Fragmenting consensus in a fragmenting world
The globalised world stands at a crossroads. International partnerships and multinational institutions are weakened, former allies are turning into competitors, and new alliances are emerging. This shift reflects a growing mismatch between the ever-evolving global distribution of power and the structures of our international systems and organisations.
Addressing this mismatch requires a deliberate renegotiation of multilateralism without undue delay, particularly where institutional rigidity prevents smooth adaptation to changing realities. However, the current moment of change is accompanied by an alarming breakdown of fundamental principles key to a sustainable and prosperous international community: shared humanitarian values, freedom of movement, free trade and strong multilateral organisations.
The disintegration of multilateral mechanisms goes hand in hand with the fragmentation of consensus on what constitutes facts, evidence, knowledge and who can provide them. Institutions once regarded as guardians of scientific integrity and evidence-informed recommendations are now under attack. If their basis in scientific evidence is replaced by ideology, they may even become sources of disinformation themselves.
Trusted information and trust in science
A further challenge to trustworthy and fact-checked information emerges from social media. Increasingly, the individual freedom of speech, even including misinformation and disinformation, is not balanced by proven and accepted information from academic and institutional bodies that follow strict requirements for the accuracy of information. The Covid-19 pandemic showed how such an environment can lead to the erosion of public trust. Personal experiences, worries and the lack of clear evidence created a platform for the spread of misinformation. This situation was exploited by malevolent actors who started disinformation campaigns motivated by commercial or political interests.
According to a Dutch proverb, ‘trust arrives on foot and leaves on horseback’. Without the willingness of politicians, health providers at all levels and the public to accept evidence provided by trusted sources on a solid factual basis jointly, global health suffers severe consequences. Consequently, people are falling victim to preventable diseases such as measles and campaigns against health insurance systems may leave millions without coverage. Preventing this and rebuilding trust require a joint effort by all players in international and national health systems, including academia, politics, the private sector and civil society.
Science as a basis for consensus
Science can play a unifying role. While academic activities are strongly influenced by their societal environment, scientific insights need to become independent of a political and cultural context as they are repeatedly examined, tested, and discarded or validated, in the quest to gradually approximate a universal ‘truth’. Such insights are represented in natural laws, which are, for example, not only the basis for all wireless communication (a fact that is accepted universally) but also for the human-made global climate crisis (which is denied by many). No person or society can argue with natural laws, and this should provide a basic consensus on which to build trust. To prevent and manage global challenges – such as pandemics, conflict and the climate crisis – societies and decision makers must thus understand and implement scientific evidence. To allow scientific insight to progress, policymakers and society must protect academic freedom as a public good.
Academic freedom and responsibility
Academic freedom is certainly not a licence for scientists to follow their own projects with public money without any responsibility for societal progress. It means freedom from ideological manipulation of results and their interpretation. History gives ample evidence that states that provide such academic freedom and reliable support for research are successful and more resilient to cope with unforeseen challenges. This requires sustained financial support for ambitious science projects as well as for societies and decision makers that translate scientific recommendations into action. In return, academia has the responsibility to improve research quality and uphold scientific protocols and standards. The scientific community relies on trust in its processes, its capacity for self-correction and the integrity of its practitioners.
Science communication
Academia and the media should become more invested in bidirectional communication with policymakers and civil society. The media plays a crucial role in making complex issues accessible and providing high-quality, trustworthy information for the public. Fact checking alone is not enough. What is needed is a cultural shift in the communication of scientific approaches and results – including uncertainties, possible mistakes and corrections. Scientists and journalists must work together to develop research communication that reaches beyond academic circles. People sometimes need reminders of the tangible benefits that science delivers for their daily lives. After all, humanity’s greatest achievements have always been built on trusted information and science.
Shared responsibility for global health
‘Building Trust for a Healthier World’ was the theme of last year’s World Health Summit. This year’s focus, ‘Taking Responsibility for Health in a Fragmenting World’, builds on that foundation. Both speak to our shared responsibility – as scientists, practitioners and citizens – to remain active and engaged for progress in an increasingly complex world. The World Health Summit is committed to fostering this process by providing the platform for generating and exchanging trustworthy information and by convening all who are engaged in assembling the fragments and laying stronger, more sustainable foundations for global health.
