The Economist - USA (2020-07-25)

10 Leaders The EconomistJuly 25th 2020

2 bank lending to companies slumped? Private data are bad, too. In

2019 sales at the biggest brewer fell by 5%. Sales of cement by the

two biggest producers were almost flat. None of these things is

likely if growth is storming ahead. The discrepancies are so large

that it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the government is ly-

ing. Yet Tanzanians are terrified to suggest anything so scurri-

lous. Two years ago Mr Magufuli’s government wrote a law (since

amended) under which people could be locked up for three years

for disputing official statistics. The government has arrested

Zitto Kabwe, an opposition mp, for questioning gdpnumbers

and closed a newspaper for publishing accurate exchange rates.

Lying is bad for democracy: without reliable numbers, it is

hard for voters to hold governments to account. Lies are also bad

for governance: it is hard to craft good policies without knowing

what works. Because accurate numbers matter so much, donors

spend almost $700m a year helping poor countries collect them.

The World Bank even gave Tanzania a $30m loan to improve its

statistics bureau. What was the point, if the imfbuckles to politi-

cal pressure and professes to believe codswallop?

Some argue that international financial institutions can do

more good by staying close to iffy governments and gently nudg-

ing them towards reform. If the imfpicks a fight with Mr Magu-

fuli, he may send it packing. But in accepting junk statistics, the

fund harms its own credibility, and stores up economic trouble

for Tanzania. Mr Magufuli is running for a second term in Octo-

ber, so bad data also undermine the democratic rights of Tan-

zanians, who should be allowed to vote for politicians based on

their actual record, rather than a fictitious one.

Honesty has worked before. In 2013, after it became clear that

Argentina was fibbing about inflation, the fund stopped accept-

ing its data. After a change in government, Argentina stopped ly-

ing. Tanzanians deserve the truth, too. 7

E

arth aside, Mars is the most-studied planet in the solar sys-

tem. Satellites zip around it. Rovers trundle over its surface. A

helicopter may soon clatter through its skies, for a clutch of new

missions are either on their way or planned to launch soon.

The motive behind all this is the hope that Mars, like Earth,

may support life—or may have done so in the past (see Science

section). And, as technology spreads and rocketry gets cheaper,

more people want to join the search for what would, in effect, be

Biosphere 2. At first, Mars was the province of America and the

Soviet Union. Japan tried and failed to explore it in 1998. Europe

sent its first mission in 2003. India launched its in 2013. The Un-

ited Arab Emirates joined the fray on July 20th. And China, after a

failure in 2011, dispatched another attempt on July 23rd. The time

is not far off when even private missions might be feasible.

Behind all this enthusiasm, though, is a wor-

ry. If Mars is sterile after all, or if any life which

once dwelled there is now extinct, what people

do to the planet by way of contamination with

Earthly bugs probably does not matter. But if

Martians do exist, even if they are but lowly bac-

teria (or something vaguely equivalent), that

would mean Mars is a pristine ecosystem. Those

wishing to investigate it should therefore tread

lightly, for reasons of both moral and scientific prudence.

Astrobiologists identify two kinds of risk in putative encoun-

ters with alien life forms that are not actually toting ray guns.

The first, “forward contamination”, is that hardy micro-organ-

isms from Earth might hitch a ride with a space probe and set up

shop on landing. The second, “back contamination”, concerns

the reverse: that samples returned to Earth might bring alien mi-

crobes with them.

The first risk is no longer theoretical. Scientists reckon that

the rovers and landers already on Mars each play host to tens of

thousands of microscopic Earthlings. Shielded from radiation

by the probes themselves, these bacteria are probably dormant—

but not dead.

Back contamination would require samples to be returned

from Mars. That has not happened yet. But America’s newest

rover is designed to stash samples of Martian regolith away, to be

returned to Earth by a follow-up mission in 2031.

Back contamination is the less worrying of the two. Lurid sug-

gestions that Martian bugs might infect human beings ignore

the fact that their biochemistry would almost certainly be too

different from that of terrestrial organisms for this to happen.

Sealed laboratories could provide reassurance for sticklers.

Forward contamination is more troubling. Some echo terres-

trial worries about conservation, arguing that humans have a

moral obligation not to damage other ecosystems. Others fret

about the scientific implications. Life on Mars, whether extant

or extinct, could be one of the most significant discoveries in the

history of biology. Contamination risks disrupting understand-

ing of that scientific bounty.

Countries are already required, by the Outer

Space Treaty of 1967, to worry about these risks.

But this treaty is light on specifics, leaving indi-

vidual space agencies to come up with their own

rules. This is better than nothing. But as more

countries head for Mars, the case grows for a for-

mal, global approach.

Plenty of ideas are worth discussing. Some

advocate risk-management, in which the greatest care is taken

when exploring those parts of Mars most likely to contain life,

though lower standards apply in harsher regions. “Reversible ex-

ploration” holds that, if life is discovered, humanity should re-

trieve the probes that already dot the Martian surface, along with

their microbial passengers. And should private individuals be

required to follow the same rules as nation-states?

International co-operation is not a popular idea just now.

Never mind: it should be tried anyway. Nationalism and protec-

tionism can wane as well as wax, and alien-hunting is the work

of decades. Counter-measures need not be expensive—experi-

ence suggests they add 10% or less to the cost of a probe. And it is

hard to think of a more intrinsically global problem than ensur-

ing that one planet’s life forms do not contaminate another’s. 7

Tread softly

Mars may be a pristine ecosystem. It should be protected

Space exploration