We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Researchers from the Mamiraua Institute for Sustainable Development analyze a dead dolphin at Tefe lake
Dire drought in the Amazon
In a region where rivers are the principal means of transport, water levels have dropped an average of 30 centimeters (11.8 inches) a day since mid-September, causing shortages of food, water, and other essentials. The government is dispatching emergency assistance to 500,000 people who could be affected by the drought before the end of the year.
Already, the local government response has cost $20 million, which is just the beginning of the drought's economic toll. Tourism in the region has all but halted since the Rio Negro is not deep enough to carry passenger boats to Amazonian hubs like the river port of Manaus.
The Amazon drought in the north of Brazil comes as the southern reaches of the country are experiencing severe flooding. Both are evidence of climate change and made worse by El Niño, a periodic warming of the Pacific Ocean that can exacerbate both droughts and rainfall across the Western Hemisphere and even globally.
The Amazon drought comes as scientists warn that the Amazon rainforest could be approaching a tipping point: when the Amazon would no longer be able to recover from droughts and much of the biodiverse forest would turn into savannah. The drought also makes extreme wildfires more likely, according to Eurasia Group’s Brazil expert Silvio Cascione. That in turn could undermine the government’s recent successes in reducing the rate of deforestation.
World trade at risk without globalization, warns WTO chief Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala
On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer sits down with WTO Director-General Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala to talk about world trade, the complicated business of moving goods and services across borders around the world.
Global trade hit a staggering $32 trillion in 2022 and the World Trade Organization oversees 98% of it. It’s an international institution that doesn’t normally make headlines, but has a massive role in almost every aspect of your daily life—from the food you eat, to the clothes you wear, to the cars you drive, to the phone you’re probably using to watch this video.
The WTO is the referee of global trade, a place for countries to negotiate agreements and resolve disputes. But it’s also received criticism for being too slow to adapt to the modern economy and for favoring wealthy nations over countries in the Global South.
Okonjo-Iweala has been pushing members to recommit to the principles of globalization and invest in developing economies.
“It's not right that 10 countries export 80% of the vaccines in the world,” Okonjo-Iweala says, “It's too concentrated.”
She argues that by decentralizing and diversifying global supply chains, we can make the global economy more resilient, reduce monopolies, and bring countries left on the margins of world trade into the mainstream.
Watch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld and on US public television. Check local listings.
- Episode 4: Broken (supply) chains ›
- US-China communications brighten over trade ›
- Climate change trade wars ›
- Hard Numbers: German far right comes up short, Ukraine dreams of drones, a space rock arrives on earth, world trade slows ›
- Women in power — the World Trade Organization's Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala ›
- What Africa has to say about climate change ›
- The Graphic Truth: Has climate change hurt or helped farmers? ›
Ian Explains: What is the World Trade Organization?
You probably don’t spend a ton of time thinking about the World Trade Organization (WTO), but it has a huge role in almost every aspect of your daily life—from your morning Brazil-roasted coffee to the Chinese-made smartphone you’re probably using to watch this video.
The WTO is an international organization that deals with the complicated business of moving goods and services across borders. It’s kind of like the referee for global trade, setting the rules and providing a forum for countries to negotiate agreements and resolve disputes. It’s why you can buy avocados from Mexico, clothes from Vietnam, or cars from Korea in the United States without a second thought.
Global trade ballooned to a staggering $32 trillion in 2022 and the WTO oversees 98% of it.
The WTO has been a force for globalization. It’s opened up new markets, lowered tariffs, and lifted millions out of poverty, but it’s also received criticism for favoring wealthy nations and exacerbating global inequality. Not to mention a broken dispute settlement system that’s made resolving international trade conflict virtually impossible.
On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer dives into the history of the WTO, why the US is blocking appointments of WTO judges, and what all of this has to do with Japanese octopus.
Watch the full interview: World trade at risk without globalization, warns WTO chief Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala
Watch the upcoming episode of GZERO World with Ian Bremmer on US public television this weekend (check local listing) and at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld.
- World Trade Organization - GZERO Media ›
- Women in power — the World Trade Organization's Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala ›
- Hard Numbers: GDP wars, WTO rules in Beijing’s favor, Africans support Chinese engagement, China winning 5G battle ›
- The Graphic Truth: Russia vs. US trade ties in Africa ›
- Graphic Truth: Who Wins From A US-China Trade War? ›
Steven Pinker shares his "relentless optimism" about human progress
If you follow the news closely, chances are your view of the state of the world is not super optimistic. From war in Ukraine to a warming planet to global poverty and hunger, there's plenty to get upset about. But what if things are actually getting...better? That's what Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker asks in his interview with Ian Bremmer for the latest episode of GZERO World.
"If you compare the number of wars and the number of people killed in wars in the sixties and the seventies and even the eighties, we're actually much better off today" Pinker argues. "And so if you don't look at data, if you look at headlines, since as long as bad things haven't vanished from the face of the earth, which they never will, you can get the impression that things are unchanged or even are worse than ever, even when they're improving. It's only when you count the number of wars, number of deaths in war, longevity, child mortality, extreme poverty, number of leisure hours, that you see that there actually has been improvement. "
Watch the GZERO World episode: Is life better than ever for the human race?
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week at gzeromedia.com/gzeroworld and on US public television. Check local listings.
The state of multilateralism: Shaky, fragile & stretched to capacity
Dr. Comfort Ero of the International Crisis Group has spent her career tackling the most difficult conflicts in the world, often exacerbated by severe environmental or social disasters. But as the climate crisis and war in Ukraine compound the forces pushing many fragile societies to the brink, she says multilateral institutions like the United Nations are not prepared to meet the challenge.
Faced with state collapse, food insecurity, and lack of governance, countries like Libya, Lebanon and Sri Lanka are not able to access the help they need to stabilize, build resilience and thrive.
“Countries are already facing difficult trend lines with a multilateral system that is shaky, that is fragile, that is already stretched to its capacity, not able to deal.” she said during a Global Stage livestream event at UN headquarters in New York on September 22, on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly.
The discussion was moderated by Nicholas Thompson of The Atlantic and was held by GZERO Media in collaboration with the United Nations, the Complex Risk Analytics Fund, and the Early Warnings for All initiative.
Watch the full Global Stage conversation: Can data and AI save lives and make the world safer?
- UN chief: We must avoid the mistakes that led to World War I ›
- Russia undermines everything the UN stands for, says Linda Thomas-Greenfield ›
- Is there a path ahead for peace in Ukraine? ›
- Many knew Putin wasn't bluffing, but not how far he'd go, says International Crisis Group’s Comfort Ero ›
- What Africa has to say about climate change ›
- The Graphic Truth: Has climate change hurt or helped farmers? ›
- UN Chief António Guterres on mounting global crises: "Hope never ... ›
- UN General Assembly day one: Not a Vanity Fair event ›
Can data and AI save lives and make the world safer?
The global climate crisis is acute. In the last few months alone, Hawaii, Morocco and Libya have experienced climate-linked catastrophes that have wiped out communities and killed tens of thousands of people.
At the same time, emerging tech – notably artificial intelligence and data ecosystems – are becoming increasingly sophisticated and influential. There’s been much focus on the perils and threats posed by these scientific developments, but how can they be proactively harnessed to mitigate climate challenges and create a more resilient world?
On the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, GZERO Media held a Global Stage livestream event unpacking these complex challenges and opportunities, in collaboration with the United Nations, the Complex Risk Analytics Fund, and the Early Warnings for All initiative.
This urgent conversation was be moderated by Nick Thompson, CEO, The Atlantic; and featured Melinda Bohannon, Director General of Humanitarian and Development at the UK’s Foreign Commonwealth & Development Office; Ian Bremmer, President and Founder of Eurasia Group and GZERO Media; Vilas Dhar, President and Trustee, Patrick J. McGovern Foundation; Dr. Comfort Ero, President and CEO of International Crisis Group; Mami Mizutori, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Disaster Risk Reduction; Amina Mohammed, UN Deputy Secretary-General; Amandeep Singh Gill, UN Envoy on Technology; Brad Smith, Vice Chair and President, Microsoft; Axel van Trostenburg, World Bank Managing Director; and Anne Witkowsky, Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization Operations at the US Department of State.
Emerging tech is presenting huge opportunities to identify climate hotspots and scale damage and destruction. Indeed, Smith says that satellites are able to not only capture visual images, but also gather “data streams” on fossil fuel emissions. In addition, AI is also being harnessed to identify communities affected by climate calamities and see which “people have been rendered homeless.” Still, tech companies can’t do it alone. In order to identify what their exact needs are, Smith adds, partnerships with NGOs and other stakeholders are key.
Amandeep Singh Gill had much to say about how these processes are applied in real time, particularly when addressing world hunger. “Across 90 countries, 700-800 million people are at risk of food insecurity,” he notes, adding that using data across institutions has allowed the multilateral organization “to get assessments about where food insecurity is going to spike next, and that allows us to respond in a better way.”
Still, having access to copious amounts of data is one thing, but figuring out how to use it to effectuate change is quite another. “There's a real gap between the information that's out there and the ability to act upon the information that's out there,” Dr Ero says, adding that “lack of policy and action” and failure to act quickly when crises are identified are hindering these global efforts. Dr Ero points to the situation in Somalia, which is still grappling with an insurgency by the Al-Shabaab terror group while also facing floods and trying to rebuild its society. “All the data points are showing the stresses that Somalia has to deal with, but why aren't we able to respond to that?” she asks, highlighting poor governance and lack of political will as impediments to progress.
When asked about how these issues might be affected by the fact that heads of state from four out of five permanent members of the UN Security Council did not show up at the UN General Assembly this week, Amina Mohammed said there is “huge momentum” from governments and stakeholders. “The 2030 agenda is urgent, and we really do just feel that there is a movement to make that happen. There's a sense of determination … too many people are at stake.”
And there’s one elephant in the room when discussing climate change and tech advancements: China. One big issue, Bremmer notes, “is that China is really distracted by very significant domestic economic challenges and that has put real constraints, material constraints, on their foreign policy strategy over the long term,” he says.
Clean energy sources amid a futuristic landscape.
The false trade-off between climate action and economic growth
World leaders are flooding New York this week for the 78th United Nations General Assembly and Climate Week NYC, less than two months before the landmark COP28, the UN Climate Change Conference, is set to begin in Dubai. With climate being at the top of the agenda and top of mind, I thought I’d use today’s newsletter to debunk a myth that pervades an annoying amount of climate doomerism.
Most climate change discussions frame the issue in cost-benefit terms. Would we rather save the planet or keep our living standards? Save the planet or increase profits? Save the planet or lift people out of poverty? In other words, how much are we willing to sacrifice to stop climate change?
In rich countries like the US, both sides of the aisle assume this tradeoff between climate action and economic prosperity exists. The difference between them is that most of the political right wants to prioritize growth at the expense of climate action, while the “de-growth” and anti-capitalist parts of the left want to halt growth for the sake of climate action.
Meanwhile, the consensus in developing nations – which today account for two-thirds of global carbon emissions but are only responsible for about one-fifth of historical emissions – is that poorer countries have the right (indeed, the obligation) to put economic development above climate action. This view is also premised on the assumption that economic growth can only be powered by fossil fuels, and therefore, that saving the planet requires economic sacrifice.
But that is a false dilemma. In 2023, there is no longer a systemic trade-off between decarbonization and economic growth.
A technological revolution in the making
The reason for this is that technological advances have made clean energy – especially solar power, wind power, and battery storage – cheaper than fossil fuels.
Until quite recently, high-polluting fossil fuels (especially coal) were by far the cheapest sources of energy available. Renewables didn’t come close. But in the past decade, the unsubsidized price of electricity from solar and wind declined by 89% and 69%, respectively. And the cost of lithium-ion batteries – which are needed to smooth out the intermittent supply of solar and wind energy – has declined by 90%. As a result, new solar power plants have gone from being 710% more expensive than the cheapest fossil-fueled plants in 2010 to being 29% cheaper now, and new onshore wind plants have gone from being 95% more expensive to being 52% cheaper than the cheapest fossil-fueled plants in the same period.
Today, when you compare the lifetime cost of building and operating new power plants, renewable energy sources like solar and wind are already the cheapest options for most of the world. In some places, building new solar and wind plants is even cheaper than keeping existing coal plants running!
This price advantage explains why the world’s largest carbon emitters are quickly moving away from coal and toward wind and solar power, and why renewable power has more than tripled as a share of global power generation in the last decade. In Europe, wind and solar generate more power than coal and gas. And solar, wind, and battery storage account for 82% of planned generating capacity additions in the US this year.
Interests trump politics
A common refrain is that these renewable technologies are being forced on unwilling Americans and Europeans by woke politicians and activists. But ask yourself, why would countries like China and India, states like Texas and Florida, and companies like BP and Total be building so much solar, wind, and battery storage capacity if not out of self-interest?
China and India certainly have little inclination to make national sacrifices for the planet’s benefit. Texas and Florida are Republican bastions — not exactly tree-huggers. And, like all corporations, BP and Total seek to maximize profits for shareholders. If you think Greta Thunberg is pushing developing countries as diverse as Brazil, Chile, Vietnam, India, and Morocco to deploy solar power at scale, I’ve got a coal mine to sell you…
The truth is that the world is adopting clean energy because it’s cheaper than the alternative. Even countries and companies that don’t care about climate change at all are finding it worthwhile to switch to renewables. And thanks to these technologies’ uniquely steep learning curves, the more they get deployed, the cheaper they’ll become, and the cheaper they become, the more they’ll get adopted everywhere.
At the same time that the increased adoption of renewables will reduce carbon emissions and deadly pollution, falling energy prices will lead to a rise in real incomes and standards of living. The advent of cheap, abundant, and widely available energy will free up income for people to spend on other things and allow poor countries to turbocharge their development while leapfrogging fossil fuels. If it sounds like a win-win, it’s because it is.
The invisible hand still needs a policy push
Although technological ingenuity and self-interest are making the energy transition an unstoppable reality, these forces alone aren’t enough to get the world all the way to net zero emissions in time to avoid some of the worst impacts of climate change.
For starters, there are still powerful vested interests and inertia holding back decarbonization, despite its increasingly obvious economic advantages. Many actors with political pull benefit from the carbon-intensive status quo, which generates up to $2 trillion in economic rents every year. These incumbents – ranging from petrostates and Big Oil to retail gas stations and fossil fuel workers – are fighting tooth and nail to slow down the energy transition and latch on to their power. Moreover, fossil fuels still make up 77% of the world’s energy production, and for now the cost of operating existing fossil fuel plants is lower than the cost of building new renewable plants in most (but not all) places. Absent policy action, that will remain the case for some years yet.
Then there’s the fact that electricity – the problem that solar, wind, and batteries solve – only accounts for about 40% of global carbon emissions. Cutting the remaining 60% will require addressing the other sources of emissions: transportation, commercial and residential buildings, and industrial processes. Some of this can be achieved by electrifying more of our energy use – like we are already doing by switching to electric vehicles, heat pumps, and induction stoves – while continuing to decarbonize electricity. But some – such as greening harder-to-abate, heat-intensive processes like cement and steel production – will require investment and incentives to invent, develop, and adopt new technological solutions.
Finally, while switching to renewables pays for itself in the long run, building new infrastructure while retiring fossil-fuel assets early can bring large upfront costs. This problem is especially acute for developing nations, which will generate most of the demand for new electricity in the coming decades but lack the fiscal space and access to long-term finance needed to meet the upfront costs of deploying clean energy systems. It’s in these countries’ economic interest to lock in low-carbon infrastructure now rather than get stuck with fossil-fuel assets that are already being phased out in the developed world and will be stranded in a matter of years. But they will need massive financing from rich countries to do that.
The bottom line is that although there’s a lot governments can do to help speed up the energy transition, even without government action the transition is most definitely happening. And it is happening without a reduction in our living standards. You don’t have to stop driving or ration electricity or eat bugs. Poor countries don’t have to stay poor. The opposite is true: stopping climate change will make most everyone richer.
That’s great news because if the fate of the planet depended on everyone agreeing to voluntarily impoverish themselves, you can bet your sweet bippy humanity would be 100% cooked.
Ukraine's Deputy of Defence Minister Hanna Maliar addresses during a media briefing of the Security and Defense Forces of Ukraine in Kyiv, Ukraine on 13 April 2023, amid Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Hard Numbers: Ukraine’s housecleaning continues, China outdoes itself over Taiwan, California sues Big Oil, US loses its wings, Nobody gets to see Cristiano Ronaldo play in Iran
6: The big fall cleaning at the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense continues, as President Zelensky fired six deputy ministers over the weekend. No reason was given, but the move comes just weeks after his office sacked the Defense Minister on allegations of corruption.
103: China set a new record for aerial aggression against Taiwan, sending a total of 103 warplanes towards the island in a mere 24 hours from Sunday to Monday. The move is part of Beijing’s carrot-and-stick approach to influencing Taiwan’s upcoming presidential election. Read more about that here.
135: The state of California, AKA the world’s fifth largest economy, has filed a 135-page lawsuit against the leading American oil companies and lobbying groups, arguing that the industry systematically misled the public about the relationship between fossil fuels and climate change.
80 million: Uh, you lost a what now? The US government is asking for help to locate an $80 million fighter jet that went missing after its pilot ejected somewhere over South Carolina on Sunday. On the plus side, if the US can’t find the state of the art f-35 warplane, chances are the Chinese or Russians can’t either, right? Right?
7: For the first time in 7 years, a Saudi football club will visit Iran, as Al-Nassr, home of living football legend Cristiano Ronaldo, arrives in Tehran. The trip comes amid a thaw between Saudi Arabia and Iran, but fans will have to catch a glimpse of “CR7” anywhere but the pitch, because Al-Nassr’s match against Tehran’s Persepolis isn’t open to fans. The Asian Football Federation reportedly hit Persepolis with a one-game crowd ban after the team goaded an opponent in Goa with a post about Iran’s 18th century invasion of India.