FT社評：以高標(biāo)準(zhǔn)看待扎克伯格的善舉

The pledge by Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, and his wife Priscilla Chan, to give at least $3bn over the next decade for medical research has justifiably received large numbers of “likes”, “loves” and “wows” on his social media site. It needs just a little nuance.

Facebook創(chuàng)始人馬克•扎克伯格(Mark Zuckerberg)和妻子普麗西拉•陳(Priscilla Chan)承諾，將在未來10年捐贈至少30億美元用于醫(yī)學(xué)研究，這理所當(dāng)然地在這家社交媒體網(wǎng)站上收獲了大量的“喜歡”(like)、“大愛”(love)和“哇”(wow)。只不過，我們需要對這件事看得再仔細(xì)一點(diǎn)。

The couple have every right to spend their fortune how they wish. Choosing philanthropy over personal luxury is admirable. It sets a powerful example for others to follow in donating money, expertise and time — from fellow billionaires, companies and individuals with far more modest means.

這對夫婦完全有權(quán)按照自己的意愿花掉他們的財(cái)富。選擇慈善而不是個(gè)人奢侈享受的舉動(dòng)令人欽佩。這一舉動(dòng)在獻(xiàn)出金錢、專業(yè)技能和時(shí)間方面，為其他人樹立了一個(gè)強(qiáng)有力的榜樣，包括與他一樣的億萬富翁、企業(yè)以及財(cái)力遠(yuǎn)不如他的個(gè)人。

The focus on medical research is also an excellent priority with global impact and high potential benefits. Ill health causes vast amounts of suffering, while disease and premature death are brakes on social and economic development around the world.

對醫(yī)學(xué)研究的關(guān)注也極好抓住了重點(diǎn)，有著全球影響以及極大的潛在好處。人們的健康不佳帶來了大量痛苦，疾病和早逝阻礙著全球的社會和經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展。

It is particularly smart to focus on bringing together scientists with engineers, to stress the importance of collaboration and sharing data, and to call for more science funding. Facebook’s expertise in bringing together disparate groups and individuals online could be a catalyst for identifying new ideas, partners for research and more efficient recruitment of patients for clinical trials.

尤其明智的是，他們關(guān)注于把科學(xué)家和工程師帶到一起，強(qiáng)調(diào)合作和數(shù)據(jù)共享的重要性，并呼吁對科學(xué)投入更多資金。Facebook擅長在線上將各種不同群體和個(gè)人帶到一起，這一優(yōu)勢可能會促進(jìn)人們發(fā)現(xiàn)新創(chuàng)意、找到研究合作伙伴，以及更有效地為臨床試驗(yàn)招募患者。

Just as important is the Zuckerbergs’ use of a limited liability partnership rather than a more rigid tax exempt foundation as the entity through which to give. This provides greater flexibility in deciding whether they provide grants or invest for profit in medical programmes.

同樣重要的是，扎克伯格利用有限責(zé)任公司作為捐贈的實(shí)體，而非更嚴(yán)格的可以減免稅收的慈善基金會。這讓他們可以更加靈活地決定是提供補(bǔ)助，還是對醫(yī)學(xué)項(xiàng)目進(jìn)行營利性投資。

There are a few caveats, however. First, while philanthropy is an excellent way to innovate, the fundamental role of the public sector in collecting and democratically distributing funding, including for medical research, is pivotal. Facebook and other companies should resist any aggressive tax avoidance that minimises taxable profits and reduces revenues to governments.

然而，這里有一些提醒。首先，盡管慈善是一種很好的創(chuàng)新方式，但公共部門在收集和民主地分配資金(包括用于醫(yī)學(xué)研究的資金)方面發(fā)揮的基礎(chǔ)性作用是至關(guān)重要的。Facebook和其他公司應(yīng)抵制任何將應(yīng)稅利潤降至最低并使政府收入減少的激進(jìn)避稅行為。

Second, they should also set a good example with high levels of transparency and accountability for their donations and the results they generate. That will help make future philanthropy more efficient, both for givers and grant-seekers.

其次，他們還應(yīng)在捐贈及其結(jié)果的高度透明和可問責(zé)方面樹立良好的榜樣。這將有助于讓未來的慈善對捐贈者和受捐者都更高效。

Third, while they are perfectly entitled to call their programme the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, philanthropy needs donors willing to co-operate. No one can begrudge them naming rights but there is a balance to be struck between strong personal branding and the need for wider collaboration and participation.

第三，盡管他們完全有權(quán)把這個(gè)項(xiàng)目叫作“陳-扎克伯格計(jì)劃”(Chan Zuckerberg Initiative)，但慈善需要愿意合作的其他捐贈者。沒有人能夠妒忌他們的命名權(quán)，但在高調(diào)的個(gè)人品牌和更廣泛合作、參與的必要性之間，他們需要找到平衡。

Finally, there is a risk of hubris, which in turn could lead to disillusionment and a loss of momentum. Bill Gates, who has spent billions of dollars over the past 15 years on global health, has yet to achieve the eradication of malaria or polio, let alone either a vaccine or a cure for HIV. Former US president Jimmy Carter’s 30-year campaign to wipe out Guinea worm disease is still not achieved, a reminder that goodwill alone cannot provide all the solutions.

最后，這里存在自大的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，進(jìn)而可能導(dǎo)致理想幻滅和動(dòng)力喪失。過去15年，比爾•蓋茨(Bill Gates)在全球健康領(lǐng)域花費(fèi)了數(shù)十億美元，也未能實(shí)現(xiàn)瘧疾或小兒麻痹的根除，更別提找到艾滋病疫苗或治愈良方了。美國前總統(tǒng)吉米•卡特(Jimmy Carter)用30年時(shí)間致力于掃除幾內(nèi)亞線蟲病，迄今這個(gè)目標(biāo)仍未實(shí)現(xiàn)——這提醒人們，僅憑良好愿望是無法解決所有問題的。

It would also be wrong to regard medical research as failing. Great progress has been made in recent decades in medicine, including new vaccines and treatments for cancer.

將醫(yī)學(xué)研究視為失敗也是錯(cuò)誤的。近數(shù)十年，醫(yī)學(xué)領(lǐng)域取得了重大進(jìn)展，包括找到了一些新的癌癥疫苗和治療方法。

The Zuckerbergs’ ambition “to cure, prevent or manage all disease in our children’s lifetime” seems grandiose. To give the gift some perspective each year, the US National Institutes of Health alone spends ten times the Zuckerbergs’ pledged decade-long $3bn. The UK’s Wellcome Trust will spend more than twice their contribution over the next five years.

扎克伯格夫婦想要“治愈、預(yù)防或控制我們的孩子們一生中可能遇到的所有疾病”，這個(gè)理想似乎相當(dāng)遠(yuǎn)大。從每年來看，單單美國國家健康研究院(National Institutes of Health)的支出就超過扎克伯格夫婦承諾在10年間捐贈的30億美元。未來5年，英國的Wellcome Trust將花費(fèi)兩倍于這筆捐贈的資金。

But each new idea is welcome, and with their commitment and convening power, they could add a great deal.

然而，我們歡迎所有新的想法，憑借決心和感召力，他們可以做出巨大的貢獻(xiàn)。