The idea of showing the costs of conflict in order to convince people to spend resources at the right point in a conflict system is not new. There are many ways of doing this and many groups that promote this type of analysis. What I have not found is an organization doing it on a large, impartial, scale.
If we are to be driven by economics, then let's get the economics right around conflicts. If indeed it is less costly to come in after a conflict and mop-up the mess then let us make the rational decision to sit back and watch the conflict happen. If however it will be less costly and perhaps more profitable from an economic standpoint to help before a conflict becomes violent, let's do that. I would like to prove that at least in some conflict circumstances it is more cost effective to prevent and manage the conflict than to work in the aftermath. I believe that in order to make that a viable alternative and tool for todays' social capital markets there must be a way to prove and predict the economic model in a reliable, consistent, and influential way.
ATTENDING SOCAP10 in October 2010 was an eye opener for me! At the intersection of world capital markets and socially good ventures is an enormous and growing segment of deal making and investments. One of the sessions I attended centered on international development and investments in markets related to international development. This was a very entrepreneurial group and the focus of many of the sessions including this one was on doing good and making money at the same time. A perfect place for people with brilliant ideas to meet people who wanted to make the world a better place and had the money help do it. Towards the end of this session a question came from the audience that asked, "where is the best place to do good and make money in the world today?" The answer went something like, "the best place we have found in the past and believe will be the best place in the future, is to invest in post-conflict development, restructuring, and rebuilding activities and ideas. There is a great deal of money to be made, and good to be done, in that critical space." A very reasonable question with a very perplexing answer for me. I would like to prove that at least in some conflict circumstances it is more cost effective and profitable to prevent and manage the conflict than to work in the aftermath. I believe that in order to make that a viable alternative for todays' social capital markets there must be a way to prove and predict the economic model in a reliable and influential way. Prove an overall cost savings, a profit along the way, while doing some good for the world, and I think there is an organizational model people would be willing to support.
DURING the most recent Climate Change negotiations (COP15) in December of 2009 I was fascinated to watch the negotiations between the 193 parties take place around economics. The lens I was looking through at COP15 was that of a conflict manager who believes that climate change will increase the number and intensity of violent conflicts worldwide over the next century. I hope that the parties will more deeply address the early intervention and management of these potential conflicts in any agreement they sign. To my surprise, one of the realizations I had during my two weeks on the ground in Copenhagen was that much of the negotiations were centered on money. I had realized that the economics was a large part of what was being discussed before I got there, but I imagined it to be a more minor part of the much bigger negotiation around emissions and changing the way the environment would be effected over the next 100 years. I was wrong. The economics of the global climate change situation seem to be at the heart of all of the negotiations and these economic considerations will heavily influence any outcome or new treaty in the future. I now believe that the economic costs of the potential conflicts we will see is worthy of great deal more research and focus because that is where the negotiators are focused, and will be focused, into the foreseeable future.
