Two weeks ago, the World Economic Forum held its annual meeting in the picturesque Swiss village Davos. CEOs from world’s biggest multinationals, heads of state, ministers and government representatives, top academics, civil society leaders, … have met in Davos to examine how industry and government can improve the current state of the world.
During the five-day meeting, the world’s top business and governmental tycoons have rethought environmental, ecological and humanitarian questions and have examined how to ensure global sustainability, how to create more social responsibility, how to create more welfare and how to enhance overall security.
Their intentions are all noble and good, but – as everybody knows – it is all about the outcomes, more precisely, it is about deal-making. On the significance of the WEF opinions differ. In an article in the Washington Post, several scholars gave their impression about the necessity of the Davos conference.
David Rothkopf for example, visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, writes: “If you think Davos is about anything other than status-seeking-behaviour, then you have read too many of the press releases of the overly-earnest Swiss gnomes who put the meeting together.” On the other hand, Walter Russell Mead, senior fellow for U.S. foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations, notes that “there is plenty of jaw-jaw, and to the extent that regular communication between the world’s business and political leaders can reduce the chances for war-war, Davos does a lot of good.”
What do you think? Will the Davos meeting achieve results, at least to the extent that it can justify the jet fuel, luxury catering and other extravagance the globe-trotting internationals consumed during their trip? What is Davos according to you: World’s biggest future-oriented think tank or a celebrity event, strongly needing lessons in humility?
