amp

How swamped preprint servers are blocking bad coronavirus research




amp

Nature Structural & Molecular Biology




amp

Hippocampal firing rates count




amp

Fetal inheritance of chromosomally integrated human herpesvirus 6 predisposes the mother to pre-eclampsia




amp

Simultaneous quantification of protein–DNA interactions and transcriptomes in single cells with scDam&T-seq




amp

Cell Death & Disease




amp

Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Q&A with Amy Austin Holmes

Amy Austin Holmes is the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Scholar with the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative. An Associate Professor of Sociology at the American University in Cairo, she has lived and taught in the Middle East since 2008 and is an expert on minority groups such as Kurds, Syriac-Assyrian Christians, and Nubians. She is the author of the 2019 book Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi.

In the Q&A section of this newsletter, we asked Amy Austin Holmes about her work.




amp

Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Extinction Watch: Which species may vanish & why

This incredibly metallic blue tarantula is found within a 39-square mile reserve forest in Andhra Pradesh. Its behaviour parallels that of many arboreal spiders. In the wild, it lives in holes of tall trees where it makes asymmetric funnel webs. Spiders of this genus may live communally when territory, i.e. the number of holes per tree, is limited.




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean: October 2019 Workshop Summary & Recommendations

The Belfer Center’s Arctic Initiative and the Wilson Center’s Polar Institute co-hosted a workshop with the Icelandic Chairmanship of the Arctic Council at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government entitled, Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean. The event convened global thought leaders, diverse stakeholders, and subject matter experts to begin developing a framework for tackling Arctic marine plastic pollution as one of the focus areas for the Icelandic Chairmanship. 




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Q&A with Amy Austin Holmes

Amy Austin Holmes is the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Scholar with the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative. An Associate Professor of Sociology at the American University in Cairo, she has lived and taught in the Middle East since 2008 and is an expert on minority groups such as Kurds, Syriac-Assyrian Christians, and Nubians. She is the author of the 2019 book Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi.

In the Q&A section of this newsletter, we asked Amy Austin Holmes about her work.




amp

Q&A with Amy Austin Holmes

Amy Austin Holmes is the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Scholar with the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative. An Associate Professor of Sociology at the American University in Cairo, she has lived and taught in the Middle East since 2008 and is an expert on minority groups such as Kurds, Syriac-Assyrian Christians, and Nubians. She is the author of the 2019 book Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi.

In the Q&A section of this newsletter, we asked Amy Austin Holmes about her work.




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean: October 2019 Workshop Summary & Recommendations

The Belfer Center’s Arctic Initiative and the Wilson Center’s Polar Institute co-hosted a workshop with the Icelandic Chairmanship of the Arctic Council at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government entitled, Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean. The event convened global thought leaders, diverse stakeholders, and subject matter experts to begin developing a framework for tackling Arctic marine plastic pollution as one of the focus areas for the Icelandic Chairmanship. 




amp

Vettel a deserving champion - Horner

Christian Horner said that Sebastian Vettel was a 'very deserving world champion' after he saw his driver win the title in style by winning the Abu Dhabi Grand Prix




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Q&A with Amy Austin Holmes

Amy Austin Holmes is the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Scholar with the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative. An Associate Professor of Sociology at the American University in Cairo, she has lived and taught in the Middle East since 2008 and is an expert on minority groups such as Kurds, Syriac-Assyrian Christians, and Nubians. She is the author of the 2019 book Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi.

In the Q&A section of this newsletter, we asked Amy Austin Holmes about her work.





amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Liuzzi hampered by tyre graining

Under pressure Tonio Liuzzi was left lamenting severe tyre graining after qualifying a disappointing 18th on the grid for the inaugural Korean Grand Prix




amp

Q&A with Amy Austin Holmes

Amy Austin Holmes is the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Scholar with the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative. An Associate Professor of Sociology at the American University in Cairo, she has lived and taught in the Middle East since 2008 and is an expert on minority groups such as Kurds, Syriac-Assyrian Christians, and Nubians. She is the author of the 2019 book Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi.

In the Q&A section of this newsletter, we asked Amy Austin Holmes about her work.




amp

Q&A with Amy Austin Holmes

Amy Austin Holmes is the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Scholar with the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative. An Associate Professor of Sociology at the American University in Cairo, she has lived and taught in the Middle East since 2008 and is an expert on minority groups such as Kurds, Syriac-Assyrian Christians, and Nubians. She is the author of the 2019 book Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi.

In the Q&A section of this newsletter, we asked Amy Austin Holmes about her work.




amp

Serving the underserved in workforce development: A Q&A with Beth Weigensberg


Improving data in the field of workforce development is a necessary step to evaluating programs and replicating success. What does current data tell us about the populations served? What outcomes should we measure to ensure programs are meeting America’s workforce development needs?

Earlier this month, we convened an expert group of policy makers, practitioners and scholars to address this problem, along with other challenges in workforce development. Previously, we interviewed Kate Blosveren Kreamer on the need to strengthen bridges from school to work. Next up in our Q&A series is Beth Weigensberg, a researcher at Mathematica Policy Research.

Q: What important research questions remain unanswered in the area of workforce development?

A: Although there is increasingly more rigorous research to assess effectiveness of programs, I feel a missing piece is understanding how to replicate and scale-up effective strategies. Often times workforce development programs that are deemed effective in one place do not always succeed when implemented in another. Research that evaluates effectiveness of programs should assess the role of contextual factors (including organizational, leadership, community, and political factors) to identify what is needed to successfully implement, replicate, and scale successful programs.

Q: You mentioned that you often think about the unemployed populations that are harder to serve. Who are some of these underserved populations, and what workforce development programs work for them?

A: The workforce development field has an unfortunate history of “creaming”—programs selectively work with individuals most likely to succeed at finding employment, leaving those “harder-to-serve” individuals struggling to find assistance. Individuals that are often considered “hard-to-serve” include those who are homeless, disabled, formerly incarcerated, older workers, non-English speakers, low-income, and youth who are disconnected from school and employment. Increasing efforts to focus on these “harder-to-serve” populations include specialized targeted programs and strategies to help address the complex needs of these individuals, which often extend beyond skill development and finding a job. These specialized programs often provide additional support services to help address their complex needs, which can serve as additional barriers to obtaining and retaining employment.

Q: What improvements can be made to better measure success?

A: Intermediate measures of engagement and skill development would provide interim measures of progress, while the ultimate objectives are obviously employment and educational attainment. Ongoing evaluation on interim measures allows for earlier acknowledgment of achievement and identification of those struggling to progress. Assessing outcomes in ways that control for different populations or barriers to employment, such as using risk-adjusted methodologies, can help us evaluate workforce development programs in an equitable manner.

One of the biggest challenges in the field is ensuring we have valid and reliable data to accurately estimate outcomes. The data available to assess outcomes are usually limited by what is collected in management information systems, which are often developed to be responsive to reporting requirements of publically-funded programs. But these siloed data do not allow for comprehensive assessment of workforce development outcomes within a state, locality, or even within a community-based employment and training organization that relies on numerous funding sources. Efforts are needed to integrate data and assess standardized outcome measures across program and funding silos to allow for more comprehensive assessment of outcomes within the field.

Authors

Image Source: © David Ryder / Reuters
      
 
 




amp

Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean: October 2019 Workshop Summary & Recommendations

The Belfer Center’s Arctic Initiative and the Wilson Center’s Polar Institute co-hosted a workshop with the Icelandic Chairmanship of the Arctic Council at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government entitled, Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean. The event convened global thought leaders, diverse stakeholders, and subject matter experts to begin developing a framework for tackling Arctic marine plastic pollution as one of the focus areas for the Icelandic Chairmanship. 




amp

Chandhok closing on Campos seat

There is increasing speculation that Indian GP2 driver Karun Chandhok will be named as a Campos driver ahead of the weekend




amp

Time running out for Campos, Stefan and US F1

Stefan GP has made one final plea to be accepted into the world championship, after it emerged that merger talks with US F1 had fallen through




amp

Q&A with Amy Austin Holmes

Amy Austin Holmes is the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Scholar with the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative. An Associate Professor of Sociology at the American University in Cairo, she has lived and taught in the Middle East since 2008 and is an expert on minority groups such as Kurds, Syriac-Assyrian Christians, and Nubians. She is the author of the 2019 book Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi.

In the Q&A section of this newsletter, we asked Amy Austin Holmes about her work.




amp

Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean: October 2019 Workshop Summary & Recommendations

The Belfer Center’s Arctic Initiative and the Wilson Center’s Polar Institute co-hosted a workshop with the Icelandic Chairmanship of the Arctic Council at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government entitled, Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean. The event convened global thought leaders, diverse stakeholders, and subject matter experts to begin developing a framework for tackling Arctic marine plastic pollution as one of the focus areas for the Icelandic Chairmanship. 




amp

Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean: October 2019 Workshop Summary & Recommendations

The Belfer Center’s Arctic Initiative and the Wilson Center’s Polar Institute co-hosted a workshop with the Icelandic Chairmanship of the Arctic Council at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government entitled, Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean. The event convened global thought leaders, diverse stakeholders, and subject matter experts to begin developing a framework for tackling Arctic marine plastic pollution as one of the focus areas for the Icelandic Chairmanship. 




amp

Trends in online disinformation campaigns

Ben Nimmo, director of investigations at Graphika, discusses two main trends in online disinformation campaigns: the decline of large scale, state-sponsored operations and the rise of small scale, homegrown copycats.

       




amp

Rosberg: Hamilton drove like a champion

Nico Rosberg praised Lewis Hamilton for his drive to victory in Australia and said he unsuccessfully mounted a full-scale attack in the closing stages




amp

Ecclestone keen on all-female world championship

Bernie Ecclestone has suggested the creation of an all-female world championship to run alongside Formula One to encourage more women to enter the sport




amp

Q&A with Amy Austin Holmes

Amy Austin Holmes is the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Scholar with the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative. An Associate Professor of Sociology at the American University in Cairo, she has lived and taught in the Middle East since 2008 and is an expert on minority groups such as Kurds, Syriac-Assyrian Christians, and Nubians. She is the author of the 2019 book Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi.

In the Q&A section of this newsletter, we asked Amy Austin Holmes about her work.




amp

Is activism against Deepavali firecrackers a one-day campaign against Hinduism?

Air pollution
Why are activists opposing an ‘old tradition’, and why not complain against other festivals? An environmentalist answers.
PTI
The run-up to Deepavali this year saw a fierce debate on religion and tradition versus the environment and pollution. This after the Supreme Court imposed a ban on the sale of firecrackers in New Delhi and NCR in an attempt to curb pollution. With public opinion polarised on the issue, environmentalist Nityanand Jayaraman, working with the Vettiver Collective in Chennai, answers some fundamental questions raised in the debate. There are four questions which I am going to address here. The first is - It is just a few days of celebration.  How much harm can it cause? Second - What about the air pollution during the rest of the year? Third – This is a tradition that we have followed for millennia. This was never a problem when we were growing up. Why is it a problem now? Fourth – What about the pollution caused by other festivals? Here's my response. 1. It is just a few days of celebration.  How much harm can it cause? The intensity of the celebration (bursting firecrackers) depends on the number of people bursting, the duration of the celebration and the quantity and type of firecrackers they burst. This can be ameliorated or worsened by weather conditions, and whether you live in a congested area or an open neighbourhood. The unfettered bursting of firecrackers can send air quality plummeting as it did yesterday (Wednesday), when air quality index (AQI) was 15 times worse than satisfactory levels. As I have written, it is a scientific fact that AQI above 400 will harm even healthy people, and may send children and other vulnerable populations to the emergency ward. Even brief exposures to such high levels can cause extreme distress to such people. Our tradition does not teach us to harm others, and I'm sure people who are bursting firecrackers are not doing that to harm others or send children and the elderly to the hospital. They are doing that because they don't know, and are not told that there are healthier ways to celebrate. At such high levels, there is no escape from the killer dust, which will go deep into your bodies and harm you over a long term. The damage due to short exposures to intense pollution can be significant and prolonged. This is particularly so, when the remaining 365 days are also spent in unhealthy conditions, and you allude to that. This brings me to your second challenge. Read: Chennai chokes on Deepavali, air pollution at hazardous levels 2. Why is enough not being done about air pollution during the rest of the year? Why do people cry and shout only during Diwali? You are right that enough is not being done about air pollution during the rest of the year. I work in a collective that lends support to communities in Ennore, a port near Chennai, where coal-fired thermal power plants and heavy vehicle movement has rendered air quality unhealthy throughout the year. No matter how loudly we shout, we are unable to make ourselves heard. We also talk about pollution of the Ennore Creek with oily wastes from the Manali petrochemical refinery. Every day, the refinery and the industrial estate discharges tonnes of toxic, noxious oily wastes into the Ennore Creek and the Bay of Bengal. Fisherfolk have been shouting about it since 1990s. But they are not being heard. It is not because the fisherfolk are not loud enough. Rather it is because we are deaf or unwilling to listen. It was ironic then that when the oil tanker collision sent oily wastes into the Bay of Bengal, all of Chennai was self-righteously indignant. You are right that after Deepavali the air (pollution) clears. When we think that air has returned to normal, air quality levels will still be high enough to harm us. What that should tell us is not that Deepavali pollution should be condoned, but that the pollution during the rest of the year needs to be curbed by tackling its causes – private vehicles, air pollution intensive electricity generation, poor construction practices and inadequate vegetative cover within the city. Also, it is not only during Diwali that we shout. You will notice a similar spike in concern over air pollution in January around Bhogi, when the burning of old things (including tyres) and unfavourable meteorological conditions intensify air pollution. In September, when the Velankanni Church celebrates the Feast of Our Lady, the beach in Chennai and all roads leading to Besant Nagar are just trashed by earnest devotees. Clearly the problem is not restricted to any one religion, and all religions and all rituals need to be re-evaluated in light of growing evidence that human lifestyles are harming the environment and humans who need air, water, and food to survive. Also read: Air quality plummets in Hyderabad on Diwali day 3. This is a tradition that we have followed for millennia. This was never a problem when we were growing up. Why are we making it a problem now? This is incorrect. Deepavali is a festival of lights, not a festival of noise and smoke. You are right that bursting firecrackers was a part of the Deepavali ritual when we were growing up. But it was not always that way. Lighting lamps which was an important part of Deepavali is hardly done nowadays, and bursting firecrackers has become more common place. The difference between when we were growing up and now is two-fold: a) There were a lot fewer people. In 1970, India's population was 550 million less than half of what it is now. Chennai had a population of 3 million as against a population of 5 million today – two million additional people live in the same land area. b) Overall, there were fewer people, and disposable incomes were small. Today, the middle class has expanded and the disposable income has increased. Hence, more people bursting more crackers. The same thing that we did a few decades ago with little impact has now become deadly. Traditions are not unchanging. Neither are the changes uniformly bad or good. Complaining about Deepavali's pollution is not an attack on Hindu tradition. It is a plea to change that tradition so that Deepavali can actually become a happy one. But Deepavalis of this loud and smoky kind are not happy for many, and particularly traumatic for animals. We would not permit our children to entertain themselves by stoning a kitten or a puppy; rather, we may teach them to enjoy themselves by petting it or feeding it. Similarly, why can't we kindle the spirit of celebration by engaging in compassionate but equally fun engagements? Why can't Deepavali be a festival of lights – a gentle festival, where we invite friends, sing songs, eat good food? 4. What about pollution caused by festivals of other religions? All our places of worship, and our rituals – irrespective of religion – have become anti-life. Christmas is a vulgar occasion of shopping and gifting things we never knew we needed to people who have no need for any more things. Increasingly, Christmas is less and less about Christ and more and more about shopping. So, you're right that we should be questioning and challenging any practices that make one person's celebration into another person's pain. I can appreciate your angst at the use of loudspeakers for religious purposes. This is done by “followers” of all religions, and there is a prohibition on this beyond 10 p.m. We could do better. Happy Smokeless, Noiseless Deepavali!




amp

Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean: October 2019 Workshop Summary & Recommendations

The Belfer Center’s Arctic Initiative and the Wilson Center’s Polar Institute co-hosted a workshop with the Icelandic Chairmanship of the Arctic Council at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government entitled, Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean. The event convened global thought leaders, diverse stakeholders, and subject matter experts to begin developing a framework for tackling Arctic marine plastic pollution as one of the focus areas for the Icelandic Chairmanship. 




amp

Q&A with Amy Austin Holmes

Amy Austin Holmes is the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Scholar with the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative. An Associate Professor of Sociology at the American University in Cairo, she has lived and taught in the Middle East since 2008 and is an expert on minority groups such as Kurds, Syriac-Assyrian Christians, and Nubians. She is the author of the 2019 book Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi.

In the Q&A section of this newsletter, we asked Amy Austin Holmes about her work.




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy. 




amp

Q&A with Amy Austin Holmes

Amy Austin Holmes is the Kuwait Foundation Visiting Scholar with the Belfer Center’s Middle East Initiative. An Associate Professor of Sociology at the American University in Cairo, she has lived and taught in the Middle East since 2008 and is an expert on minority groups such as Kurds, Syriac-Assyrian Christians, and Nubians. She is the author of the 2019 book Coups and Revolutions: Mass Mobilization, the Egyptian Military, and the United States from Mubarak to Sisi.

In the Q&A section of this newsletter, we asked Amy Austin Holmes about her work.




amp

Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean: October 2019 Workshop Summary & Recommendations

The Belfer Center’s Arctic Initiative and the Wilson Center’s Polar Institute co-hosted a workshop with the Icelandic Chairmanship of the Arctic Council at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government entitled, Policy and Action on Plastic in the Arctic Ocean. The event convened global thought leaders, diverse stakeholders, and subject matter experts to begin developing a framework for tackling Arctic marine plastic pollution as one of the focus areas for the Icelandic Chairmanship. 




amp

Defense Playbook for Campaigns

The 2018 National Defense Strategy (NDS) is predicated on a single organizing principle: America’s military pre-eminence is rapidly eroding. This is not a new concept. For years, experts have warned that the economic and technological advancements of U.S. adversaries, coupled with the 2008 financial crisis and America’s focus on peripheral conflicts, have caused a decline in America’s military dominance. 

In this context, the advances of near-peer competitors such as China and Russia have created plausible “theories of victory” in potential conflicts across Eastern Europe and East Asia. Competitors’ unaddressed improvements in strategic innovation, economic investment, and dual-use technology increases the risk of conflict and strains the U.S. alliance system. It is urgent that the United States reestablish and maintain credible deterrents against these near-peer competitors. After decades of focusing on post-Cold War ‘shaping’ operations, the American military needs to reinvigorate for full spectrum great power competition.

This report is intended as a blueprint on how to begin that process from graduate students at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University. Contained inside are 12 memorandums. Each provides a high-level overview and specific recommendations on a key issue of American defense policy.