最該做的事，是營養不良的問題
09:55
Not just malnutrition in general, but there's a very cheap way
214
571000
3000
不只是一般的營養不良，而是有更經濟的方式
09:58
of dealing with malnutrition, namely, the lack of micronutrients.
215
574000
3000
來面對解決微量營養元素缺乏的問題。
10:01
Basically, about half of the world's population is lacking in
216
577000
3000
基本上全球有一半的人口缺乏
10:04
iron, zinc, iodine and vitamin A.
217
580000
2000
鐵，鋅，碘和維生素A
10:06
If we invest about 12 billion dollars,
218
582000
2000
如果我們投資一百二十億美元
10:08
we could make a severe inroad into that problem.
219
584000
3000
就可以為這問題帶來重大的解決方案
10:11
That would be the second best investment that we could do.
220
587000
3000
那會是我們能做的第二樣最棒的投資。
10:14
And the very best project would be to focus on HIV/AIDS.
221
590000
5000
至於我們成效最佳的專案，就是愛滋病的問題。
10:19
Basically, if we invest 27 billion dollars over the next eight years,
222
595000
4000
原則上，如果我們在未來八年內投資兩百七十億美元
10:23
we could avoid 28 new million cases of HIV/AIDS.
223
599000
4000
我們可以預防兩千八百萬的人口感染愛滋。
10:27
Again, what this does and what it focuses on is saying
224
603000
4000
同樣的我們必須考慮的是
10:31
there are two very different ways that we can deal with HIV/AIDS.
225
607000
3000
對付愛滋問題有兩種截然不同的解決方式，
10:34
One is treatment; the other one is prevention.
226
610000
3000
一個是治療，另一個是預防。
10:37
And again, in an ideal world, we would do both.
227
613000
3000
同樣的在一個理想世界，我們兩者都要做。
10:40
But in a world where we don't do either, or don't do it very well,
228
616000
3000
但如果不能兩者兼顧，或者沒法做得好
10:43
we have to at least ask ourselves where should we invest first.
229
619000
4000
至少得先問自己，應該首要投資的是在哪裡？
10:47
And treatment is much, much more expensive than prevention.
230
623000
3000
治療是要比預防昂貴太多太多了，
10:50
So basically, what this focuses on is saying, we can do a lot more
231
626000
4000
所以基本上,如果我們投注心力在預防上，
10:54
by investing in prevention.
232
630000
2000
我們可以得到比較多的成效。
10:56
Basically for the amount of money that we spend,
233
632000
2000
基本上我們可以用一筆錢來預防愛滋
10:58
we can do X amount of good in treatment,
234
634000
3000
可以做無數個治療
11:01
and 10 times as much good in prevention.
235
637000
3000
也可以在預防得到十倍的成效
11:04
So again, what we focus on is prevention rather than treatment,
236
640000
3000
所以我們首要注重的應該是預防
11:07
at first rate.
237
643000
1000
而不是治療。
11:08
What this really does is that it makes us think about our priorities.
238
644000
4000
這告訴我們的是，考慮我們的優先順序是很重要的。
11:12
I'd like to have you look at your priority list and say,
239
648000
4000
請你看看你們手上的清單，捫心自問：
11:16
did you get it right?
240
652000
2000
這清單是否正確？
11:18
Or did you get close to what we came up with here?
241
654000
2000
或者與我們所制定的是否類似？
11:20
Well, of course, one of the things is climate change again.
242
656000
4000
當然，我們要面對的其中一個問題，又是氣候變遷。
11:24
I find a lot of people find it very, very unlikely that we should do that.
243
660000
3000
我知道很多人都不認為我們應該這麼做。
11:27
We should also do climate change,
244
663000
2000
我們應該單單處理好氣候變遷的問題，
11:29
if for no other reason, simply because it's such a big problem.
245
665000
3000
因為這是個影響深遠的問題。
11:32
But of course, we don't do all problems.
246
668000
3000
不過我們也不會解決所有的問題。
11:35
There are many problems out there in the world.
247
671000
2000
世界上有太多的問題了
11:37
And what I want to make sure of is, if we actually focus on problems,
248
673000
4000
我想要確定的是，如果我們專注在問題上，
11:41
that we focus on the right ones.
249
677000
2000
高過專注在對的問題上，
11:43
The ones where we can do a lot of good rather than a little good.
250
679000
3000
就是那些可以讓我們得到重要成效而不只是無關痛癢的問題，
11:46
And I think, actually -- Thomas Schelling,
251
682000
3000
我們夢幻隊伍中的成員，
11:49
one of the participants in the dream team, he put it very, very well.
252
685000
4000
湯瑪斯謝琳說得非常好，他指出，
11:53
One of things that people forget, is that in 100 years,
253
689000
3000
人們常常忘記一百年後
11:56
when we're talking about most of the climate change impacts will be,
254
692000
3000
當我們討論氣候變遷所帶來的巨大影響時，
11:59
people will be much, much richer.
255
695000
2000
人們會比現在富有很多。
12:01
Even the most pessimistic impact scenarios of the U.N.
256
697000
4000
即使是聯合國最不樂觀的預測，
12:05
estimate that the average person in the developing world in 2100
257
701000
3000
在二一零零年時，發展中國家的人最差的時候
12:08
will be about as rich as we are today.
258
704000
2000
也和我們現在一樣富有。
12:10
Much more likely, they will be two to four times richer than we are.
259
706000
4000
很有可能的是，他們要比我們現在富有兩到四倍。
12:14
And of course, we'll be even richer than that.
260
710000
2000
當然，到時我們也會比現在更富有。
12:16
But the point is to say, when we talk about saving people,
261
712000
4000
我要說的是，當我們說要在二一零零年，
12:20
or helping people in Bangladesh in 2100,
262
716000
3000
幫助孟加拉人民時，
12:23
we're not talking about a poor Bangladeshi.
263
719000
2000
我們面對的不是一個窮困的孟加拉，
12:25
We're actually talking about a fairly rich Dutch guy.
264
721000
2000
而是一個挺富有的荷蘭人
12:27
And so the real point, of course, is to say,
265
723000
2000
追根究底來說，
12:29
do we want to spend a lot of money helping a little,
266
725000
4000
我們是否真的想花一大筆錢，去幫助一位
12:33
100 years from now, a fairly rich Dutch guy?
267
729000
2000
一百年後相當富有的荷蘭人？
12:35
Or do we want to help real poor people, right now, in Bangladesh,
268
731000
5000
還是我們現在幫助那些窮困的孟加拉人民
12:40
who really need the help, and whom we can help very, very cheaply?
269
736000
3000
而所花費的不需太龐大的代價？
12:43
Or as Schelling put it, imagine if you were a rich -- as you will be --
270
739000
5000
或者如同Schelling所說，想像自己到了2100年
12:48
a rich Chinese, a rich Bolivian, a rich Congolese, in 2100,
271
744000
5000
是個有錢的中國人，波利維亞人，或者是剛果人，
12:53
thinking back on 2005, and saying, "How odd that they cared so much
272
749000
6000
當你回想2005年時你會說，"為何他們會這麼在意
12:59
about helping me a little bit through climate change,
273
755000
4000
幫助應付氣候變遷上的事，
13:03
and cared so fairly little about helping my grandfather
274
759000
4000
卻不在意幫助我的祖父，
13:07
and my great grandfather, whom they could have helped so much more,
275
763000
3000
和我的曾祖父，即使他們能夠做的
13:10
and who needed the help so much more?"
276
766000
3000
是那麼那麼的多？
13:13
So I think that really does tell us why it is
277
769000
3000
所以我認為這正說明了
13:16
we need to get our priorities straight.
278
772000
2000
為何正確地制定優先順序是如此重要。
13:18
Even if it doesn't accord to the typical way we see this problem.
279
774000
3000
雖然這和我們一般看這問題的角度不同。
13:21
Of course, that's mainly because climate change has good pictures.
280
777000
5000
當然，主要原因是氣候變遷有許多闡述方式
13:26
We have, you know, "The Day After Tomorrow" -- it looks great, right?
281
782000
3000
我們有像［明天以後］的電影，看起來挺棒的，不是麼?
13:29
It's a good film in the sense that
282
785000
3000
那是部好電影，
13:32
I certainly want to see it, right, but don't expect Emmerich
283
788000
3000
會讓我想去欣賞，但別期待Emmerich
13:35
to cast Brad Pitt in his next movie
284
791000
3000
會找布萊特彼特出現在他下一部戲中。
13:38
digging latrines in Tanzania or something. (Laughter)
285
794000
2000
在坦桑尼亞挖廁所之類的（笑聲）
13:40
It just doesn't make for as much of a movie.
286
796000
2000
因為那沒什麼票房可言。
13:42
So in many ways, I think of the Copenhagen Consensus
287
798000
2000
所以從許多方面來看，我認為哥本哈根共識
13:44
and the whole discussion of priorities
288
800000
2000
與整個關於優先次序的討論
13:46
as a defense for boring problems.
289
802000
3000
只是對於沉悶問題的辯解罷了。
13:49
To make sure that we realize it's not about making us feel good.
290
805000
4000
為了確保我們意識到不是要做些自我感覺良好的事，
13:53
It's not about making things that have the most media attention,
291
809000
5000
也不是要做吸引媒體注意力的事，
13:58
but it's about making places where we can actually do the most good.
292
814000
3000
而是去做最能帶來果效的事。
14:01
The other objections, I think, that are important to say,
293
817000
3000
我在想，另外的反對聲音是需要注意到的，
14:04
is that I'm somehow -- or we are somehow -- positing a false choice.
294
820000
4000
就是我－或者我們有時候會提出假象的選擇。
14:08
Of course, we should do all things,
295
824000
2000
當然，我們應當做所有的事，
14:10
in an ideal world -- I would certainly agree.
296
826000
2000
尤其是在一個理想的世界裡－我是絕對同意。
14:12
I think we should do all things, but we don't.
297
828000
2000
我們該做所有的事，但事實上並沒有。
14:14
In 1970, the developed world decided we were going to spend
298
830000
4000
在七十年代，已開發國家估計我們所花費的成本
14:18
twice as much as we did, right now, than in 1970, on the developing world.
299
834000
6000
是現在實際上花費在開發中國家的兩倍。
14:24
Since then our aid has halved.
300
840000
2000
從那時以來，我們所援助的金額減了一半。
14:26
So it doesn't look like we're actually on the path
301
842000
3000
由此可見，我們現在走的方向，
14:29
of suddenly solving all big problems.
302
845000
2000
不會馬上解決所有重大問題。
14:31
Likewise, people are also saying, but what about the Iraq war?
303
847000
3000
同樣的，有人會問，那美伊戰爭呢?
14:34
You know, we spend 100 billion dollars --
304
850000
2000
我們已為了這戰爭花費了一千億美元，
14:36
why don't we spend that on doing good in the world?
305
852000
2000
為何不用這筆錢為世界做些好事？
14:38
I'm all for that.
306
854000
1000
這點我全力支持
14:39
If any one of you guys can talk Bush into doing that, that's fine.
307
855000
2000
如果你們其中有人能說服布希那樣做，那最好。
14:41
But the point, of course, is still to say,
308
857000
2000
但我的論點仍然是，
14:43
if you get another 100 billion dollars,
309
859000
2000
如果有額外的一千億美元，
14:45
we still want to spend that in the best possible way, don't we?
310
861000
3000
我們仍想把這筆錢做最好的運用，是吧？
14:48
So the real issue here is to get ourselves back
311
864000
2000
所以最重要的問題是，我們重新回頭想想，
14:50
and think about what are the right priorities.
312
866000
2000
哪些是正確的優先制序。
14:52
I should just mention briefly, is this really the right list that we got out?
313
868000
4000
還有一點我要說的，是這張清單是否訂定的夠正確?
14:56
You know, when you ask the world's best economists,
314
872000
3000
當我們找來世界上頂尖的經濟學家，
14:59
you inevitably end up asking old, white American men.
315
875000
3000
不可避免找來的都是些有點年紀的美國白人，
15:02
And they're not necessarily, you know,
316
878000
2000
然而他們並不一定能提供
15:04
great ways of looking at the entire world.
317
880000
4000
觀察這個世界的最好方法。
15:08
So we actually invited 80 young people from all over the world
318
884000
2000
所以我們從世界各地邀請來了八十位年輕人，
15:10
to come and solve the same problem.
319
886000
2000
邀請他們解決相同的問題。
15:12
The only two requirements were that they were studying at the university,
320
888000
4000
他們只需符合兩個條件：大學生
15:16
and they spoke English.
321
892000
2000
並懂英文
15:18
The majority of them were, first, from developing countries.
322
894000
3000
大多數的從開發中國家來的人
15:21
They had all the same material but they could go vastly
323
897000
2000
他們都有相同的資訊
15:23
outside the scope of discussion, and they certainly did,
324
899000
3000
在討論時有寬廣的思考空間，也都這麼做了
15:26
to come up with their own lists.
325
902000
2000
提出他們自己的清單
15:28
And the surprising thing was that the list was very similar --
326
904000
2000
令人驚訝的是這些清單的雷同之處
15:30
with malnutrition and diseases at the top
327
906000
3000
饑荒與疾病為當務之急
15:33
and climate change at the bottom.
328
909000
2000
氣候變遷是最不重要的
15:35
We've done this many other times.
329
911000
1000
我們嘗試了很多次
15:36
There's been many other seminars and university students, and different things.
330
912000
3000
經過許多論壇與大學生的討論
15:39
They all come out with very much the same list.
331
915000
3000
大家都有著類似的清單
15:42
And that gives me great hope, really, in saying that I do believe
332
918000
4000
這給我很大的希望，真的，我衷心相信
15:46
that there is a path ahead to get us to start thinking about priorities,
333
922000
5000
是有這麼一條路引領我們開始好好思考優先順序
15:51
and saying, what is the important thing in the world?
334
927000
2000
並問：什麼是世界上最重要的事？
15:53
Of course, in an ideal world, again we'd love to do everything.
335
929000
3000
當然在一個裡想的世界裡，我們希望做所有的事
15:56
But if we don't do it, then we can start thinking about where should we start?
336
932000
4000
但如果我們不做，仍可以開始思考從哪裡先做起？
16:00
I see the Copenhagen Consensus as a process.
337
936000
2000
哥本哈根協議是個過程
16:02
We did it in 2004,
338
938000
2000
2004年我們做到了
16:04
and we hope to assemble many more people,
339
940000
1000
並希望結合更多的人
16:05
getting much better information for 2008, 2012.
340
941000
4000
為2008, 2012年匯集更多的資訊
16:09
Map out the right path for the world --
341
945000
2000
鋪陳出一條對世界有益的路
16:11
but also to start thinking about political triage.
342
947000
3000
並開始思考政治上的分類
16:14
To start thinking about saying, "Let's do
343
950000
2000
思考並提倡"就去做"
16:16
not the things where we can do very little at a very high cost,
344
952000
3000
而不是做一些小事卻得付出極大的代價
16:19
not the things that we don't know how to do,
345
955000
2000
也不是那些我們不知如何去做的事
16:21
but let's do the great things where we can do an enormous
346
957000
3000
而是，就從現在，
16:24
amount of good, at very low cost, right now."
347
960000
4000
用最小的成本去做很多很棒的好事。
16:28
At the end of the day, you can disagree
348
964000
2000
到了最後，你可以不同意
16:30
with the discussion of how we actually prioritize these,
349
966000
2000
我們所討論的制定優先秩序的事情
16:32
but we have to be honest and frank about saying,
350
968000
3000
但我們必須坦誠佈公的說
16:35
if there's some things we do, there are other things we don't do.
351
971000
2000
如果有我們能做的事，也有我們不能做的事
16:38
If we worry too much about some things,
352
974000
2000
如果我們為某些事情太煩憂
16:40
we end by not worrying about other things.
353
976000
2000
最後會忘了其他事
16:42
So I hope this will help us make better priorities,
354
978000
2000
希望這能夠幫助我們做出更好的選擇
16:44
and think about how we better work for the world.
355
980000
2000
並想想怎麼讓世界更好
16:46
Thank you.
356
982000
1000
謝謝
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Bjorn Lomborg - Global prioritizerDanish political scientist Bjorn Lomborg heads the Copenhagen Consensus, which has prioritized the world's greatest problems -- global warming, world poverty, disease -- based on how effective our solutions might be. It's a thought-provoking, even provocative list.
Why you should listen
Bjorn Lomborg isn't afraid to voice an unpopular opinion. In 2007, he was named one of the 100 Most Influential People by Time magazine after the publication of his controversial book The Skeptical Environmentalist, which challenged widely held beliefs that the environment is getting worse. This year, he was named on of the "50 people who cold save the planet" by the Guardian newspaper. In 2007 he published Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming, further analyzes what today's science tells us about global warming and its risks. That same year, his next book Solutions for the World's Biggest Problems was released, which provided a summary of the greatest challenges facing humanity.
In 2004, he convened the Copenhagen Consensus, which tries to prioritize the world's greatest challenges based on the impact we can make, a sort of bang-for-the-buck breakdown for attacking problems such as global warming, world poverty and disease.
It begins from the premise that we can't solve every problem in the world, and asks: Which ones should we fix first? The Copenhagen Consensus 2004 tapped the expertise of world-leading economists, as well as a diverse forum of young participants; collectively, they determined that control of HIV/AIDS was the best investment -- and mitigating global warming was the worst. Lomborg summarized these findings in How to Spend $50 Billion to Make the World a Better Place. In spring of 2008, Copenhagen Consensus convened again, assembling over 55 international economists, including 4 Nobel laureates, to assess, prioritize and brainstorm solutions for the major global challenges of today, including conflicts, malnutrition, health, education and terrorism. In 2013, he published How to Spend $75 Billion to Make the Wolrd a Better Place.
Bjorn Lomborg | Speaker | TED.com