Bjorn Lomborg: Global priorities bigger than climate change

Prevoditelj: Sanja Blažević Recezent: Tilen Pigac - EFZG

What I'd like to talk about is really the biggest problems in the world.

Ono o čemu želim govoriti su najveći problemi na svijetu.

I'm not going to talk about "The Skeptical Environmentalist" --

Neću pričati o "Skeptičnom borcu za okoliš" --

probably that's also a good choice.

vjerojatno je i to dobar izbor.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

But I am going talk about: what are the big problems in the world?

No govorit ću o tome koji su veliki problemi u svijetu?

And I must say, before I go on, I should ask every one of you

I moram reći, prije nego nastavim, želim zamoliti svakoga od vas

to try and get out pen and paper

da pokuša i uzme olovku i papir

because I'm actually going to ask you to help me to look at how we do that.

jer vas zapravo želim pitati da mi pomognete kako da to napravimo.

So get out your pen and paper.

Stoga uzmite vaše olovke i papir.

Bottom line is, there is a lot of problems out there in the world.

U konačnici, puno je problema na svijetu.

I'm just going to list some of them.

Navest ću samo neke od njih.

There are 800 million people starving.

800 milijuna ljudi gladuje.

There's a billion people without clean drinking water.

Milijarda ljudi nema čistu pitku vodu.

Two billion people without sanitation.

Dvije milijarde ljudi nema zdravstvo.

There are several million people dying of HIV and AIDS.

Više milijuna ljudi umire od HIV-a i AIDS-a.

The lists go on and on.

Popis se neprestano nastavlja.

There's two billions of people who will be severely affected by climate change -- so on.

Dvije milijarde ljudi će biti teško pogođeni klimatskim promjenama -- i tako dalje.

There are many, many problems out there.

Postoji mnogo, mnogo problema.

In an ideal world, we would solve them all, but we don't.

U idealnom svijetu, sve bismo ih riješili, ali to ne činimo.

We don't actually solve all problems.

Mi zapravo ne rješavamo sve probleme.

And if we do not, the question I think we need to ask ourselves --

I ako to ne činimo, mislim da si trebamo postaviti pitanje --

and that's why it's on the economy session -- is to say,

i zato smo u ekonomskoj sesiji -- da kažemo,

if we don't do all things, we really have to start asking ourselves,

ako ne rješavamo sve stvari, doista se trebamo početi pitati,

which ones should we solve first?

koje bismo prve trebali riješiti?

And that's the question I'd like to ask you.

I to je pitanje koje vam želim postaviti.

If we had say, 50 billion dollars over the next four years to spend

Da imamo, recimo, 50 milijardi dolara u sljedeće četiri godine da potrošimo

to do good in this world, where should we spend it?

radeći dobro na ovome svijetu, gdje bismo ih potrošili?

We identified 10 of the biggest challenges in the world,

Identificirali smo 10 najvećih izazova na svijetu,

and I will just briefly read them:

i samo ću ih kratko pročitati.

climate change, communicable diseases, conflicts, education,

Klimatske promjene, zarazne bolesti, konflikti, obrazovanje,

financial instability, governance and corruption,

financijska nestabilnost, upravljanje i korupcija,

malnutrition and hunger, population migration,

pothranjenost i glad, migracije stanovništva,

sanitation and water, and subsidies and trade barriers.

zdravstvo i voda, i subvencije i trgovinske barijere.

We believe that these in many ways

Vjerujemo da ovi na mnoge načine

encompass the biggest problems in the world.

obuhvaćaju najveće probleme na svijetu.

The obvious question would be to ask,

Očigledno pitanje bi bilo,

what do you think are the biggest things?

što mislite koje su najveće stvari?

Where should we start on solving these problems?

Gdje trebamo započeti s rješavanjem ovih problema?

But that's a wrong problem to ask.

Ali to je krivi problem o kojem se pitamo.

That was actually the problem that was asked in Davos in January.

To je zapravo problem koji je postavljen u Davosu u siječnju.

But of course, there's a problem in asking people to focus on problems.

Ali naravno, nastaje problem kada tražimo od ljudi da se fokusiraju na probleme.

Because we can't solve problems.

Jer mi ne možemo riješiti probleme.

Surely the biggest problem we have in the world is that we all die.

Sigurno je najveći problem na svijetu da svi umiremo.

But we don't have a technology to solve that, right?

Ali nemamo tehnologiju koja će to riješiti, zar ne?

So the point is not to prioritize problems,

Dakle poanta nije odrediti probleme po važnosti,

but the point is to prioritize solutions to problems.

već je poanta odrediti rješenja problema po važnosti.

And that would be -- of course that gets a little more complicated.

A to bi bilo -- naravno tu postaje kompliciranije.

To climate change that would be like Kyoto.

Za klimatske promjene to bi primjerice bio Kyoto.

To communicable diseases, it might be health clinics or mosquito nets.

Za zarazne bolesti, to mogu biti zdravstvene klinike ili mreže protiv komaraca.

To conflicts, it would be U.N.'s peacekeeping forces, and so on.

Za konflikte to mogu biti U.N.-ove mirovne misije, i tako dalje.

The point that I would like to ask you to try to do,

Ono što vas želim zamoliti je da pokušate napraviti,

is just in 30 seconds -- and I know this is in a sense

da u samo 30 sekundi -- i znam da je to na određeni način

an impossible task -- write down what you think

nemogući zadatak -- zapišete što vi mislite

is probably some of the top priorities.

koji su najvjerojatnije najveći prioriteti.

And also -- and that's, of course, where economics gets evil --

I također -- i to je naravno gdje ekonomija postaje zlobna --

to put down what are the things we should not do, first.

da zapišete koje stvari ne bismo trebali napraviti, prve.

What should be at the bottom of the list?

Što bi trebalo biti na dnu popisa?

Please, just take 30 seconds, perhaps talk to your neighbor,

Molim vas, uzmite 30 sekundi, možda razgovarajte s vašim susjedom,

and just figure out what should be the top priorities

i odredite što bi trebali biti najviši prioriteti

and the bottom priorities of the solutions that we have

i najniži prioriteti rješenja koja imamo

to the world's biggest issues.

na najveće svjetske probleme.

The amazing part of this process -- and of course, I mean,

Nevjerojatan dio toga procesa -- i naravno, mislim,

I would love to -- I only have 18 minutes,

želio bih -- imam samo 18 minuta,

I've already given you quite a substantial amount of my time, right?

dao sam vam već znatan dio svoga vremena, zar ne?

I'd love to go into, and get you to think about this process,

Želio bih istražiti i navesti vas na razmišljanje o tom procesu,

and that's actually what we did.

i to smo zapravo napravili.

And I also strongly encourage you,

I također vas snažno potičem,

and I'm sure we'll also have these discussions afterwards,

i siguran sam da ćemo ove rasprave imati i kasnije,

to think about, how do we actually prioritize?

da razmislite, kako zapravo određujemo prioritete?

Of course, you have to ask yourself,

Naravno, trebate se zapitati,

why on Earth was such a list never done before?

zašto nikada prije ovakav popis nije bio napravljen?

And one reason is that prioritization is incredibly uncomfortable.

Jedan razlog je da je određivanje prioriteta nevjerojatno neugodno.

Nobody wants to do this.

Nitko to ne želi raditi.

Of course, every organization would love to be on the top of such a list.

Naravno, svaka organizacija bi željela biti na vrhu takvoga popisa.

But every organization would also hate to be not on the top of the list.

Ali i svaka organizacija bi mrzila ne biti na vrhu liste.

And since there are many more not-number-one spots on the list

A kako ima puno više mjesta koja nisu prva na tom popisu,

than there is number ones, it makes perfect sense

nego što ima prvih mjesta, savršeno je jasno

not to want to do such a list.

zašto se takav popis ne želi raditi.

We've had the U.N. for almost 60 years,

Imamo U.N. već skoro 60 godina,

yet we've never actually made a fundamental list

a ipak nikad nismo napravili temeljni popis

of all the big things that we can do in the world,

svih velikih stvari koje možemo napraviti na svijetu,

and said, which of them should we do first?

i rekli, koje od njih ćemo napraviti prve?

So it doesn't mean that we are not prioritizing --

To ne znači da ne određujemo prioritete --

any decision is a prioritization, so of course we are still prioritizing,

bilo koja odluka je određivanje prioriteta, pa zapravo mi ipak određujemo prioritete

if only implicitly -- and that's unlikely to be as good

no samo prešutno -- a to ne može biti dobro

as if we actually did the prioritization,

kao da zapravo odredimo prioritete,

and went in and talked about it.

i razgovaramo o tome.

So what I'm proposing is really to say that we have,

Dakle ono što zapravo predlažem je da kažemo da imamo,

for a very long time, had a situation when we've had a menu of choices.

već dugo vremena, situaciju kad imamo izbor mogućnosti.

There are many, many things we can do out there,

Ima mnogo, mnogo stvari koje možemo napraviti,

but we've not had the prices, nor the sizes.

ali nismo imali cijene, niti veličine.

We have not had an idea.

Nismo imali ideju.

Imagine going into a restaurant and getting this big menu card,

Zamislite da idete u restoran i dobijete veliki jelovnik,

but you have no idea what the price is.

ali nemate pojma kakve su cijene.

You know, you have a pizza; you've no idea what the price is.

Znate, imate pizzu, nemate pojma kolika je cijena.

It could be at one dollar; it could be 1,000 dollars.

Može biti jedan dolar, može biti 1.000 dolara.

It could be a family-size pizza;

Može biti veća obiteljska pizza.

it could be a very individual-size pizza, right?

Može biti pizza za jednu osobu, zar ne?

We'd like to know these things.

Željeli bismo znati te stvari.

And that is what the Copenhagen Consensus is really trying to do --

I to je ono što Konsenzus u Kopenhagenu zapravo želi napraviti --

to try to put prices on these issues.

pokušati odrediti cijene tim problemima.

And so basically, this has been the Copenhagen Consensus' process.

I zapravo, to je bio proces Konsenzusa u Kopenhagenu.

We got 30 of the world's best economists, three in each area.

Imamo 30 najboljih svjetskih ekonomista, tri za svako područje.

So we have three of world's top economists write about climate change.

Dakle imamo tri najbolja svjetska ekonomista koji pišu o klimatskim promjenama.

What can we do? What will be the cost

Što možemo napraviti? Kakav će biti trošak?

and what will be the benefit of that?

I koje će biti koristi od toga?

Likewise in communicable diseases.

Tako i za zarazne bolesti.

Three of the world's top experts saying, what can we do?

Tri najbolja svjetska stručnjaka govore, što možemo učiniti?

What would be the price?

Koja bi bila cijena?

What should we do about it, and what will be the outcome?

Što bismo trebali napraviti s tim i kakav će biti ishod?

And so on.

I tako dalje.

Then we had some of the world's top economists,

Pa imamo neke od najboljih svjetskih ekonomista,

eight of the world's top economists, including three Nobel Laureates,

osmorica od najboljih svjetskih ekonomista, uključujući tri Nobelova laureata,

meet in Copenhagen in May 2004.

susreli su su u Kopenhagenu u svibnju 2004.

We called them the "dream team."

Nazvali smo ih timom iz snova.

The Cambridge University prefects decided to call them

Starješine sa Sveučilišta u Cambridgeu su ih odlučili nazvati

the Real Madrid of economics.

Real Madridom ekonomije.

That works very well in Europe, but it doesn't really work over here.

To funkcionira u Europi ali zapravo ne funkcionira ovdje.

And what they basically did was come out with a prioritized list.

I ono što su u osnovi napravili je da su stvorili popis s prioritetima.

And then you ask, why economists?

I onda se pitate, zašto ekonomisti?

And of course, I'm very happy you asked that question -- (Laughter) --

I naravno, vrlo sam sretan da ste postavili to pitanje -- (Smijeh) --

because that's a very good question.

jer to je jako dobro pitanje.

The point is, of course, if you want to know about malaria,

Poanta je u tome, naravno, ako želite znati o malariji,

you ask a malaria expert.

pitat ćete stručnjaka za malariju.

If you want to know about climate, you ask a climatologist.

Ako želite znati o klimi, pitat ćete klimatologa.

But if you want to know which of the two you should deal with first,

Ali ako želite znati što ćete od toga prvo rješavati,

you can't ask either of them, because that's not what they do.

ne možete pitati ni jednoga od njih, jer to nije ono što oni rade.

That is what economists do.

To ekonomisti rade.

They prioritize.

Određuju prioritete.

They make that in some ways disgusting task of saying, which one should we do first,

Oni odrađuju na neki način gadan zadatak da kažu, što prvo trebamo rješavati,

and which one should we do afterwards?

i što ćemo raditi sljedeće?

So this is the list, and this is the one I'd like to share with you.

I to je popis, i to je ono što želim s vama podijeliti.

Of course, you can also see it on the website,

Naravno, to možete vidjeti i na internetskoj stranici,

and we'll also talk about it more, I'm sure, as the day goes on.

i razgovarat ćemo o tome više, siguran sam, kako dan bude odmicao.

They basically came up with a list where they said

Oni su u osnovi stvorili popis gdje su rekli

there were bad projects -- basically, projects

da su postojali loši projekti -- u osnovi projekti

where if you invest a dollar, you get less than a dollar back.

kod kojih ako si uložio dolar, dobio bi povrat manji od dolara.

Then there's fair projects, good projects and very good projects.

Zatim postoje pravedni projekti, dobri projekti i jako dobri projekti.

And of course, it's the very good projects we should start doing.

I naravno, trebamo započeti s jako dobrim projektima.

I'm going to go from backwards

Krenut ću unatrag

so that we end up with the best projects.

tako da završimo s najboljim projektima.

These were the bad projects.

Ovo su bili loši projekti.

As you might see the bottom of the list was climate change.

Kao što možete vidjeti na dnu popisa su klimatske promjene.

This offends a lot of people, and that's probably one of the things

To vrijeđa mnoge ljude, i to je vjerojatno jedna od stvari

where people will say I shouldn't come back, either.

zbog koje će ljudi reći da se ne trebam vratiti.

And I'd like to talk about that, because that's really curious.

I želim pričati o tome, jer to je vrlo zanimljivo.

Why is it it came up?

Zašto se to dogodilo?

And I'll actually also try to get back to this

I zapravo ću pokušati doći do toga

because it's probably one of the things

jer je to vjerojatno jedna od stvari

that we'll disagree with on the list that you wrote down.

koja se neće slagati s popisom kojega ste vi zapisali.

The reason why they came up with saying that Kyoto --

Razlog zbog čega su rekli da je Kyoto --

or doing something more than Kyoto -- is a bad deal

ili činiti nešto više nego što je Kyoto -- loša stvar

is simply because it's very inefficient.

je jednostavno zato jer je vrlo neefikasno.

It's not saying that global warming is not happening.

Time se ne tvrdi da se globalno zagrijavanje ne događa.

It's not saying that it's not a big problem.

Ne tvrdi se da to nije veliki problem.

But it's saying that what we can do about it

Ali ukazuje da ono što mi možemo oko toga učiniti

is very little, at a very high cost.

je vrlo malo, a trošak je vrlo visok.

What they basically show us, the average of all macroeconomic models,

Ono što su nam oni u osnovi pokazali, uprosjećivanjem svih makroekonomskih modela,

is that Kyoto, if everyone agreed, would cost about 150 billion dollars a year.

je da bi Kyoto, da su se svi usuglasili, koštao oko 150 milijardi dolara godišnje.

That's a substantial amount of money.

To je značajan iznos novaca.

That's two to three times the global development aid

To je dva ili tri puta više od pomoći globalnom razvoju

that we give the Third World every year.

koju svake godine dajemo Trećem svijetu.

Yet it would do very little good.

Ipak napravilo bi malo dobroga.

All models show it will postpone warming for about six years in 2100.

Svi modeli pokazuju da bi se zagrijavanje odgodilo za otprilike šest godina u 2100.

So the guy in Bangladesh who gets a flood in 2100 can wait until 2106.

Tako da čovjek u Bangladešu kojeg zadesi poplava u 2100. može čekati do 2106.

Which is a little good, but not very much good.

Što je malo dobro, ali ne i jako dobro.

So the idea here really is to say, well, we've spent a lot of money doing a little good.

Ideja je da se ovdje kaže, pa, potrošili smo puno novaca radeći malo dobroga.

And just to give you a sense of reference,

I samo da vam približim smisao,

the U.N. actually estimate that for half that amount,

U.N. je zapravo procijenio da za pola toga iznosa,

for about 75 billion dollars a year,

za otprilike 75 milijardi dolara godišnje,

we could solve all major basic problems in the world.

mogli bismo riješiti sve velike temeljne probleme u svijetu.

We could give clean drinking water, sanitation, basic healthcare

Omogućili bismo čistu pitku vodu, zdravstvo, osnovnu zdravstvenu zaštitu,

and education to every single human being on the planet.

i obrazovanje svakom pojedinom ljudskom biću na planeti.

So we have to ask ourselves, do we want to spend twice the amount

Pa se moramo zapitati, želimo li trošiti dvostruko veći iznos

on doing very little good?

čineći malo dobra?

Or half the amount on doing an amazing amount of good?

Ili pola iznosa čineći nevjerojatnu količinu dobroga?

And that is really why it becomes a bad project.

I zbog toga zapravo to postaje loš projekt.

It's not to say that if we had all the money in the world, we wouldn't want to do it.

Ne tvrdi se da to ne bismo željeli učiniti da imamo sav novac ovoga svijeta.

But it's to say, when we don't, it's just simply not our first priority.

Nego se tvrdi, kada to ne činimo, to jednostavno nije naš prvi prioritet.

The fair projects -- notice I'm not going to comment on all these --

Pravedni projekti -- primijetite da neću komentirati sve njih --

but communicable diseases, scale of basic health services -- just made it,

ali zarazne bolesti, opseg osnovnih zdravstvenih usluga -- su zapravo uspjeli,

simply because, yes, scale of basic health services is a great thing.

jednostavno zato jer, da, opseg osnovnih zdravstvenih usluga je izvrsna stvar.

It would do a lot of good, but it's also very, very costly.

Napravilo bi se puno dobroga, ali je također vrlo, vrlo skupo.

Again, what it tells us is suddenly

No opet, ono što se tvrdi je da iznenada,

we start thinking about both sides of the equation.

počinjemo razmišljati o obje strane jednadžbe.

If you look at the good projects, a lot of sanitation and water projects came in.

Ako pogledate dobre projekte, puno zdravstvenih i projekata vodoopskrbe tu spada.

Again, sanitation and water is incredibly important,

Doista, zdravstvo i voda su nevjerojatno važni,

but it also costs a lot of infrastructure.

ali i potrebno je mnogo skupe infrastrukture.

So I'd like to show you the top four priorities

Želim vam pokazati najvažnija četiri prioriteta

which should be at least the first ones that we deal with

koji bi zasigurno trebali biti prvi s kojima ćemo se baviti

when we talk about how we should deal with the problems in the world.

kada govorimo o tome kako bismo trebali rješavati probleme u svijetu.

The fourth best problem is malaria -- dealing with malaria.

Četvrti najbolji problem je malarija -- suočavanje s malarijom.

The incidence of malaria is about a couple of [million] people get infected every year.

Zahvaćenost malarijom je oko nekoliko [milijuna] ljudi koji se zaraze svake godine.

It might even cost up towards a percentage point of GDP

To bi moglo koštati i do jednog postotnog poena BDP-a

every year for affected nations.

svake godine za zahvaćene narode.

If we invested about 13 billion dollars over the next four years,

Da investiramo oko 13 milijardi dolara u sljedeće četiri godine,

we could bring that incidence down to half.

mogli bismo prepoloviti zahvaćenost.

We could avoid about 500,000 people dying,

Mogli bismo izbjeći smrt 500.000 ljudi,

but perhaps more importantly, we could avoid about a [million] people

i što je možda još važnije, mogli bismo izbjeći da oko milijarde ljudi

getting infected every year.

bude zaraženo svake godine.

We would significantly increase their ability

Značajno bismo povećali njihovu sposobnost

to deal with many of the other problems that they have to deal with --

da se bave mnogim drugim problemima s kojima se moraju suočavati.

of course, in the long run, also to deal with global warming.

Naravno, dugoročno, da se suočavaju i s globalnim zatopljavanjem.

This third best one was free trade.

Treći najbolji je slobodna trgovina.

Basically, the model showed that if we could get free trade,

U osnovi, model je pokazao da kada bismo mogli ostvariti slobodnu trgovinu.

and especially cut subsidies in the U.S. and Europe,

i pogotovo ukinuti subvencije između SAD-a i Europe,

we could basically enliven the global economy

zapravo bismo oživjeli globalno gospodarstvo

to an astounding number of about 2,400 billion dollars a year,

do zapanjujućeg broja od 2.400 milijardi dolara godišnje,

half of which would accrue to the Third World.

od čega bi polovina pripala Trećem svijetu.

Again, the point is to say that we could actually pull

Ponovno, poanta je da se kaže da zapravo možemo izvući

two to three hundred million people out of poverty,

dvije ili tri stotine milijuna ljudi iz siromaštva,

very radically fast, in about two to five years.

izrazito brzo, kroz dvije do pet godina.

That would be the third best thing we could do.

To bi bila treća najbolja stvar koju bismo mogli napraviti.

The second best thing would be to focus on malnutrition.

Druga najbolja stvar bi bila usredotočenost na pothranjenost.

Not just malnutrition in general, but there's a very cheap way

Ne samo pothranjenost općenito, ali postoji vrlo jeftin način

of dealing with malnutrition, namely, the lack of micronutrients.

suočavanja s pothranjenošću, odnosno, nedostatkom mikronutrijenata.

Basically, about half of the world's population is lacking in

U osnovi, oko polovice svjetske populacije ima nedostatak

iron, zinc, iodine and vitamin A.

željeza, cinka, joda i vitamina A.

If we invest about 12 billion dollars,

Da investiramo oko 12 milijardi dolara,

we could make a severe inroad into that problem.

mogli bismo ozbiljno napasti na taj problem.

That would be the second best investment that we could do.

To bi bila druga najbolja investicija koju možemo učiniti.

And the very best project would be to focus on HIV/AIDS.

I najbolji projekt bi bio fokusirati se na HIV/AIDS.

Basically, if we invest 27 billion dollars over the next eight years,

Odnosno, da uložimo 27 milijardi dolara kroz sljedećih osam godina,

we could avoid 28 new million cases of HIV/AIDS.

mogli bismo izbjeći 28 milijuna novih slučajeva HIV-a/AIDS-a.

Again, what this does and what it focuses on is saying

Ponovno, ono što se time čini i na što se fokusira je da se tvrdi

there are two very different ways that we can deal with HIV/AIDS.

da postoje dva vrlo različita načina kojima se možemo boriti protiv HIV-a/AIDS-a.

One is treatment; the other one is prevention.

Jedan je liječenje, drugi je prevencija.

And again, in an ideal world, we would do both.

I ponovno, u idealnom svijetu, činili bismo oboje.

But in a world where we don't do either, or don't do it very well,

Ali u svijetu u kojemu ne činimo ni jedno, ili ne činimo to dovoljno dobro,

we have to at least ask ourselves where should we invest first.

moramo se barem zapitati gdje bismo najprije trebali investirati.

And treatment is much, much more expensive than prevention.

I liječenje je puno, puno skuplje od prevencije.

So basically, what this focuses on is saying, we can do a lot more

Tako u osnovi, fokus je na tvrdnji da možemo puno više učiniti

by investing in prevention.

investiranjem u prevenciju.

Basically for the amount of money that we spend,

U osnovi, za iznos novaca koji potrošimo,

we can do X amount of good in treatment,

možemo ostvariti količinu X dobroga u liječenju,

and 10 times as much good in prevention.

i 10 puta toliko dobroga u prevenciji.

So again, what we focus on is prevention rather than treatment,

Pa ponovno, rađe se fokusiramo na prevenciju negoli na liječenje,

at first rate.

što je bolje.

What this really does is that it makes us think about our priorities.

Ono što se time zapravo čini je da nas tjera na promišljanje o našim prioritetima.

I'd like to have you look at your priority list and say,

Želim da pogledate u vašu listu prioriteta i kažete,

did you get it right?

jeste li pogodili?

Or did you get close to what we came up with here?

Ili jeste li blizu onoga što smo rekli ovdje?

Well, of course, one of the things is climate change again.

Pa, naravno, jedna od stvari jesu opet klimatske promjene.

I find a lot of people find it very, very unlikely that we should do that.

Vidim mnogo ljudi kojima je vrlo, vrlo malo vjerojatno da to trebamo raditi.

We should also do climate change,

Trebali bismo se baviti i klimatskim promjenama,

if for no other reason, simply because it's such a big problem.

ako ne iz bilo kojeg drugog razloga onda zato jer je to tako veliki problem.

But of course, we don't do all problems.

No naravno, mi se ne bavimo svim problemima.

There are many problems out there in the world.

Mnogo je problema u svijetu.

And what I want to make sure of is, if we actually focus on problems,

I ono što želim osigurati je da ako se stvarno fokusiramo na probleme,

that we focus on the right ones.

da se fokusiramo na ispravne.

The ones where we can do a lot of good rather than a little good.

Na one kod kojih rađe možemo napraviti puno dobroga negoli malo dobroga.

And I think, actually -- Thomas Schelling,

I mislim, zapravo -- Thomas Schelling,

one of the participants in the dream team, he put it very, very well.

jedan od sudionika tima iz snova, je rekao vrlo, vrlo dobro.

One of things that people forget, is that in 100 years,

Jedna od stvari koju ljudi zaboravljaju je da za 100 godina,

when we're talking about most of the climate change impacts will be,

kada govorimo o tome kakav će utjecaj klimatskih promjena biti,

people will be much, much richer.

ljudi će biti puno, puno bogatiji.

Even the most pessimistic impact scenarios of the U.N.

Čak i najpestimističniji scenariji U.N.-a

estimate that the average person in the developing world in 2100

procjenjuju da će 2100. prosječna osoba iz svijetu u razvoju

will be about as rich as we are today.

biti bogata kao što smo mi danas.

Much more likely, they will be two to four times richer than we are.

Više je vjerojatno da će biti dva do četiri puta bogatija nego što smo mi danas.

And of course, we'll be even richer than that.

I naravno, mi ćemo biti još bogatiji od toga.

But the point is to say, when we talk about saving people,

Ono što želim reći, kada govorimo o spašavanju ljudi,

or helping people in Bangladesh in 2100,

ili pomaganju ljudi u Bangladešu 2100.,

we're not talking about a poor Bangladeshi.

ne govorimo o siromašnom Bangladešaninu.

We're actually talking about a fairly rich Dutch guy.

Mi zapravo govorimo o prilično bogatom Nizozemcu.

And so the real point, of course, is to say,

I zapravo stvarna poanta je da se kaže,

do we want to spend a lot of money helping a little,

želimo li trošiti mnogo novaca pomažući malo,

100 years from now, a fairly rich Dutch guy?

100 godina od danas, prilično bogatom Nizozemcu?

Or do we want to help real poor people, right now, in Bangladesh,

Ili želimo li pomoći stvarno siromašnim ljudima, upravo sada, u Bangladešu,

who really need the help, and whom we can help very, very cheaply?

koji stvarno trebaju pomoć, i kojima možemo pomoći, vrlo, vrlo jeftino?

Or as Schelling put it, imagine if you were a rich -- as you will be --

Ili kako Schelling kaže, zamislite da ste bogati -- što ćete i biti --

a rich Chinese, a rich Bolivian, a rich Congolese, in 2100,

bogati Kinez, bogati Bolivijanac, bogati Kongoležanin, 2100.

thinking back on 2005, and saying, "How odd that they cared so much

i da se prisjećate 2005. i kažete, "Kako čudno da su se tako mnogo brinuli

about helping me a little bit through climate change,

pomažući mi malo kroz klimatske promjene,

and cared so fairly little about helping my grandfather

a tako se malo brinuli oko pomaganja mojem djedu

and my great grandfather, whom they could have helped so much more,

i mojem pradjedu, kojima su puno više mogli pomoći,

and who needed the help so much more?"

i koji su trebali pomoć puno više?"

So I think that really does tell us why it is

Mislim da nam to stvarno govori zbog čega

we need to get our priorities straight.

trebamo odrediti ispravno svoje prioritete.

Even if it doesn't accord to the typical way we see this problem.

Čak i ako to ne odgovara tipičnom načinu na koji promatramo problem.

Of course, that's mainly because climate change has good pictures.

Naravno, to je najviše zato jer klimatske promjene imaju tako dobre prikaze.

We have, you know, "The Day After Tomorrow" -- it looks great, right?

Imamo, znate, "Dan poslije sutra" -- izgleda odlično, zar ne?

It's a good film in the sense that

Dobar je film na način da

I certainly want to see it, right, but don't expect Emmerich

ga stvarno želim pogledati, ali ne očekujem da će Emmerich

to cast Brad Pitt in his next movie

unajmiti Brada Pitta u svom sljedećem filmu

digging latrines in Tanzania or something. (Laughter)

da kopa poljski zahod u Tanzaniji ili slično. (Smijeh)

It just doesn't make for as much of a movie.

Jednostavno i nije baš za neki film.

So in many ways, I think of the Copenhagen Consensus

Na mnoge načine, razmišljam o Konsenzusu u Kopenhagenu

and the whole discussion of priorities

i o cijeloj diskusiji prioriteta

as a defense for boring problems.

kao obrani dosadnih problema.

To make sure that we realize it's not about making us feel good.

Da sigurno shvatimo kako nije bitno da se osjećamo dobro,

It's not about making things that have the most media attention,

nije do toga da određujemo stvari koje imaju najveću pozornost medija,

but it's about making places where we can actually do the most good.

već je do toga da određujemo mjesta gdje stvarno činimo najviše dobroga.

The other objections, I think, that are important to say,

Drugi prigovor, mislim, kojeg je važno navesti,

is that I'm somehow -- or we are somehow -- positing a false choice.

je da sam nekako -- ili smo mi nekako -- napravili krivi izbor.

Of course, we should do all things,

Naravno, trebamo činiti sve stvari,

in an ideal world -- I would certainly agree.

u idealnom svijetu -- svakako se slažem.

I think we should do all things, but we don't.

Mislim da moramo činiti sve stvari, ali ne činimo.

In 1970, the developed world decided we were going to spend

1970. je razvijeni svijet odlučio da ćemo potrošiti

twice as much as we did, right now, than in 1970, on the developing world.

duplo više nego što smo potrošili, sada, negoli 1970., na svijet u razvoju.

Since then our aid has halved.

Odonda naša pomoć se prepolovila.

So it doesn't look like we're actually on the path

I zapravo se ne čini da smo na putu

of suddenly solving all big problems.

da iznenada riješimo sve velike probleme.

Likewise, people are also saying, but what about the Iraq war?

Također, ljudi govore, ali što je s ratom u Iraku?

You know, we spend 100 billion dollars --

Znate, trošimo 100 milijardi dolara.

why don't we spend that on doing good in the world?

Zašto to ne trošimo čineći dobro u svijetu?

I'm all for that.

U potpunosti sam za to.

If any one of you guys can talk Bush into doing that, that's fine.

Ako bilo tko od vas ljudi može nagovoriti Busha da to napravi, to je u redu.

But the point, of course, is still to say,

Ali poanta je naravno da se kaže,

if you get another 100 billion dollars,

ako dobijete dodatnih 100 milijardi dolara,

we still want to spend that in the best possible way, don't we?

i dalje to želimo potrošiti na najbolji mogući način, zar ne?

So the real issue here is to get ourselves back

Pravi problem ovdje je da se vratimo nazad

and think about what are the right priorities.

i razmislimo koji su ispravni prioriteti.

I should just mention briefly, is this really the right list that we got out?

Trebam samo kratko spomenuti, je li ovo stvarno pravi popis koji smo napravili?

You know, when you ask the world's best economists,

Znate, kada pitate najbolje svjetske ekonomiste,

you inevitably end up asking old, white American men.

neizbježno završite tako da pitate stare, američke bijelce.

And they're not necessarily, you know,

A to nisu neminovno, znate,

great ways of looking at the entire world.

najbolji načini da gledate na cijeli svijet.

So we actually invited 80 young people from all over the world

Tako smo zapravo pozvali 80 mladih ljudi iz cijeloga svijeta

to come and solve the same problem.

da dođu i riješe isti problem.

The only two requirements were that they were studying at the university,

Jedina dva preduvjeta su bila da studiraju na sveučilištu,

and they spoke English.

i da govore engleski jezik.

The majority of them were, first, from developing countries.

Većina njih su bili iz zemalja u razvoju.

They had all the same material but they could go vastly

Svi su imali isti materijal ali su mogli ići široko

outside the scope of discussion, and they certainly did,

izvan opsega diskusije, i doista jesu,

to come up with their own lists.

da naprave svoje vlastite popise.

And the surprising thing was that the list was very similar --

Iznenađujuće je bilo da su popisi bili vrlo slični --

with malnutrition and diseases at the top

pothranjenost i zarazne bolesti su bili na vrhu

and climate change at the bottom.

a klimatske promjene na dnu.

We've done this many other times.

To smo napravili još jako puno puta.

There's been many other seminars and university students, and different things.

Bilo je mnogo drugih seminara i sveučilišnih studenata, i različitih stvari.

They all come out with very much the same list.

Svi su napravili vrlo slične liste.

And that gives me great hope, really, in saying that I do believe

I to mi daje veliku nadu, doista, dok govorim da vjerujem,

that there is a path ahead to get us to start thinking about priorities,

da postoji put naprijed koji će nas navesti da počnemo razmišljati o prioritetima.

and saying, what is the important thing in the world?

I da kažemo, koje su najvažnije stvari na svijetu?

Of course, in an ideal world, again we'd love to do everything.

Naravno, u idealnom svijetu, voljeli bismo sve napraviti.

But if we don't do it, then we can start thinking about where should we start?

Ali ako to ne napravimo, možemo početi razmišljati o tome gdje bismo počeli?

I see the Copenhagen Consensus as a process.

Vidim Konsenzus u Kopenhagenu kao proces.

We did it in 2004,

To smo napravili 2004.,

and we hope to assemble many more people,

i nadamo se da ćemo okupiti mnogo više ljudi,

getting much better information for 2008, 2012.

i dobiti bolje informacije za 2008., 2012.

Map out the right path for the world --

Iscrtati pravi put u svijetu.

but also to start thinking about political triage.

I također početi razmišljati o političkoj trijaži.

To start thinking about saying, "Let's do

Početi razmišljati o tome da kažemo, "Idemo napraviti

not the things where we can do very little at a very high cost,

ne one stvari koje možemo napraviti malo po visokoj cijeni,

not the things that we don't know how to do,

ne stvari koje ne znamo kako napraviti,

but let's do the great things where we can do an enormous

idemo napraviti velike stvari gdje možemo učiniti nevjerojatno puno

amount of good, at very low cost, right now."

dobroga, po niskoj cijeni, upravo sada.

At the end of the day, you can disagree

Na kraju dana, ne morate se složiti

with the discussion of how we actually prioritize these,

s diskusijom o tome kako zapravo određujemo prioritete,

but we have to be honest and frank about saying,

ali moramo biti pošteni i iskreni i reći,

if there's some things we do, there are other things we don't do.

ako postoje stvari koje činimo, postoje i stvari koje ne činimo.

If we worry too much about some things,

Ako se previše brinemo oko nekih stvari,

we end by not worrying about other things.

završimo tako da se ne brinemo oko drugih stvari.

So I hope this will help us make better priorities,

Nadam se da će ovo pomoći da određujemo bolje prioritete,

and think about how we better work for the world.

i razmišljamo o tome kako bolje radimo za svijet.

Thank you.

Hvala vam.