Global Challenges Foundation Executive summary Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 © Global Challenges Foundation/Global Priorities Project 2016 GLOBAL CATASTROPHIC RISKS 2016 The views expressed in this report are those of the authors. Their statements are not necessarily endorsed by the affiliated organisations. Authors: Owen Cotton-Barratt*† Sebastian Farquhar* John Halstead* Stefan Schubert* Andrew Snyder-Beattie† * = The Global Priorities Project † = The Future of Humanity Institute, University of Oxford Graphic design: Accomplice/Elinor Hägg Global Challenges Foundation in association with 2 Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 THE GLOBAL CHALLENGES FOUNDATION works to raise awareness of the Global Catastrophic Risks. Primarily focused on climate change, other en- vironmental degradation and politically motivated violence as well as how these threats are linked to poverty and rapid population growth. Against this background, the Foundation also works to both identify and stimulate the development of good proposals for a management model – a global gover- nance – able to decrease – and at best eliminate – these risks. THE GLOBAL PRIORITIES PROJECT helps decision-makers effectively prior- itise ways to do good. We achieve his both by advising decision-makers on programme evaluation methodology and by encouraging specific policies. We are a collaboration between the Centre for Effective Altruism and the Future of Humanity Institute, part of the University of Oxford. Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 3 4 Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 Definition: Global Catastrophic Risk – risk of events or processes that would lead to the deaths of approximately a tenth of the world’s population, or have a comparable impact. Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 5 FOREWORD Dear Reader! early four years ago when the Global Challenges Foundation was established, we decided on a direction Nwith two parallel strategies. The first is increasing the knowledge about Global Catastrophic Risks (GCRs), which with our terminology means threats that can eliminate at least 10% of the global population. This knowl- edge is an important prerequisite for the Foundation’s second strategy: to encourage debates and proposals as to how we can effectively and fairly reduce – and preferably eliminate – these catastrophic risks. This publication, the Foundation’s Annual Report for 2016, is the re- this. In addition to the risks involved sult of a collaboration between the in the Annual Report for 2016, the Foundation and the Future of Hu- Foundation actively works with envi- manity Institute (FHI) and the Global ronmental degradation, weapons of Priorities Project at Oxford University mass destruction, population growth in the U.K., which has now lasted for (that exacerbates several risks), and over two years. A big group of re- political violence which is behind searchers at the FHI, commissioned many of the world’s current problems. by the Foundation, summarized Political violence comes in many where research, focused on charting forms. Various kinds of weapons of some of the greatest global risks, cur- mass destruction represent poten- rently stands. tially devastating weaponry. Further, In addition to describing the risks, political violence creates uncon- their effects and their likelihood of trolled migration and we receive occurring, this year’s Annual Report repeated reminders that there is takes one step further and try’s to also “digital violence” in the form of show how different risks relate to one cyber-attacks. Together, this takes up another, what can be done to combat a significant amount of space on the the risks and who can and should do political agenda, thus stealing atten- 6 Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 tion from other important risks. And in favor of one or more organizations above all, the defense against various that have a mandate to decide on how forms of political violence requires to mitigate GCRs. a grotesquely large share of public Would this be possible? My count- resources. Each day, the world spends er question is whether there are any over SEK 40 billion on defence alternatives? To continue relying on expenditure – money that would be multilateral negotiations increases needed to fight poverty and prevent the probability that decisions and catastrophic risks. actions are insufficient and executed My personal opinion is that in order too late. This means that the likeli- to drastically minimize GCRs we hood of GCRs continues to escalate. must develop a model where a major- I hope that this publication can ity of the world’s nations, with strong deepen the understanding of GCRs support from leading nations, can and that these insights provide a make binding decisions which can fertile ground for both debates and be enforced in an effective and fair proposals on how we can develop a way. This would imply that individ- better way of managing and address- ual nations waive their sovereignty ing these risks. Stockholm, April 2016 Laszlo Szombatfalvy Founder of Global Challenges Foundation Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 7 INTRODUCTION Global catastrophic risks pose a pressing challenge his report addresses one of the most important issues of our age – glob- al catastrophic risk. Over the last decades, Tbehavioural psychology has taught us that, as a species, we are bad at assessing scope. Issues that affect ten people do not intuitively seem ten times more important than those that affect one person. Global catastrophic risks are one area where our scope insensitivity might prove the most dangerous. These risks can’t just be treated as problem for the future, even though we might well expect them not to ma- terialise this year or the next. At the of our universe itself – the beauty Future of Life Institute, my team and of which has inspired my own deep I have been calling for global leaders curiosity in cosmology. to address critical global risk issues This technological power is an including nuclear weapons, biotech- enormous force for good, but carries nology and artificial intelligence. This its own risks. Although consuming builds on existing risk reduction work fossil fuels was critical in creating the led by institutions such as the United thriving and wonderful civilization Nations. we live in today, we’ve come to learn Over the last centuries, humanity that there are potentially catastroph- has achieved incredible things. New ic long-term consequences from medical technologies save millions of climate change. Other technologies, lives every year. Agricultural science more powerful than combustion en- allows billions to be fed who might gines, might also offer huge benefits otherwise not exist. And we have and carry unforeseen risks. If we fail begun to explore the very foundations to manage this risk well, we might be 8 Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 caught out by consequences that fol- some risks. Smart risk management low from the technology more rapidly means being realistic in weighing than climate change has. these factors against each other. This As a global community, we need report offers an excellent background to win the race between the growing to the underlying issues of global power of our technology and the catastrophic risks, and is an outstand- wisdom with which we manage it. ing starting point for policy-makers This requires a nuanced approach developing an interest in the area or towards technological developments, researchers considering how their acknowledging both that technol- own work might be brought into the ogy carries huge potential to make study of global catastrophic risks. lives better and also that it carries Max Tegmark Co-founder of the Future of Life Institute Professor of Physics at MIT Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 9 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary ost generations generations. Reducing these risks is never experience a therefore both a global and an inter- global catastrophe. generational public good. However, the idea of The ever-evolving landscape of such catastrophes technology and society compounds Mis not fanciful: plagues have killed these challenges. Technological over 10% of world’s population and and economic forces can create new we came close to nuclear war several global catastrophic risks, such as times in the 20th century. anthropogenic climate change and Despite their scale, the risks of the 20th century’s nuclear arms race. global catastrophes receive limited But technology can also reduce risk, attention. One reason is that many for example through better vaccines of these risks are unlikely in any or clean energy. given decade. But even when the We believe the global community probability is low, the sheer magni- should work together to harness new tude of an adverse outcome warrants tools to address global catastrophic taking these risks seriously. A global risks. It is possible that, collectively, catastrophic risk not only threatens we significantly under-invest in glob- everyone alive today, but also future al catastrophic risk reduction. 10 Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 We believe the global community should work together to harness new tools to address global catastrophic risks. Global Catastrophic Risks 2016 11 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY What are the biggest threats? he global catastrophic risks in this report can be divided into T two categories. Some are on- going and could potentially occur in any given year. Others are emerging and may be very unlikely today but will become significantly more likely in the coming decades. The most significant ongoing risks are natural pandemics and nuclear war, whereas the most significant emerging risks are catastrophic climate change and risks stemming from emerging tech- nologies. Even where risks remain in the future, there are things we can do today to address them. The Spanish influenza pandemic of 1918 may have killed as much as 5% of the world population. Some outbreaks since then infected over a third of the world’s population (e.g., pandemic influenza), whereas others killed over half of people infected (e.g., Ebola or SARS). If a disease were to emerge that was as transmis- sible as the flu and as lethal as Ebola, the results could be catastrophic.