Davos Newbies

Vive la difference

I went to the workshop on “The future of Europe: hard choices ahead”. It exemplified the benefits and problems of the workshop format.

We had a good table of participants, and in the first part of the workshop we had a lively discussion about what defines Europe and what creates European identity. But then all the tables had to “report back” on the discussions. With a couple of exceptions, these reports were tedious and fuzzy.

Workshops can succeed with a more tightly defined topic, a judicious selection of table discussion leaders, and considerable design and crafting of the discussion. All three were absent.

I did love, however, what happened when Michel Barnier, the French EU commissioner for regional policy, was asked to provide his report. He stood up and declared, “I will speak in French.” I’d guess that he thereby lost about 50% of the people in the room — and provided a wonderful illustration of one aspect of European identity.

The irrational

In all modesty, I moderated one of the best sessions in Davos so far at lunchtime today. Nothing to do with me. The speaker, Princeton psychology professor Daniel Kahneman, was speaking about the latest findings in behavioural finance. That’s the emerging study of non-rational and imperfect behaviour in markets.

I’ll throw out some of Kahneman’s insights. It’s apparently well established now that the cost of “having an idea” (something that motivates you to buy or sell) is 3.5%. In other words, it doesn’t pay — on average — to have ideas.

I also thought his findings on people’s attitudes towards risk. According to Kahneman, “People take risks because they don’t know the risks they are taking.”

What made it such a successful session was the passion, humour and range of a true expert, and a steady stream of interesting, deep questions from a knowledgeable group of participants.

How the mighty

A difference in this Davos is there are quite a few “formers”. Davos has traditionally been quite rigid about excluding former foreign ministers or presidents, but for understandable reasons, there are a lot of Clinton cabinet folk around.

It’s interesting in this context to see Madeleine Albright, former US secretary of state, and Ernesto Zedillo, former president of Mexico, in happy conversation around “the clock”, the centrepiece of the Waldorf lobby. Two years ago in Davos, Albright and Zedillo together would have meant a clutch of eager aides and a crowd of business supplicants jostling for attention.

Now Albright and Zedillo were left in total peace to have their tete-a-tete.

Development demons

The value of the plenary on building support for development was the way in which all of the speakers — Bill Gates, Bono, former Mexican president Ernesto Zedillo — ganged up on US Treasury secretary Paul O’Neill.

O’Neill gave his speech from yesterday, virtually unaltered. But Zedillo in particular laid into his seeming complacency. “Even if we have everything else [good governance, open markets, etc], we still need money,” Zedillo said. I can’t say that O’Neill flinched, but I’m beginning to hope that if enough people keep banging the drum about the need for vastly increased developmental aid, the US will eventually get the message.

Again, I liked Bono. When asked how the public could be mobilised behind the message, he talked about his experienced in the debt relief campaign. “You’d think that a rock star talking about debt or the Pope talking about debt could get on the front pages. But they don’t. But put the rock star and the Pope together, and people scratch their heads and say, ‘What are they doing together?’”

Eat safely

The New York Times reports that every bit of food being consumed here has been x-rayed and screened. I guess it’s a step up from the practice of having official tasters, who will die first if the food is poisoned.

The long good Friday

Friday in New York has taken the place of Saturday in Davos: the
longest, most packed day in the schedule (this Davos is a day shorter than
usual). One thing that has been surprising, and encouraging, is that
sessions have been very, very full.

Old conference hands will tell you that conferences in New York can get
large numbers of participants, but you end up with empty rooms. Everyone
has other meetings to go to, or hears the Siren call of shopping or
museums. That isn’t proving true for the Forum, which is a testament to the
participants and the programme.

It may also have something to do with the logistics of the Waldorf. I’ve
heard that there are something like 2,800 white badges (full participants)
for this meeting. That’s about 1,000 more than in Davos. But with every
room used for sessions, there are seats for only a little more than 1,000.

The House of Commons in the UK is designed on that sort of principle. If
all 650 MPs show up for a major debate, there isn’t enough seating for all
of them. Some have to stand or crowd the aisles. That’s what creates an
intense atmosphere on key parliamentary occasions.

Friday here in New York has, of course, been about more than full
sessions. Most of the private receptions and dinners were scheduled for
Friday night, which was the only evening on the schedule without some
major, crowd-pulling conflict. I’ve already railed at Lehman’s Elton John
obscenity ($1 million for one night). I did feel sorry for some of my hosts
tonight, however. Having really pushed the boat out in various lavish ways,
there just weren’t enough people to go around for all the parties. So the
reception I went to at the New York Public Library, given by Merrill Lynch,
was very sparsely attended.