What is your main field of expertise?
Developing policies of diversity and inclusion that lead to women’s
empowerment.
Given your research, what would you say is the most
under-appreciated risk?
The most under-appreciated risk is that organisations, corporations,
countries and their governments are too slow to realise that women have to be
included in the decision making on issues that impact us all. Take population
growth. By the time they figure out that women are integral to this issue, the
problem will have grown further out of control.
Climate change and environmental issues, ageing societies, economics,
employment, all the major global challenges need a balanced gender perspective.
Every day that we don’t figure out how women are can be included in the problem
solving, is a day that slows us finding solutions.
How would you frame this risk as a hypothetical scenario: “what if”
this was to actually happen?
Imagine if women were 50% of the decision makers. What if the established
research on the positive impact of women on the economy, on population, on
health and well-being were taken seriously into account by policy-makers? What
if women were a critical mass at every decision making table; if they were actively
involved in conflict prevention or in post conflict resolution instead of being
excluded or considered only as an afterthought? Imagine the different and more
sustainable decisions that would be made.
In your analysis, how might this “what if” scenario unfold?
We would immediately have more ways of solving problems. You know the old
saying that if the only tool you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a
nail? If we have more knowledge and awareness through the input of different
people with different ideas, we have many more tools in our toolbox: more
knowledge, more awareness, more innovative thought, more creativity, more
awareness of the impacts of policies, and a greater range of points of view
helping to resolve issues. Our capacity to solve problems quickly would
increase straight away.
When Rosabeth Moss Kanter was asked how the world would be different if
women were 50% of the decision makers, she said the world would already be
different if women were 50% of the decision makers. That’s the sort of
awareness I want to raise.
What if this doesn’t happen and world leaders won’t move more
quickly to include women?
In countries with high fertility rates or where there is food insecurity
and fragile states, unless population growth is moderated, the problems
of famine, youth unemployment and even high youth death rates will continue. We
need women to be fully engaged and committed to population control, or the
problems will continue and increase beyond the point of return.
It’s like climate change. There is going to be a point where if we don’t
step in to do things to moderate climate change, we’re going to get to a point
where we can’t turn back. There will be no more elasticity left in the
ecosystem. I want us to turn back from the edge of the cliff that we are
speeding towards. I want to slow us down, and temper the risks by finding new
solutions to global problems like population growth.
Who would be mostly impacted by this “what if” scenario and how?
In the short term, those most impacted are the poor. I believe we are
already seeing the growing gap between the have and the have-nots. From an
economic perspective, from the perspective of access to healthcare and to fresh
water, and from the perspective of environmental degradation, the split is
already occurring. In the long term, however, failure to include women in
decision-making on issues such as population growth will seriously affect all
of us.
What is your top mitigation approach for this risk?
The major decision making tables where these issues are raised, whether
it’s intergovernmental organisations like the G20, or other forums, must
include a critical mass of women to have women’s views adequately represented.
What do you consider as a critical mass?
If I were to put a figure on it, I would say a critical mass is at least
30%. In Norway, for example, the figure for women on boards is 40%. I like
framing the idea of a critical mass at a minimum of 40% for either gender. That
would make a real difference.