专题：对话ESG全球领导者
新浪财经ESG评级中心提供包括资讯、报告、培训、咨询等在内的14项ESG服务，助力上市公司传播ESG理念，提升ESG可持续发展表现。点击查看【ESG评级中心服务手册】新浪财经 李涛/发自北京
当前全球地缘冲突持续蔓延，人道救援空间不断收缩，全球人道需求呈爆发式增长，同时叠加资金紧缩、舆论失序、治理失衡等多重困境，传统人道救援模式与可持续发展、企业海外合规发展的衔接矛盾日益凸显。
作为全球人道救助体系的核心机构，红十字国际委员会始终以中立、公正、独立的核心原则，穿梭于全球各大冲突区域开展救援工作。面对新形势下的人道治理难题、紧急救援与长效发展的平衡之道、政企协同创新模式以及中企出海合规等行业关键议题，新浪财经对话红十字国际委员会东亚地区代表处代理主任纪博瑞（Boris Kelecevic），深度解读新时代红十字国际委员会的中立领导力内核，剖析全球人道体系现存短板，并为全球人道建设、企业海外ESG合规发展、中外人道领域协同发展给出专业解答与未来展望。
红十字国际委员会东亚代表处代理主任 纪博瑞
一、全球冲突加剧、人道空间收缩，重新定义中立领导力
在全球冲突不断升级、人道空间持续压缩的当下，您如何定义红十字国际委员会的“中立领导力”？在实地落实这一理念时，面临的最严峻挑战是什么？
自1863年成立以来，红十字国际委员会（ICRC）始终致力于在战争与武装暴力局势中减轻人类苦难、维护人的尊严。我们与国际红十字与红新月运动伙伴并肩协作，跨越战线提供救命援助，全力帮助离散家庭重聚、寻找失踪人员。
我们与各方当局及武装部队开展沟通，多以非公开方式进行，倡导给予被拘留者人道待遇，敦促各方遵守国际人道法，保护平民免受伤害，包括在网络空间中。
中立，意味着我们向所有有需要的人提供帮助，不分种族、宗教、性别与政治立场。我们不偏袒任何一方，始终站在受助民众的一边，正因如此，冲突各方都信任我们能够不带偏见地为其民众与战俘提供正当帮助。不公开评判孰是孰非，让我们得以与所有冲突方开展坦诚对话，建立必要信任，从而抵达其他机构无法进入的区域，为困境中的人们提供援助。
但这一理念在落实中仍面临诸多挑战。对于在战区开展工作的我们而言，安全是重中之重，关乎员工、合作伙伴及各项行动的安危，安全无保障则工作无法开展。令人痛心的是，尽管受国际人道法保护，人道救援人员与医疗工作者正越来越多地成为袭击目标。仅2024年，就有338起针对人道救援人员的袭击事件被记录在案；2023至2024年间，针对医疗设施及医务人员的袭击超过600起；2025年，25名红十字会与红新月会志愿者及工作人员不幸牺牲。
公众认知同样至关重要。数字时代，部分冲突方秉持“非友即敌”的叙事逻辑，救助受伤的甲方人员，就会被乙方视为敌方支持者。当下我们还面临虚假信息、错误信息与仇恨言论的困扰，这极具危险性，会严重损害我们的公信力与行动能力，最终导致急需帮助的人无法获得救援。面对这些问题，我们需要持续与相关各方沟通对话，明确传递红十字国际委员会不偏袒任何一方的立场。
二、供需矛盾凸显，坚守人道原则不破底线
面对人道需求激增与预算收紧的双重压力，作为东亚地区代表处的代理主任，您认为红十字国际委员会应如何平衡满足人道需求与坚守人道核心原则？
遗憾的是，武装冲突已成为我们这个时代的鲜明特征。目前全球正在发生的武装冲突约有130起，数量较15年前翻了一番还多；其中超过20场冲突已持续20年以上，整整几代人从未经历过和平。逾2.04亿人生活在武装团体全面控制或争夺控制的地区；红十字与红新月运动登记的失踪人员达28.4万人，短短一年内数量激增70%。这些庞大的人道需求，亟需国际社会共同应对。
另一方面，人道领域获得的资金支持持续缩减，人道需求攀升与资金资源短缺形成尖锐矛盾。包括红十字国际委员会在内的多家人道机构，不得不缩减人员规模。
对红十字国际委员会而言，人员与资金有限，意味着要聚焦核心任务、优先保障重点区域与关键行动，尽可能帮助更多民众。当下人道需求极为迫切，没有任何一家机构能独自应对，我们迫切需要各国提供政治与资金支持。
面对这些挑战与限制，我们绝不会妥协或放弃我们的基本原则。相反，中立、公正等原则是我们一切行动的核心。中立并非道德上的奢侈品，而是务实的工具。
各国在阻止世界陷入无节制的战争冲突中发挥着决定性作用。红十字国际委员会呼吁各国政府支持恪守原则的人道行动，维护旨在保护平民、避免过度苦难的国际人道法。在此方面，2024年9月，中国、法国、巴西、南非、哈萨克斯坦、约旦与红十字国际委员会共同发起激励对国际人道法做出政治承诺的全球倡议，为各国搭建平台，共同扭转当代战争中战争规则被肆意漠视的严峻态势。红十字国际委员会赞赏中国将国际人道法提升至政治优先议题的努力，以及支持我方探索国际人道法与和平关联的举措，这也是该倡议的重要内容，旨在提出切实可行的建议，确保战争规则得到遵守。
三、联动人道与发展，打造长效可持续救援体系
冲突地区的可持续发展与标准ESG框架存在本质区别，红十字国际委员会在供水、医疗等项目中，如何将紧急救援与长期韧性建设相结合？
这是一个重要的问题。传统上，红十字国际委员会的核心专长是紧急短期救援，长期发展工作通常由发展机构承担。但如今，强化人道机构与发展机构的协作、发挥各自优势，对于保障救援行动的持续性与影响力、维护基础服务与设施、提升受冲突影响民众的抗风险能力与自主生存能力愈发重要，这就是人道—发展联动。将人道救援、保护对话与发展机构的长期视野、资金能力相结合，有助于实现更具包容性与可持续性的成果。在旷日持久的冲突中，我们时常面临冲突、气候变化、卫生危机等多重复杂因素引发的挑战，此时人道与发展领域的联动协作，是避免服务体系崩溃、适应冲突压力的关键。
尽管我们的核心工作是短期救援，但红十字国际委员会的应对举措同样具备长期影响。例如，我们的工作人员修复供水管网与电力设施、开展能力建设与职业培训、建设水厂，这些工作都将产生长远效益，惠及当地民众。
我想列举三个案例，展现我方与发展机构、企业伙伴协作开展的人道工作所带来的可持续影响：
刚果民主共和国戈马：为让数十万民众获得安全、可负担的饮用水，红十字国际委员会在刚果民主共和国戈马市实施大型供水项目。2019年启动的戈马西部韧性供水项目，建设了包含水处理厂、泵站、蓄水池等设施的饮用水供应系统，得到世界银行、瑞士发展与合作署、瑞典国际发展合作署、隆奥基金会支持，将为数十万民众的生活带来积极、可持续的改变。
也门：红十字国际委员会与世界银行合作实施也门粮食安全应对与韧性建设项目，兼顾短期与中期目标，改善粮食供应与营养获取条件。
加沙：近两年，我们在加沙拉法建成一所红十字战地医院，满足当地紧急医疗需求。该医院于2024年5月投入使用以来，已完成超11300台手术、25万次诊疗、1200例接生、19200次康复治疗，以及至少1500次输血服务。当地医疗需求依然迫切，因此红十字国际委员会决定对医院进行翻新升级，持续为当地民众提供救命医疗服务。该医院得到多国红十字会与红新月会支持，包括中国红十字会总会及香港分会。
在中国，我们与中国外交部、国家国际发展合作署、中国红十字会及相关机构保持密切合作，共同探寻实地应对人道需求的合作路径。我们感谢中国为受武装冲突影响国家的人道行动提供资金支持，希望通过进一步合作与互信，中国能加大对红十字国际委员会的资金支持，以应对武装冲突引发的日益增长的人道需求。
四、赋能中企出海，将人道合规融入ESG核心体系
对于走向高风险地区的中国企业，应如何将人道合规融入ESG与可持续发展框架？您有哪些可落地的建议？
企业在高风险或复杂环境中运营，面临的风险显著升高。这类地区通常治理薄弱、公共或私人安保力量管理混乱、国家及国际法被普遍违反、社会矛盾尖锐，有时甚至直接陷入武装冲突。
与此同时，投资者、监管机构、多边贷款机构、保险公司、当地社区等各方，越来越要求在此类环境中运营的企业，将应对人道影响——包括平民伤亡、民众流离失所、劳工剥削、粮食与饮水短缺、冲突敏感性等——纳入负责任商业行为的范畴。
因此，对于拓展高风险地区业务的中国企业而言，超越传统ESG指标已非选择，而是必然要求。务实的做法是，从战略层面看待人道合规，将其融入与ESG、企业风险管理、海外战略相结合的核心治理框架，而非将其视为独立的慈善或企业社会责任模块。
具体而言，在高风险地区运营的企业可从四个方面强化ESG义务落实：
1． 采取主动、具备冲突敏感性的工作方式；
2． 开展动态、强化的尽职调查；
3． 作出尊重国际人道法的政策承诺；
4． 推动国内准则与国际框架接轨，重视ESG工作本地化落地。
二十多年前，红十字国际委员会就开始系统性对接在复杂环境中运营的商业主体。多年来，我们与多方伙伴合作，编制了冲突预防、尽职调查等一系列全面参考资料，包括《复杂环境下负责任商业与安全管理工具包》《商业与国际人道法指南》《冲突预防手册》。我们希望这些工具与资源，能助力中国企业开展更有效的冲突分析与强化尽职调查，在高风险地区更好落实ESG义务。
五、展望行业未来，人道治理需转向协同赋能与机制创新
未来五年，全球人道体系最突出的领导力短板是什么？您对ESG与人道领域下一代领导者有何倡议？
我认为，与人道领域一样，全球众多行业的领导力都愈发需要跨学科综合能力，以应对涵盖ESG、资金、高风险人道危机等多元议题。下一代领导者或许应更注重机制建设，而非仅专注于物资援助。这需要更具跨部门协作视野，在脆弱地区建设可持续基础设施。此外，领导者应与时俱进，善用人工智能等新兴技术。未来的领导者还应思考如何赋能当地社区，推动人道与ESG领域从“施助者”思维转向“伙伴”思维。与此同时，当地社区也将从人道援助的“受助者”，转变为本地化援助机制的设计者，更好地构建自身韧性。
以下为英文原文：
In an era of escalating global conflicts and shrinking humanitarian space， how do you define the ICRC’s “Neutral Leadership”？ What is the most critical challenge when implementing this approach on the ground？
Since 1863， the International Committee of the Red Cross （ICRC） has worked to relieve suffering and preserve human dignity during war and armed violence． Alongside our Red Cross and Red Crescent partners， we deliver life-saving aid across front lines and strive to reconnect with families and locate missing people．
Engaging with authorities and armed forces on all sides， often confidentially， we advocate for humane treatment of detainees and urge compliance with international humanitarian law to protect civilians from harm， including online．
Neutrality means we help whoever is in need， regardless of race， religion， gender or political affiliation． Because we do not take a side – other than that of the people we’re here to help – warring parties on both sides trust us to do the right thing for their people and prisoners of war， without bias． Not passing public judgement on who’s right or wrong allows us to engage in an open dialogue with warring parties on all sides and build the trust we need to reach places and help people other organizations cannot．
However， challenges do exist in several aspects． For us operating in war zones， safety is key， for our staff， our partners and operations． We can’t work when it’s not safe． Unfortunately， we witness humanitarian and medical workers are increasingly targeted， despite protection under international law． In 2024 alone， 338 attacks against humanitarian workers were recorded． Over 600 attacks struck health facilities and personnel between 2023 and 2024． 25 Red Cross and Red Crescent volunteers and staff lost their lives in 2025．
Perception is also essential． In a digital age， some belligerents use “with us or against us” narrative． If you treat a wounded person from “Side A，” “Side B” perceives you as an enemy combatant supporter． In today’s world， we are also facing challenges of disinformation， misinformation and hate speech， which is dangerous as it will undermine our credibility and capacity to operate while those in urgent need can’t get help． All of these require constant and consistent communication and dialog with concerned parties to demonstrate that the ICRC doesn’t take sides．
Facing the dual pressure of skyrocketing humanitarian needs and tightening budget constraints， how do you—as the acting HOD for East Asia—believe the ICRC should balance addressing humanitarian needs with upholding fundamental humanitarian principles？
Unfortunately， armed conflict is a defining feature of our time． There are around 130 armed conflicts ongoing today， more than double the number just 15 years ago． Over 20 conflicts have lasted for more than two decades， leaving entire generations who have known nothing but war． More than 204 million people now live in areas under the full or contested control of armed． 284，000 people are registered as missing by the International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement – a 70% increase in just one year． All these are immense humanitarian needs that need to be addressed by the international community．
On the other hand， we have seen dwindling funds allocated or made available to the humanitarian sector． This is a dilemma between increasing needs and decreasing funding and resources． Many humanitarian organizations， including the ICRC， have had to downsize their workforce．
For the ICRC， with less hands and funding， this means focusing and prioritizing contexts and core activities， so that we can help as many people as possible． Again， the needs are overwhelming． No organization can handle them alone， and we do need political and financial support from states．
Facing these challenges and constraints doesn’t mean we will compromise or sacrifice our fundamental principles． On the contrary， principles like neutrality and impartiality are at the heart of our activities． Neutrality is not a moral luxury， but a functional tool．
States have a decisive role to play in preventing the world from sliding further into unrestrained warfare． The ICRC urges governments to support principled humanitarian action and uphold international humanitarian law （IHL） which is meant to protect civilians and prevent excessive suffering． In this aspect， China， France， Brazil， South Africa， Kazakhstan and Jordan along with the ICRC launched the Global Initiative to galvanize political commitment for the respect of IHL in September 2024． It’s a platform for all states to take part in reversing the alarming disregard for the rules of war in contemporary warfare． The ICRC appreciates China’s role in elevating IHL as a political priority， and its support for the ICRC in exploring the connection between IHL and peace， that is part of the initiative， to find practical recommendations to ensure respect for the rules of war．
Sustainable development in conflict zones differs fundamentally from standard ESG frameworks． How does the ICRC integrate emergency relief with long-term resilience in projects such as water supply and healthcare？
This is an important question． Traditionally the ICRC’s expertise has been emergency and short-term relief， instead of long-term development which is usually undertaken by development actors． However， it’s increasingly important to strengthen collaboration by leveraging comparative advantages between humanitarian organizations and development institutions to sustain the impact and continuity of interventions， preserve essential services and infrastructures， and build resilience and independence for people affected by conflict． This is the so-called Humanitarian–Development Nexus． Combining humanitarian action and protection dialogue with the long-term vision and financing capacity of development institutions will help achieve more inclusive and sustainable outcomes． Sometimes we are facing the challenges caused by complex drivers such as conflicts， climate change， health hazards， particularly in protracted conflicts， making collaboration within the humanitarian-development nexus essential to prevent service collapse and adapt to conflict pressures．
While our essential job is short term， the ICRC’s response does have long-term impacts． For example， our colleagues are working to repair water supply networks and power grid， provide capacity building and vocational training， or set up water plants． This will have lasting effects and benefit people in the long run．
I will quote three examples to show sustainable humanitarian impact of our work， in coordination and partnership with development and corporate entities．
Goma， Democratic Republic of Congo： To help hundreds of thousands of people access safe and affordable drinking water， the ICRC is running a vast water project in the city of Goma， in the Democratic Republic of Congo． Launched in 2019， the Goma West Resilient Water Project includes the construction of a drinking water supply system composed of water treatment plants， pumping stations and reservoir， etc． The project is supported by the World Bank， the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation， the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency and the Fondation Lombard Odier． It will have a positive and sustainable impact on the lives of hundreds of thousands of people．
Yemen： The ICRC has also worked with the World Bank on the Yemen Food Security Response and Resilience Project （FSRRP） aimed at improving the availability of and access to food and nutritious diets， both in the short and medium-term．
Gaza： And more recently， we established a hospital in Rafah， Gaza two years ago to address urgent health needs in the region． Since it opened in May 2024， the hospital has facilitated more than 11，300 surgeries， 250，000 consultations， 1，200 deliveries， 19，200 physiotherapy sessions， and at least 1，500 blood transfusions． The needs are still there． That’s why the ICRC decided to refurbish and upgrade the hospital to continue to provide life-saving health care for communities． This hospital is supported by many partner Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies of different countries， including Red Cross Society of China （both HQ and Hong Kong branch）．
In China， we maintain a close working relation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs， China International Development Cooperation Agency （CIDCA）， the Red Cross Society of China and other relevant entities， to identify opportunities and avenues to jointly address needs in the field． We appreciate China’s financial contributions to support humanitarian action in countries affected by armed conflicts． We hope that through mutual collaboration and understanding， China’s financial support to the ICRC is increased in response to the growing humanitarian needs caused by armed conflicts．
For Chinese enterprises “going global” into high-risk regions， how should humanitarian compliance be integrated into their ESG and sustainability frameworks？ What actionable advice can you offer？
When companies operate in high-risk or complex contexts， they are faced with heightened risks as these environments are often characterized by weak governance， poor management of public or private security forces， widespread violations of national or international law， high levels of societal tensions and at times outright conflicts．
At the same time， companies operating in such settings are increasingly expected to address humanitarian impacts – including civilian harm， displacement， labor exploitation， food/water insecurity， and conflict sensitivity — as part of responsible business conduct by different stakeholders such as investors， regulators， multilateral lenders， insurers and local communities．
Therefore， for Chinese enterprises expanding into high-risk regions， going beyond traditional ESG metrics is not merely an option， but has become a necessity． A practical approach they can take is to view humanitarian compliance from a more strategic level and embed it into their core governance frameworks that are integrated with ESG， enterprise risk management and overseas strategy， rather than as a separate philanthropy or corporate social responsibility function．
Specifically， companies operating in high-risk regions can act in four directions to strengthen the implementation of their ESG obligations．
First， adopt a proactive， conflict-sensitive approach．
Second， conduct dynamic， heightened due diligence．
Third， make policy commitments on respect for IHL．
Last， align domestic guidelines with international frameworks and emphasize localized ESG implementation．
The ICRC started a systemic approach to engage with business actors operating in complex environments more than two decades ago． Over the years we have worked with different partners to develop a comprehensive range of resources on conflict prevention and due diligence， including a guidance handbook – the Toolkit on Responsible Business and Security Management in Complex Environments， a guide on Business and International Humanitarian Law， and a manual on conflict prevention – the Conflict Prevention Tool． We hope these tools and resources can help support Chinese enterprises to undertake more effective conflict analysis and heightened due diligence and strengthen the implementation of their ESG obligations in high-risk regions．
What is the most significant leadership gap in the global humanitarian system over the next five years， and what is your call to action for the next generation of leaders in the ESG and humanitarian sectors？
I believe the leadership in the global humanitarian sector， as in many other sectors， increasingly requires multidisciplinary capabilities in order to look at and address issues ranging from ESG considerations to funding and the high-risk humanitarian crises． The next generation of leaders can perhaps try to focus more on building mechanisms instead of only delivering aid． This requires a better vision of cross-sector collaboration to build sustainable infrastructure in fragile contexts． Furthermore， they should also keep up with the times， for example， making use of emerging technologies like AI． Future leaders should also think about how to empower local communities， when the humanitarian and ESG sectors may shift from a “provider” mindset to a “partner” mindset． In the meantime， local communities may transition from being “beneficiaries” of humanitarian aid to designers of a localized aid mechanism or model that helps better build their resilience．
新浪财经ESG评级中心简介
新浪财经ESG评级中心是业内首个中文ESG专业资讯和评级聚合平台，致力于宣传和推广可持续发展，责任投资，与ESG（环境、社会和公司治理）价值理念，传播ESG的企业实践行动和榜样力量，推动中国ESG事业的发展，促进中国ESG评估标准的建立和企业评级的提升。
依托ESG评级中心，新浪财经发布多只ESG创新指数，为关注企业ESG表现的投资者提供更多选择。同时，新浪财经成立中国ESG领导者组织论坛，携手中国ESG领导企业和合作伙伴，通过环境、社会和公司治理理念，推动建立适合中国时代特征的ESG评价标准体系，促进中国资产管理行业ESG投资发展。
海量资讯、精准解读，尽在新浪财经APP
责任编辑：李涛
晶顶网配资提示：文章来自网络，不代表本站观点。
