IDENTIFY AND ANALYSE EXTREME AND GLOBAL CATASTROPHIC RISKS HOLISTICALLY
Policy action 1: Develop centralised risk assessment processes
Simple option: Develop and implement a regular all-hazard risk assessment process for all risks to the homeland originating domestically or internationally, ensuring to capture long-term and highly unlikely risks (Source: based on practice of multiple countries according to OECD’s 2017 cross-country comparison – see Case Study)
Advanced option: Develop a detailed assessment of global catastrophic and existential risk, including a comprehensive list of potential catastrophic or existential threats as well as technical assessments and lay explanations of the risks, including potential pathways and scenarios (Source: based on the Global Catastrophic Risk Management Act of 2022)
Case study – UK National Risk Assessment
The UK’s National Risk Assessment process, run out of the Cabinet Office, is probably the most mature form of all developed countries. Since 2008, the biennial review has considered domestic hazards, with the purpose of informing national resilience planning, risk assessments by devolved administrations and local-level emergency planning. Separately, since 2010, the five-yearly National Security Risk Assessment has reviewed security concerns overseas to inform the National Security Strategy and Strategic Defence and Security Review. In 2019, both assessments were combined so that domestic and foreign risks were assessed against a common methodology.
Despite the UK’s world-leading process, the UK’s Parliamentary Office and Science identified further challenges and limitations, including the focus on short-term acute risks rather than long-term and chronic risks, such as climate change or antimicrobial resistance. The House of Lords published a report in December 2021 that evaluated the UK government’s assessment and planning for extreme risks. It found that the UK government’s risk assessment process does not fully capture the complexity and severity of extreme risk and under-appreciated low-likelihood or chronic risks.
In 2021, the UK Cabinet Office Civil Contingencies Secretariat commissioned the Royal Academy of Engineering (RAEng) to review the National Security Risk Assessment (NSRA) methodology. The review made 11 recommendations to encourage greater resilience, many of which RAEng claim have been incorporated into the 2022 NSRA process.
Policy action 2: Understand the country’s contribution to the manifestation of global catastrophic risk
Simple option: Map and evaluate how existing government programs relate to national and global catastrophic risks (Source: original to this report)
Advanced option: Conduct a review of actions of all stakeholders – such as state and local governments, business sectors and citizens – that contribute to manifestation of national and global catastrophic risks (Source: original to this report)
Further explanation
These policy options are original to this report. The purpose of these policy actions is for each country to recognise and analyse how they contribute to global catastrophic risk, which they would use to inform policy efforts to reduce the risk. Currently, no academic or government study has determined countries’ contributions to global catastrophic risk. The most meaningful effort in this direction is a paper that compares how major powers contribute to nuclear war, climate change and artificial intelligence.
Policy action 3: Conduct a capability and resilience assessment
Simple option: Develop a national capability assessment to understand the capabilities – such as critical infrastructure, emergency services and other national assets – that would reduce the impact of risk (Source: based on existing policy in some countries – see Case Study below)
Advanced option: Develop a holistic and regular capability and resilience assessment for all global catastrophic risks (Source: original to this report, based somewhat on Global Catastrophic Risk Index)
Case study – Capability and vulnerability assessments
National capability assessments are conducted by some countries in order to understand their capabilities and vulnerabilities to inform efforts to build national resilience. For example, in the US, under Presidential Policy Directive-8, the US government is required to prepare an annual National Preparedness Report. This report “summarizes progress made, and challenges that remain, in building and sustaining the capabilities needed to prevent, protect against, mitigate, respond to, and recover from the threats, hazards and incidents that pose the greatest risk to the nation.” Similarly, New Zealand has previously conducted a National Capability Assessment to identify strengths and weaknesses, to note any trends in capacity and capability, identify gaps, or areas for improvement, and to monitor progress towards a ‘Resilient New Zealand’.
National capability assessments do not appear to be a common policy across the world. And when conducted, they do not adequately consider global catastrophic risk. These risks are likely to test national capabilities in ways that are different or beyond typical national risks.
The Global Catastrophic Risk Index, first released in 2022 by the Global Governance Forum, attempts to quantify countries’ overall vulnerability to global catastrophic risk. However, the seven aspects that the composite index includes – economic stability, quality of governance, education and skills, gender equality, business environment resilience, environmental vulnerabilities, and exogenous vulnerabilities – do not appear to empirically or rigorously assess such vulnerability.