I wrote about social media in July last year when I made the point that information, and how it is used and distributed, underpins how we function as societies ("Addictive social media distracts us from doing something about the state of the planet", Planetary Health Matters, StarLifestyle, July 19, 2022). It’s a point that I also took up at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, which I attended last month (Jan 16-20, 2023).
There are arguments about the merits of the WEF, but the fact is that this international forum is a place where, sometimes, things get done. A closed-door discussion I spoke at with global leaders was called “Science is experiencing its Don’t Look Up moment, as collapses in the natural world gain pace. How can scientists continue to ramp-up their communications of key evidence to influence the hearts, minds and actions of public and private decision-makers?”
From a planetary health perspective, this is probably the biggest question out there. We know that compelling science, when mixed with cataclysmic evidence, can get people to change their behaviours very rapidly – think Covid-19. But there are other examples. The annual growth rate in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions is slowing globally – down from 3% in the 2000s to 0.5% in the last decade, according to the Global Carbon Project, which quantifies greenhouse gas emissions. And there are signs that with the right incentives we can find a way to get ourselves to net zero by 2050. So the impact of the evidence, combined with sensible policy choices and the right messaging can promote change.
A lot of that will come down to us and how we change our behaviour and encourage or, perhaps more appropriately, push for change by corporations which deliver goods and services in “our” names.
For example, Petronas paid out RM50bil in 2022 in dividends to the Malaysian government, its sole shareholder. Since its foundation it is estimated that Petronas has paid out RM1.2tril in dividends to successive governments. In 2021 the company reported net profits of RM48bil. Granted its energy transition strategy lays out the establishment of a new entity looking at renewables, but the strategy’s main selling point is that natural gas is the clean fuel to ease our energy transition.
In November 2022 a United Nations-backed team of researchers found that the world was on track to produce 70% more natural gas in 2030 than would be compatible with the goal of keeping the global temperature increase to 1.5°C. And climate scientists are concerned about methane that leaks into the atmosphere during natural gas production. Methane has a warming effect up to 90 times more powerful than C02 over a 20-year timescale.
The specific “50-billion-ringgit question” about Petronas is that its profits contribute around 15% to 20% of the national budget, which means we still need fossil fuel resources to pay for schools, hospitals, roads and other public services. The need for Malaysia to divest from fossil fuels has never been more critical. On the positive side Petronas is more transparent than others and has shared its aspirations to reach net zero. Many Malaysian companies’ public facing “achievements” hide the fact that they’re among the biggest emitters. The cement and coal industries, among others, come to mind. This is “green hushing” masked in glossy sustainability reports.
So here is the science providing us with two contradictory arguments: Argument 1: Gas is our transition saviour as we move towards net zero. Argument 2: Gas is bad and accelerating global warming.
Of course, argument is healthy; it helps us get to the truth. Or does it? The arguments now seem to go on for so long that it’s sometimes easier simply not to engage. After all, for millennia, we didn’t have the knowledge, information, platforms and audiences that we all have today.
At the WEF, I was able to work out what I wanted to ask about this growing confusion and uncertainty, and it was this: “Where are the Zukerbergs and Murdochs?”
Social and mainstream media, whether we like it or not, are the fourth estate (or fourth power), which means the press and news media can both explicitly, through advocacy, and implicitly, through influence, frame political issues or lead its audience astray.
We are facing an existential crisis so what can the WEF do to bring science and media together beyond a cosy chat in Davos and into some real work at the global level which sorts out how to translate science into digestible actionable pieces of information? A partnership that finds answers to the arguments rather than complicating them in forums where everyone is suddenly an expert? There are enough skilled people on both sides to make this happen –but someone needs to grip it. Can WEF do that? If not, who and what will move the needle?
Dr Jemilah Mahmood, a physician and experienced crisis leader, was appointed the executive director of the Sunway Centre for Planetary Health at Sunway University in August 2021. She is the founder of aid organisation Mercy Malaysia and has served in leadership roles internationally with the United Nations and Red Cross for the last decade. She writes on Planetary Health Matters once a month in StarLifestyle.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Get 20% OFF The Star Digital Access
Cancel anytime. Ad-free. Unlimited access with perks.
