I've been thinking a lot about the world recently and how it's changed over the last 20, 30, 40 years. Twenty or 30 years ago, if a chicken caught a cold and sneezed and died in a remote village in East Asia, it would have been a tragedy for the chicken and its closest relatives, but I don't think there was much possibility of us fearing a global pandemic and the deaths of millions.
最近我常常思考我们的世界 以及它在过去的20，30，40年里经历了何等的转变 20或30年前， 如果在东亚一个遥远村落里，一只鸡 患了感冒，打个喷嚏然后死了， 对那只鸡和它的近亲来说 可能是个灾难， 但我想我们不太可能会 因此而担心全球流行病 和数百万人的死亡。
Twenty or 30 years ago, if a bank in North America lent too much money to some people who couldn't afford to pay it back and the bank went bust, that was bad for the lender and bad for the borrower, but we didn't imagine it would bring the global economic system to its knees for nearly a decade.
20或30年前，如果北美的一家银行 借出了太多钱 给那些无力偿还的人 并因此而倒闭了， 只是借贷双方 运气不好而已， 但我们不会想到 这会给全球经济系统带来 将近10年的瘫痪期。
This is globalization. This is the miracle that has enabled us to transship our bodies and our minds and our words and our pictures and our ideas and our teaching and our learning around the planet ever faster and ever cheaper.
这就是全球化。 这就是奇迹，它已经让 我们的身体，我们的头脑、 我们的语言、图像以及我们的思想、 还有我们的教育和学习都围绕这个星球 运转得更快、成本更低。
It's brought a lot of bad stuff, like the stuff that I just described, but it's also brought a lot of good stuff. A lot of us are not aware of the extraordinary successes of the Millennium Development Goals, several of which have achieved their targets long before the due date.
它带来很多坏事， 比如我刚才举的例子。 但它也带来许多好事。 我们当中很多人并不了解 千禧年发展目标取得了非凡的成就， 有几个远在截止日期之前 就完成了预定目标。
That proves that this species of humanity is capable of achieving extraordinary progress if it really acts together and it really tries hard. But if I had to put it in a nutshell these days, I sort of feel that globalization has taken us by surprise, and we've been slow to respond to it. If you look at the downside of globalization, it really does seem to be sometimes overwhelming.
这证明了人类这个物种 能够取得超凡的进展， 如果我们真正地一起合作并努力的话。 但如果我简明扼要地说， 我觉得全球化有点儿 让我们措手不及， 我们对它的回应太慢了。 如果你看看全球化的负面影响， 有时候的确有点儿难以应付。
All of the grand challenges that we face today, like climate change and human rights and demographics and terrorism and pandemics and narco-trafficking and human slavery and species loss, I could go on, we're not making an awful lot of progress against an awful lot of those challenges.
今天我们面对的所有重大挑战， 像气候变化或人权问题 还有人口问题、恐怖主义和流行病 还有毒品走私和奴隶贩卖 以及物种灭绝，我可以一直说下去， 我们在这么多可怕的挑战面前 并没有取得多么重大进展。
So in a nutshell, that's the challenge that we all face today at this interesting point in history. That's clearly what we've got to do next.
所以简单来说， 这就是我们所有人今天面临的挑战， 在这个有意思的历史时期。
We've somehow got to get our act together and we've got to figure out how to globalize the solutions better so that we don't simply become a species which is the victim of the globalization of problems.
这很明显是我们接下来要做的。 我们要设法共同行动起来 我们要想办法如何更好的 解决全球化的问题 以至于我们不会沦为 全球化问题中受害的一个种群。
Why are we so slow at achieving these advances? What's the reason for it? Well, there are, of course, a number of reasons, but perhaps the primary reason is because we're still organized as a species in the same way that we were organized 200 or 300 years ago.
为什么我们取得进展的速度如此缓慢？ 原因是什么？ 当然，这有许多原因。 但也许最首要的原因 是我们这个物种的机构组成 与200或300年前的 还是一样。
There's one superpower left on the planet and that is the seven billion people, the seven billion of us who cause all these problems, the same seven billion, by the way, who will resolve them all.
目前世界上只有一个超能力 那就是这7亿人口， 我们这7亿人，造成了所有这些问题， 但同样的7亿人， 也要解决这些问题。
But how are those seven billion organized? They're still organized in 200 or so nation-states, and the nations have governments that make rules and cause us to behave in certain ways.
但这7亿人是怎么组织起来的呢？ 他们还是由200多个国家或者多民族国家组成， 国家都有政府 颁布法律 并要求我们遵守一定的准则。
And that's a pretty efficient system, but the problem is that the way that those laws are made and the way those governments think is absolutely wrong for the solution of global problems, because it all looks inwards.
这是一个相当有效的体制， 但问题是这些法律的形成 以及政府思考问题的方式 在解决全球问题上是完全错误的， 因为它只看到国内。
The politicians that we elect and the politicians we don't elect, on the whole, have minds that microscope. They don't have minds that telescope.
我们选举出来的政治家 还有我们没选的政治家，总体来说， 他们的思维方式都是显微镜式的。
They look in. They pretend, they behave, as if they believed that every country was an island that existed quite happily, independently of all the others on its own little planet in its own little solar system.
他们没有望远镜式的思维。 他们只看国内。当他们行作起来的时候就假装 他们在相信好像每个国家都是一座岛屿 独立而快乐地 存在于自己的小星球 于他国不无相干， 而是在自己的太阳系里。
This is the problem: countries competing against each other, countries fighting against each other. This week, as any week you care to look at, you'll find people actually trying to kill each other from country to country, but even when that's not going on, there's competition between countries, each one trying to shaft the next.
这就是问题所在： 国家间互相竞争， 国家间互相征战， 这周，或任何一周，如果你认真看的话， 你会发现一个国家和另一个国家的人民在互相残杀， 就算没有战争， 国家之间也在互相竞争， 每个国家都试图把别国挤下去。
This is clearly not a good arrangement. We clearly need to change it. We clearly need to find ways of encouraging countries to start working together a little bit better. And why won't they do that? Why is it that our leaders still persist in looking inwards?
这明显不是个良好的形势。 我们明显需要改变现状。 我们明显需要找到一些方式 以鼓励国家之间可以 共同合作得更好。 但他们为什么不这么做呢？ 为什么我们的领袖还坚持只看着自己呢？
Well, the first and most obvious reason is because that's what we ask them to do. That's what we tell them to do. When we elect governments or when we tolerate unelected governments, we're effectively telling them that what we want is for them to deliver us in our country a certain number of things.
最主要和最明显的理由 就是因为那是我们要求他们这么做的。 这是我们叫他们做的。 当我们选举政府的时候 或当我们容忍我们没有选的政府的时候， 我们就是在告诉他们我们想要的 就是让他们在我们的国家 带来一系列的举措。
We want them to deliver prosperity, growth, competitiveness, transparency, justice and all of those things.
我们希望他们带来繁荣、 发展、竞争力、透明度、正义， 和所有这些事情。
So unless we start asking our governments to think outside a little bit, to consider the global problems that will finish us all if we don't start considering them, then we can hardly blame them if what they carry on doing is looking inwards, if they still have minds that microscope rather than minds that telescope.
所以除非我们要求政府 看远一点， 考虑一下那些会毁灭我们的全球问题， 如果我们不开始考虑这些事情的话， 那么我们难以指责他们 如果他们继续只是关注国家内部的话， 如果他们依然只有显微镜的头脑 而没有望远镜头脑的话。
That's the first reason why things tend not to change.
这是第一个为什么事情很难改变的原因。
The second reason is that these governments, just like all the rest of us, are cultural psychopaths. I don't mean to be rude, but you know what a psychopath is.
第二个原因是这些政府 就像我们一样， 是文化精神变态。 我并非要无礼， 但你知道精神变态是什么。
A psychopath is a person who, unfortunately for him or her, lacks the ability to really empathize with other human beings. When they look around, they don't see other human beings with deep, rich, three-dimensional personal lives and aims and ambitions.
一个精神变态者 对他／她来说很不幸的， 是缺乏 对其他人类真正的同情能力。 当他们四下环顾， 他们看到的不是 有深度的、内心丰富的、三维的人生 以及梦想和雄心。
What they see is cardboard cutouts, and it's very sad and it's very lonely, and it's very rare, fortunately.
他们看到的是纸片人， 这其实是非常可悲及孤独的， 但可幸的是这种情况很少见。
But actually, aren't most of us not really so very good at empathy?
但事实上，我们大多数人 难道不是缺乏同情心吗？
Oh sure, we're very good at empathy when it's a question of dealing with people who kind of look like us and kind of walk and talk and eat and pray and wear like us, but when it comes to people who don't do that, who don't quite dress like us and don't quite pray like us and don't quite talk like us, do we not also have a tendency to see them ever so slightly as cardboard cutouts too?
当然，我们非常有同情心 当问题出在那些 跟我们长得差不多 走路、说话和祈祷的方式差不多 衣着也差不多的人， 但当问题出在那些不那样做的人， 那些跟我们衣着不同的人， 祈祷方式不同的人， 说话方式不同的人， 我们岂不是倾向于 把他们当成纸片人吗？ 这是我们需要问自己的问题。
And this is a question we need to ask ourselves. I think constantly we have to monitor it. Are we and our politicians to a degree cultural psychopaths?
我认为我们需要不断地监督自己。 我们和我们的政党某个程度上 是不是文化精神变态？
The third reason is hardly worth mentioning because it's so silly, but there's a belief amongst governments that the domestic agenda and the international agenda are incompatible and always will be.
第三个原因都不值一提 因为它太白痴了， 但政府间有一种想法， 那就是国内事务 和国际事务 是不兼容的，并会一直如此。
This is just nonsense. In my day job, I'm a policy adviser. I've spent the last 15 years or so advising governments around the world, and in all of that time I have never once seen a single domestic policy issue that could not be more imaginatively, effectively and rapidly resolved than by treating it as an international problem, looking at the international context, comparing what others have done, bringing in others, working externally instead of working internally.
这是无稽之谈。 我的工作是政策顾问。 我过去的15年左右 都在世界各国的政府里做顾问， 整个这段时间我从没见过 任何一个国家政策问题 会不比国际问题 能够更具想像力的、 高效并快捷的解决了。 看看国际大环境， 比较其他国家是怎么做的， 请别人进来，外部合作 而不只是内部工作。
And so you may say, well, given all of that, why then doesn't it work? Why can we not make our politicians change? Why can't we demand them?
你可能说，就算这样， 为什么不奏效呢？ 为什么我们无法让政党改变？ 为什么我们无法要求他们？
Well I, like a lot of us, spend a lot of time complaining about how hard it is to make people change, and I don't think we should fuss about it. I think we should just accept that we are an inherently conservative species.
我，就像我们中间许多人，花很多时间抱怨 让人改变有多困难。 我不认为我们应该对此小题大作。 我觉得我们应该接受 我们是天生非常保守的种类。
We don't like to change. It exists for very sensible evolutionary reasons. We probably wouldn't still be here today if we weren't so resistant to change. It's very simple: Many thousands of years ago, we discovered that if we carried on doing the same things, we wouldn't die, because the things that we've done before by definition didn't kill us, and therefore as long as we carry on doing them, we'll be okay, and it's very sensible not to do anything new, because it might kill you.
我们不喜欢改变。 这种现状的存在是因为非常合理的进化原因 如果我们不是如此顽固执守的话， 我们今天很可能不会在这里。 很简单：几千年前， 我们发现如果我们继续 做同样的事情，我们就死不了。 因为我们以前所做的， 肯定让我们生存下去， 所以只要我们继续这么做， 我们就没事， 不去尝试新事物是很合理的， 因为新事物可能会杀了你。
But of course, there are exceptions to that. Otherwise, we'd never get anywhere. And one of the exceptions, the interesting exception, is when you can show to people that there might be some self-interest in them making that leap of faith and changing a little bit.
但当然，也有例外。 不然我们就无法前进。 一个有趣的例外 是当你告诉别人 满怀信心 并做出一些改变 是对他们自身有利的时候。
So I've spent a lot of the last 10 or 15 years trying to find out what could be that self-interest that would encourage not just politicians but also businesses and general populations, all of us, to start to think a little more outwardly, to think in a bigger picture, not always to look inwards, sometimes to look outwards.
所以我在过去的10到15年里 试图找到那个 可以鼓励不仅是政治家 也包括商家和大众的自身利益是什么， 我们所有人，开始一点点往远看， 想想大局， 不要总是只顾自己，偶尔也向外（世界）看看。
And this is where I discovered something quite important. In 2005, I launched a study called the Nation Brands Index.
这时我发现了 一件相当重要的事。 2005年，我展开了一项研究 称为国家品牌指数。
What it is, it's a very large-scale study that polls a very large sample of the world's population, a sample that represents about 70 percent of the planet's population, and I started asking them a series of questions about how they perceive other countries.
这是一个非常庞大的调查 它从世界人口范围取出庞大样品数据 这个样本代表了 地球人口的70%， 我开始问他们一系列的问题 关于他们是如何看待自己国家的。
And the Nation Brands Index over the years has grown to be a very, very large database. It's about 200 billion data points tracking what ordinary people think about other countries and why. Why did I do this?
多年来国家品牌指数 变成了一个非常非常庞大的数据库。 它具有大概两千亿数据点 记载了常人是如何看待他们国家的 以及为什么。 为什么我要做这件事呢？
Well, because the governments that I advise are very, very keen on knowing how they are regarded. They've known, partly because I've encouraged them to realize it, that countries depend enormously on their reputations in order to survive and prosper in the world. If a country has a great, positive image, like Germany has or Sweden or Switzerland, everything is easy and everything is cheap.
因为我做顾问的政府 非常非常想要知道 他们是如何被看待的。 他们已经了解到，一半是出于 我鼓励他们来意识到 国家很大程度上 取决于他们的声誉 来决定他们在世界中的生存及繁荣。 如果一个国家有很伟大很正面的形象， 像德国、瑞典或瑞士， 所有事情就很容易而东西也会很便宜。
You get more tourists. You get more investors. You sell your products more expensively. If, on the other hand, you have a country with a very weak or a very negative image, everything is difficult and everything is expensive.
你能得到游客，你能得到投资商。 你可以高价卖出你的商品。 另一方面，如果你的国家 有一个非常弱或负面的形象， 所有事情就变得困难而且东西昂贵。
So governments care desperately about the image of their country, because it makes a direct difference to how much money they can make, and that's what they've promised their populations they're going to deliver.
所以政府极度关注 国家的形象。 因为它直接影响到 他们能挣多少钱， 这也是他们向国民所承诺的 他们将给予的。
So a couple of years ago, I thought I would take some time out and speak to that gigantic database and ask it, why do some people prefer one country more than another? And the answer that the database gave me completely staggered me. It was 6.8. I haven't got time to explain in detail. Basically what it told me was
所以几年以后，我认为我可以 抽出些时间来跟那个庞大的数据库聊聊 问问它， 为什么有些人更喜欢一个国家 相比于另一个国家？ 数据库给我的答案 完全出乎我的意料。 答案是6.8。 我没时间解释详情。 基本上它告诉我的是
(Laughter)
（笑声）
(Applause)
（掌声）
the kinds of countries we prefer are good countries. We don't admire countries primarily because they're rich, because they're powerful, because they're successful, because they're modern, because they're technologically advanced.
我们喜欢的国家是好国家。 我们不会因为有些国家富有而爱慕它们， 或因为它们有权势，因为它们成功， 因为他们现代化，因为他们有先进的科技。
We primarily admire countries that are good. What do we mean by good? We mean countries that seem to contribute something to the world in which we live, countries that actually make the world safer or better or richer or fairer. Those are the countries we like.
我们爱慕一个国家因为它们好。 好是什么意思？ 我们指的是那些国家 对我们所居住的世界作出了贡献。 那些让世界更安全 或更好或富有或更公平的国家。 这些是我们喜欢的国家。
This is a discovery of significant importance you see where I'm going because it squares the circle. I can now say, and often do, to any government, in order to do well, you need to do good.
这是一个有重大意义的发现 你知道我要说什么了 因为它解释了一切。 我现在可以说，而且经常说，对任何政府， 想要做得好，就要做好事。
If you want to sell more products, if you want to get more investment, if you want to become more competitive, then you need to start behaving, because that's why people will respect you and do business with you, and therefore, the more you collaborate, the more competitive you become.
如果你想卖