What COVID19 can teach us about resilience
Transcriber: Eunice Tan
Reviewer: Peter Van de Ven
Jeremy Duhon: Colorado
started out in March
with amongst the highest number
of COVID-19 cases.
And since then, the state
has worked hard to bring them down.
I’m joined by the founder
of Geospiza, Sarah Tuneberg,
who was called by the governor
earlier this year
to lead Colorado’s Coronavirus
Innovation Response Team.
Sarah, it’s a pleasure
to have you with us today.
Now, you moved from the private sector
to a critical role
in government oversight.
Tell us about what’s been
most eye-opening so far.
Sarah Tuneberg: I did.
So after a career in emergency
management and public health,
I cofounded a company
that worked with very large companies
to help them manage
and plan for climate change
and really manage
their climate risk and reduce it.
And so moving into this role
in the government
has been incredibly interesting
because I feel like my learning
has really gone full circle.
In my role in Geospiza,
leading that team
and working with our customers,
we were always striving
towards resilience.
We were helping them
have more resilient supply chains,
more resilient revenue models.
And I had this sort of idea
that perhaps resilience and efficiency
were two sides of the same coin.
And in my new role at the state,
working on COVID,
I’ve really seen that manifest,
and I’ve seen it come really full circle.
I’ve seen it on the private sector side
and now seeing how
it really affects government
and our taxpayers and all of us.
JD: That’s interesting.
I’d love to hone in
on that trade-off a bit more.
So what’s a specific example
of how efficiency can actually
make us less resilient?
ST: So one of the most
interesting examples
that I’ve seen specifically in COVID
is that in March, as we started
experiencing more and more disease,
we had huge disruptions
in our meat processing capabilities.
So, in meat processing facilities,
people work very, very close together -
good for efficiency,
not great for disease transmission.
Well, actually, really great
for disease transmission,
but that’s not what we want.
And so in the early days of COVID,
people were working very close together
in meat processing facilities,
and we had our first series
of outbreaks in the United States.
And the system of factory farming
that makes the meat we eat
is so efficient that any hitch
or any sort of slowdown,
as we saw because plants had to close
because they had outbreaks,
backs up the entire system.
And in Colorado and, again,
states across the Midwest and West,
we saw huge numbers of animals
being unable to be moved
into that processing capacity -
not enough room on farms and ranches -
and those animals,
in the tens of thousands,
had to be slaughtered.
And it was doubly terrible because
it was a time when millions of people
were losing their jobs because of COVID
and going to food banks,
and we had all of this excess capacity
in our meat system,
and then taxpayers had to fund
the disposal of all of those carcasses.
So the system that was so efficient
couldn’t absorb any of the shock or slack,
and it became hugely problematic.
JD: Yeah, it’s really devastating
in a lot of ways.
Why do companies and individuals
really struggle to understand
this need for resiliency?
I mean, is it the long-term aspect of it?
I mean, why don’t we do a better job
when it comes to this trade-off?
ST: I’m still really trying
to understand that myself,
but I have a couple of hypotheses.
The first is that we emphasize
lean, mean businesses
that really squeeze every bit of profit
and every cent out of every dollar we can.
And in doing that,
we create systems that are just-in-time,
that are ultra, ultraefficient.
And we don’t leave any slack,
we don’t leave any squish
because we want every bit
of profit we can get.
And that leaves us
in a really very vulnerable state.
Another interesting example
is that as Hurricane Maria destroyed
Puerto Rico a couple of years back,
we lost access to 10
of our top prescribed drugs.
Because our systems were so efficient
and our processing capability
was so centralized -
because that allowed us to take advantage
of highly trained workers
and really efficient shipping systems -
that when Maria wiped out those factories,
the whole world lost access
to really important drugs.
So we see this over and over again,
and we’re going to see it more.
JD: Yeah, that example makes me think,
Is this a common, I mean,
is it a uniform problem
across the entire world
or are there certain countries
that really struggle more
with this long-term thinking
and this need for resiliency?
ST: I think we see it especially
in well-developed Western economies,
Western democratic economies,
where we emphasize profit
and we emphasize being really efficient,
like I said.
And we don’t just see it
sort of across the globe,
we see it across all of our systems.
So in addition to seeing it manifest
in large corporations
and in our governments,
we also really experience it
a lot of times in our individual families.
We’ve seen in the statistics
that very few people have enough savings
to cover a broken arm
and the insurance cost that that might be
or a car accident
and having to pay that premium.
We just don’t give ourselves
a lot of slack.
And as as a result,
we don’t absorb shock very well.
And we are in a time of incredible shock.
JD: Clearly, this is hugely important
right now during COVID-19.
How important is it going to be
to consider this in the future?
ST: It’s absolutely essential,
because what we’re seeing in COVID-19
is just the start of what we’re going
to see as a result of climate change.
We know that natural hazards
and weather phenomena
are increasing in frequency and severity.
And as we have more
and more people in the world,
the weather and our populations interact
in a way that becomes very dangerous.
So we need to start being incredibly
intentional and incredibly thoughtful
about how we build cushion and slack
and really resilient systems,
so that when we experience
a hurricane or a flood or a drought
or, God forbid, another pandemic,
which we think is likely,
we have the systems in place
so that 30 million people
don’t lose their jobs almost overnight
and that we don’t have to spend
1.6 million dollars in Colorado alone
to dispose of carcasses of animals
that were intended to be people’s food.
We need to create systems
that can absorb these challenges.
JD: What are some of the things
that we can do as individuals,
you know, as we move forward.
What’s some of the advice
you would have for everybody
as we think about the next few years?
ST: I think, as I said,
it’s a whole systems approach.
So on the individual level, thinking about
where your family’s challenges are
or where your weaknesses might be.
So that might look like
holding a little extra food
or saving a little extra money -
I realize that’s incredibly difficult,
especially in these incredibly
difficult economic times -
but creating more family resilience.
Also buying some food more locally,
having businesses locally that you support
so you’re not dependent
on these long supply chains.
And then businesses investing
and having a little extra capital around
so they don’t have to lay off everybody.
I recognize that investors
don’t always love that;
they want you to spend the money.
But we might need to invest in that -
in having some cushion,
having some capital.
And then the last thing is,
on the government side,
we need to elect politicians
who have smart growth policies
and resilient economic
and environmental policies.
And so we have to vote;
we have to vote for those things.
JD: Sarah, well, thank you
for sharing all that perspective.
That gives us all a lot that we can do
to help with, you know, really,
the next chapter in this trade-off
between resiliency and efficiency.
I hope we can continue the conversation,
but thank you for being here today,
and we’re so grateful for your work
in helping us get out
of this current situation we’re in.
ST: Thank you for having me.
JD: Thank you, Sarah.