Africa is on the frontline of a fast-moving battle against digital misinformation, one with profound effects for politics, trust and daily life. In this episode of We Kinda Need a Revolution, host Nolita Mvunelo talks to Abdullahi Alim, award-winning economist and CEO of the Africa Future Fund, about how social media, YouTube rumours, deepfakes and adversarial AI are reshaping the continent, often out of the global spotlight. From election hoaxes to ethnic divisions stoked online, they highlight the unique and urgent challenges confronting the continent and the lack of accountability from major tech platforms. But the conversation is also about hope: practical solutions like investing in education, boosting community resilience and creating spaces for honest, offline dialogue. Drawing on his own journey from Somalia to a different life in Australia, Abdullahi reflects on how lived experience shapes his vision of the risks and opportunities Africa faces in the digital age. Watch the episode: Full transcript: Nolita: While the world's attention is often elsewhere, Africa is facing a digital war on misinformation. Nations across the continent are facing a quieter but equally dangerous battle for the truth in the age of social media and AI, one that is reshaping politics trust and power. Welcome to We Kinda Need a Revolution, a special series of the Club of Rome Podcast where we explore bold ideas for shaping sustainable futures. I am Nolita Mvunelo, and today I'm speaking to Abdullahi Alim, an award-winning economist and CEO of the Africa Future Fund. Abdullahi is a leading voice on how disinformation and adversarial AI are reshaping power and trust. These are ideas that he examines in his foreign policy essay, how Africa's war on disinformation can save democracies everywhere. In this episode, we dive into the war on misinformation in Africa and ask, what risks lie ahead, what role are young people playing, and what will it take to build resilience and reclaim the digital space? Let's explore what's at stake and what's possible. Hi, how are you doing? Thank you so much for joining us today. Abdullahi: I'm good. Thanks. Thanks for having me, Nolita. Nolita: Our discussion today is going to be on Africa's war and disinformation, but before we get into that, can you please tell us more about yourself and what led you into considering some of these challenges and these potentially existential risks? Abdullahi: I think every idea needs to be drawn back to its origins, and that also holds for me as a person too. I was born in 1992 in Somalia, and I am of the children of that initial conflict that earned Somalia, the unfortunate nickname of a failed state. And I think going from that early childhood experience in in Somalia to eventually where we settled in Australia, in a more low income bubble when you are a product of failed systems, be it, examples of systems of migration, systems of transportation, systems of housing, you have no choice but to think deeply about how those systems operate to advantage some people and how they operate to disadvantage others. So, I think I've always been a deeply reflective person, even from a young age, and I take that with great responsibility, because my story isn't the norm. I'm the exception to the norm, having had the life that I've had so far, and I want to use that responsibly. And I think that starts not so much with solving things, but asking the right questions, and that's why I lend myself better to systemic issues, systemic fault lines, like what we're about to discuss today. Nolita: So as a start, may you please take us through the challenge and the landscape? Abdullahi: Sure. So I think when we think of disinformation, we think of it through a US Eurocentric lens, largely because it's language borrowed from the west. When we think about the large disinformation campaigns that pique media interest, we're usually talking about events that's around the US election, or perhaps proxy conflicts taking place in Europe between pro-Russian voices and pro NATO voices. But the world of disinformation actually expands beyond that, and I think it gets the least amount of attention in Sub Saharan Africa. Least amount of attention, but some of the most profound impacts. Why? Because, I think for the most part, identity on the continent is still delineated against clan, religious and ethnic lines. So, somebody could be of X nationality, but at the same time, they may have an additional loyalty, especially when conflict comes to rise. At a more granular level, the loyalty again, could be to their ethnic group, it could be to their religious group. It could be to their clan. Now, when you have an unregulated landscape of that sort, and when you have less sort of resources deployed by the big tech companies who have a large monopoly in the information highway in these parts of the world, what it means is that those regions, and principally Africa, in this moment, is most vulnerable and most at risk to the kind of disinformation tactics which seem quite analogue relative to what we typically think of disinformation. It really could just be somebody edited to look like they've said something when they haven't. It could be a court attributed to a particular leader of a group, any of those forms of misappropriated text or deep fakes, anything from one end to the other, can have real life ramifications. Nolita: Do you have any like specific examples or cases where this has happened and what has the impact been? I say this also, like in the current context, where there is a lot of conflict right now, is that at the same time, Africa doesn't get the same type of global attention at times of conflict. Abdullahi: I think the example that I can give again would be in Ethiopia, because it sort of happened at the worst possible time when the conflict in Tigray broke out in Ethiopia. And of course, this has been brewing for some time. I think it came off the backs of a lot of. Tech companies culling their trust and safety teams, budgets, councils. And what you had was one moderator, for example, for every let's say I'm giving an arbitrary figure here, just to sort of give you the scale one per million of population, so that really when you, when you reduce her to that level, you're never going to be at the scale necessary to be able to tackle this issue. We saw examples in Ethiopia where one faction would basically share an image of a leader from another particular faction. This is, again, was based on ethnic lines, saying a particular, particularly provocative statement against them, or suggesting that they were about to incite violence, which they never did. It got so bad that it reached the stage where that particular misappropriated community leader from the other group was killed off the backs of this misassumption. Now, when you look at the death toll in the Tigray conflict, clocking something around 600,000 people, you cannot disassociate that from social media and the role of disinformation in this particular form of warfare. Nolita: So then I sense that there's an element of accountability and infrastructure, like what is available for governments or maybe even people to, you know, hold platforms accountable for the lack of infrastructure, like the lack of moderation, etc, but also who chooses what gets moderated, what is right, what is wrong, what can be shared, what can't be shared. Are there any initiatives, even at the state level or even at the international organisation level, that are addressing some of these challenges? Abdullahi: Most of the efforts now are calling for more moderation, which would have worked a few years ago, but in the age of AI, actually, it's it's going to prove quite inconsequential. I'll tell you why. So I could literally put out propaganda that calls for and incites violence against even an individual, let alone a particular group, and in such a way that I use the latest, what we call adversarial AI, to change and augment the detail of the image from the back end in such a minute way that the naked eye won't see the difference. But a machine might misread as something completely different. So it might read it as, oh, that's a rose, or that's something that isn't inflammatory. So imagine that at scale. So the question then becomes, where do we go from here? Now, unfortunately, the AI ecosystem is quite closed around the world. A lot of these big companies are running closed models. We're outsourcing this huge responsibility to smaller teams behind these tech companies, who, for the most part, don't have the incentive and may not have the interdisciplinary expertise to be able to tackle this issue at their core. So that, I think is the number one issue at the moment is that we've got closed innovation ecosystems that as these problems get more and more advanced, these disinformation tactics become more and more advanced, it actually shuts the door from a global community of experts, both technical and non-technical, being able to come to the table to figure out how to counter that from an algorithm perspective, and we're outsourcing this important duty and responsibility to smaller and smaller companies whose main incentives is really just to win the AI race, as it's called. And so I think who bears the cost? Unfortunately, it will be the continent. It will fortunately be parts of the world that don't have that. Don't have that same level of fluency with these kind of more advanced disinformation campaigns. I also think nalita, we're paying the costs for decades long poor education systems and decades long lack of investments, lack of even just community spaces to heal divides, to create spaces where tension will arise when you bring up narratives and experiences, lived experiences in particular, but not doing it unfortunately means that those issues fester to the point where, when a new medium emerges that's able to sort of take prey on that it
Why does the vision of a wellbeing economy remain both urgently needed and frustratingly out of reach? In this episode of The Club of Rome Podcast, Till Kellerhoff speaks with political economist and Wellbeing Economy Alliance co-founder Katherine Trebeck to unpack this dilemma. As overlapping global crises continue to shake confidence in our current economic model, they discuss the promise and paradoxes of wellbeing economics: its appeal, its challenges and its limitations. Together, they dig into what’s stalling real systemic change, why hopeful visions struggle against the tide of rising authoritarianism and pessimism, and how ideology shapes our economic futures. Their conversation highlights the need for plurality and the need to move beyond dashboards toward courageous, structural reform. Full transcript: Till: People are losing trust in our current system, and we are faced not only with environmental degradation, but also the destruction of our social fabric. Many of the challenges we see today are actually symptoms of a crisis of our economic system. An alternative to that is the Wellbeing Economy, something I will talk about in today's Club of Rome podcast, where we explore bold ideas for shaping sustainable futures. I am Till Kellerhoff, Programme Director at The Club of Rome, and in this episode, I'm delighted to be joined by political economist, writer and advocate for economic system change, Katherine Trebek. Katherine co-founded the Wellbeing Economy Alliance and is a member of The Club of Rome. During the episode, we get into the concepts of wellbeing economy, the challenges of implementation in this crazy world, why this movement doesn't benefit more from the existing pain of the people and current crisis and why there's still hope. Katherine, it's a real pleasure to speak to you today. How are you doing? Katherine: I'm well, yeah, fantastic to be with you, and I'm buzzing at the moment, because yesterday, I was hanging out with incredible community group who are doing amazing work up in Sydney. We're coming up with some cool cornerstone indicators for the success of their locality. So I'm filled with hope at the moment. Till: Oh, that's amazing. And we will both speak about communities indicators and hope later in this episode. And we want to talk about Wellbeing Economics today, what it is, but also what the challenges and hopes are in the implementation. Before we dig deeper into that, if you had 30 seconds to explain wellbeing economics to someone who isn't very familiar with the term, how would you do that? And what does it have to do with a picnic blanket? Katherine: Ah, okay, so I'm not going to tell you about wellbeing economics. I'm going to talk about the wellbeing economy agenda. Wellbeing economics, I think of as more about the curricula and the sort of the study of wellbeing, but the wellbeing economy agenda is much more like a program for change that is essentially about transforming our economic systems, how we produce, consume, who's winning, who's losing, how we treat the environment, how we treat each other, the nature of businesses, transforming all of that. So it's very deliberately in service of people and planet. Till: Excellent. Katherine: You want to hear about a picnic blanket? Till: Absolutely Katherine: That's my, my way of describing how the wellbeing economy agenda is not some new on its own concept that's here to sort of shove out of the way all the existing amazing schools of thought and ideas and visions for economic system change. There are loads of concepts out there, loads of ways of describing an economy that is much better for people and planet. And lots of folk who have heard of many of these, from donut economics, regenerative economics, solidarity economics, feminist economics, future generations thinking, post growth economics and so on and so on and so on. I think of the wellbeing economy as not so much coming along saying, Here I am in addition to this, pick me over the others, but more sitting on a sort of different level and saying it's a bit like a picnic blanket, that's making all of them feel welcome, but really showcasing that, yes, they'll have their slightly different emphasis and different terminology and thus resonate with different audiences. And that's, I think, okay, but at their core, they really share this idea of an economy that is in service of people and planet, rather than the other way around. Till: Excellent. And you said in a TED Talk five years ago that some people call wellbeing economics a utopian vision. But since when is this a bad thing? And I would agree with that, you know, I think we need utopia. We need also vision, but that was five years ago. Has this hope and this vision and this utopia changed in the last years for you? Katherine: Do you know Till, I think, five years ago, almost, in retrospect, feels like halcyon days. And of course, the challenges were enormous then, but this is pre COVID, since that that talk, which was, I think 2019, we've seen more and more destruction of our planet. We're seeing almost daily records being being broken in terms of extreme heat and flooding and so on. And I'm here in Australia, and we feel that particularly acutely, and just people's level of despair and loneliness and frustration with the system seems to have been accelerated even since those days, which were challenging enough. And so I think the need to have hope in a better way of doing the economy. The need to point out that our economy can be redesigned so it's much better for people and planet, that need has even become more critical. It certainly hasn't gone away. Has the hope for change abated? Well, I think it'd be almost naive to say we're not in a very challenging situation. I think though the recognition that business as usual can't carry on, feels to be more broadly understood, and we're seeing folks almost reaching for almost what I describe as coping mechanisms, because they're so frustrated with the status quo. They're doing that at the metaphorical pillbox in through, you know, self-medication or turning to retail therapy, for example, or their Twitter bubbles or x bubbles, or they're turning for coping mechanisms at the ballot box as well. And we're seeing that with the rise of sort of quite extreme politics around around the world, though not here in Australia, as we've just seen in the last few weeks. But yeah, it is interesting. I think what's inevitable is change is happening. I think the question is how deliberate communities and societies can be about shaping that change so that it's just and something better emerges beyond. Till: I would very much agree with that change is happening, but the key question is, why, despite the crisis, despite the factors you mentioned, despite the climate catastrophe, but also related social impacts, and we see rising levels of burnouts and depressions. And one could say there are not only environmental tipping points, but also social tipping points in a way that destabilise societies. And all of that is there and all of that we see, but still, one doesn't have the feeling, if you look into the news today, that the implementation of the wellbeing economy is much farther advanced now than was five years ago. And the question really is, why is that? Because you point out that crises are very often moments of paradigm shifts, right? Katherine: Yeah, I think you're right. I don't think it was a lack of ideas lying around that, say, for example, after the global financial crisis, we didn't see a whole scale shift to a different way of configuring and sort of having a different logic behind the economic system to the one that we have today. In a sense, we've just doubled down on the current approach. And so I think part of the challenge is that the ideas are not yet making it from the movement, if I can use that broadly understood idea of the economic change movement, they're not making it from the movement's quarters and desks and discussions and conferences and gatherings into policy making sufficiently. They're not making it into many universities sufficiently. They're not, definitely not making into education curricula, and they're not, perhaps most critically, making it into the everyday conversations of everyday people. I don't think the movement is short of ideas. I don't think the movement is short of policy examples, and there's definitely no shortage of evidence of the why for change, and I think that's great, and that's all critical and important, but it clearly has not been enough. And so I think that almost we need the next wave of work to be done by the movement is to broaden the base, take these conversations into quarters that are that are not hearing them, that are not excited by these ideas, do not feel that their lives will be positively improved by implementation of these ideas, and, perhaps most importantly, also help people work with people in a compassionate way, so that they feel they're owning the change, and that they're at the forefront of the change. So it's not just being imposed on them by admittedly really well-intentioned movement, but it's something that's and it's a cliche word to use, but really co-created with communities around the world, and then use that momentum to shift the pressure on various policymakers. And when I say policymakers, I also mean decision-makers inside businesses and enterprises as well, not just governments. I don't think either we should be naive about the counter pushback to some of this work, and if I could just even share the small example of Scotland, where I used to live, the movement there this sort of civil society group and colleagues that I worked with, I think we're pretty successful in pushing the agenda onto the policy table. We had a lot of government traction. We even had the First Minister do her TED talk on the wellbeing economy approach, and a group of governments that
What does freedom look like for African women in a world shaped by crisis, colonial legacies, and patriarchy? How does African feminism take shape across the continent, from urban political centres to rural communities? And is feminism rooted in African values, or has it too often been misrepresented and misunderstood? In this episode Nolita Mvunelo sits down with Minna Salami, feminist author and social critic, to explore identity, liberation and justice. Together, they explore how African feminist thought can fuel planetary wellbeing, challenge patriarchy and imagine radically inclusive futures. Watch the episode: Full transcript: Nolita: Welcome to 'We Kinda Need a Revolution', a special limited series of The Club of Rome Podcast where we explore bold, intergenerational ideas for shaping sustainable futures. I am Nolita Mvunelo, a Program Manager at The Club of Rome, and in this episode, I'm excited to be joined by feminist author, social critic and member of The Club of Rome, Minna Salami, the Program Chair at THE NEW INSTITUTE. Together, we unpack the central question of her powerful book and essay, Can Feminism be African, exploring how African feminism offers a unique lens to understand ideas of freedom, identity and power in a world shaped by crisis. We dive into class and generational tensions, the influence of colonial legacies and the personal experiences that inform Minna's vision of what it means to truly be free. Hi, Mina, how are you doing? Minna: I'm very well. Thank you. How are you? Nolita: I'm good. Thank you so much for joining us. What brought you to the work that you do? Minna: I have always been someone who was very observant and opinionated at the same time, and from a very early age, one of the ways in which I expressed that was through writing. So already, as a child, I would write little columns in like my school magazine, and they were typically about topics that had to do with society, like I lived in Nigeria. So, you know, I wrote pieces about democracy in my country, or whatever, stuff like that. And so when I discovered the the technology of blogging in the early knots, I automatically and very spontaneously set one up. This was probably around 2006 and then that sort of evolved. And then in 2010 I launched my what became my blog, which I still have, called MsAfropolitan. Nolita: One of the key essays that you wrote was about feminism being African. What is African feminism in your definition? Minna: Well, African feminism is, by large, like all feminism in that it wants to abolish the patriarchy. You know, that is the key philosophy of all feminism, is that it is anti patriarchal and sees male dominance as something that is harmful and detrimental to social progress. And so I preface because it's important to understand that, you know, African feminism, in that sense, shares the same same intentions and motivations as all feminism does. What makes it specific is, of course, its connection to the continent. Patriarchy, you know, it looks and feels and operates in somewhat different ways in relation to Africa, which means, for example, that African feminism is concerned more with tradition than maybe a kind of white Western feminism might be. It is certainly much more concerned with fighting imperialism and neo colonialism, because these are things about the global order which have negative impacts on African women's lives. So African feminism, to sort of try to sum it up, which is a very difficult thing to do, is feminism that is concerned with all the many different issues that affect African women's lives, from patriarchy to tradition to imperialism to the global order. Nolita: It's incredibly complex. I think reading some of your work and being a young African woman myself, a lot of it resonates with me. To your point that you're making about it being about questioning traditions, what types of traditions have you witnessed that made you think, actually, there's a bit of nuance here, and how do they show up in urban centers versus rural life? Because I noticed also in my own lived experience, that how a woman shows up in the rural space versus how I show up living in a city are very different. And so my expressions of who I am, my liberties and my freedoms are very much like in line with, as you said, imperialism and traditions, etc. Minna: I mean, I think I should first of all say that I grew up in in the city in Lagos, so my experiences of rural Africa are limited. So, yeah, tradition in Africa, it's such a complicated and paradoxical space, because many of the traditions that may be harmful for African women's lives may also contain elements of empowerment. You know, because we are a continent whose history has so much been negated through the transatlantic slave trade, through the colonial narratives. We've lost so much of of our history, really, and with that, of course, also traditions. And there's something I think, quite empowering and enriching about recuperating many of those traditions. I mean, there's traditions, for instance, in Yorubaland, which is where my ancestry is, of women having, like female only, political alliances in which they would come together and reflect and then also strategize and have a real impact on the rulers, the kings and the chiefs of the particular communitie. And these traditions are, and were, of course, very empowering in some way, but at the same time, they were part of a patriarchal structure in which it was like in the Yoruba lineage, there has been one female Ooni. The Ooni is the sort of highest, the royal king of Yorubaland. So this is a very male dominant and patriarchal lineage. And so we can see with this tradition that, you know, it sort of gives women power to some extent, but it also sits within a kind of culture that is disempowering to women at the same time. Nolita: Do you have any insight on how to go about handling these types of tensions? I mean, a crude way to say it is, like a criticism that I hear a lot, is this feminism thing, it's a Western thing. It's a white people thing. We have to honor our traditions and our culture. But how do we do both? Minna: Yes, this is absolutely very much at the crux of African feminism and the African feminist movement, because since its inception in the 1970s as an explicit political movement for women's liberation in Africa and the diaspora, there has been a vast backlash against feminism in the continent. And the underlying argument, and of the backlash, is precisely this notion that feminism is not something that is, you know, home to Africa, it's a Western import. It's unAfrican you know, there's all these kinds of very harmful and ungrounded positions, that that that nevertheless have had a wide traction, but nevertheless so within African feminism, I mean, there's just been so many answers to your question, you know. And It really depends on which feminist you're speaking with which region they're in, as you asked previously, about like rural Africa versus urban Africa, I think the way in which we negotiate and negate space, valuing and even loving our indigenous traditions vis a vis how we, you know, respond to our real desires to express autonomy over our bodies, over our choices, over the ways that we think and live our lives. You know, there's really a tension there. You know, it's not an easy thing to there's no straightforward answer, in a sense, but I do think that it's very important to do the latter and and, and to the extent that indigenous traditions present obstacles to a woman being able to thrive and express agency, then I would choose the expression of agency, and maybe therein that's where there are possibilities to draw inspiration from indigenous traditions without maybe embodying them fully. I remember reading a very wonderful article by South African or Zimbabwean writer, Sisonke. I cannot pronounce her surname, Simang, I think it is pronounced something like that. But she writes about this kind of practice of the dowry at a wedding, you know, which is a very patriarchal practice, tradition. But she somehow, like, I can't remember the exact details, but she incorporates this into her wedding in a way that feels empowering and that is empowering. So, you know, there's a way to negate these, these spaces, I think Nolita: I'd be very interested to read that on how to make it empowering, because that is very much a tradition that's still practiced in my culture. And there have been, like, incredibly heated debates about that, about why are we still buying women? Or, you know, whatever perception there is, how are we forging pathways towards the future without spending too much time venerating the past? Which brings me to my question about African feminism as an opportunity to bring forth while being on a healthy planet. Is there a connection between the those two things, and what are the opportunities that it presents for for us? Minna: Our planet and our environment is absolutely one of the very important issues for African feminism at large. Because for one, you know, Africa contributes, I think it is 2% it's like between 2 and 5% of global warming, right? I mean, and yet, the continent is so much impacted by what happens, you know, to our climate and from other continents, contribution to global warming. And so climate change impacts African women's lives detrimentally. Women in the continent are responsible for so much of agriculture and farming, and you know, all of the the professions that are related to the land. And so climate change, of course, you know, is impoverishing a lot of women in the continent. And yet, at the same time, there's this cultural narrative about how you know women generally, but specifically African Women's bodies are just so much connected to the soil. You know, there's this really romantic imagery about Mother Africa, and that's, you know, of course, you know, often shaped as the continent and as a woman at the same tim
Africa’s adult population consists of three generations: the independence generation that lived through colonial rule and subsequent liberation, the multiparty system generation, and the younger generations with the complex challenge of ensuring peace, prosperity, and climate resilience within one generation. In this episode, Nolita Mvunelo is joined by Aya Chebbi, Founder of the Nala Feminist Collective. Aya rose to prominence as a political blogger during Tunisia’s Revolution. She later became the first-ever African Union Special Envoy on Youth, championing youth inclusion and intergenerational collaboration through campaigns such as “silencing the guns”. Today, she leads NalaFem, one of Africa’s largest multigenerational alliances of women politicians and activists united towards transformative feminist change. Together, Aya and Nolita dive into the role of African women in strengthening peace and security while exploring the evolving perspectives on youth leadership in bringing reform. Watch the episode: Full Transcript: Nolita: We kinda need a revolution. Welcome to a special edition of The Club of Rome Podcast, exploring how we can work together across generations, across cultures, across regions, to mobilise action for a regenerative future, a podcast about how to drive meaningful change when the only response seems to be... we kind of need a revolution. I am Nolita Mvunelo, Programme Manager of The Club of Rome, and in this episode, I had a chance to speak to Aya Chebbi from Tunisia about women and silencing the guns. Aya was the first African Union youth envoy and founder of Nalafem Collective. Well, thank you for joining us today, Aya. Thank you for taking the time to speak to us. You were the first African Union youth envoy, and a sizable part of your work focused on the theme silencing the guns. Today, you lead Nalafem, one of Africa's largest multi-generational alliances of women and politicians and activists united towards transformative feminist change. Has there been a shift in thematic focus, from silencing the guns to, you know, transformative change from women, and if so, what inspired that shift? Aya: Thank you so much, Nolita. No, there hasn't been. I think for me, gender justice issues are intersectional issues. When I launched Nalafem, it was guided by Africa Young Women Beijing+ 25 Manifesto, which we convened at the African Union. Six consultations, six regions of Africa, and they came up with 10 demands, and part of those demands are silencing the guns, sexual reproductive health rights, economic justice, digital justice and so on. So Nalafem is taking that manifesto to member states to ensure the implementation and accountability of these demands to go to the ground and trickle down to women and girls in conflict settings, in rural areas, in displaced areas. So, it definitely hasn't shifted. I think it deepened, because now I'm focused on looking at peace and security from a feminist lens. I'm looking at peace and security from where are the young women at the table of negotiation. But I think also part of the problem in women, you know, peace and security, youth peace and security is looking at these issues in silos and not looking at them as intersectional issues that have to address health and education and employment and all the other issues that we talk about. Nolita: In your work of trying to get member states to adopt some of the work and the policies, what has been like, the most surprising thing that you did not expect to happen. Aya: Well, you know, after being in this space for over 15 years, I'm not surprised anymore. Member states, a lot of the member states’ attitudes towards looking at women and young women in leadership. For me, the double standard, the contradictions of how member states behave, remain my biggest surprise, even though some of the countries it's just not surprising anymore. Like they have a track record of that's how they deal with issues in silos. I think particularly for Africa, this is really globally, you know, at different levels, especially Africa-Europe dynamics, but particularly in Africa, I think after over decades advocating for youth participation, and especially young women, and still hearing the rhetoric of, you know, demographic dividend, but not seeing it on the ground, hearing the rhetoric of youth as a force of change, but not seeing young people appointed to leadership positions, hearing the rhetoric of, yeah, women at the table. But we look at Senegal, recent election, and we don't find any single women in the cabinet. We look at all the recent elections, and it's, you know, a lot of old men holding space, or even younger men now holding space in Chad, the recent election - a 40 year old. But then you look at society, you look at the leadership spectrum, you don't see women and youth. And so that's also contradiction is still surprising to me, because I think we passed the stage of saying why youth should be co-leading this space, why, you know, women and young women should be in these spaces. I think we all agree on why. So, why are we not moving to implementation? Nolita: That's such a good point. Because I remember when I first learned of you and your position at the AU, I was like, “Oh my gosh, this is such a big moment, right?” A young woman, a young woman in such a high-level position, but to your point is that, like, very rarely does it trickle down back into leadership at different spheres, and there's like, there seems to be a resistance. How can young people contribute to driving forth that cause that you were such an implementing moment of? Aya: You know, I'm quite frustrated because young people have done an incredible, incredible, incredible mobilisation. Have taken lot of risks since 2010, 2011 revolutions, from Tunisia to Libya to Senegal to Sudan to Algeria to Burkina Faso, you know. So, I think there is a lot of like always demand from youth, whether it's democracy or the climate movement or whatever cause is. The decision makers who are predominantly male and old, they always expect youth to call on or to champion or to, you know, drive the change, you know, but at the same time being really intimidated by these youth who are demanding change. So, you want youth to demand change, and then when they go on the streets, you're ready with tear gas and arrest and deportation or whatever it is. So, you know, I think there is predominantly a fundamental question of how the African state relates with its youthful population, that needs to be addressed. Because now that we're having, let's say, more young people in the system, whether it's head of state, we had two at least this year elected in their 40s or members of parliament, we don't see the system changing. So, it's not just now a generational issue. It's also a system-based issue. And these institutional systems, they're post-colonial systems that were built on a certain legacy and that they do not speak to the youth population aspirations, the way they're structured. They do not speak to the citizenship, which is predominantly young, the youngest in the world. And I think that's where we should really put our efforts, and our analysis and to address the root cause of this. We're pretty much focused on what's going on, very politically, on the political level, but we're not looking at systems change. Because if you, even if you put massively right now young people in the system. If the system is failing, it's not going to work. You're going to set up this generation to failure as well. And I think we need that incremental change in reforming the system and making it respond to the aspiration of this century and the next century for it to make sense. From Nalafem side, what we're trying to do is to really prepare this generation when they take on the system, because we know this is an army of women we're building to take charge of the continent, but we don't want them to perpetuate the same practices, the same norms, the same system, the same policies. We want to make sure that, first of all, they all know each other, they all understand where they come from and their stories and their context. So, when they're all at the same level of leadership, change can be accelerated. If you look at the whole of the African Union and you find more than 50% of these leaders actually understand where we're all going, actually, not disputing these small you know, self-interest debates and know where we should be going. Those policies will pass like, you know, very fast. And I think that's when you need that army to take charge with the same values, the same understanding of the future, the same aspirations at the same time. And that way you see a shift, I think that's one thing we're trying to do. And then the second thing is to make sure there is a generational healing. So part of what we do is a lot of work on multi-generational. It's not like, you guys are irrelevant, and we should, you know, take over you. It's more like, how can we co-lead this moment? Because we're going to take over anyway, and so without when we transition, we can build something better, and we can be better leaders than you were. Nolita: Two questions, then. One is, you mentioned an aspiration of the century, or the aspiration of the generation. If you were to articulate in a few sentences, what would it be? And then the second one, maybe adding on to that is, part of it has to do with power, right? Because we look at it from a generational lens. But to your point, about like, systems are not changing, like we're asking for inclusion, but we're asking for inclusion in systems that fundamentally do not work for the type of makeup that we have. There's a point in there at the centre about it has to do with power and how we organise power, in that at the end of the day, there will only be one president, there will only be one minister of whatever, there will only be... so even if we're asking for inc
From Financing Change to Changing Finance Today’s financial system extracts value from natural, human, and social capital while increasing the gap between rich and poor. This has significantly shifted the interaction between financial and economic systems from ‘finance supporting the economy’ to ‘the economy supporting finance’. In this episode, Till Kellerhoff, Program Director at The Club of Rome, speaks with Peter Blom, former CEO of Triodos Bank, member of The Club of Rome and chair of the Club of Rome Rethinking Finance Hub, about the urgent need to transform the financial system. They explore the transition from financing sustainable projects to changing the financial paradigm itself, the concept of financialisation, and how it impacts the real economy, ecological health, and social equity, as well as the possibilities and obstacles in achieving these transformations. Watch the video: Full transcript: Till: Welcome to the Club of Rome Podcast, exploring the shifts in mindset and policy needed to transform the complex challenges we face today. My name is Till Kellerhoff. I am Program Director of the Club of Rome and leading the Reclaiming Economics Impact Hub. I am very pleased to welcome today Peter Blom. Peter is the former CEO of Triodos Bank, which won the Financial Times sustainability bank of the Year award in 2009 and has become a global reference for value based banking. Peter also founded the Global Alliance for Banking on Values in 2009 and was the chair of the board in 2021.Alongside many other things, Peter is a member of the executive committee of the Club of Rome and Chair of the Rethinking finance Impact Hub, which aims to contribute to the evolution of the financial system so it can serve the transformation of our economy to achieve human well being within planetary boundaries. Welcome Peter. Peter: Thank you for being here. Till: Thank you for joining. And let's start with a general question on the Club of Rome to which you became a member in 2015. What motivated you to join the Club of Rome back then? Peter: Well, what motivated me to join was actually the invitation I got, and I was very surprised by that. And what I was surprised of that people said to me from the Club of Rome, you're relatively young. I just had then become 50, but anyway, you have a good track record, so we are very happy to have you in the club. So that was I felt very honored as an as a useful new member to the club, and really was happy that I could contribute to the to the thinking of the Club of Rome. What in that time, was not so exposed anymore as it was in 1973 when I read as a very young guy, this first book, Limits to Growth. But I've seen in the last, I would say, decades two decades, that there has been an increasing interest in the Club of Rome thinking. And that we are very doing very well in transforming this idea of limits to growth, so a more system change approach what is needed today and tomorrow. Till: Very good. And you mentioned the Limits to Growth, already published in 1972 by a group of MIT researchers, and the Limits to Growth spoke about the material limits to growth on a finite planet. Now your background is in banking and finance. What is the connection of finance and the financial system to this boundaries of growth on a finite planet? Peter: Yeah, actually, if you look back at this report, it's it's quite a linear approach. It's not a circular approach at all. It's a quite linear approach. But first we had to be more conscious and aware of the linear limitations of our system before we could really think about the circular approach we need today. And in banking, it's very important, and finance very important that you don't look only to the next two or three months, although that happens more and more in banking, but the next 5 to 10 years. So limits to growth, what is possible, how you can grow your business in a sustainable way, is highly relevant for banks. It was already in the 80s, when I started my career in banking, but it's even more today. So circular thinking, not only counting on growth, also considering that substitution from non sustainable business to more sustainable business is a very important aspect of banking today, and so I think the club of Rome's thinking about system finance is highly relevant for the financial industry, the financial sector. Till: And you mentioned already, one point of finance very often connected with is that it demands short term financial returns. Before we come to the broader systemic shifts of the finance system, is it even possible as kind of one player to change the game? So if the rules are in such game that they value short term returns, how easy is it to change that as one player in this industry? Peter: I think you cannot change yourself the whole system as one single financial institution. That is one of the reasons where, when we founded this Global Alliance for Banking on Values, I realize already, uh, 20 years ago, that we did quite well and grew very well as a bank, that just being one bank growing is not enough to change the system. Maybe with an alliance, we could contribute, and I think that is happening at the moment. At that I'm also very happy that the Global Alliance is so successful at the moment. But I think what you can do is stretch. You can say from getting even more short term. You can make it slightly more longer term, and can make clear that maybe it's not the next year you're only looking at, but the next five year, the next seven years, maybe the next 10 years. But you can never say, Well, I only look at the long term and not at the short term. Banking is looking at both. But many banks forgot about the long term and only looked at the short term. I think that's what we corrected, in a way, by the practices of Triodos Bank, and I must say, where many other banks also are looking at because they also can see that the system is much more vulnerable than it was maybe 20, 30, years ago, where you really couldn't count on linear developments what you really can't anymore today. Till: And we saw the vulnerability of the banking sector in the crisis, 2008, 2009. Do you think regulations were put in place that changed the system to the better since then, in the sense of the banks that were too big to fail, in the sense of the public having to buy certain banks out of that, did regulation and governance pick up on that issue? Peter: Let's stay positive. It helped. It helped to calm down things, to create bigger buffers for the banks, what was good. But they did not change fundamentally the system. So it was still possible to create more money, to create to grow faster the financial sector than the real economy, what, in itself, brings a lot of vulnerability into the whole system, including the society and what we having to deal with as people. So I do think it helped, and we learned from it, but not fundamentally. Fundamentally. We have to look much more closely to what is the role of banking and how can it? How can we make it much more structurally supporting the real economy, instead of making it less vulnerable and slightly more more stable compared to what it was in the past? Till: Yeah, and you mentioned that certain changes and improvements might have happened, but not on a systemic level. And I think that's one of the goals many Club of Rome members could subscribe to, right achieving something like well being for all within planetary boundaries from a systemic level. How helpful do you say now the financial system today is in achieving this goal, achieving well being for all within the planetary boundaries? Peter: Well, I think what is a very important notion in this whole financial debate, I would say, is that you can talk about finance change, and that's what we learned as banks. We really started to focus on different asset classes, made some parts of the economy greener. Also thought it was a very interesting new sector for the banks. But what we didn't look at as if on a financial system level, in change finance. How do we change the finance system altogether so we can more, structurally avoid that we are still financing brown assets and not green assets. How do we not continue to tweak a little bit the current system while we are not really addressing the more systemic questions? Till: It's not enough to finance change, but actually to change finance, and that was the title as well, of a paper you co authored last year entitled From financing change to changing finance. And one of the starting points there is that you speak about the financialization of societies. Could you briefly explain what that financialization is and maybe also how we got there? Peter: I think if you look at the volumes in the financial sector, you see an incredible growth where in the banking sector, in let's say, in the in the Western world, it was only a percentage of the gross national product. What we did in the financial sector, in banking, and now we have sort of three, four times gross national product. So the importance of the financial industry has become major. We depend on it with our pensions. We depend on it as businesses, citizens, for taxes and so forth and so on. So we financialized a lot of things, and we became dependent on it. And it's a little bit abstract. What do we mean by that? And I think many things we take for granted now and who function in the real economy sphere have been discovered by financial institutions, by asset managers, including CO2 carbon emission markets and biodiversity, and you name it, everything can be financialized and be brought to a market. And I think we have to think much harder about where a market is a good thing to help to allocate resources, and where markets only create more dynamics and more growth and actually create a problem because there is a market for it. So I think that is something, what the Club of Rome should do really make clear where markets work and where they don
Music, art, and media have always played powerful roles in social movements that created long-lasting societal change. Will the 21st century be any different? How can we inspire a generation to liberate their future actively? In this episode, Nolita Mvunelo is joined by Sishii, an award-winning singer and activist. Together, they dive into the role of art and music in inspiring young Africans to make a difference in the face of adversity. They question why more artists do not address the climate change crisis and other systemic issues while reflecting on the importance of art in raising awareness, inspiring action, and shaping the future. Watch the video: Full Transcript: Nolita: We kind of need a revolution. Welcome to a special edition of The Club of Rome podcast exploring how we can work together across generations, across continents, across contexts, to mobilize action for a regenerative future. I am Nolita Mvnelo, Programme Manager of the Club of Rome, and in this episode, I had a conversation with someone I am proud to call a friend, Sishii. Actor, R&B, singer heard by millions, based in South Africa and changing the world. Against a backdrop of all the concerns we are facing, we discussed the role of art and music in inspiring young Africans to make a difference in the face of adversity. Thank you so much for joining me and joining me in my world of big picture and asking big questions and asking about the future of humanity and society, but also the future of us as Africans. Other people won't know this, but you're partly responsible for why we're doing this limited series, because you're the one who said, "Yo, you we always have these interesting conversations. Why don't we, why don't you sit down and try to have more conversations with more interesting people?" So I'm very grateful for you taking the time to chat with me today. Sishii: Thank you for having me and thanks for doing it. Nolita: I have, like, a handful of questions that also, again, are very reminiscent of some of the conversations we've had. The first one being, we always share a sense of, like, these concerns about the future of South Africa, the future of Africa, and our place in making a difference in those concerns. Sishii: Yeah. I mean, a lot of the time the conversation is about leadership. It's about what we as young people are doing currently for, you know, our country, our continent, our world, and what we're trying to do to make things better for this world. And I'd say that the concern, it's like, there's so many facets of life, obviously, there's the economy, there's politics. I'm an artist, so there's the future of the arts. And we kind of cover a lot of those subjects, you know, in the conversations that we have, but I think in all of those subjects, the primary concern is what we're doing to make things better, because we recognize that something is, something's definitely wrong. Nolita: When you say what we're doing, do you feel like there is enough opportunity to do things? Sishii: I think a lot of our conversation is about how we feel like those who do have the opportunity to do something aren't actually doing anything, and those who don't have the opportunity to do anything are not even really considering what possible changes there could be. And in terms of what I'm doing, I'm just doing what I love, which is being an artist and inspiring other artists. Inspiring, you know, young people, according to them, also, this is not, I'm not saying I'm an inspiration. I have been called one on a few occasions. Yeah, inspiring African artists to pursue their dreams of being artists and inspiring Africans in my little corner of the world, which is South Africa, to just believe in themselves, to believe that they can come from circumstances that aren't necessarily great and make a change in the world and try and do positive in the world. So yeah, I think that's what I'm currently up to, and I hope I'm doing well at it. Nolita: Do you think you have a sense of what does it take to inspire someone who feels that they don't have enough opportunity to rise to leadership or to make like, like groundbreaking, world changing art. Sishii: It's weird, but like, as an artist, it's when your intention is to inspire, and you create from wanting a certain reaction, right from certain people, it doesn't really work as well as when you're being true to yourself, it doesn't work as well as telling your story in the best way you know how with whatever it is that you have and so what I've learned is this road for me, has just been about storytelling and using whatever resources I can find, gather people. This is a people's business, yeah, just essentially using all of that to tell my story. And in the process, I found that there are people who find that inspiring. Because if you have gone through hardship and you're talking about it, I'm pretty sure there's someone out there, at least one, I mean, there's billions of people in the world, and surely there's one, if you just stay true to who you are. So that's been my journey of what I've been trying to do, and I've found that I've inspired people in the process. But I didn't kind of start my journey saying, oh, I want to inspire people. I just wanted to express myself. And I found that a lot of people just want to express themselves, and they really struggle to do so. Nolita:I think you've hit, like, a very important point on authenticity. Because, like, as I started a conversation, I said, welcome to my world, this, podcast. But also a lot of the things that the Club of Rome and the international contract are working on are very much concerned about the question of leadership, but leadership, specifically when it comes to climate change and sustainability and the types of decisions that people are making. You make a point about storytelling and also authenticity being important for how to bring forth that messaging and that voice, but very often, I feel that it doesn't land. But from your perspective, when it comes to like, the concerns about climate and the risks that we're facing, do you feel that it's being, the storytelling is being effective, and if you do what is effective about it? If you feel that it's not being effective, what do you think could be done to improve it, from your perspective as an artist? Sishii: So, I've not found a lot of artists talking about climate change, it's interesting. I don't think we take it as seriously as it is. I really don't. And as a result of that, I don't see much art talking about that, and I don't see a lot of people my age talking about climate change or even really thinking about it. There are people who think it's a lie, there are people who think, and a lot of the time, you ask those people why they think it's a lie, they go, "Ah, it doesn't make sense". "Well have you read anything about it?" It's like, "No, I haven't actually read anything about it. I just, I just think it's a lie." So there's this weird kind of choosing of sides without having any information on which side you're choosing, but saying, okay, it seems like there's a side I have to choose, so I'm just going to choose the side without actually figuring out why I'm choosing said side. Yeah, I don't know if that answers your question. Nolita:Actually, I feel like, as you're speaking, in my mind, I immediately thought, imagine a song about climate and like, a song about climate and like, would it hit like, the Spotify 1 million streams or Apple Music, you know, like, would it? Would it hit? Sishii: I mean, the only person I can think of who ever did stuff like that was like, Michael Jackson. Nolita: Oh yeah, heal the world or something. Sishii: Yeah I mean, this is my kind of perspective on life in general right now, which is that I think we have become a lot more self-absorbed, not necessarily in a negative way, but a lot of the time it does show up negatively. And that when it comes to a change that inspires or affects more people than yourself, you know, or more people that do not actually include yourself, you know, we're not finding people not being interested in doing that anymore. Nolita: When I imagine like a challenge that's as big as climate, right, which requires collaboration on such a broad level, but also requires collaboration across different cultures and perspectives. One of the best ways to share values and perspectives in culture is in our art, right? So the role of art in making sure that everyone is involved in this big group project is incredibly significant. But for some reason, we are struggling to imagine that we could get a million Spotify streams on a song about climate. So how do we make it, yeah, so how do we make it happen? Sishii: Right? Nolita: Is there something about maybe it's where from, where we understand the innovation comes from. Like, not to quote him, but we know who said, listen to the kids bro. And he was making a very specific point about the tastemakers are young people. In your creative process, is there any like consultation that you do about like with the people who listen to your music and care about your music? Do you ever try to get a sense of like, this is what is interesting. These are the topics people are listening to. Or is it very much like me and my creative process. Sishii: I would love to say absolutely not. I would love to be an artist who's so, you know, self-sufficient that people's opinions don't actually matter to me. I do subconsciously, I definitely subconsciously digest what people are thinking about and talking about, and sometimes it does affect my music. I'm trying to make that less of a thing, now. I think I'm doing better at that, but it's really hard. I think the kind of thing about being an artist is like, you've really got to be self-sufficient. Don't care about what people think. Don't care about what people are talking about. It's very weird, because I believe that if this was, I don
Heatwaves and floods dominated the headlines in the summer of 2024. This lived reality of climate change is taking place against a backdrop of political shifts as far-right parties across Europe win shares of the vote that would have been unimaginable only a few years ago. To uncover what is happening and explore what campaigners, politicians and businesses can do to ensure climate action in the run up to COP30 in Brazil in 2025, Philippa Nuttall spoke to Laurence Tubiana, CEO of the European Climate Foundation and a key architect of the Paris Agreement, and Sandrine Dixson-Declève, co-president of The Club of Rome and executive chair of Earth4All. Sandrine and Laurence discuss the growing trend of right-wing politics in Europe and its impact on climate action, emphasising the urgent need to address social inequality and injustice in the energy transition. They highlight strategies for accelerating a globally just transition and call for a comprehensive reform of COP and climate governance to ensure effective implementation of the Paris Agreement. Watch the video: Full transcript: Philippa: Welcome to the Club of Rome podcast exploring the shifts in mindset and policy needed to transform the complex challenges facing us today. I'm Philippa Nuttall, a freelance journalist and editor of Sustainable Views, and in this episode, we're discussing the road to COP30, which will be held in Brazil next year, and what needs to change to ensure that timely climate action is agreed and implemented. With me today I have Laurence Tubiana, CEO of the European Climate Foundation, and a professor at Sciences Po in Paris. Laurence previously chaired the Board of Governors at the French Development Agency, the board of Expertise France, and is best known for being France's Climate Change Ambassador and Special Representative for COP 21 and a key architect of the landmark Paris agreement. We also have Sandrine Dixson-Declève, co president of the Club of Rome and executive chair of Earth for All. Welcome to both of you today. Thank you. So Laurence, I'd like to start with you. In 2024 we're seeing heat records broken constantly. We've had many months where the temperatures are 1.5 degrees above pre industrial levels. And yet, in many countries, we're seeing people vote, including in France, for parties which whose vision is not aligned with with climate action, who want to slow or even halt climate action. And even if these parties are not, perhaps getting the support that they expect, that they're still there. And we've seen a swing very much to the right, and even the far right, in the European Parliament. Could you explain to us a bit what you think is going on here, and how much perhaps poor communication or mixed messages around climate change are responsible for what we're seeing? Laurence: I think first of all, this trend towards the right-wing is, of course, now a trend that is distributed across many, many countries, including mostly in Europe, but not only in Europe, as we see in United States and other countries at the same time. It's a probably more nuanced evaluation, because you see in some countries where very much pointing to the right-wing has been showing other direction as well. And Poland is a good example. In Europe, we see the resistance and of Spain and the more progressive parties. So, it's a mixed bag, but you see that the polarisation is there. And I think there is a big element of understanding for that. We have inflation. We have the problem of security because, of course, of the invasion of Ukraine, and of course, these incredible energy prices that have damaged so much, not only to consumers accusative power, but as well the industry and the economy, but the sense that we are missing a very, very important social element in all this, that people feel marginalised. They feel not listened to. They feel that they are not represented. And I think that is a main issue for the climate community at large, the climate policy in general, that the social element should be the first entry point to this big transformation of society we are aiming at, and it cannot. It had been discarded. It has not been taken seriously enough so people legitimately think that they, and that a number of poles are signaling it, that they are paying for the reduction of emission that others are finally the origin of. And in particular, of course, the more affluent people, the higher middle class and even the higher income households that are finally polluting much more than they are, but they are paying the cost for it. So, I think this social dimension is certainly now that's a big moment to rethink all what we do in terms of climate policies. So, it's not only communications even because people feel the climate change impact, but they feel the solutions are not fair. And just one example, you pay a lot of tax on your gasoline when you drive, but then you don't pay any for the one who are flying all the time. So that, I think, is a justice element, and the social element is a key element, in my view, and that's why we see that in France, and the economic insecurity, if you add on that, that you have recommendation that you have to change your boilers or to go to electric vehicle you cannot even buy. And you know, it's a very interesting study recently by OECD, people who have access to mobility and collective transport care about climate change. The people who don't have access to public transport, they tend to deny and don't want to talk about climate change. So, you know, it's a problem of access and fairness much more than anything else. Philippa: Yeah, no, I think that's come out really clearly in the elections in terms of the pushback. We've heard a lot of this that it's not fair and people shouldn't be paying for the energy transition, especially poorer people in society. And how do you think, why do you think this message has not got through? I mean, the just transition has been mentioned as part of the energy transition, but perhaps not as a core point. And why do you think this message has got lost? And how do you think this can now be changed? Is this something that needs to happen at a national level, or is it something that can work through the international process? Laurence: Why are government afraid? Because, in a way, I must say, most government hasn't taken the issue of social fairness and justice really seriously enough. Because the trend on the evolution of the economy is a consensus on, you know, that finally, inequality was not a big issue. And so, the response to that, look at the reform of the tax system, for example, that we are now currently discussing at European level. The government doesn't dare to go in that direction for the moment. So, in a way, the only thing they can offer is, you know, more right-wing type of argument, like immigration is a big problem, where, in reality, social justice is a real problem. So, they don't want to reassess the model, and then they don't have the tools or the mindset or the philosophy, the political philosophy, that they can respond to the issue. So, the main, and that has been very, very evidently, even in France, the main response was to talk about security in the hard terms, police and, you know, control and immigration, when they should be talking about social justice. And that, in my view, a contradiction. If we continue doing that, we will never, never have an ambition climate action at home. So, it's a very crucial juncture point. And that's all, of course, all the battle we have in political terms in France these days. Philippa: Thanks Laurence. Sandrine, the Club of Rome and Earth4All, you've done lots of work around the importance of inequality and social justice. Do you agree with the conclusion that Laurence has come to, and how do you see that this discussion or these policies can now change? Sandrine: I completely agree, and I think that what's, I must say, a bit disappointing is that we're in a situation, at least at the Club of Rome as saying we warned you and we told you, so if you look at the Limits to Growth, and if you look at the culmination of social and environmental tipping points, which were already pretty much drawn out in our scenarios in 1972 where we indicated that in the 2020s we would start to see these pressure points. And then I think the culmination, obviously, with the polycrisis, exactly as Laurence indicates, and the impacts have made it really difficult at this time to put in place and roll out the climate legislation and the climate implementation that we need. So coming back to the core of the issue, which is the inequality in the poverty issue, better understanding actually what leaders need to do at this time is fundamental for people like ourselves, people like Laurence trying to actually guide our policy leaders so they don't get caught with their pants or their skirts down, as we say, and really have the solutions that they need. And we have to remember that the yellow vest protest was truly a protest, both about wealth issues, because several weeks before, the wealth tax that had been proposed was actually eliminated, as well as a diesel tax issue. And when we look at most of the data that we have from a variety of different sources today, what we see is really interesting, and we've done an analysis of this also because we've been working directly with President von der Leyen's team on communications. One, most people, exactly as Laurence says, understand climate change is here, and they're suffering. They're ready to pay their fair share. The issue is, what's fair, when we see 2.8 billion windfall profits by oil and gas companies per day globally, when we see that actually, we don't and we're not able to pass a wealth tax, when we see that we continue to give subsidies to fossil energy, but not actually to renewables or industrial agriculture, rather than farmers who want to shift to regenerative agriculture.
As the world faces increasing inequality and environmental degradation, the Universal Basic Dividend (UBD) emerges as a promising idea for a more equitable and sustainable economic system. UBD proposes that the wealth generated from our shared resources, such as land, air and water, should benefit everyone, not just a few. In this episode, Till Kellerhoff is joined by Ken Webster and Sarath Davala to explore the transformative potential of UBD. They discuss the ethical justification for sharing the commons, examine the challenges of implementing UBD and consider how UBD could help transition to a regenerative economy. Tune in for a thought-provoking conversation on how UBD could pave the way for a fairer and more sustainable future. Watch the video: Full transcript: Till: (0:00) Welcome to the Club of Rome podcast today on the Universal Basic Dividend. My name is Till Kellerhoff. I am Program Director at the Club of Rome and Program Lead of the Earth for All Initiative. We have two great guests today, and I'm very pleased to welcome Ken Webster, who is a visiting professor at Cranfield University, fellow at the Cambridge University Institute for Sustainable Leadership, contributing author of the latest report to the Club of Rome, Earth for All, A Survival Guide for Humanity, and lead author of three Earth For All deep dive papers on universal basic dividend. Welcome Ken. And we have with us today Sarath Davala, who is an Indian sociologist and president of the Basic Income Earth Network, amongst many, many other things, he co authored the book, Basic Income, A Transformative Policy for India. And he's also a contributing author to the Earth for All deep dive paper, unconditional cash transfers and t he five turnarounds, beneficiaries perspectives. Welcome Sarath. Let's dive, dive right into the topic universal basic dividend. And Ken, let's, let's start with you. I think many people have heard the expression universal basic income in the last years. It has been a prominent discussion, basically described as a regular cash payment to all members of a community without any conditions. Today we speak about the universal basic dividend. Maybe you can start explaining in a few words what what that is, and how it relates to the concept of the universal basic income many listeners will be familiar with. Ken: (1:42) Okay, thank you Till. The universal basic dividend is really a kind of basic income, because it is an unconditional cash transfer. It is regular, and it is, if you like, an obligation towards the fellow members of our communities. But the basic dividend differs in the use of the word dividend, rather than just income, and the dividend is a reward, if you like, for owning something, or co-owning something, or having a share of something. Now a basic dividend is connected to common resources. It might be the atmosphere, it might be the ocean, it might be forests, it might be the local Tool Lending Library. These are commons. These are resources which people can access and also as part of a community manage so the basic dividend is a reward, or a share of a reward, for resources which have been captured, enclosed is generally the word people use, and it's an ethical obligation to give people a share of these surpluses. In the economic language it's called economic rents. These are surpluses which are not required to keep the business going. So if some of our shared heritage has been captured, the idea is part of the gains from that should be put into a fund, and the benefits of the fund should feed back to everyone in the community, either nationally or in the grand scheme of things, globally, Till: (3:23) Super thank you, Ken. And we will dive a bit deeper into the practicalities of all of that. And Sarath, you have worked for many, many years on the universal basic income and ideas around that, and we know that there are many, many different concepts on how to implement that. Do you feel like language matters a lot in this regard? We speak about universal basic dividend today, you have worked a lot on universal basic income. What's your approach towards that whole debate? Sarath: (3:46) As long as the vision aligns, I think I would say, what's in a name that's not the point. I think philosophically, like Ken has just mentioned, philosophically, we come from the same pedigree. I mean, it's, it's to say that every individual on Earth is entitled. So I think we belong to the same blood group. Till: (4:10) Super. Well, you mentioned the entitlement. Where does that come from? Why do you think people are entitled? Can you mention the obligation right in the context of the comments? Why do you think Sarath, we are entitled to receive something like a universal basic income? Sarath: (4:24) Because I think natural resources, and all resources basically belong to people of the land, any given land, okay, so, and then the wealth that is created in any given society is a kind of, comes from several generations of contribution. So a few individuals cannot stand today at the end of the road and say that we made this, we made that money. So I think we have to really go to the roots of what wealth is and who owns it. I think those questions, these are the civilizational questions we are raising now. I'm glad to be alive at this time. Till: (5:03) That's good, and it really comes to fundamental points, right? And can you argue that there's something like the commons that might be a little bit difficult for everyone to understand, and is it, is it right to say that it might be something in between private and public ownership, and that there is a category we need to we might have forgotten, is the dichotomy between private and common. Ken: (5:25) That's the key point Till, I think that many people have forgotten or not been able to engage with the concept of the commons in more recent times, because you say on one side is either private ownership, which is very familiar. And equally familiar is state ownership. You know, public ownership and control, whereas in the middle there always used to be, if you like, meso scale or middle scale, social institutions. I've got a lovely little quote here about that from a writer called Dil Green. He said, commons are mesoscope social institutions, not micro, individual or macro, collective, but meso. But it's in the middle where life takes place. I like that, where we all live. The missing middle is the key, build commons. Now the commons are a set of resources people who have access and to those resources, and a set of rules by which those resources are used. The aim is to maintain those resources for all generations. This is what the commons if it was grazing back in the 14th century in England, or it was the use of the forests. It exists all over the world in different forms, but I think this is an opportunity to revive the middle, the missing middle, Green called it, the opportunity to look more at what we can do for each other. And it's rooted in the idea that the state of economic and technological development makes the adoption of openness, quoting again, cooperation and shared ownership and governance a more rational economic choice in meeting the needs and wants of humanity than one based on competition, artificial scarcity and the pursuit of profit. So I think it's an exciting area to recover the notion of the commons. But the very strong element of this is it's taking unearned income, it isn't making a firm any less competitive, and giving it as unearned income, as a dividend, in the language I use. And it also ties in with what Club of Rome's been very interested in, which is, how do we get prices to tell the truth? You know, we can't run an economy if environmental and social costs are exported with no comeback. But if we put the prices up on fossil fuels, etc, there's a lot of resistance to that, of course, because the poor suffer the most. So it does two jobs at once, there or three. It's ethically the right thing to do. It allows us to charge the real price for resource extraction and damage of the environment, and it gets the poor on side, because they feel more secure, and in this economy at the moment, what many millions of poor people are saying is, I don't feel secure. And everybody has perhaps begun to realize that you need a different way to approach this problem, and you need to bring economic security as well as social and environmental concerns to the fore, and I think it's really brave of the Club of Rome to make that point. Till: (8:49) Thank you very much, Ken and you mentioned various aspects of this whole debate, and kind of a holistic approach towards the universal basic dividends, in the sense that it has an ethical component, it has a strong economic component in what is often now described in internalization of externalities. But Sarath, I mean,that's a debate many economists have today as well, right? Like we make certain products we don't want that have environmental harm more expensive, but that is usually in the form of kind of taxes that then go to the government. Why do you think it's important to have this dimension of cash transfer to citizens, which is different to kind of taxes where the government then decides where the money goes? Sarath: (9:32) Yeah, let me go back to the point that Ken was making. I would not take this very artificial binary of private versus state ownership. No, I think it is not a settled matter, we should go back a little and then say, how did we come here is a question we should ask now, like, for example, there is a does government really own all that it says it owns? Is a question. There was a big Supreme Court case in India where a group of people who were working asking the government to close down the mines. They said that people own the mines, natural resources, and government is only a custodian. Okay, so the Supreme Court gave it the judgment, which said that, yes, people are the owners of
The impacts of extreme weather events and climate crises are threatening many of the hard-won advancements in public health infrastructure across African countries. In this episode of the special series ‘We Kinda Need a Revolution’, host Nolita Mvunelo is joined by Saad Uakkas, a medical doctor and executive chair of the African Youth Initiative on Climate Change. They discuss the profound effects of nature crises on public health and the urgent need for systemic solutions. Together, they explore the importance of intergenerational leadership in building resilient and sustainable public health systems. This episode is part of a series highlighting the need for a New Generational Contract. How can we foster equity and mutual support between generations? This is one of the key questions being asked by The Fifth Element, an initiative from The Club of Rome and partners. To find out more visit: www.thefifthelement.earth Watch the video: Full transcript: Nolita: We kinda need a revolution. Welcome to this special edition of The Club of Rome Podcast exploring how we can work together across generations to mobilise action for a regenerative future. To get there, we need some systemic change, a revolution of sorts, maybe. I am Nolita Mvunelo, programme manager for The Club of Rome. And in this episode, we'll be diving into the topic of public health in nature crises. Joining us today is Saad Uakkas a Moroccan medical doctor and a youth engagement and empowerment specialist. We're seeing a growing frequency of nature crises across the world. More recently, the floods in Kenya have resulted in a loss of over 230 lives and 40,000 households displaced. And similarly, in 2022 on the east coast of South Africa, flooding claimed over 300 lives. These events are catastrophic and pose a serious threat to the lives of many with far reaching impact tearing away hard won gains in public health and infrastructure. So I turn over to you Saad, firstly, thanking you for joining us and also asking you to briefly introduce yourself. Saad: Dr Saad Uakkas here, I am the Executive Chair of the African Youth Initiative for Climate Change, which represents and unites African young people all over the continent. I'm also in the environment working group of the global Mental Health Action Network. So, working on the intersection of climate change and mental health on the global level. Medical doctor by background, climate actor by passion, and young African from Morocco, so great to be here. Nolita: Thank you so much for joining us. So in January 2024, the World Economic Forum released a report quantifying the impact of climate change on human health, which projects that by 2050, climate change could result in an additional 14.5 million deaths and 1.1 trillion US dollars in extra health care costs. With your extensive experience as an MD working with young people on climate change issues, what specific health challenges have you observed, that could contribute to such significant impacts in the next few decades ? Saad: I already started seeing that when I was a medical student seeing more respiratory diseases in the city I worked on Kenitra, which has really large industrial parts. And that was one example how pollution both air water pollution affected health of you know, the local population. So we have seen that we have see more people come in with also infectious diseases also that was something not only in Morocco, but all over the continents, you know, in the way that weather pattern change, and rains, patterns also change, this affects the habitats of vector-borne diseases. And also, when the weather is warmer, more insect-borne diseases can spread more easily and for longer periods. So this constitutes a huge threat for us in Africa, especially with all the neglected tropical disease with like infectious diseases like malaria, and those insects being able to live longer and in more places, you've been talking about disasters, you know, recently in Morocco, we had this earthquake, and you know, I remember people in Pakistan in Libya, with those floodings that they had in UAE, and you know, the houses that are being lost and the habitats and all those infrastructure, this usually has a direct impact on people's livelihood, on people's food security, and then the thing that I work most on, on people's mental health, and I can't tell you enough, how crucial that is, when you lose your house, when you lose your livelihood, your daily life. Here, we're talking, for example about farmers in the rural areas that don't have access to water to agriculture anymore. So livelihood lost, And they're obliged to migrate to find a new source of income. Those people usually they have huge mental health consequences out of that and with with psychologists with mental health professionals, we've been seeing that, you know, the need for mental health supports for people because of all the uncertainty because of all the impacts of climate change has been immense and then finally, you know, health systems and usually here we're talking about, you know, for example, the continents, we have hospitals and weak infrastructure, and especially in the rural areas, so the health system is not ready to cope up with the impacts of climate change. So when a disaster happens, resilience is not there. So usually you have a health system which loses electricity or which loses, you know, people lose access to hospitals, because of climates or disaster events, you know, when something related to climate change happens, people really get affected lose access to health, basic health care services, and it can affect them, you know, just losing access to medication can really have huge effects in your life if you're in a rural area. And then, of course, you have food security, you know, with the lack of water with all the effects of agriculture, food security is a very, very important one. So impacts of climate change on health, we can talk about a lot of aspects. And, you know, one thing is, recently, the World Health Assembly that happened in Geneva, recognize that and they voted for a resolution for the first time they adopted that in the World Health Assembly related to climate change and public health, recognising that today, climate change is the number one killer is the number one disease. And as you said the amount of lives that are threatened because of climate change is huge. So today, this is a very relevant discussion for all of us to be aware of this intersection, and to know what steps we need to take in order to, you know, take care of our health to improve the health system resilience, and prevent climate change in the future. Nolita: Thank you for such a comprehensive answer. It makes me want to ask a very specific question because of your background. Having worked as a medical doctor, you have a particular focus on healthcare. Additionally, you work closely with young people on climate change and climate resilience. Practically speaking, what interventions have you seen coming from the youth constituencies you work with in addressing climate-related disasters and healthcare? Saad: One concrete example is young people conducting research by being in the field and gathering data. That's step number one for me. I've seen many young people across the continent working at the intersection of climate and health, being on the ground, doing surveys, and identifying issues within their communities. For instance, we have a strong collaboration with the International Federation of Medical Students Association and the African Youth Public Health Association. These health-related youth groups are collaborating to conduct data gathering and research actions. Young people are working on improving food systems by promoting climate-smart agriculture and agroecology. This involves using natural seeds, reducing water consumption, and creating holistic ecosystems that minimize pesticide use. Such practices lead to more sustainable and healthier agriculture, which enhances food quality and, consequently, the health of local populations. Another area is advocacy. Young people are using health arguments to advocate for policies and decisions aimed at preventing and controlling climate change. Here, for example, I'm talking about people gathering data on pollution, the effects of industry, and the impacts of greenhouse gases on people's livelihoods. They then advocate together using media, joining the voices of health professionals, and pushing for policies to improve the situation. Additionally, engaging in dialogue with the private sector is crucial. This involves discussing how to prevent negative health outcomes, holding industries accountable, and pressuring them to reduce emissions. By including the private sector in the conversation, we can collaboratively work to decrease the health impacts of climate change. Policy action is essential in driving these efforts forward. One very good example is the youth group in Nigeria, Susty Vibes. They are doing great work in addressing climate change and mental health. One specific aspect they focus on is climate care for activists who are working within the space and constantly witnessing the negative impacts of climate change. They emphasize the importance of self-care for young people, as it can become overwhelming when facing such a large issue. Susty Vibes addresses climate anxiety among the youth generation, acknowledging that young people often feel that the problem is too big to solve alone. They stress the importance of taking breaks and having a support system to avoid being consumed by the enormity of the challenge. Susty Vibes provides this support system for young activists in Nigeria and West African countries, helping them care for themselves. Climate anxiety and self-care are crucial not only for climate activists but for everyone. In today's fast-paced world, where we strive to make a positive impact, it's essential
1 billion urban citizens live in informal settlements like slums and shanty towns, vulnerable to the most extreme impacts of climate change - flooding, prolonged drought and unprecedented heatwaves. India is in the eye of this storm — in May 2024, places in northern India, including Delhi, were suffering under temperatures as high as 50C, with those experiencing poverty most affected. In this episode Philippa Nuttall is joined by Sheela Patel, activist, founding director of the Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centers and member of The Club of Rome to talk about the challenges faced by informal communities and the need for the experiences of these often excluded citizens, particularly women, to contribute to ensure effective climate initiatives and urban planning. Watch the video: Full transcript: Philippa: Welcome to the Club of Rome podcast exploring the shifts in mindset and policy needed to transform the complex challenges facing us today. I'm Philippa Nuttall, a freelance journalist and editor of Sustainable Views. And in this episode, we're going to be talking about climate resilience. I'm going to be speaking to Sheela Patel, the founder and director of The Society for the Promotion of Area Resource Centres, which is an NGO based in Mumbai in India that has been working since 1984 to support community organisations of the urban poor to secure housing and basic amenities. Sheela, thank you for being with us today. It's a great pleasure to speak to you. Sheela: Me too. Philippa: To kick us off. Perhaps you can explain to us what we mean by climate resilience and what's your interest in the subject? Sheela: We believe that for any change to happen, behaviour, values, investments, knowledge, transitions have to happen in communities who are vulnerable, with all of us who are professionals who work with them. One of the flaws of the past development paradigm has been that we treat poor communities like charitable beneficiaries of whatever we throw at them, and we expect them to be very substantial and benevolently accept everything. And if it doesn't work for them, they don't take it. So we have worked very hard to produce strategies in which the transition produced by new knowledge for any change we believe has to happen across the board. So when we approached climate, which was not very long ago, just before the Paris Agreement, we were very uncomfortable with these silos that emerged in development and climate right from the UN, down. In the lives of poor people it's all meshed up and it's integrated. And therefore we believe that it's as important for communities to understand what is adaptation for changing your resilience, to dealing with unplanned episodes of climate, of extreme weather, that are now coming faster and faster at all of us, how they have to acknowledge themselves as first defenders whenever any crisis happens, and to take on that role seriously in making representation, in producing data, in producing evidence and demanding accountability from state and non state actors, while making their own contributions. So this is the way in which we work and we bring that same process into the climate space. Philippa: Thanks. And sort of concretely, what have you been actually doing in the area of climate resilience with the urban poor to help them achieve the aims that you've just outlined? Sheela: So a lot of our work has been to learn, as professionals working with communities, what is the climate science, theorisation and practical action, what does it mean in the lives of poor people? And what we explored together with community women was that extreme weather of wind, of high velocities, rain that came down in sheets, in ways and times that people didn't understand, and heat, which are the most common things that people experience when they live informally, was impacting every element of their lives. And in the conversation that we have with women, we started a campaign called What Women Want, which is to ask women leaders of very poor communities, not only in India, but through Slum Dwellers International's network of women leaders collectives in almost 17 countries, of what were the challenges that they were facing? And there were lots of challenges, but their priorities was their homes, which is symbolic by saying that their roofs were just unable to deal with extreme weather. The roofs flew away, they leaked, and they made their homes into ovens, and they didn't know what to do with it because that didn't happen 15 years ago. The second thing they said is that COVID demonstrated to them that food that was not grown nearby was completely inaccessible to them when there were curfews and where there were problems. So food, health. COVID brought out all the ways in which we don't look at the social determinants of health and the need for women to understand how climate was affecting both chronic and infectious diseases. So, health. The fourth one was transport. We all know in COVID, we were all stuck at home, but poor women had to go and work, and they had to find informal transport, which often ended up being as much as the wages that they earned. And so all these helped us look at the flaws in how our cities coped with crisis and how it impacted poor people. And the last one, which was traumatic. And interestingly, this was long before, you know, the climate change process understood the concept of losses and damages. They basically talked about how their lives are completely destroyed equally by physical demolitions of their homes, by their cities, and by climate episodes. There's no difference in our lives whether it's done by the city and bulldozers, whether it's done by a cyclone or something like that. So these kind of insights, the starkness of what was not designed to include them, like, for instance, all our cities all over the world, and definitely in the global south, are putting in a lot of investment in public transport to try and get more and more people out of cars into public transportation. Well, they're designed in a way that has nothing to do with informal settlements. So people have to use informal tuk tuks and bicycle rides and all those and walking to reach a public transport point. And as the public transport gets more and more sanitised to attract people like you and me. It got more and more expensive. So a lot of our work is now attempting to produce large groups of people all over the world, aggregating evidence to show what they needed and the starkness of what was not being done for them. And a very good example of that is the, is the campaign we started with the first of the five things called Roof Over Our Heads. Philippa: Before we go into the campaign specifically, could you explain to us a little bit why you're working specifically with women rather than men? Sheela: Several reasons. From the time we started this work 40 years ago, we realised that the challenges that we were picking up were not quick and easy wins. If you want tenure, you want basic amenities. We've often taken 15 or 20 years to get legislation. It's taken another ten years to actualise it in the form of investment that will produce evidence that such a thing is possible. All of us in our network, including the men we work with, say that men are, you know, men are very good at hundred metre dashes. You want something done quickly, you go to the guys, you want something that's going to take a long time, requires patience and perseverance and tenacity. You go to the women. Philippa: And is also part of the reason for working with women, because they are particularly impacted, especially in some of these informal communities, in terms of having to, they're the ones that, I presume, put food on the table, who are responsible for the children, who could be impacted more if there is damage to the house, either through destruction, through the city being changed, or through climate impacts? Sheela: Well, that's true, but I'm also very critical of campaigns, processes and projects that instrumentalise women. You know, everybody says, oh, you educate a woman and you educate the family, you give a loan to a woman and it invests. But nobody talks about that woman's emancipation, her ability to withstand pressure, to be subservient, who gives her voice and the right to make representation. So our work not only seeks to involve individualwomen, we create an aggregation of women's collectives, so that in all things where, you know, that's why you need social movements rather than projects. So we want to make this process such that it fulfils both aspects, that women learn to talk about themselves, they learn to represent themselves, they learn to negotiate. And the most powerful element that women bring through their advocacy is deep persistence. Philippa: And could you perhaps use the project Roof Over Our Heads to give us some concrete examples of how what you mentioned as the theory is being put into practice? Sheela: We're at a very early stage. What we are trying to do right now is to build a knowledge base to make an assessment of what is the resilience quotient index of their present homes. You know, it's like tomorrow, if you are living in Europe and your city has never faced real serious heat, then you've got to look at elements in your house that are not producing the ventilation, that are not producing the coolness, because your house was designed to hold in heat, not to give out heat. So you always have to make an assessment. Now, informal institutional arrangements, we have engineering companies and scientists who do that for us, so we just have to tick some boxes and we know what it is. But in the case of poor people, this doesn't exist because they build their own homes. It breaks, they upgrade it, they incrementally improve it. So what we are doing right now is that we are doing 17 settlements in ten cities in India where we are designing these processes with women's collectiv
Almost thirty years after the end of apartheid, Black South Africans still fight for African liberation from colonial narratives. While previous generations struggled to end apartheid, younger generations now face the task of reimagining themselves, their communities, and the world. Mamphela Ramphele, The Club of Rome co-president and Nolita Mvunelo, The Club of Rome program manager discuss the need for intergenerational collaboration to combine the wisdom of older generations with the energy of younger ones. The need for social equity ties into the idea of ecological civilisations as an alternative to our current society. Ramphele and Mvunelo emphasise the need to consider freedom for all life, not just humans and see the Earth Charter as an opportunity to help build a new narrative for ecological civilisations. First published in Earth Charter International
This episode explores the transformative potential of female leadership. Our expert guests, Sharan Burrow, Sylvia Mukasa and Anna Rathmann delve into the nuanced aspects of what female leadership truly means in times of unprecedented global challenges, from tackling environmental crises to addressing social inequalities and the role of businesses. This podcast is a cooperation between The Club of Rome and BMW Foundation moderated by Philippa Nuttall.
In this episode, David Collste,researcher and modeller at the Stockholm Resilience Centre talks about the Earth4All framework's research and strategies. Winner of the Donella Meadows Prize 2023, David's work focuses on the future of human development in the Anthropocene. This is part of series of interviews profiling The Earth4All: an international initiative convened by The Club of Rome, the PIK - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, the Stockholm Resilience Centre and the BI Norwegian Business School to accelerate the systems-change needed for an equitable future on a finite planet. First published on The Mona Morrell Podcast
Nolita Mvunelo, Program Manager at the Club of Rome, and co-lead of The 50 Percent, talks to The Aspect about the importance of integrating multiple future visions and particularly the views of young people who make up half the world's population. First published on The Aspect
In this episode, Hunter Lovins member of The Club of Rome, Earth4All contributor and the founder of Natural Capitalism Solutions, gives a personal insight into the five extraordinary turnarounds for a sustainable future outlined in Earth for All: A Survival Guide for Humanity. This is part of series of interviews profiling The Earth4All: an international initiative convened by The Club of Rome, the PIK - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research , the Stockholm Resilience Centre and the BI Norwegian Business School to accelerate the systems-change needed for an equitable future on a finite planet. Published first on The Rhona Morrell Podcast
In this episode, Owen Gaffney, lead author of Earth for All: A Survival Guide for Humanity, talks about building a sustainable future through climate action and systems change. Owen shares valuable insights on the urgency of climate action, the importance of systems change, and the role of collaboration in tackling these complex issues. First published on Global Partners for Development.
In this episode Anders Wijkman, Honorary President of The Club of Rome and Chair of the Governing Board of Climate-KIC talks to The Rhona Morrell Podcast about the urgent need for transformation not incrementalism and for investment in green economies and global equity. This is part of series of interviews profiling The Earth4All: an international initiative convened by The Club of Rome, the PIK - Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research , the Stockholm Resilience Centre and the BI Norwegian Business School to accelerate the systems-change needed for an equitable future on a finite planet. Published first on The Rhona Morrell Podcast
In this episode, Jayati Ghosh, a co-author of ‘Earth for All’, outlines how reducing inequality is the key to a just transition towards a greener economy. The talk is moderated by Roberto Pasqualino from the University of Cambridge. This was part of the 50th Anniversary of ‘The Limits to Growth’ Seminar Series, hosted by the Centre for Environment, Energy and Natural Resource Governance (CEENRG) at the University of Cambridge, in collaboration with the Club of Rome, Bennett Institute for Public Policy at the University of Cambridge, and the Global Sustainability Institute at Anglia Ruskin University.
In this episode, Roberto Pasqualino, a researcher at the University of Cambridge shares how his work on the Economic Risk Resources and Environment model extends ‘The Limits to Growth’ with new insights relative to the dynamics of resource prices, employment, and general economic downturn. The talk is moderated by Sergey Kolesnikov from the University of Cambridge. This was part of the 50th Anniversary of ‘The Limits to Growth’ Seminar Series, hosted by the Centre for Environment, Energy and Natural Resource Governance (CEENRG) at the University of Cambridge, in collaboration with the Club of Rome, Bennett Institute for Public Policy at the University of Cambridge, and the Global Sustainability Institute at Anglia Ruskin University.
In this episode, Mamphela Ramphele, Club of Rome co-president and a co-author of ‘Limits and Beyond’, talks about the importance of including relational, cultural, and spiritual factors in addressing planetary emergencies. The talk is moderated by Roberto Pasqualino from the University of Cambridge. This was part of the 50th Anniversary of ‘The Limits to Growth’ Seminar Series, hosted by the Centre for Environment, Energy and Natural Resource Governance (CEENRG) at the University of Cambridge, in collaboration with the Club of Rome, Bennett Institute for Public Policy at the University of Cambridge, and the Global Sustainability Institute at Anglia Ruskin University.