We can cut violent deaths around the world by 50 percent in the next three decades. All we have to do is drop killing by 2.3 percent a year, and we'll hit that target.
我們可在未來30年內 將世界各地暴亂的死亡人數 降低 50 %, 我們要做的就是 讓他殺死亡率每年下降 2.3 %, 然後我們就能達標了。
You don't believe me? Well, the leading epidemiologists and criminologists around the world seem to think we can, and so do I, but only if we focus on our cities, especially the most fragile ones.
你不相信我嗎? 世界上首屈一指的 流行病學和犯罪學專家們 似乎認為我們行的,我也是一樣, 前提是假使我們看緊我們的城市, 尤其是最脆弱的這一些。
You see, I've been thinking about this a lot. For the last 20 years, I've been working in countries and cities ripped apart by conflict, violence, terrorism, or some insidious combination of all. I've tracked gun smugglers from Russia to Somalia, I've worked with warlords in Afghanistan and the Congo, I've counted cadavers in Colombia, in Haiti, in Sri Lanka, in Papua New Guinea. You don't need to be on the front line, though, to get a sense that our planet is spinning out of control, right? There's this feeling that international instability is the new normal. But I want you to take a closer look, and I think you'll see that the geography of violence is changing, because it's not so much our nation states that are gripped by conflict and crime as our cities: Aleppo, Bamako, Caracas, Erbil, Mosul, Tripoli, Salvador. Violence is migrating to the metropole.
我一直在關心這個問題, 過去 20 年來,我工作的國家和城市 充斥著衝突、動亂或恐怖主義, 甚者樣樣皆有; 我曾經由俄羅斯到索馬利亞 追蹤過軍火走私者、 與阿富汗以及剛果的軍閥共事過、 在哥倫比亞、海地、斯里蘭卡、 巴布亞紐幾內亞等地計算過屍體。 縱使你不在第一線上 也會感覺到地球正迅速失控吧, 感覺到國際動盪是新常態。 不過請大家仔細觀察, 就會發現暴亂的地理位置正在改變, 因為深陷衝突和犯罪的 並不是我們的國家, 而是城市:阿勒坡、巴馬科、加拉加斯、 埃比爾、摩蘇爾、的黎波里、薩爾瓦多。 暴力正向大都市遷移。
And maybe this is to be expected, right? After all, most people today, they live in cities, not the countryside. Just 600 cities, including 30 megacities, account for two thirds of global GDP. But when it comes to cities, the conversation is dominated by the North, that is, North America, Western Europe, Australia and Japan, where violence is actually at historic lows. As a result, city enthusiasts, they talk about the triumph of the city, of the creative classes, and the mayors that will rule the world. Now, I hope that mayors do one day rule the world, but, you know, the fact is, we don't hear any conversation, really, about what is happening in the South. And by South, I mean Latin America, Africa, Asia, where violence in some cases is accelerating, where infrastructure is overstretched, and where governance is sometimes an aspiration and not a reality.
也許這是預料中之事,對吧? 畢竟現今絕大多數人住在城市 而不是鄉間, 600個城市——包括30個巨型城市, 就佔了全球GDP的三分之二。 不過當說到城市的時候, 話題大都由北部地區主導, 所謂北部地區, 是指北美、西歐、澳洲和日本, 這些地方暴動確實是史上的低點; 因此,城市的熱衷者聊的是 城市的勝利、創新階級的勝利、 說市長們將會管治世界。 我希望市長們有天真會管治這世界, 不過事實是 我們沒有真正地聽到 南部地區的聲音和形勢。 所謂南部地區,我是指 拉丁美洲、非洲、亞洲 在這些地方,暴力不斷加劇, 基礎建設過度匱乏、 治理有時候只是抱負而非實事。
Now, some diplomats and development experts and specialists, they talk about 40 to 50 fragile states that will shape security in the 21st century. I think it's fragile cities which will define the future of order and disorder. That's because warfare and humanitarian action are going to be concentrated in our cities, and the fight for development, whether you define that as eradicating poverty, universal healthcare, beating back climate change, will be won or lost in the shantytowns, slums and favelas of our cities. I want to talk to you about four megarisks that I think will define fragility in our time, and if we can get to grips with these, I think we can do something with that lethal violence problem.
目前,一些外交官、 發展專家、專業人士在關注 會決定21世紀安全的 四五十個脆弱城市。 會決定21世紀安全的 四五十個脆弱城市。 我認為:這些脆弱城市 會直接決定未來的秩序和穩定。 因為戰爭和人道救助行動 即將要匯聚到我們的城市裡, 為發展而起的鬥爭, 無論是消滅貧窮、 普及醫療保健,還是擊退氣候變化, 成敗關鍵都在城市中的破屋、殘樓、貧民窟。 我要跟你們講四項巨大風險, 我認為將會決定這時代的脆弱性, 倘若我們能夠處理這些風險, 我們就可以解決致命暴力問題。
So let me start with some good news. Fact is, we're living in the most peaceful moment in human history. Steven Pinker and others have shown how the intensity and frequency of conflict is actually at an all-time low. Now, Gaza, Syria, Sudan, Ukraine, as ghastly as these conflicts are, and they are horrific, they represent a relatively small blip upwards in a 50-year-long secular decline. What's more, we're seeing a dramatic reduction in homicide. Manuel Eisner and others have shown that for centuries, we've seen this incredible drop in murder, especially in the West. Most Northern cities today are 100 times safer than they were just 100 years ago.
那麼我們先由好消息談起。 事實是我們正處在 人類歷史中最和平的時候, 「司提芬•朋克」等人表明 現今衝突的強度和頻率 實際上處於史上低點, 目前迦薩、敘利亞、蘇丹、烏克蘭 這些國家的衝突可怕恐怖, 在暴力持續下降50年之後, 現階段的暴力 只是一個相對較小的往上攀升的點。 再者是我們看到了謀殺大量的減少, 「曼紐沃‧艾斯納」等人證實了 我們看到數世紀以來 謀殺令人無法置信般地減少, 特別是在西方, 今天大多數的北方城市比 100 年前 還要更安全著 100 倍,
These two facts -- the decline in armed conflict and the decline in murder -- are amongst the most extraordinary, if unheralded, accomplishments of human history, and we should be really excited, right? Well, yeah, we should. There's just one problem: These two scourges are still with us. You see, 525,000 people -- men, women, boys and girls -- die violently every single year. Research I've been doing with Keith Krause and others has shown that between 50,000 and 60,000 people are dying in war zones violently. The rest, almost 500,000 people, are dying outside of conflict zones. In other words, 10 times more people are dying outside of war than inside war. What's more, violence is moving south, to Latin America and the Caribbean, to parts of Central and Southern Africa, and to bits of the Middle East and Central Asia. Forty of the 50 most dangerous cities in the world are right here in Latin America, 13 in Brazil, and the most dangerous of all, it's San Pedro Sula, Honduras' second city, with a staggering homicide rate of 187 murders per 100,000 people. That's 23 times the global average.
武裝衝突減少了, 謀殺犯罪減少了, 也許曠古未有, 是人類歷史最了不起的成就, 我們應該為此感到興奮,對吧? 沒錯是要的。 就只有一個問題: 這兩項災禍始終還不放過我們。 知道嗎,每年有52.5萬人, 不分男女老少,慘死於暴力, 我與凱斯‧克勞斯等人 做的研究指出 介於五至六萬人慘死於戰爭區, 其餘大約50萬人死於衝突區域之外。 換言之,十倍之多人死於戰爭外 而非其中, 更甚者是暴亂往南方移動, 來到拉丁美洲和加勒比海、 非洲中部及南部的地方、 又襲擊到中東和中亞。 世界上五十個最危險的城市, 有四十個正是在拉丁美洲這邊; 十三個在巴西, 當中最危險的是宏都拉斯的 第二大城市「聖佩德羅蘇拉」, 有著非常駭人的謀殺率, 每一萬人就有 187 人死於他殺, 是世界平均值的23倍。
Now, if violence is re-concentrating geographically, it's also being reconfigured to the world's new topography, because when it comes to cities, the world ain't flat, like Thomas Friedman likes to say. It's spiky. The dominance of the city as the primary mode of urban living is one of the most extraordinary demographic reversals in history, and it all happened so fast. You all know the figures, right? There's 7.3 billion people in the world today; there will be 9.6 billion by 2050. But consider this one fact: In the 1800s, one in 30 people lived in cities, today it's one in two, and tomorrow virtually everyone is going to be there. And this expansion in urbanization is going to be neither even nor equitable. The vast majority, 90 percent, will be happening in the South, in cities of the South.
如果暴力正在重新地理定位, 它亦正按世界新地形 重新定形, 因為對於城市來說, 地球不是平的, 就像湯瑪士‧佛烈曼常說。 世界是尖的。 城市至上 成為了城市生活主要方式, 這是歷史上最不尋常的人口結構逆轉之一, 而且這全都發生得太快, 大家都知道這些數字,對吧? 今天世界上有73億人, 到2050年世界將有96億人。 不過請考量這個事實, 在十九世紀,30個人當中 有1個人是住在城市裡, 在今天每兩人中會有一個是住在都市裡, 未來肯定是每個人都會住在都市裡; 城市化的擴張 既不會均等,也不會公平。 90%的城市變遷擴張 會發生在南部地區, 在南部的城市。
So urban geographers and demographers, they tell us that it's not necessarily the size or even the density of cities that predicts violence, no. Tokyo, with 35 million people, is one of the largest, and some might say safest, urban metropolises in the world. No, it's the speed of urbanization that matters. I call this turbo-urbanization, and it's one of the key drivers of fragility.
所以都市地理學和人口統計學的學者們 告訴我們:一個城市的大小或密度 不一定會造成暴力,不一定。 東京有三千五百萬人口, 是最大的、有些人還可能會說是 最安全的都會型城市之一。 都市化的速度才是關鍵, 我叫它「渦輪式都市化」, 這是脆弱的關鍵導因之一,
When you think about the incredible expansion of these cities, and you think about turbo-urbanization, think about Karachi. Karachi was about 500,000 people in 1947, a hustling, bustling city. Today, it's 21 million people, and apart from accounting for three quarters of Pakistan's GDP, it's also one of the most violent cities in South Asia. Dhaka, Lagos, Kinshasa, these cities are now 40 times larger than they were in the 1950s.
當你在想這些城市不合理的擴張、 想想看「渦輪都市化」, 想一下喀拉蚩吧, 喀拉蚩在1947年約有50萬人, 是一個繁忙的城市。 今天它有兩千一百萬人口, 佔有巴基斯坦GDP的三分之四, 它還是南亞最暴亂的城市之一。 達卡、拉哥斯、金夏沙等, 這些城市比起 1950 年時要大40倍;
Now take a look at New York. The Big Apple, it took 150 years to get to eight million people. São Paulo, Mexico City, took 15 to reach that same interval.
現在來看看紐約, 「大蘋果」用了150 年才有八百萬人, 墨西哥的聖保羅市花了 15 年達到一樣的人口級距,
Now, what do these medium, large, mega-, and hypercities look like? What is their profile? Well, for one thing, they're young. What we're seeing in many of them is the rise of the youth bulge. Now, this is actually a good news story. It's a function of reductions in child mortality rates. But the youth bulge is something we've got to watch. What it basically means is the proportion of young people living in our fragile cities is much larger than those living in our healthier and wealthier ones. In some fragile cities, 75 percent of the population is under the age of 30. Think about that: Three in four people are under 30. It's like Palo Alto on steroids. Now, if you look at Mogadishu for example, in Mogadishu the mean age is 16 years old. Ditto for Dhaka, Dili and Kabul. And Tokyo? It's 46. Same for most Western European cities. Now, it's not just youth that necessarily predicts violence. That's one factor among many, but youthfulness combined with unemployment, lack of education, and -- this is the kicker -- being male, is a deadly proposition. They're statistically correlated, all those risk factors, with youth, and they tend to relate to increases in violence.
如今這些中型、大型、巨型, 以及超級城市是怎麼樣貌呢? 這些城市是什麼樣子? 首先,這些城市都很年輕。 許多這些城市都出現年輕人口膨脹。 這算是好消息。 因為這意味著幼兒死亡率下降了。 但是年輕人口膨脹,我們得小心看待。 它基本上代表麼呢? 生活在脆弱城市中的年輕人比例 比其他更健康富裕的城市的比例要高得多。 在某些脆弱的城市裡, 75%人口年齡在30歲以下, 想想看每 4 個人就有 3 個人不到 30 歲, 那就像是打了類固醇的「帕羅奧圖」市 (美國加州之城市) 看看摩加迪休——東非索馬利首都 在摩加迪休,平均年齡是16歲, 達卡、帝力、喀布爾等也是如此, 東京呢?平均年齡46歲! 大部分西歐城市亦一樣。 不是年輕人多就會帶來暴力。 那是許多因素的其中一項, 但如果年輕,再加上失業、缺乏教育, 最要不得的是作為男性, 這是一個最致命的前提, 這些因素都是統計學上的相關因素 這些風險因素發生在青年身上, 會使暴力發生率上升。
Now, for those of you who are parents of teenage sons, you know what I'm talking about, right? Just imagine your boy without any structure with those unruly friends of his, out there cavorting about. Now, take away the parents, take away the education, limit the education possibilities, sprinkle in a little bit of drugs, alcohol and guns, and sit back and watch the fireworks. The implications are disconcerting. Right here in Brazil, the life expectancy is 73.6 years. If you live in Rio, I'm sorry, shave off two right there. But if you're young, you're uneducated, you lack employment, you're black, and you're male, your life expectancy drops to less than 60 years old. There's a reason why youthfulness and violence are the number one killers in this country.
在座如果有兒子處於青少年階段, 就會懂我的意思。 想像你的男孩一點規矩也沒有, 與那些不受管束的朋友一起, 四處闖鬧。 再想像他們沒有了父母, 沒有受到教育, 教育機會受到限制, 加一點毒品、酒水、槍械進來, 想想他們會變成什麼樣子。 後果可能是不堪設想的。 在巴西這邊 預期壽命是73.6歲, 如果你住在里約熱內盧的話 抱歉,減兩歲。 但是如果你是年輕人、沒唸過書、 找不到工作、黑人、又是男性, 你的預期壽命要下降到60歲以下, 年輕和暴力是這個國家的頭號殺手, 這是有原因的。
Okay, so it's not all doom and gloom in our cities. After all, cities are hubs of innovation, dynamism, prosperity, excitement, connectivity. They're where the smart people gather. And those young people I just mentioned, they're more digitally savvy and tech-aware than ever before. And this explosion, the Internet, and mobile technology, means that the digital divide separating the North and the South between countries and within them, is shrinking. But as we've heard so many times, these new technologies are dual-edged, right? Take the case of law enforcement. Police around the world are starting to use remote sensing and big data to anticipate crime. Some cops are able to predict criminal violence before it even happens. The future crime scenario, it's here today, and we've got to be careful. We have to manage the issues of the public safety against rights to individual privacy.
我們的城市並不全然都是厄運和絕望, 畢竟城市是創新的溫床, 充滿活力、前景、刺激、人際關係。 它們是有腦筋的人的聚集之地, 還有那些我剛提到的年輕人, 他們比以前所有的人還要 更精通數位、瞭解科技, 科技爆炸、網路、移動通信技術 使南北部地區國家之間的 數位技術差異逐步縮小, 也使國內的數碼技術差異 逐步縮小。 不過就如同我們常聽到的, 這些新科技是雙面刃, 拿執法來舉例。 全球的警察開始使用 遙感技術和海量數據來預測犯罪。 一些警察能夠在犯罪發生前 就預測到罪犯的暴力行為。 將來犯罪的場景, 今天可以預見, 我們得要小心注意, 我們必須協調好公共安全問題 防止個人隱私權利受到侵害。 不過不只是警察們在革新,
But it's not just the cops who are innovating. We've heard extraordinary activities of civil society groups who are engaging in local and global collective action, and this is leading to digital protest and real revolution. But most worrying of all are criminal gangs who are going online and starting to colonize cyberspace. In Ciudad Juárez in Mexico, where I've been working, groups like the Zetas and the Sinaloa cartel are hijacking social media. They're using it to recruit, to sell their products, to coerce, to intimidate and to kill. Violence is going virtual.
我們也聽過社會公民團體卓越的行動, 參與了當地和國際串聯行動, 那帶來了數位化的抗議和真實的革命。 不過最令人擔憂的是 犯罪團體利用網絡 開始侵略網絡空間。 在我工作的墨西哥華雷斯城, 像是「賽塔斯」和「錫那羅亞」 這些卡特爾組織團體 正控制著社群媒體, 他們利用社交媒體來招兵買馬, 販賣他們的產品, 脅迫、恐嚇和殺害他人。 暴亂正要進入虛擬化,
So this is just a partial sketch of a fast-moving and dynamic and complex situation. I mean, there are many other megarisks that are going to define fragility in our time, not least income inequality, poverty, climate change, impunity. But we're facing a stark dilemma where some cities are going to thrive and drive global growth and others are going to stumble and pull it backwards. If we're going to change course, we need to start a conversation. We can't only focus on those cities that work, the Singapores, the Kuala Lumpurs, the Dubais, the Shanghais. We've got to bring those fragile cities into the conversation.
現今形勢多變複雜 這不過是其中一面。 巨大風險還有許多, 並且會直接影響我們時代的脆弱性, 也會影響當今的收入不均、 貧窮、氣候變化、 罪犯逍遙法外等問題。 但我們面臨著一個嚴峻的窘境: 有些城市會繁榮發展 促進全球的進步, 但也有城市會障礙重重 拉大家的後腿。 想要改變結局, 我們就必需開始新對話, 我們不能只注重那些成功的城市: 像新加坡、吉隆坡、 杜拜、上海等等, 我們要與脆弱城市對話。
One way to do this might be to start twinning our fragile cities with our healthier and wealthier ones, kickstarting a process of learning and collaboration and sharing of practices, of what works and what doesn't. A wonderful example of this is coming from El Salvador and Los Angeles, where the mayors in San Salvador and Los Angeles are collaborating on getting ex-gang members to work with current gang members, offering tutoring, education, and in the process are helping incubate cease-fires and truces, and we've seen homicide rates go down in San Salvador, once the world's most violent city, by 50 percent. We can also focus on hot cities, but also hot spots. Place and location matter fundamentally in shaping violence in our cities. Did you know that between one and two percent of street addresses in any fragile city can predict up to 99 percent of violent crime? Take the case of São Paulo, where I've been working. It's gone from being Brazil's most dangerous city to one of its safest, and it did this by doubling down on information collection, hot spot mapping, and police reform, and in the process, it dropped homicide by 70 percent in just over 10 years. We also got to focus on those hot people. It's tragic, but being young, unemployed, uneducated, male, increases the risks of being killed and killing. We have to break this cycle of violence and get in there early with our children, our youngest children, and valorize them, not stigmatize them. There's wonderful work that's happening that I've been involved with in Kingston, Jamaica and right here in Rio, which is putting education, employment, recreation up front for these high-risk groups, and as a result, we're seeing violence going down in their communities.
方法之一可以是 將我們較健康富有的城市 與較脆弱的城市配對, 展開學習與合作的過程, 分享經驗,成功與失敗的經驗。 一個很好的例子是 薩爾瓦多和洛杉磯。 聖薩爾瓦多市長和洛杉磯市長攜手合作 讓從前的幫派份子與 現在的幫派份子協力合作, 給予他們引導與教育, 在這個過程中幫助催生了 停火和休戰協定, 聖薩爾瓦多的兇殺率顯著下降了, 過去世界上最暴力的城市, 兇殺率下降五成。 我們也可以關注熱門城市、熱門地點。 地點對城市暴力形成有著根本影響。 你是否知道在任一脆弱城市裡 1 - 2%的街道地址 可以預知到 99 %的暴力違法, 以我工作過的聖保羅市為例, 它從巴西最危險的城市變成最安全的, 它做到如此是透過加倍於 資訊蒐集、熱點標誌、警政改革等, 僅 10 年過程中 降低了70 %的謀殺率, 我們也鎖定了那些鋒頭人物。 年輕、失業、無教育、男性 雖然不幸,但卻可增加 被人殺害或殺害他人的機率。 我們必須打斷這個暴力的循環, 盡早與兒童和青年相處, 給予認可 而非將他們冠上惡名。 最近我在致力的一項工作 在牙買加的金士頓市, 還有里約這裡, 把教育、工作、娛樂 帶給這些高風險人群, 因此這些社區的暴力下降了。
We've also got to make our cities safer, more inclusive, and livable for all. The fact is, social cohesion matters. Mobility matters in our cities. We've got to get away from this model of segregation, exclusion, and cities with walls. My favorite example of how to do this comes from Medellín. When I lived in Colombia in the late 1990s, Medellín was the murder capital of the world, but it changed course, and it did this by deliberately investing in its low-income and most violent areas and integrating them with the middle-class ones through a network of cable cars, of public transport, and first-class infrastructure, and in the process, it dropped homicide by 79 percent in just under two decades.
我們也發現城市變得 更加安全,更加包容,更加宜居。 事實是社會的團結很關鍵, 流動性在我們的城市很關鍵, 我們必須要讓我們的城市 遠離種族隔離、排斥他人的模式。 一個很好的例子是麥德林。 90 年代末期時我住在哥倫比亞, 麥德林是當時世界經典的兇殺城市, 但是這個城市後來改變了, 因為刻意投資在低收入高暴力的地區 與中等區域相整合, 通過纜車網絡的接駁、 大眾交通的聯繫、 一流基礎設施的投入, 該城市在此二十年內 兇殺率下降79%。
And finally, there's technology. Technology has enormous promise but also peril. We've seen examples here of extraordinary innovation, and much of it coming from this room, The police are engaging in predictive analytics. Citizens are engaging in new crowdsourcing solutions. Even my own group is involved in developing applications to provide more accountability over police and increase safety among citizens. But we need to be careful.
最後還有科技, 科技具有絕佳的榮景, 也有巨大的危害。 我們在此見過不少了不起的創新例子, 絕大部分是出自於這裡; 警察參與了預測分析、 市民致力於新的公眾解決方案。 我自己的隊伍也在開發程序, 提供更多可信破案資訊, 為市民帶來更多安全。 可是我們得謹慎小心,
If I have one single message for you, it's this: There is nothing inevitable about lethal violence, and we can make our cities safer. Folks, we have the opportunity of a lifetime to drop homicidal violence in half within our lifetime. So I have just one question: What are we waiting for?
如果我可以向您傳達一個訊息,那會是: 致命的暴亂沒有說是不可避免的, 我們可以讓我們的城市更安全, 在座各位,我們現在有機會 在我們有生之年 將兇殺率減少一半。 所以我只有一個問題: 我們還在等什麼?
Thank you.
謝謝你們!
(Applause)
(掌聲)