The message of hope from the man who knew

Bill Gates said repeatedly that states must be prepared, that the cost of preparing for the epidemic was minimal compared to the economic impact that a pandemic could have. He said that the World Bank had estimated the global economic cost of such a pandemic at 3 trillion dollars.

At the time of the Ebola crisis, he even explained that we had to prepare as soon as possible because the next virus could be much more devastating than Ebola; if it had to be transported by air and if those affected could prove to be contagious without having any symptom.

It all sounds so prophetic today. It was in 2015 and the Ted Talk video, in which Bill Gates sums up his position very well in 8 short minutes, was seen by more than 31 million people.

Now, what does he tell us about the new coronavirus?

He thinks that we were not sufficiently prepared and that this crisis will cost us a lot economically, even more than the $3 trillion that was anticipated. But he also believes that we will overcome this epidemic collectively and that the solidarity and innovation that comes out of this crisis can carry us forward and ensure that we are ready for the next epidemic.

With a horizon of about 3 years, he hopes that we will have a testing capacity that will have exploded, that we will be able to carry out billions of tests in 2 to 3 weeks and that we will be able to avoid a pandemic whose lethality rate could be much higher than the one of Covid-19. This seems possible if health innovation is generously funded, if we learn to listen to our scientists (which would also be beneficial for the climate issue) and if we let our creativity reach its full potential while respecting the requirements of isolation, of course.

This pandemic has therefore taught us that sanitary risk is a priority and even a crucial priority.

There is a haunting question from this point of view: why did many general company risk mappings, whenever they exist, not anticipate this risk?

Have we been arrogant in thinking that we would always know how to contain epidemic risks in order to avoid their globalization, as we were able to contain the Ebola epidemic? This does not seem very lucid in a globalized economy.

Have we tried to play the denial card and preferred to close our eyes on the altar of quarterly results and rapid growth?

Or have we been short-sighted because risk mapping is, more often than not, designed as sectoral instrument prepared in response to specific regulations? Thus, the company will adopt a "Sapin 2 Law" anti-corruption map to fight against the risks of corruption and influence peddling, but without necessarily extending this action by a real effort to prioritize and prevent general risks that could affect this company and the economy in the broadest sense.

This means that risk mapping is often not sufficiently cross-sectional and lacks proactivity.

One of the crucial questions to be asked is therefore that of redefining risk mapping as a genuine tool for managing corporate risks. This redefinition requires, in our view, collegial skills: it must be based, of course, on knowledge derived from the businesses at stake but also on general and almost disembodied knowledge. In order to be fully effective, the risk mapping of tomorrow will need to take a step back and present a strategic vision which is able to respond to long-term risks, as diverse as a new pandemic, the flood of the century, the risks related to climate change, the risks arising from globalization, those arising from corruption and money laundering, but also all those related to corporate social responsibility.

Coming back to Bill Gates one last time, what does he tell us about the greatest risk facing humanity, which we must absolutely seek to prevent, by throwing all our energy into it?

He tells us that it is the risk linked to climate change. He sets out a roadmap for achieving zero CO2 emissions by 2050, with a stage at minus 20% by 2020 (and we are unfortunately a long way from that by now...).

He tells us that if he had only one wish for the next 50 years, it would be that collectively we manage to create and finance the miracles of innovation that will allow us to reach zero CO2 emissions in a very short time.

He believes that we can do this and that we have the creative forces to invent an exceptional battery or the other miracle technologies to achieve zero CO2 emission.

We have to admit that we have not heard his first warning about pandemics, will we be able to hear this second vibrant call from the man who knows how to anticipate?