Search results

Fighting climate change and COVID, which is currently done at the international level through the use of public goods based on subscriptions, is the case for charitable organisations within states. Such institutions lead to equilibrium situations that are clearly inefficient (not Pareto optimal). They also raise difficult questions of equity between developed, developing and emerging countries: If we want to promote more effective ways of fighting climate change or COVID type epidemics, how can we achieve such important goals at the global level without jeopardising the growth of poorer countries and making them still poorer? We will show that this is actually possible within certain limits. It will require the formation of broad-based climate or COVID coalitions that will be able to influence outsiders and force them to cooperate by sanctioning those who want to take advantage of carbon leakage. Such sanctions could take the form of carbon tariffs and other pressure measures. The result should be a solution that benefits both developed and developing countries while achieving global public goods that are efficient at the same time.

Why use an artificial intelligence (AI) system to determine crucial, major changes in a post-COVID-19 world? Globalisation is both a system and a process characterised by complexity, that is, a referential in which heterogeneous agents are constantly interacting. It therefore requires an integral and dynamic approach, and even more so a tool in tune with complexity. That is the case of the AI system Mileva, specifically designed for tackling complexity, highlighting the fabric of its reality, its core issues, and to forecast the probabilities of the different possible evolutions. In this chapter, the authors first briefly describe globalisation with regard to complexity, at the crossroads of computational complexity theory and sociological complexity theory (Edgar Morin). The authors then present the AI system Mileva, its key principles and the main lines of its architecture. Finally, the aforementioned points will be illustrated by two examples of analyses provided by Mileva on the issue of major changes in a post-COVID-19 world: the situation of the international organisations and that of the world of work in relation to health, environment, development, and democracy.

This chapter gives an overall description of how Japan has coped with COVID-19 pandemics. Under COVID-19 pandemics, many smaller communities tended to suffer less, or even survive better with small and modest adaptive approaches to transform themselves, than most larger cities and metropolitan regions. The cases of Tottori Prefecture and the town of Chizu are highlighted, and illustrations are made to explain how small and modest adaptive approaches have worked relatively well here. Some reasons have been examined such as good political leadership based on the former lessons learned from the previous coronavirus threats which Tottori Prefecture scarcely avoided in 2009 when South Korea suffered from them. The Town of Chizu has demonstrated well how the previous efforts to adaptively enhance community’s coping capacity called SMART Governance have worked effectively under the new persistent disruptive stressor (PDS), i.e. COVID-10 pandemics.

One can always blame that the pandemic has again revealed the weaknesses of our international governance. One can also blame governments for not being able to more quickly draw lessons from the Covid-19 crisis. Nevertheless, despite very different and uncoordinated agendas from various stakeholders involved across the world, we see a first convergence around corporate social responsibility (CSR) and environmental social and governance (ESG) agendas in the context of increasing climate change and ecological transition global awareness.

Even if their interests are very different by design, global stakeholders share at least the fact that our planet has now reached its limits in terms of resources and their exploitation. Even if some consider that humanity, not to say Humanism, is slow to happen on the global scale, we see the early stages of stronger corporate responsibility of all stakeholders, including and starting with the business sector. Corporate business has positively moved from a ‘greenwashing’ attitude at the end of twentieth century and beginning of the new one, to a more integrated and risks-related corporate responsibility awareness that now appears to be a must have.

This chapter aims to study the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the inequality in countries, define it as a new conflict for sustainable development, and determine the prospects of conflict management. This chapter is based on the Theory of Conflicts and such methods as analysis of variations, trend and regression analysis, and simplex method. It is found that the variation of the COVID-19 case rate in the developed (by the example of G7) and developing (by the example of BRICS) countries was very high (140.99%). The variation of the COVID-19 death rate is lower, but it remains rather high (63.29%). The economic growth rate for the whole sample of countries under the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic reduced by 404.16% in 2021, while the quality of life reduced by 1.86% on average. The COVID-19 pandemic increased the inequality in countries, thus creating a new conflict of sustainable development. The perspectives of conflict management of sustainable development are connected to the improvement of the practice of using digital technologies, which helps to reduce the inequality in countries. By the example of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the offered recommendations would have allowed reducing the decline of economic growth rate by 95.01% and preventing the decline in quality of life.

Is conflict driven by environmental scarcities or an abundance of natural resources? For quite some time, this question has generated a lively academic debate. The theoretical literature and empirical evidence it offers are inconclusive. On the one hand, authors such as Homer-Dixon (1994) have emphasized the importance of resource scarcities in explaining conflict. On the other hand, scholars such as Collier and Hoeffler (1998) have tried to link conflict with a relative abundance of natural resources. We believe that the failure to provide a coherent explanation upon which rigorous predictions can be based is due to the neglect of institutions in understanding resource use. What we will try to highlight here is the importance of institutional settings to explain this apparent paradox.

The objective of this chapter is to discuss how different techniques in Regional Science and Peace Science and the emerging techniques in Management Science can be used in analysing Disaster Management and Global pandemic with special reference to developing countries. It is necessary for me to first discuss the subjects of Disaster Management, Regional Science, Peace Science and Management Science. The objective of this chapter is to emphasise that the studies of Disaster Management should be more integrated with socioeconomic and geographical factors. The greatest disaster facing the world is the possibility of war, particularly nuclear war, and the preparation of the means of destruction through military spending.