in a very different world from before. Information flows instantly around the globe and emerging technologies have boosted the influence of new players and new types of warfare. At the same time, past warnings of potential environmental catastrophes have begun to be borne out, yet insufficient progress has been made – as reflected in the high concerns about failure of climate-change adaptation and looming water crises in this year’s report.

new concepts designed for uncertain environments. If global risks are not effectively addressed, their social, economic and political fallouts could be far-reaching, as exempli ed by the continuing impacts of the nancial crisis of 2007-2008.
The systemic nature of our most signi cant risks calls for procedures and institutions that are globally coordinated yet locally exible. As international systems of nance, supply chains, health, energy, the Internet and the environment become more complex and interdependent, their level of resilience determines whether they become bulwarks of global stability or ampli ers of cascading shocks. Strengthening resilience requires overcoming collective action challenges through international cooperation among business, government and civil society.

One reason for this is that global risks do not fit neatly into existing conceptual frameworks. Fortunately, this is changing. The Harvard Business Review recently published a concise and practical taxonomy that may also be used to consider global risks.1 There are three types of risks as categorized by Professors Kaplan and Mikes.(Kaplan, R.S. & Mikes, A. Managing Risks: A New Framework. In Harvard Business Review, 2012)
First are “preventable” risks, such as breakdowns in processes and mistakes by employees. Second are “strategic” risks, which a company undertakes voluntarily, having weighed them against the potential rewards. Third are “external” risks, which this report calls “global risks”; they are complex and go beyond a company’s scope to manage and mitigate (i.e. they are exogenous in nature). This differentiation will, we hope, not only improve strategic planning and decision-making but also increase the utility of our report in private and public sector institutions.

We need to explore and develop new conceptual models which address global challenges. It is in this spirit that I present the World Economic Forum’s Global Risks 2012 report. Now in its seventh edition, the report features more refined risk descriptions and rigorous data analysis covering 50 global risks. It aims to improve public and private
sector efforts to map, monitor, manage and mitigate global risks. It is also a “call to action” for the international community to improve current efforts at coordination and collaboration, as none of the global risks highlighted respects national boundaries.
This report captures the input of risk leaders in thought and practice, including members of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Councils. It is also underpinned by the support and guidance of all the partners of the Risk Response Network. Underlying all these risks are velocity, multiplicity, and interconnectivity – creating a global system where mastering complexities will be the foremost challenge. The more complex the system, the greater the risk of systemic breakdown, but also the greater the potential for opportunity. Together, we have the foresight and collaborative spirit to shape our global future and particularly the survival instinct to move from pure urgency-driven risk management to more collaborative efforts aimed at strengthening risk resilience to the benefit of global society.

Global Risks 2011, Sixth Edition provides a highlevel overview of 37 selected global risks as seen by members of the World Economic Forum’s Global Agenda Councils and supported by a survey of 580 leaders and decision-makers around the world. The report also benefits from the expertise and thought leadership of the World Economic Forum’s Global
Risk Partners: Marsh & McLennan Companies, Swiss Reinsurance Company, Wharton Center for Risk Management, University of Pennsylvania, and Zurich Financial ServicesThis report aims to enhance understanding of how a
comprehensive set of global risks are evolving, how their interaction impacts a variety of stakeholders, and what trade-offs are involved in managing them.
Global Risks 2011, Sixth Edition is a useful tool for policy-makers, CEOs, senior executives and thought leaders around the world. It aims to equip institutions to understand and respond to global risks and to embrace change as a source of innovation. Most importantly, I hope that focusing on the critical connections between key global risks, stakeholders
and decision-makers will inspire all to engage collectively in efforts to improve the global system’s overall resilience.
At the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2011 in Davos-Klosters, the Forum will go beyond its current global risk work in launching the Risk Response Network (RRN). The RRN will build on the understanding embodied in Global Risks 2011, Sixth Edition to provide a platform for our Partners and constituents to collaborate in multistakeholder efforts
to shape a more secure, innovative and resilient future.

Il 39% delle imprese prevede di incrementare il personale da mandare all'estero nei prossimi cinque anni, contro il 13% che lo ha fatto nell'ultimo biennio caratterizzato, appunto, dalla crisi. La globalizzazione «costringe le aziende a rivedere la propria strategia di localizzazione nonchè la gestione delle risorse umane e delle proprietà immobiliari», sottolinea Mark Dixon, Ceo di Regus, sponsor dello studio, che prosegue: «a livello mondiale, la necessità di manodopera mobile e flessibile mette in evidenza la sfida che si deve affrontare nel proporre un'infrastruttura lavorativa adeguata e a un costo ragionevole».
Il trend emergente vede l'Asia come principale destinazione, soprattutto la Cina, 35%, altri paesi del continente (esclusi India e Giappone), 32%, India, 16%. Quest'ultima è anche molto gettonata come paese di provenienza dei collaboratori da inviare all'estero, 21%, dietro solo all'Europa Occidentale, 60% e agli Usa, 56%. I cinesi, invece, espatriano solo nel 9% dei casi, così come i giapponesi. Europa e America si confermano a loro volta come mete di trasferte, rispettavemente 29% e 25%. Destinazioni ricorrenti sono anche il Medio Oriente, la Russia, l'Europa dell'Est. Sotto il 10% Giappone, Africa, Brasile e America Latina.
Nella maggioranza dei casi, 53%, l'incarico del dirigente dura da due a cinque anni, ma sono in aumento trasferte a breve termine (17% fra uno e due anni, 8% meno di un anno).
Nel passato un incarico internazionale veniva in genere affidato a un manager di lunga esperienza, oggi vengono scelte anche persone più giovani, soluzione fra l'altro meno costosa. Cresce però, in generale, l'importanza che il manager dà al consenso del consorte e alla possibilità di stare vicino ai figli.
Il 73% dei manager ritiene che la qualità più importante per lavorare fuori sede sia la "sensibilità culturale", seguita dalle precedenti esperienze di soggiorni, lavorativi e non, all'estero, 39%, dall'abilità di leadership attraverso l'esempio, 38%, e dalla padronanza delle lingue straniere, 32%. Seguono la capacità di lavorare in gruppo, di operare in contesti difficili o emergenti.

Business travel is increasing in range and frequency, with the need to seek new markets and lower production costs in ever more remote places. This exposes both employees and employers to greater risks. Away from familiar surroundings, employees may encounter precarious environments, presenting increased and unfamiliar threats to their health, safety, and security. This heightens the corporate liability of employers, who have a legal, fiduciary, and moral Duty of Care for their employees.
MNCs risk liability for breaching not only the laws of the country(s) in which they operate and in which their employee(s) are nationals or permanent residents, but also those laws in the countries to which their employees travel on business or live as expatriates. The liability can arise under civil codes, statutes, and common law and may result in civil damages or in criminal fines - even imprisonment.

Frequent business travel is time-consuming, tiring, stressful and fraught with potential medical and health pitfalls.While all travel can be stressful, business travel can be especially so: it can involve multiple flights over many time zones, changes in food, culture and host environment, not to mention separation from a family support structure coupled with the need to achieve certain tasks within specified timescales. Quite apart from the potential risks to employee health and safety, travel-related ill health costs our industry millions of dollars in lost time every year. Following the simple guidance given in this document will help with forward planning for travel and, specifically, will help you to effectively manage the potential for health complications, be more relaxed and productive while you are away, and acclimatize better and faster on your return.

As the turmoil settles and the worldwide financial future unfolds, governments, regulators, and the business community will increasingly work together on the great issues of the day—economic recovery, new governance models, climate change, technology advances. But how will businesses adapt to the “new normal” and what talent will they need to operate in this collaborative global environment? In the next 10 years we believe companies will have an even greater need to deploy their talent around the world, and as a consequence, international assignment levels and overall mobility will
increase significantly (see maps on pages 18 and 19).
Having access to the best talent continues to be a challenge for CEOs and business leaders—with 97% of CEOs in PwC’s annual global CEO survey saying that having the right talent is the most critical factor for their business growth. In addition, 79% of CEOs said they would be changing their strategies for managing talent as a result of the downturn—and 55% said they would look to change their approach to global mobility including international secondments. In the wake of a foreseeable upturn, the winners and losers of the next decade will be defined by those who are able to attract, retain, and deploy their key talent globally. The sentiments outlined above are well aligned with the key findings of this report:
• Our data reveals that assignee levels have increased by 25% over the last decade; we predict a further 50% growth in assignments by 2020. There will be more assignees, more business travel, more virtual tools, and especially more quick, short term, and commuter assignments.
• The growing importance of emerging markets will create a significant shift in mobility patterns, as skilled employees from emerging markets increasingly operate across their home continent and beyond, creating greater diversity in the global talent pool
• Mobility strategies will need to become more sophisticated and complex as organisations meet growing deployment demands, while simultaneously managing the very different needs and expectations of three generations of workers.
• Governments and regulators will accept the economic benefits of talent mobility to stimulate economic growth. This acceptance will lead to greater collaboration between governments and businesses, and within the business community, to remove some of the barriers to mobility around the world.
• The millennial generation will view overseas assignments as a rite of passage, an outlook that will change the way workers and organisations approach overseas opportunities in the future.
• Organisations will adopt “destination pay and local plus” remuneration methodologies as compensation levels across some skill sets and industries will begin to harmonise across the globe.
• Technology will play a key role in global working arrangements and help to support compliance obligations; however technology will not erode the need to have people deployed “on the ground”.
The nature of overseas assignments has changed significantly since the 1970s. Businesses, like the population, will continue to adjust their operations, nature and geographic location of the workforce, as well as their fundamental structure and roles. We will see a shift from country-based multinationals to global multinationals, and a change in how and where business operates.
How your organisation responds to these rapid changes will be critical. Business and mobilisation strategies will need to progress quickly to keep ahead of both changes in the organisation’s geographic landscape, and the further increases in assignee numbers that will result.
How will your business operate in this new environment? What talent will you need to compete, and how will you safeguard your talent pipeline for the long term? The winners of 2020 will be those companies that adjust their strategies now.

Courageous humanitarian workers struggle every day to reach, against all odds, civilians in some thirty armed conflicts and the affected in the numerous natural disasters that occur each year. Much has been done to improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and security of humanitarian operations. In many desperate situations inadequate political and security measures fail to address the root causes of the crisis and life-saving relief is often the only expression of compassion with those who suffer at humanity’s frontlines.
Because humanitarian work has become so widespread and so visible, peoples all over the world now expect that the needy should get immediate relief when conflict or disasters strike. All major religions, ideologies, and humanistic
philosophies prescribe that the sick, the suffering, and the starved should be helped irrespective of race, creed or culture.
But this expectation, shared by heads of state and the public at large, that humanitarians will rush to the neediest irrespective of circumstances, is not supported by a corresponding unconditional political and military support for the basic humanitarian principles that are a precondition for secure and unrestricted access by our impartial humanitarian workers.
Humanitarian action is under attack, but neither governments, parties to armed conflicts, nor other influential actors are doing enough to come to its relief. On the contrary, those who control territory, funding, or simply the closest guns are too often allowed to harass, politicise, militarise and undermine humanitarian action with impunity.
As this report details, much can be done to break the vicious cycle in which humanitarians are attacked and blocked and victims in wars and disasters suffer unassisted. Those who attack or hinder the right to assist needy people must be held accountable for their breaches of international law. Humanitarian organisations must become more professional, more disciplined and more principled in how they act and how they enforce principles and standards in high risk circumstances. More resources for security measures are needed, especially among local non-governmental groups and national staff members.
The UN and all non-UN humanitarian leadership must more vigorously defend their rights of humanitarian initiative and access as well as the security of their front-line staff. And humanitarian organisations that are willing to become tools for political agendas and compromise fundamental and inherited humanitarian principles for easy money must face greater peer pressure.
Again and again, as Emergency Relief Coordinator I saw how unhindered humanitarian action, or lack of such, is measured in human lives. I also saw ix that much can be done if humanitarian groups learn from each other, from
their good practices and their hard won lessons.
This report, with its truly unique documentation and world-wide input, is an invaluable tool to protect and promote humanitarian action in the most difficult of circumstances. We are indebted to Abby Stoddard and Adele Harmer, with
their extensive expertise on humanitarian security challenges, for working so hard in preparing this important report. Seldom, if ever, have so many humanitarian workers been consulted to give their views on how lifesaving humanitarianism under attack can be better protected.
We hope for follow up. Still, in this new millennium, men, women, and children in desperate need are denied assistance and relief workers who wish to help are attacked and denied access. This trend must be stopped.
Governments must be reminded that they have obligations under international law.