May you live in interesting times, goes the blessing/curse. Andone thing I think we can all agree on, for better or worse, is thatdull days are few and far between in 2011.

Just another typical, ho-humweek: The long-term sovereign debt of the United States gets itsfirst-ever downgrade. The stock market goes on a stomach-churningroller-coaster ride. Massive riots break out (and break in) inLondon. “Double dip” starts being read on a lot of lips. And oh,just in case the tussle for Transatlantic wasn't tumultuous enoughwith two suitors, Warren Buffett throws his (plain andunpretentious) hat in the ring.

Yawn.

With all this agitation and uncertainty, and with reports ofglobal chaos overflowing in our RSS feeds, it's easy to concludethat we live (duh!) in a riskier world. 

Mother Nature is on a real tough-love bender of late.Earthquakes. Tsunamis. Floods. (What, no asteroids?) 

Our own species, not to be outdone, is wreaking plenty of havocon its own. Cyber terrorists—and the ones who operate in thephysical world. Politicians working hard to make that profession asunpopular as…trial lawyers. Global supply chains, which, for alltheir efficacy, can be disrupted by the far-distant flap of abutterfly's wings. 

Then there's the really scary stuff: Pakistan. And a worldrunning out of oil. And water.

Given all of the above, it may not be surprising that a majorityof the more than 30 industry leaders we asked to opine on thequestion “Is the world a riskier or safer place?” (it all starts onpage 12) took the side of pessimism. 

But a respectable number of our experts opted for optimism. Andthey make a pretty strong case for their positive position. Cars,buildings and the workplace—all infinitely safer (with insuranceowed a lot of thanks for these improvements). The “safer”contingent can also point to the stat that perhaps trumps allothers: the average lifespan continues to go up and up andup—which, arguably, can only happen in a world of diminishingrisks.

And humans, for all our hang-ups, do have a pretty good trackrecord, when push comes to shove, of using our oversized brains tocome up with solutions to ensure our survival (the idea that wecould feed seven billion people would have seemed like a fantasyfewer than 100 years ago). 

My own answer? Like some of the respondents, I'll hedge mybet—at least a little bit. Overall, I do propose that the world isgenerally becoming safer. How can I, a New Yorker who remembers thecity's Dark Ages, not feel that way about life when walks home lateat night are now cause for quiet contemplation, not sheerterror?

But, as much as it horrifies me to write, I do think the oddsare decent we'll see a nuclear terror attack in my lifetime. Andwhile I don't think I'll see my lights go out or faucets run dry, Ido worry, a lot, that near-future generations will face thisnightmare. 

Here's hoping our better angels ultimatelyprevail.  

Bryant Rousseau

Editor in Chief