Institutional independence
A forum is useful only if no participant, host, sponsor or donor can capture it. The Global Risks Forum (GRF) is a Swiss association with a public-good, not-for-profit purpose, governed by its statutory organs under its articles of association. It does not regulate, finance, procure, certify, underwrite, rate, invest or approve projects, so it has no such power to trade. This page sets out the safeguards designed to protect GRF's governance and the programme it leads from anyone who would try to buy influence: separated decisions, disclosed support, managed conflicts and open challenge.
- InstitutionThe Global Risks Forum (GRF)
- Service levelR0: information and enquiries
GRF · Institution · service level R0
The short answer.
Institutional independence at GRF rests on its form and its limits: a Swiss association governed by its statutory organs that does not regulate, finance, procure, certify, underwrite, rate, invest or approve projects, so it has no such power to trade. The page sets out safeguards that keep money apart from decisions.
Report to outcome.
Fig.How a reported error is reviewed and corrected. Design, not a record.
Jurisdictions in the Lake Chad Basin.
The jurisdictions that hold authority over this question: countries, their first-level divisions and capitals, shown for the Lake Chad Basin as an example geography for this subject.
Who governs GRF, and what does not.
Statutory organs
GRF is governed by its statutory organs under its articles of association. Any description of them is taken from the association's own records.
Councils do not govern
Councils are programme bodies through which institutions, leaders and experts take part. They do not replace or sit above statutory governance.
No borrowed status
GRF describes only its own relationships. Statuses held by The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI) or The Global Risks Alliance (GRA) never extend to GRF.
Questions anyone can ask of a GRF output.
- Who funded the activity that produced it, and on what terms?
- Who chose the question and the participants?
- Did any party review the record before participants did?
- Were interests declared, and by whom?
Each output is designed to answer these from its own record.
Money kept apart from decisions.
- Support is accepted only for a defined public-good purpose, under written terms, after a review of the supporter's interests.
- Support is disclosed as agreed and separated from agendas, the selection of participants and every finding.
- No donor, member, host or sponsor can buy a finding, an agenda item, an appointment or the removal of a stated limitation.
- Support that cannot be separated from influence is declined.
- Funding grants no ownership of the programme, its records or its results.
Rules that keep decisions clean.
| Rule | What it means in practice |
|---|---|
| Declare interests | Council members, reviewers, hosts and sponsors declare relevant interests before taking part |
| Recuse on conflict | A person with a declared conflict does not decide or sign the matter it concerns |
| Separated decisions | Convening and programme governance sit with GRF, evidence with GCRI, finance readiness with GRA, and every decision with the competent authority |
| No bought allocations | Neither membership nor sponsorship secures mission admission or computing |
| Named only with permission | Hosts, sponsors and partners are named only with written permission and a current record |
| Open challenge | Anyone may raise a concern about capture, without membership or payment |
Terms used on this page.
Each term as this page uses it. Where a standard-setting body defines the term, the wording follows that body.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Sponsor neutrality | The principle that a campaign's funder does not control its findings, claims or editorial decisions. |
| Regulatory capture | The situation in which a regulator comes to serve the interests of those it regulates rather than the public. |
| Conflict of interest | A situation in which financial, professional or personal interests could compromise, or appear to compromise, judgement in research or review. |
| Swiss association | A corporate body under the Swiss Civil Code formed for a non-commercial purpose, such as a scientific, cultural or charitable one, which acquires legal personality once its articles show the intention to exist as a corporate body. |
Where this page's references lead.
The bodies and documents this page is read against. Status and editions change; each link goes to the issuing body.
Questions and answers.
Is GRF part of GCRI or GRA?
Can a large donor shape GRF's priorities?
Does GRF hold any regulatory or diplomatic status?
Around GRF.
Start with an enquiry.
The current service level is R0: information and enquiries. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.