Perseverance and collaboration: How a new clinical trial aims to determine whether sex matters when matching blood products to patients

When customers call your service company, it’s for one thing — your expertise. They don’t want a price, the problem fixed, the fast and cheap solution, etc. like many technicians think. They want good information and possibly a little guidance to make a good decision.

Friedrich recently sponsored a NEWS webinar titled “Ductless Split System Innovations That Matter to Your Bottom Line.”  Below are questions taken from the Q&A portion of that webinar.

Can organized labor continue its recent momentum into the next presidential administration?

Assistant Prof Yeo Su Lin – Death is a part of life. However, people often feel awkward and ill at ease when faced with the opportunity for communication at the end of life. While talking about death and dying may not be comfortable for some, research has shown that having these conversations within families and communities, and with our healthcare provider can help prepare us emotionally for our deaths and that of others, and better ensure that we will receive the care and treatment that we prefer at the end of life. Yeo Su Lin is an Assistant Professor of Corporate Communication at SMU’s Lee Kong Chian School of Business. Her research focuses on corporate reputation, crisis management and health communication. In this podcast, she discusses a recent nationwide study which was conducted to better understand end-of-life communication and sentiments towards palliative care in Singapore.

Forget the hype! A panel of working architects share their insight into the trends and technologies that will have the greatest impact on their work in 2013.

The panel of working architects discusses the trends, technologies, and other aspects of enterprise IT that will lose steam in 2013.

The panel of working architects discusses how the evolution of enterprise IT is profoundly reshaping the IT architecture profession.

Lithoz to showcase ceramic 3D printed filtration technology at Formnext  VoxelMatters

Some 20,000 civilian employees work in the organic industrial base, supplying DoD with items it can't get from industry in enough quantity or not not at all.

The post These rarely seen DoD civilians matter a lot in times of war first appeared on Federal News Network.

I'm not sure what's more impressive, the Apple's new M3 chips or the fact that the entire was shot using iPhone 15 Pro Maxes. #apple #iphone15promax #scaryfast #mac

Library - Art Library, Location - OSIZ, Call number - FOLIO TR183 .M38 2016

Location: Sciences Library Library- QH501.C376 2016

Festival explores life and death through cafes, catacombs and caterpillars.

The podcasting industry has grown a lot since its birth in 2004, but the core of what a podcast could be and what it could do hasn't changed much. Now, Podcasting 2.0 revolutionizes the industry with highly requested innovations that will help everyone on all sides of the RSS feeds.

The post What Is Podcasting 2.0 and Why Does It Matter? first appeared on The Audacity to Podcast.

You might have heard people talk about IAB podcast stats, measurement guidelines, compliance, and certification. Here's what all of that means, and whether it even matters!

The post Do IAB-Certified Stats Matter for Your Podcast? first appeared on The Audacity to Podcast.

On Thursday, November 14, industry thought leader Erin Firneno will moderate the panel "Measurement Matters: Delivering Better Audience Data to Streaming Advertisers." The promise of streaming as a boon to advertisers has always been its potential to help them target audiences more precisely by delivering more substantive audience data than broadcast can offer. But even as streaming's audience share has grown to justify substantial migration of CTV ad dollars from broadcast to digital, when it comes to quantifying audiences and measuring engagement, the lack of consistent and easily translatable measurement standards?not to mention the sheer number of measurement options?continues to frustrate ad buyers. How can streaming move toward the proposed "single source of truth," or is that even the answer? Confirmed panelists include experts from Vevo, Warner Bros Discovery, and Revry.

Growing up in St. Paul, Minn., Rashad Turner remembers playing cops and robbers. It was always a given which side he'd choose. "We'd ride our bikes," he says. "I'd always be the cop." He always knew. It was that way for years. He trained for it. He got a bachelor's in criminal justice. He enrolled in the police academy. All because he wanted to help. To him, the cops were the good guys. Turner is 35 now. When he was two years old, a man shot and killed his father in an alley during a dispute. No one should lose a parent that way, he thought. And policing was one way to protect a community. "I had this idea of the Officer Friendly that came to our school," he says. "Like, that was all cops." His friends didn't always get it, he says. Some of them quit him. In the African American neighborhoods he moved in, there had been too many bad run-ins with police. But back then, Turner was used to defending law enforcement. Not so much anymore. Five years ago, he founded a chapter of Black Lives

While the deaths of Travon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and Sandra Bland galvanized the #BlackLivesMatter movement, the killings of Rayshard Brooks, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and Ahmaud Arbery have forced America to reckon with centuries of racial injustice and police brutality in unprecedented ways. Not only have protests demanding change been widespread, but major corporations — which, until now, have been largely silent and hesitant to embrace Black Lives Matter — are pledging to fight racial injustice and declaring their support of the nearly seven-year-old movement. We discuss the significance of those corporate responses, as well as new challenges these companies face to commit to righting past wrongs.

While the deaths of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, and Sandra Bland galvanized the #BlackLivesMatter movement, the killings of Rayshard Brooks, George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and Ahmaud Arbery have forced America to reckon with centuries of racial injustice and police brutality in unprecedented ways. Not only have protests demanding change been widespread, but major corporations — which, until now, have been largely silent and hesitant to embrace Black Lives Matter — are pledging to fight racial injustice and declaring their support of the nearly seven-year-old movement.

Copyright 2020 WABE 90.1. To see more, visit WABE 90.1 .

The summer of Black Lives Matter protests responding to the police killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor and Rayshard Brooks, among others, has led to stunning commitments from major banks and corporations to commit to social justice and promoting practices to recruit, hire and retain underrepresented populations, including black Americans, Latinx and female colleagues.  American Express just announced its pledge to invest $1 Billion to advance racial and gender equity.  JP Morgan Chase in October announced a $30 Billion commitment to advance racial equity.  Similarly, Citi and Bank of America have each pledged $1 Billion to promote economic mobility among communities of color.  Goldman Sachs, famously referred to as a vampire squid during the mortgage crisis in 2008, has announced its "Launch With Goldman Sachs" program "to increase capital and facilitate connections for women, Black, Latinx and other diverse entrepreneurs and investors."  These commitments represent huge infusions of capital into causes that these major corporations have just recently found religion upon.  Numerous corporations have made recent pledges to financially support social justice and economic equality including Google, Disney, Facebook, Amazon,  Cisco, DoorDash, Etsy, Home Depot, Intel, TikTok, Lego, Nike, Proctor & Gamble, Fashion Nova, WeWork, and YouTube, among so many others.

For those long-time followers of the Corporate Justice Blog, these corporate pronouncements may seem ironic or perhaps will be received with trepidation or doubt.  Profit maximization has for years furiously driven corporate leadership to dizzying examples of fraud, corruption, and malfeasance as recorded on these blog pages for years.  Still, these Billion dollar commitments respond to a summer of true discontent and protest over inequality and the value of black lives, and if these corporations are to be taken seriously, these capital infusions could come as true gamechangers.  Will these corporations truly put their money where their commitments are?  And how do we hold these companies accountable to their commitments to advancing racial equality and economic mobility for those communities previously shut out?  

photo: Jamie Dimon, Wikimedia Commons

hat tip: Jessica Smith, 3L, Arkansas Little Rock Bowen School of Law

Many of us know Ava Abramowitz, a retired Professorial Lecturer in Law at George Washington. She recently gave a presentation at the Garibaldi Inn of Court, “Making Words Matter.”  The communication behaviors discussed in her presentation can give mediators, lawyers, disputants and litigants more tools to communicate. and in the process, help them develop additional … Continue reading Ava Abramowitz on Making Words Matter →

#loveislove

A 29-year-old man wanted in connection with the recent seizure of firearms, drugs, and ammunition turned himself in to police and “another male has also since been arrested in relation to this matter, making it five suspects arrested as part of this operation.” A police spokesperson said, “Around 10:40 a.m. on Wednesday, October 2nd, 2024, […]

First light through the limbs of the trees. And then the trees. Each morning the hum of traffic through the freeway wall. And then the traffic we’re bottled in. Each thing first betrayed by the shapes around it. As if shadows held all our weight. Like the empty space that props each fiery nest of …

Read more "Poem from Dark Matter"

The post Poem from Dark Matter first appeared on Timothy Green.

Elected Republicans, almost all of them, are in no hurry to stop the disorder. They appear to believe what we're watching is a version of the Rodney King riots from 1992. People saw an upsetting video on the internet, they're angry, and that's understandable. But they'll calm down soon, and we can get back to cutting capital gains taxes and sanctioning Bashar al- Assad. That's their view of it. They are wrong. This is not a momentary civil disturbance. This is a serious and highly organized political movement. It is not superficial. It is deep and profound. It has vast ambitions. It is insidious; it will grow. Its goal is to end liberal democracy and challenge Western civilization itself. This is an ideological movement. The ideas that fuel it have incubated for decades on college campuses. We paid for all of it, by the way. The rest of us were so thrilled that our kids got into Duke that we decided to ignore what Duke was actually teaching them and are continuing to send big checks. That was a mistake. It was one of the greatest mistakes we've ever made. Continue reading →

Democratic politicians don't fear the mob. Notice that? Why? Because they don't need to. They control the mob. The mob operates with their permission. These are their foot soldiers. This is their militia. Continue reading →

NEWS – Matter, the connectivity standard for smart devices for the home, has recently been upgraded to version 1.4.  Every six months or so the Connectivity Standards Alliance releases a new version with support for more IoT devices.  Version 1.3 brought support for a variety of home appliances, things like dishwashers, washing machines, refrigerators, and […]

DOESN'T MATTER Had Sex

Image by Mario Jr. Nicorelli is licensed via CC BY-NC 2.0 Over the past weeks, the CC board and team have been working behind the scenes on our strategy refresh. We are excited to share our progress as we enter the community engagement phase of the refresh and explain how you can contribute to the process.…

The post CC Is Refreshing Its Strategy. Here’s Why Your Voice Matters. appeared first on Creative Commons.

The rotation curves of disc galaxies are flat and dark matter is speculated as explanation. Alternatively, the gravity of material disk could explain the flat curves. Using the gravitational force that a disk exerts on a body in the disk, we have computed the the rotation curves of disc galaxies and the curve of their...

Special relativity does not deal with acceleration, general relativity does not deal with non gravitational acceleration, which leave the theory of relativity imperfect. We will demonstrate some relativistic dynamical laws that specify relativistic acceleration, force and kinetic energy. Also, based on equivalence principle does gravitational mass vary with inertial mass? Newtonian kinematics defines motions of...

read more

read more

In some ecosystems, such as high-latitude forests, wildfires are a natural occurrence. These help maintain healthy ecosystems by depositing nutrients into the soil and boosting seed dispersal. However, in recent years, fire seasons have become more extreme and widespread. This includes forest ecosystems where fires are uncommon, such as tropical rainforests. Consequently, this has led to devastating results for communities, flora, fauna and other organisms that live in and around these areas.[...]

A Princeton-led team of astrophysicists has measured a surprising value for the “clumpiness” of the universe’s dark matter.

As captain, Aiden Markram is allowed a long rope from a wonky form perspective, but how long can that rope be as the run river continues to shrivel, asks Khanyiso Tshwaku.

Why the UN matters for Britain Interview LJefferson 6 September 2022

In the fourth of a series of interviews with Queen Elizabeth II Academy faculty, Jeremy Greenstock argues that the UN is still important in a polarized world.

For many people looking at the United Nations (UN) today, the institution (and the world) appears to be at an inflection point and the UN seems ill-equipped to meet these challenges. From your vantage point, how does this period look in relative terms? 

I think for an institution like the UN founded on principles and compromises laid down in 1945, the passage of time is bound to be difficult because society changes quicker than an institution can reform. We can talk about reform later, but the UN has challenges. Where do these challenges come from? I see them coming from a crisis in governance, in governments around the world.

The UN is a forum of member states, and the member states carry their national labels at the UN and follow their national interests at the UN. And almost all governments are suffering huge challenges, not just from the circumstances of geopolitics, but from the expectations of their own people, which they find difficult to meet.

The UN is a servant in that sense, of governments, and so what happens at the UN reflects what is happening in and between governments. We need to keep that in perspective. The UN still retains a tremendous value as a forum. It is a natural forum for governments to talk before they shoot, which was not there in previous eras, and that has had a significant effect since 1945 in reducing the incidence of war between states, particularly between the largest states.

It has obviously been more difficult to deal with local and regional conflicts, but the kind of confrontation that threatens to escalate into a global war has been severely restricted by the UN. The habit of talking at the UN General Assembly (UNGA), artificial as it may seem, is an extremely important part of the avoidance of conflict in the modern age.  

There is a deep scepticism about the UN. Many people think there is a lot of talking but that the real action takes place elsewhere. What is the value of the UN?  

Well, there are two aspects to this. One is the fact that leaders must give their reasons for their policymaking to an international public. This has a force in today’s digital world where most people have access to a megaphone of some kind. The legitimacy of what governments do is exposed at the UNGA.

Secondly, alongside the open meetings and the publicized speeches, there are countless side meetings that go on, and it is an opportunity for leaders to test each other out, and to have private words that may differ from the public words they have to produce for their own followers in their own capitals.

It is an opportunity for personal diplomacy which is highly valuable, and which might not otherwise happen, particularly between leaders who have very serious differences. And I think that the testing of the legitimacy of policy in both the public and the private spheres is an important aspect of international diplomacy that the UNGA provides an opportunity for.  

At the UNGA, states are called to account before the UN, and this can expose hypocrisies. But sometimes there are fundamental clashes over interests and also over values. How would you characterize the UN’s handling of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine?

It is a different audience at the UN from the audience that they have back in their capitals or in their own groups of like-minded people. They must justify themselves in different ways, and there are a whole host of inconsistencies in foreign policy that get exposed at the UN when people must explain themselves in public.

A lot of member states around the world have not condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine; yet underneath their non-condemnation is a general regret because Russia has broken a huge taboo of the UN Charter, which is the sacrosanctity of independent sovereign territories in Article 2.7.

And that article is valuable to member states who feel threatened by more powerful member states. Russia, as a permanent member, has ridden roughshod over sovereign independence. China and India will have equivocal feelings about that, but they can’t say so in public because they want some of the West’s hypocrisies and inconsistencies exposed, and because they find the approach of sanctions very unpalatable.

Sanctions are unpopular, and the use of sanctions has become a major weapon of non-war by the United States in particular. So, the Russian invasion is unpopular, but the approach of the West is also unpopular for not better looking after the interests of emerging economies and lower-income states, particularly on climate change, but also on economic development.

So, a whole host of different considerations come into play over Ukraine at the UNGA.

How do you think the UN could be best repurposed or reformed?  

It is terribly difficult, because if you open the UN Charter for one reason, you are opening it up to a host of demands from member states for other reforms. And remember that no reform of the Charter can happen without a 2/3 majority at the General Assembly, and that is an effective blocker, because you will always find more people opposing a particular reform that supporting it.

So, I think formal reform remains a bit of a dream in the circumstances of a polarized world. I want to divert discussions about UN reform into areas where the Secretary General has a competence without needing a vote from member states.

I am talking about improvement in methodologies, in the meritocracy of appointments, in the day-to-day workings of the UN. It looks unambitious on a large-scale basis, but just improving the competence of the UN and its agencies will ensure the relevance of the UN to people’s material interests in terms of human rights, refugees, food distribution, and children, and all the other things that the agencies look after.

So, I would prefer to concentrate reform energy into competence reforms, management reforms, rather than reforms of the Charter. 

This takes us to the question of the permanent members of the Security Council, and especially the US and the UK. You have experienced first-hand America’s ambivalence towards the UN. How much has this undercut the UN’s relevance?

I was frequently disappointed by the approach of the US to issues of policy at the UN. The US finds it very difficult as a nation to move beyond the primacy of its own domestic public opinion.

That perspective – that we have democracy at home, but we will not, as Americans, allow international democracy – is regarded around the world as an untenable position for the superpower. And I think it is more than untenable, it is against the US’s long-term interests to demand such national exceptionalism.

That exceptionalism is extremely unpopular, and the US’s extraterritorial reach is very unpopular. That loss of legitimacy around the world is affecting American interests, in the Middle East, over Afghanistan, over the reaction to the Russian invasion of Ukraine; America losing the argument with international public opinion has a material effect on American power, influence and interests.

Has America paid the price for asserting its exceptionalism? From your perspective, representing the UK, arguably the closest ally of the US and one with a permanent seat on the Security Council, how did you manage this?

Well, I had a long experience of that in my job in Baghdad. Yes, the UK normally supports the US in international forums because our interests coincide. In foreign policy, interests are more important than values, and sometimes you have to make compromises and shade your values in order to get results and to avoid conflict.

I found myself taking up the US’ arguments and trying to deliver them as the UK, because the US was more unpopular than the UK and we could act more subtly. The US was more unpopular than the UK because the UK – and a lot of the time France – tried a lot harder than other permanent members to work for the common interest of UN members.

There were times I argued publicly against the US at the Security Council because their logic was incompatible with a multilateral approach, over the International Criminal Court for instance, or over some approaches to the Middle East. I would take a different view, not just because I didn’t want to seem like a constant puppet of the US, but because I thought the logic that they were following was constraining for them, and the counter-productiveness washed off on us.

Here, I want to make an important point. You won’t get governments coming together to form a multilateral approach with all the compromises that this entails unless they are confident of their position at home. They can’t otherwise explain those compromises to their domestic public opinion. If governments are insecure at home, they won’t pursue a multilateral approach because of that insecurity.

The UK is seeking to define a new global role for itself. It has been one of the most influential states at the UN. Do you see this changing?

I don’t think the change of leader makes a terrific difference for the UK in the UN because there is cross-party parliamentary agreement that the UN is important.

I was disappointed that the UK did not take the UN more seriously at a political level except when it badly needed it at a particular moment. At an official level, there was plenty of support from London, but I don’t think that politicians ever gave much priority to the health of the UN.

Why America’s midterm elections matter for the world The World Today mhiggins.drupal 28 September 2022

The outcome could threaten the fight against climate change and the future of democracy itself, warns Leslie Vinjamuri.

As the November 8 midterm elections in the United States approach, the sense of urgency among the Democrats and Republicans is escalating. Early voter turnout is on track to surpass the 2018 midterms, when a record 122 million Americans voted ahead of election day. The midterms – when congressional, state and local seats are determined – used to pass almost unnoticed, especially outside the US.

Since 2018, though, they have become a matter of global concern. The 2022 midterm elections will be the first major elections in the US since the January 6 insurrection at the US Capitol. As such, they will be the first real litmus test for the continued relevance of Donald Trump and Trumpism.

For both parties, winning is more important than ever and it is not only a matter of policy. Today, a majority of members of both parties – 72 per cent of Republicans and 63 per cent of Democrats – see those belonging to the opposing party as immoral, according to a Pew Research Center poll in September, representing a significant rise since 2016.

In many states, the midterms will have a direct impact on the 2024 presidential elections, influencing who decides how voting takes place, how votes are counted and, especially, who controls the certification of election results.

Given this context, the stakes in elections are especially high. The winners will have the upper hand not only in defining many procedural rules but also the values that constitute the nation, such as on abortion rights, education and healthcare.

Republicans and Democrats align on most key foreign policy

Though foreign policy will bear a strong resemblance to its former self even if Republicans gain a majority in the House of Representatives, as many anticipate, the outcome of the elections on US global influence could impact efforts to combat climate change and to support the defence of Ukraine.

The Republican Party has become known for its embrace of climate deniers and the radicalized anti-immigrant rhetoric of many of its party’s most established figures. The failure to address rampant gun violence – and, instead, to defend a historically suspect interpretation of the right to bear arms – and the push for a national abortion ban mean that the party is imposing a version of America onto itself that is out-of-step with virtually all other rich democratic countries.

The choices voters make in November are likely to shape the values that come to the fore in the US, and with this the affinity that America’s closest partners feel for it.

Domestic policy is likely to be more heavily affected by the elections. A Republican majority in the House would stall progress on President Joe Biden’s domestic agenda and undercut his ability to raise the taxes he needs to pay for his spending plans. The drive to hold the former President Trump accountable will also be affected by the choices voters make in November.

A Republican majority in the House would spell an end to congressional investigations of Donald Trump. Instead, Republicans would use their electoral gains to launch their investigations into the Democrats.

One anti-Trump Republican on the January 6 committee investigating the storming of the Capitol building last year warned of a vengeful and obstructive turn against Biden from his Republican colleagues if they took the House. ‘They’re going to demand an impeachment vote on President Biden every week,’ said congressman Adam Kinzinger. It is under this shadow that the January 6 Committee is pressing ahead to finish its proceedings and publish its report.

On foreign policy, the parties are more aligned than divided on most of the key issues. Their differences are a matter of diplomacy, which matters, and degree. Support for Ukraine has had bipartisan backing, but in recent weeks the issue has become politicized. Some congressional Republicans are more hawkish than their Democratic counterparts in their ambition to support Ukraine. Yet, the congressman set to be Speaker of the House if Republicans gain a majority, Kevin McCarthy, is leading an effort to exercise far stronger oversight of any additional funds for Ukraine.

Ultimately, though, the president and his advisers maintain considerable control over foreign policy.  

Bipartisan support for a tougher stance on China was consolidated under Trump. He mobilized US voters by blaming China for the loss of manufacturing jobs. Later he held China responsible for the outbreak of Covid and for covering it up. China’s crackdown on democracy in Hong Kong, its assertiveness in the South China Seas, tensions over Taiwan and reports of human rights abuse against the Uighur in Xinjiang have cemented a bipartisan consensus on America’s China policy. But a more empowered Republican base looks likely to lead to a more ideologically driven anti-China rhetoric. 

The ground has also shifted over Russia. During President Trump’s tenure, Republican attitudes towards Vladimir Putin softened. But the Russian president’s aggressive invasion of Ukraine has entrenched American opposition to him and bolstered support for NATO.

Democrats and Republicans are also more aligned on policy towards Iran today than they were before Trump abandoned the Iran Deal negotiating the Middle Eastern country’s nuclear programme. On some contentious issues, such as immigration reform, progress is already stalled and that is unlikely to change.

US climate change policy may depend on the results

The upshot of all this is that the president is unlikely to make radical changes to US foreign policy regardless of the results of the midterms. The most important exception to this is climate change, which continues to be the unwanted stepchild of the Republican Party. Domestic infighting in the US would inevitably detract even further from the bold policy that is needed.

Republicans are unlikely to get the two-thirds majority needed to pass legislation that would undermine President Biden’s climate bill. Republican control of House committees, however, would add more politically driven oversight of any climate spending, including what has already been authorized by the Inflation Reduction Act. 

Policy convergence and clear executive authority cannot mitigate the sheer disruption that would be unleashed if the Republicans were to gain majorities in both the Senate and the House, however. For the rest of the world, and especially within Europe, this would send warning signs about the future trajectory of US foreign policy commitments and set off alarm bells that an ‘America First’ president might return to the White House after 2024.

A Republican majority in the House with a Democratic majority in the Senate would be disruptive, if less so, but would probably spell the end of business as usual, unsettling people, states and markets. All of this is unfolding at a time when many of the world’s rich democracies face internal divisions, rising inequality and populist challenges at home and so are ill-equipped to lead.

Democracies face a trust deficit. This is especially apparent in the US where only 43 per cent of Americans have trust in US institutions, according to the 2022 Edelman Trust Barometer.

Internal threats to democracy also unsettle the promise of US global leadership at a time when concerted and determined leadership is needed to maintain a strong and united response to Russia, and to tackle global food insecurity and the energy, climate and debt crises. In addition, the failure to lead a global response that can help developing countries is feeding a trust deficit between rich and poor countries.

The midterms will reveal a greater truth about the future of the Republican Party. Even more so, it will reveal the values held by the American electorate. In the run-up to the 2020 US presidential elections, Europeans frequently said that they would not give Americans a pass if they voted for Donald Trump twice – and indeed only 17 per cent of those in European Union countries would have cast a vote for Trump if they could.

A Republican midterm victory in both the Senate and the House of Representatives would have ripple effects across the Atlantic at a time when the threat from Russia has intensified.

The US is judged around the world for what it does, but also for who it is. The perception that democracy is failing in America creates a permissive environment for aspiring autocrats. At a time when democracy has been in decline around the world for more than 15 years, it is essential that the US fix its own democracy and that it demonstrates to the rest of the world that democracy can deliver.

The midterms will signal to the world what Americans value, sending a message about what it can expect from the US.

This article was updated on October 31, 2022 to reflect developments such as early voting turnout, and the impact of the midterms on the 2024 presidential election, support for Ukraine and climate change spending.

A seat at the table – why inclusivity matters in global governance 10 May 2021 — 1:30PM TO 3:00PM Anonymous (not verified) 22 April 2021 Online

Exploring the changing dynamics of global cooperation and the role inclusivity can play in building collaborative action.

Please click on the below link to confirm your participation and receive your individual joining details from Zoom for this event. You will receive a confirmation email from Zoom, which contains the option to add the event to your calendar if you so wish.

The scale of today’s global challenges demand collaborative and coordinated action. But deepening geopolitical competition is threatening multilateralism while growing inequality and social tensions continue to undermine public confidence in the ability of international institutions to deliver.

Into this challenging environment, add the complexity and sheer pace of many global challenges such as the climate crisis and the proliferation of new technologies – issues that cannot be addressed effectively by governments alone.

• How do global institutions and mechanisms need to adapt to address the demands for a fairer distribution of power between states and to engage the diverse set of actors essential today for effective solutions?
• What can be learnt from existing initiatives that bring together governments, civil society, private sector, cities, next generation leaders and other stakeholders?
• And what are the political obstacles to greater inclusivity?

This event supports the launch of a synthesis paper from Chatham House’s Inclusive Governance Initiative.

20 August 2020

TED Fellow and chemosensory researcher Paule Joseph unveils the hidden power of a sense that's too often overlooked: smell. She delves into the science behind smell — from how it evokes memory and emotion to its potential for early disease detection — and advocates for the creation of a baseline test for taste and smell that could open the door to more comprehensive health care.

Most school boards don’t look the students they serve, but new research suggests that must change.

Melting permafrost is leading to more frequent rockfalls and landslides on the iconic peak and other areas of the Alps

Astrophysicist Stephen Murray explains how X-ray energies can be used to understand dark matter and its place in the universe

Non-Profit Cooperative Assembled Virtual Team to Prove $1,000 Incubator Was Possible, Safe, and Reliable