2020.06.10 贾里德-戴蒙德和内森-沃尔夫谈准备的价值
By Invitation | The world after covid-19
Jared Diamond and Nathan Wolfe on the value of preparation
Crises are inevitable—but society can act beforehand to limit their destructiveness
By Jared Diamond and Nathan Wolfe
Jun 10th 2020 (Updated Jun 10th 2020)
“BE PREPARED” is the sensible motto of the boy scouts. Yet the fast spread of covid-19 reveals that the world largely ignored that wise dictum. With one conspicuous exception that we shall explain, most countries didn’t have adequate plans or stockpiles for confronting a pandemic.
That was despite ample warning. The Spanish flu in 1918-20 killed around 50m people globally. And a long list of epidemics has marked our own day. AIDS, identified in 1981, has killed tens of millions of people. “Mad cow disease” (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) emerged in 1996, from which no patient has recovered. Then there was SARS in 2002–03; the H1N1 “swine flu” in 2009; MERS in 2012; and the Ebola outbreaks in 2014 and again in 2018. We should have expected more such epidemics, because new diseases of humans keep arising from diseases of animals with which we have close contact.
Although several East Asian countries reacted to covid-19 quickly by imposing lockdowns and track-and-trace measures, the more singular exception is Finland. It had learned the cost of unpreparedness in a painful way.
In 1939 Finland was attacked by the Soviet Union, whose population was 40 times larger. Finland‘s access to help from the outside world, via the narrow outlet from the Baltic Sea, was cut off during the second world war. Finns managed to fight Soviet troops and preserve their independence—but at a terrible cost. Finns have not forgotten the war’s lessons nor the interruption of their supply routes.
On a visit in 2017 to Hietaniemi cemetery’s beautiful, sombre military section for fallen soldiers from that war, fresh flowers decorated the graves, even though more than 70 years had passed since the last burial. A Finnish visitor explained, “Every Finnish family lost family members in that war.” That memory has stayed alive. Finns remember their unpreparedness, and their losses, and the enormous odds against them, and their nevertheless surviving.
As a result, the Finns developed the concept of “total defence”. They now prepare for almost anything: war, pandemics and a range of natural and man-made disasters. The government appoints a Security Committee, which identifies critical functions of society, crises that might disrupt them and the ministry responsible for maintaining each particular function.
Four times a year, a four-week National Defence Course gives training to participants from business, media, government, churches, the security forces and non-profit groups. A National Emergency Supply Agency stockpiles (at secret locations) essential products the import of which might be blocked in a crisis. It includes fuels, grains, chemicals, industrial materials and, of course, masks. Organisations at all levels—national, regional and city—formulate preparedness plans. By law, industries must maintain stockpiles. For example, the pharmaceutical industry must maintain “excess stocks” of critical medicines.
People who worry about balancing the cost of preparation against economic efficiency may wonder: how can a country allocate funds given the unlimited potential disasters that could strike? Does preparedness cost more money upfront than it saves in the long run if disaster hits?
Finland‘s experience suggests answers. To allocate funds, Finns identified the most important dozen types of crises requiring plans, such as disruptions of the power supply, telecommunications, public health, food-supply and payments systems. They considered risks ranging from extreme weather and terrorism to the breaching of national borders. That is, Finland is prepared not just for a specific crisis, but for almost any calamity.
As for the cost, plans in themselves cost little money but save crucial time. Countries without adequate pandemic-response plans lost valuable weeks just debating what to do about covid-19. And although money is spent on stockpiling, prices are lower in normal times than in an emergency. Finland‘s stockpiles are funded by a small petrol tax, less than a penny per litre of car fuel.
Finns haven’t reverted to short-term thinking, because there are those 100,000 graves with fresh flowers to remind them of the price that they paid for unpreparedness—and because Finnish politicians exercised leadership by promoting planning. As a result, the country has among the lowest covid-19 case rate among 21 western European countries.
Of course, other countries have prepared responses to specific calamities. Japan is exceptionally ready for earthquakes, but wasn’t equipped for the Fukushima nuclear meltdown. Switzerland has nuclear bunkers, but not silos filled with facemasks. East Asian countries responded quickly to the virus based on previous experience with epidemics, not from a culture of general preparedness. The country closest to Finland’s prepare-for-anything mentality is Singapore, an island state amid big neighbours. Though it dealt quickly with covid-19’s first wave, it was caught off guard by its subsequent spread.
The big, unanswered question is how can preparation happen on a planetary scale? After all, Finland is a single country that can devise national solutions for a national crisis. Covid-19 is a global crisis, as future pandemics will be. They require international solutions. America won’t be safe if it eliminates covid-19 within its borders while the virus persists elsewhere. Will the countries of the world co-operate?
It is easy to be pessimistic. Almost all of the world’s institutions have failed us during this crisis. But future preparedness has a powerful ally: the unforgiving reality of virus transmission. Covid-19 is persuasive, and its tools include killing people around the world, devastating economies and government budgets, and causing massive unemployment.
The first wave of this merciless persuasion has barely begun in most of the developing world. Its further waves of persuasion, including inevitable tax increases, lie ahead for the industrial world. (President Donald Trump, Fox News and American beach party-goers might be unpersuaded, but the broader American electorate may be when it vote in November.)
Remember: the world already has a track record of international, collaborative success against widespread diseases. Smallpox, one of history’s worst viruses, was finally eradicated worldwide in 1979 despite the difficulty of stamping it out in Somalia, its last frontier. All countries, through the World Health Organisation, funded the campaign to eliminate smallpox there—for decent, selfish reasons: no nation was safe so long as smallpox survived there. The world also eliminated rinderpest (or “cattle plague”). It is close to eliminating polio.
Efforts like these protect everyone against threats that do not respect borders. We hope that the world after covid-19 will be like Finland, prepared for a myriad of calamities. What threats should the world prioritise? Besides pandemics, our list includes the threats that interrupt international supply chains (such as embargoes); along with droughts, natural disasters, financial crises, trade wars and political and military unrest.
Would stockpiling supplies be a waste of money? No. As many countries have now discovered, supplies may be unavailable or far more expensive in a crisis. Finns found that stockpiling even lots of essential supplies adds only trivial costs to a national budget.
If this approach is duplicated on a global scale, our planet will be better prepared. Do you have a better idea? No, you don’t: there is no good alternative.■
Jared Diamond, a geographer, is the author of books on development and crises of civilisations, notably “Guns Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies” (Norton, 1997). Nathan Wolfe, a virologist, is the founder of Metabiota, an epidemic risk analytics firm, and author of “The Viral Storm: The Dawn of a New Pandemic Age” (Times Books, 2011).
应邀参加｜"十九大 "之后的世界
贾里德-戴蒙德和内森-沃尔夫谈准备的价值
危机是不可避免的，但社会可以事先采取行动来限制其破坏性
作者：贾里德-戴蒙德和内森-沃尔夫
https://www.economist.com/img/b/1424/801/90/sites/default/files/20200613_OPD001.jpg
2020年6月10日（2020年6月10日更新）
"做好准备 "是童子军的明智格言。然而，covid-19的快速传播表明，世界在很大程度上忽略了这一明智的箴言。除了一个明显的例外（我们将解释），大多数国家没有足够的计划或储备来应对大流行病。
尽管有充分的警告。1918-20年的西班牙流感导致全球约5千万人死亡。还有一长串的流行病标志着我们的时代。1981年发现的艾滋病，已经杀死了数千万人。1996年出现的 "疯牛病"（牛海绵状脑病），至今没有病人康复。然后是2002-03年的SARS；2009年的H1N1 "猪流感"；2012年的MERS；以及2014年和2018年再次爆发的埃博拉疫情。我们应该预料到更多这样的流行病，因为人类的新疾病不断从与我们有密切接触的动物的疾病中产生。
尽管几个东亚国家对covid-19作出了迅速反应，实施了封锁和追踪措施，但芬兰是一个比较独特的例外。它以一种痛苦的方式了解了没有准备的代价。
1939年，芬兰受到了苏联的攻击，其人口是苏联的40倍。在第二次世界大战期间，芬兰通过波罗的海的狭窄出口获得外部世界的帮助的途径被切断。芬兰人设法与苏联军队作战并保持了他们的独立，但付出了可怕的代价。芬兰人没有忘记战争的教训，也没有忘记他们的供应路线的中断。
2017年，在参观赫塔涅米公墓为那场战争中的阵亡将士准备的美丽而沉闷的军事区时，新鲜的鲜花装饰着坟墓，尽管距离上一次埋葬已经过去70多年了。一位芬兰游客解释说："每个芬兰家庭都在那场战争中失去了家人。" 这种记忆一直保持着。芬兰人记得他们的毫无准备，记得他们的损失，记得他们面临的巨大困难，而他们却活了下来。
因此，芬兰人提出了 "全面防御 "的概念。他们现在几乎为任何事情做准备：战争、大流行病和一系列自然和人为的灾难。政府任命了一个安全委员会，负责确定社会的关键功能、可能破坏这些功能的危机以及负责维护每个特定功能的部委。
每年四次，为期四周的国防课程为来自商业、媒体、政府、教会、安全部队和非营利团体的参与者提供培训。国家紧急供应机构（在秘密地点）储存了在危机中可能被阻止进口的基本产品。它包括燃料、谷物、化学品、工业材料，当然也包括口罩。各级组织--国家、地区和城市--都制定了防备计划。根据法律，各行业必须保持库存。例如，制药业必须保持关键药品的 "超额库存"。
担心平衡准备工作的成本和经济效益的人可能会问：鉴于可能发生的潜在灾难是无限的，一个国家如何分配资金？如果灾难来临时，准备工作的前期成本是否比长期节省的钱多？
芬兰的经验给出了答案。为了分配资金，芬兰人确定了最重要的十几种需要计划的危机，如电力供应、电信、公共卫生、食品供应和支付系统的中断。他们考虑了从极端天气和恐怖主义到突破国家边界的各种风险。也就是说，芬兰不仅为特定的危机做准备，而且为几乎所有的灾难做准备。
至于成本，计划本身并不花钱，但可以节省关键的时间。没有适当的大流行病应对计划的国家，仅仅在辩论如何应对covid-19时就损失了宝贵的几个星期。而且，尽管花钱进行储备，但正常情况下的价格比紧急情况下的价格要低。芬兰的储备是由小额汽油税资助的，每升汽车燃料不到1分钱。
芬兰人没有恢复到短期思维，因为有那10万座坟墓和新鲜的鲜花提醒他们为毫无准备而付出的代价，也因为芬兰的政治家们通过促进规划来发挥领导作用。因此，在21个西欧国家中，该国的covid-19病例率是最低的。
当然，其他国家也为特定的灾难准备了应对措施。日本对地震有特别的准备，但没有为福岛核泄漏做好准备。瑞士有核掩体，但没有装满面罩的筒仓。东亚国家对病毒的快速反应是基于以前的流行病经验，而不是来自普遍准备的文化。最接近芬兰的万全准备心态的国家是新加坡，一个大邻国中的岛屿国家。尽管它迅速处理了covid-19的第一波疫情，但对其随后的传播却措手不及。
最大的、未回答的问题是如何在全球范围内进行准备？毕竟，芬兰是一个单一的国家，可以为国家危机制定国家解决方案。Covid-19是一个全球危机，就像未来的大流行病一样。它们需要国际解决方案。如果美国在其境内消除了Covid-19，而病毒却在其他地方持续存在，那么它就不会安全。世界各国会进行合作吗？
悲观是很容易的。在这场危机中，几乎所有的世界机构都让我们失望。但未来的准备工作有一个强大的盟友：病毒传播的无情现实。Covid-19是有说服力的，它的工具包括杀死世界各地的人，破坏经济和政府预算，并造成大量失业。
这种无情的劝说的第一波在大多数发展中国家还没有开始。它的进一步说服浪潮，包括不可避免的增税，就在工业世界的前方。(唐纳德-特朗普总统、福克斯新闻和美国海滩派对的观众可能不会被说服，但更广泛的美国选民在11月投票时可能会被说服）。
请记住：世界上已经有一个国际合作成功防治广泛疾病的记录。天花是历史上最糟糕的病毒之一，尽管在索马里这个最后的边境地区消灭它很困难，但最终还是在1979年在全球范围内消灭了它。所有国家都通过世界卫生组织资助了在那里消除天花的运动--出于体面和自私的原因：只要天花在那里存活，就没有国家是安全的。世界还消除了牛瘟（或 "牛瘟"）。它接近于消除脊髓灰质炎。
像这样的努力保护每个人免受不尊重边界的威胁。我们希望covid-19之后的世界将像芬兰一样，为无数的灾难做好准备。世界应该优先考虑哪些威胁？除了大流行病，我们的清单还包括中断国际供应链的威胁（如禁运）；以及干旱、自然灾害、金融危机、贸易战以及政治和军事动荡。
囤积物资会不会是一种浪费？正如许多国家现在发现的那样，在危机中，物资可能无法获得，或者价格昂贵得多。芬兰人发现，即使是储存大量的必需品，也只会给国家预算带来微不足道的费用。
如果这种方法在全球范围内得到复制，我们的地球将得到更好的准备。你有更好的主意吗？不，你没有：没有好的选择。
贾里德-戴蒙德是一位地理学家，他撰写了关于发展和文明危机的书籍，特别是《枪炮、病菌和钢铁。人类社会的命运》（诺顿，1997年）。内森-沃尔夫是一位病毒学家，是流行病风险分析公司Metabiota的创始人，也是《病毒风暴》的作者。新大流行时代的黎明》（Times Books, 2011）。
页:
[1]