Ode to Harvard Senior MacKenzie Sigalos delivers one of two Harvard orations, a Class Day tradition. The occasion also featured the humorous Ivy orations. Graduation gathering Sanjey Sivanesan ’10 (from left), Kaartiga Sivanesan ’06, and their mother, Renuka Sivanesan, listen carefully. CNN, reporting in International television correspondent Christiane Amanpour was the main speaker for this year’s Class Day ceremonies, traditionally organized by the seniors and held the day before Commencement. Friends and families Audience members pay close attention to the speakers. Class Day 2010 Temperature up, jacket off Featured speaker Christiane Amanpour succumbs to the heat and removes her jacket. Sea of listeners Seniors and their families gather in Tercentenary Theatre for Class Day festivities. Tune time Audience members listen to the Harvard Band at the close of the day’s ceremonies. Having a heat wave A.C. Gomez ’13 waits for empty water containers to be picked up. The lighter side Jose Robles (from left), Silvia Robles, and Victoria Robles enjoy the speeches. Rose Lincoln, Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard Staff Photographers Getting the message Christopher Miller ’10 listens to Amanpour’s words of advice to the senior class. Moments for memories Amanpour poses for photographs with seniors and their families. International television correspondent Christiane Amanpour urged Harvard’s graduating class to take a year before plunging into the job market and head overseas to work on the myriad problems facing the world.“I hope you will take this moment to think about traveling,” Amanpour said. “There is so much opportunity out in the developing part of the world … where I have been for the past 27-odd years. People are waiting for you. They’re waiting for an army of energetic idealists like you to help build small businesses, to run schools, to teach class … It will change your lives, and it will set you on the road to your future.”Amanpour, who has been a fixture on the front lines of conflicts and disasters overseas for CNN, was the main speaker for this year’s Class Day ceremonies, traditionally organized by the seniors and held the day before Commencement. In her 25-minute speech Wednesday (May 26), Amanpour hearkened back to the Marshall Plan, the massive European aid effort unveiled at Harvard’s 1947 Commencement by Secretary of State George Marshall. Just two years after the end of World War II, he outlined the assistance that was pivotal in helping Europe to rebuild from its rubble. Today, Amanpour said, America’s challenge is similar, involving stabilizing Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, and Haiti, all important to America’s peace and security.“Beyond the armies and treasure of the United States deployed to these places, they need armies of people like you who are graduating today, civilians wielding … high ideals, smart ideas, smartly deployed to really make development work,” Amanpour said.Amanpour delivered her address in Harvard Yard’s Tercentenary Theatre. Amanpour said she too was graduating, after a fashion, moving on after 27 years at CNN to host ABC’s Sunday morning “This Week” program.She was one of several speakers to address the seniors during Class Day, which offers a less formal setting than Commencement’s scripted rites and provides a chance for class members and College officials to address those attending.Harvard College Dean Evelynn Hammonds briefed the students on what was coming Commencement Day, describing the exercises as “full of incantation and free of explanation,” and warning the students that the time will likely pass quickly for them, joking that it may seem especially quick since they probably won’t be paying attention.Hammonds said the students will be sent into the world to “advance knowledge, promote understanding, and serve society,” goals she hoped they’d advance. She also added a personal farewell to the students and wished them luck.The ceremonies also featured two Harvard orations, delivered by MacKenzie Sigalos and Benjamin Schwartz, the humorous Ivy orations, delivered by James Wilsterman and Alexandra Petri, and remarks by class officers and the president-elect of the Harvard Alumni Association, Robert Bowie.Bowie said that though departing Harvard will be tinged with sadness for the students, they are embarking on an exciting journey. Although the closeness of House life will be gone, the students will become part of an alumni network that spans the world and can prove helpful virtually anywhere.The Ames Awards, given annually to the man and woman who have dedicated themselves to service, this year went to Talya Havice, who took a leave from Harvard in 2001 to join the Marine Corps and who was commissioned a second lieutenant earlier in the afternoon, and Adam Travis, who worked tirelessly for the Harvard Square Homeless Shelter.Amanpour, who got her start at then-fledgling CNN in 1983 after graduating from the University of Rhode Island, urged students to take risks and work in some field that they’re passionate about, that will spur them to work hard, and increase their chances of becoming successful.“Mastery, mission, purpose: Those … were my greatest motivators,” Amanpour said. “Right now, I passionately wish for all of you to find something that sets you on fire, that fills you with joy, and love, and commitment.”Despite the economic difficulties now facing journalism, Amanpour said, there is still as large a need for quality, professional journalism as ever. Amanpour called journalism “a public trust” and a critical element of democracy.Other prominent speakers who have headlined Class Day include NBC’s “Today” show anchor Matt Lauer last year, Federal Reserve Board chairman Ben Bernanke in 2008, and former President Bill Clinton in 2007. Earlier speakers have ranged from the serious (humanitarian Mother Teresa) to the silly (comedian Sacha Baron Cohen). An audience request Seniors Caitlin Lewarch, Anne Calkins, and Laura Garvin playfully gesture for the band to play the second stanza of “Ten Thousand Men of Harvard.”
In addition to opposition from environmentalists, governors, and mayors, many prominent business leaders reacted with dismay to President Trump’s decision to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement. Members of the higher education community also recommitted to fighting climate change, with Harvard President Drew Faust among a dozen leaders of research universities issuing a joint statement this week in support of the Paris agreement and the importance of transitioning to a low-carbon economy. Among the CEOs voicing disagreement with the president were the heads of companies whose interests clearly lie in a clean energy future, like electric cars or renewable energy. But they weren’t alone. Leaders across a range of sectors worried that the U.S. is turning its back on the future, suggesting that it may fall to the business community to lead the way on the issue. George Serafeim, Harvard Business School’s Jakurski Family Associate Professor of Business Administration, is an expert in corporate performance and social impact, including corporate sustainability. In a Q&A, Serafeim discussed corporate views on the Trump announcement and how the Paris exit might affect U.S. competitiveness in the years to come.GAZETTE: What was your reaction to President Trump’s announcement, and what are the important issues to think about with respect to U.S. businesses?SERAFEIM: I was very disappointed, but at the same time not surprised, given that he has given lots of indications that he’s skeptical about it. He’s trying to distance himself, I think, from the global community and this is the primary example of the world finally getting together and achieving global cooperation.I think what many people are worried about in business is that this is going to fundamentally decrease American competitiveness, because it’s putting the U.S., at least from a federal policy standpoint, at odds with where the world economy is going. The world economy is going toward low-carbon infrastructure … transportation systems, electricity infrastructure in the city, and so forth. This is a signal that at the federal level — not necessarily at the state level, because we have seen already that some states are drawing their own path — there’s not going to be support, and actually there’s going to be active resistance toward that low-carbon pathway.The U.S. [would be] losing the cutting-edge technology, skills, and capabilities that could revolutionize our transportation system, that could revolutionize the fuel that we use in our cars and trucks and vehicles — whether that is electricity or hydrogen. We might lose our cutting edge when it comes to creating a decentralized, digitized, powered-by-renewables electric grid, and so forth.‘When you have politics against science, at the end of the day science is going to win.’GAZETTE: Do the objections of some business leaders mean they recognize that there may be costs to addressing climate change, but that they accept those costs as part of the price to modernize and to participate in this low-carbon future you’re talking about? Or do they just disagree with the president that the Paris agreement is a bad deal and bad for the economy?SERAFEIM: I think many people disagree with that. It is not clear that it will be bad for the economy. If you actually look at the data, many economies have reduced their carbon emissions at the same time they have grown their economy, so I think that argument is just false. What’s happening is that many business leaders want to have a seat at the table [to determine] how you create institutions and policies and regulations and infrastructure to guide that low-carbon pathway forward. And with the U.S. withdrawing, you’re losing that seat at the table. You’re not actually going to be part of the conversations that are going to be happening. As a result, instead of shaping that agenda, you’re going to be on the back end of the process.GAZETTE: Some corporate leaders are talking about the business community stepping in to provide leadership, echoing what we’ve heard from some governors and some mayors. Does the business community have the capacity to step into a leadership role? Is there a lot that it can do without government?SERAFEIM: There is a lot that has already happened without government, and for a long time. You look at companies — especially large companies — that have committed to long-term contracts to purchase renewable energy. You see many auto manufacturers making tremendous investments for electrification of their models and so forth. The world is moving on and, personally, that’s what I’m worried about from a U.S. competitiveness standpoint.When you have politics against science, at the end of the day science is going to win. Politics may win short-term, but science is going to win in the long term. The world will decarbonize, the world will move forward, the world will create the low-carbon economy, and, if you close your eyes and remain blind to that, you will actually fall behind. That is the fundamental risk that the U.S. economy is facing because of federal inertia.GAZETTE: Was there anything that you heard from members of the business community that surprised you? A particular leader who spoke out and you didn’t expect it, such as Tesla’s Elon Musk stepping down from presidential advisory councils?SERAFEIM: Elon Musk is running a giant solar company, and denying the fact that solar is going to be a big part of our energy revolution is just incompatible with everything that he represents. So that completely makes sense. I saw Jeff Immelt from General Electric and that makes a lot of sense. General Electric has a huge business that has to do with the energy revolution.But at the same time, I saw someone like Lloyd Blankfein from Goldman Sachs coming out and saying this is the wrong path forward. The business importance is less obvious for Goldman Sachs compared to a company like General Electric or Tesla. That gives me a sense that many business leaders are worried not only about their companies, but about the nation overall, and at the end of the day, about the world.GAZETTE: I also want to ask you about the shareholder action at the ExxonMobil annual meeting last week. They apparently pushed through a requirement that the company report on the impact of measures to keep climate change to 2 degrees Celsius. We hear about shareholder activism now and again, but how rare is this, and is this particular action significant?SERAFEIM: This is huge, in my opinion. Such climate-related resolutions have been filed for many, many years now, but you never heard of them because they were basically ignored. People are realizing the huge investments that companies might be making to develop carbon-intensive assets, with long payback periods and high marginal costs, might become stranded assets. They might not be economically viable projects anymore. [Investors] are asking for information about the resilience of the asset and the rationale for those investments in a world compatible with a 2-degree scenario. I think that’s very reasonable because at the end of the day it speaks to asset quality. It speaks to how good a steward management is of the asset and it speaks to the resilience of the company to be able to compete in a low-carbon world. So what you are finding this year is that a huge moment has arrived where finally investors and their proposals on climate-related topics have received majority support in more than one oil and gas company. [They are] asking for this information that allows for better modeling of the risks that these companies are exposed to. That is a recent development.GAZETTE: Just to help people interpret this, we’re not talking about a climate activist effort to harass the company, but rather a level-headed examination by investors of what this company is really going to be worth 20 years down the road, particularly if demand for their product goes down.SERAFEIM: Absolutely. If you’re an index fund, for example, you’re going to hold this company for a very long time. So what they’re asking is: You’re spending on exploration and production this year, $15 billion, $10 billion, $20 billion — whatever that number is — and is this money well spent? Is this money completely wasted? Will you be able to compete in the future? Are you investing in technologies that are going to make you competitive in the future? And so forth. So it’s a huge moment, I think, for changing mindsets inside companies, inside boardrooms, boards of directors. Because those shareholder proposals were opposed by the board of directors. The investors voted against the recommendations of the board of directors. At the same time, it’s completely consistent with a rigorous investment analysis that requires you to have a model about how risks are going to unfold.GAZETTE: How influential can shareholders be? Can they redirect the company’s actions?SERAFEIM: Those proposals are advisory in nature. They’re not binding. But it’s a very strong signal that your investor base wants you to take action in a particular way. In most of the cases when this happens — you have majority support from the investors — the company acts on that. My expectation is that companies are really going to act on this. I would be surprised if they just ignored it. It has become such a strong business issue, it’s hard for anybody to ignore.Interview was edited for clarity.
National parks’ economic benefits put at over $100B annually HKS: The Trump administration has been criticized for its efforts to roll back protections for a number of national monuments as well as plans to privatize some services in the national parks. How did the White House come to support one of the largest parks and conservation bills to pass through Congress in years?BILMES: It is ironic that President Donald Trump will get to have his signature on a historic milestone that has eluded conservationists for decades. The Trump administration has undermined public land protection more than any in my lifetime. It slashed Bear Ears National Monument in Utah by 85 percent, reduced Grand Staircase Escalante by 50 percent, removed protection for millions of acres of sage-grouse habitat in Western states, opened the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and most of the U.S. coastline to oil and gas drilling, reduced protections for wetlands, and weakened the Endangered Species Act. Earlier this year, Trump proposed cutting discretionary spending on the Land and Water Conservation Fund by 97 percent. As recently as last month, the president held a huge event at Mount Rushmore, refusing to honor the park superintendent’s request to cancel it due to high fire risk at the adjacent forest — a ban has been in place for a decade.But 2020 is a crazy year. In yet another reversal, Trump will sign the Great American Outdoors Act in a big White House ceremony. After winning final bipartisan approval in Congress last week, a bill that will pump billions of dollars into overdue repairs and maintenance of U.S. national parks is now headed to the president for his signature. It’s an unlikely success story: bipartisan support in a polarized legislature for an environmental and conservationist initiative to which the Trump administration has shown itself hostile until only recently. Linda Bilmes, the Daniel Patrick Moynihan Senior Lecturer in Public Policy at Harvard Kennedy School (HKS), served on the bipartisan National Parks Second Century Commission and on the U.S. Department of Interior National Parks Advisory Committee from 2011 to 2017. She is also co-author (with John Loomis) of “Valuing U.S. National Parks and Programs: America’s Best Investment” and is an expert on the national parks’ complicated budgeting and chronically scarce funding. We asked her about the new legislation.Q&ALinda BilmesHKS: What is the Great American Outdoors Act and what will its impact be on the national parks and federal conservation funding more broadly?BILMES: The Great American Outdoors Act (GAOA) is the biggest land conservation legislation in a generation. The National Parks Conservation Association, the leading advocacy organization for the parks, is hailing it as “a conservationist’s dream.”The legislation has two main impacts. First, it establishes a National Park and Public Lands Legacy Restoration Fund that will provide up to $9 billion over the next five years to fix deferred maintenance at national parks, wildlife refuges, forests, and other federal lands, with $6.5 billion earmarked specifically to the 419 national park units.This funding is needed badly. The number of visitors to the national parks system has increased by 50 percent since 1980, but the parks’ budget has remained effectively flat. This imbalance has led to a $12 billion backlog of maintenance to repair roads, trails, campgrounds, monuments, fire safety, utilities, and visitor infrastructure — which will finally be addressed.Second, the GAOA guarantees $900 million per year in perpetuity for the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), a flagship conservation program paid for by royalty payments from offshore oil and gas drilling in federal waters. The LWCF was established in 1964 with an authorization level of $900m, but in most years Congress has appropriated less than half of this amount. The LWCF is especially important because it helps fund the four main federal land programs (National Parks, National Forests, Fish and Wildlife, and Bureau of Land Management) and provides grants to state and local governments to acquire land for recreation and conservation.“The National Parks Conservation Association … is hailing it as ‘a conservationist’s dream,’” says Professor Linda Bilmes of the Great American Outdoors Act. Jon Chase/Harvard file photoHKS: As the author of a leading study on enhancing funding for the national parks, do you feel that this legislation puts the parks on sounder financial footing?BILMES: The GAOA will help to safeguard the national park units and other public lands. However, it is not a panacea. As I have outlined in my “Valuing U.S. National Parks and Programs: America’s Best Investment,” the park system is funded through a complex formula that includes federal appropriations, revenue generated from concessions and user fees, private philanthropy and in-kind donations. This model creates wide variation in the resources available to different park units and is volatile from year to year. Each component of the formula needs to be reformed to provide the parks with a more sustainable, stable funding structure.HKS: When Congress and much of our political system is buckling under the weight of political polarization, how did a piece of legislation with significant cost implications manage to pass both the House and the Senate on such a broad bipartisan basis?BILMES: Congress passed the legislation by huge bipartisan majorities, in the House (310-107) and Senate (73-25). Although many elected officials of both parties have long supported conservation, the unusual show of bipartisanship that led to enact this legislation is largely due to the political and economic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.The national parks are intertwined with the economy of Western states. Visitor spending in and around national parks — which are mostly located in the West — contributed more than $40 billion to the U.S. economy last year and supported 340,500 jobs. But these communities are now struggling and many of the jobs related to tourism have been lost. The GAOA is expected to create more than 108,000 new jobs to repair park infrastructure, including access roads and bridges in these adjacent communities.In general, support for the national parks cuts across party lines. But this year, several incumbent Republican senators and members of Congress face tough electoral battles in November. Republican Senator Cory Gardner of Colorado is running against the popular former Gov. John Hickenlooper, and Montana’s Republican Senator Steve Daines is running neck and neck with Democratic Governor Steve Bullock. These two seats are critical to Republican hopes of holding the Senate. This is the main reason that President Trump, who had rejected previous efforts to fund the LWCF, agreed to sign the legislation.The pandemic has also led Americans to rediscover the outdoors. The national parks not only provide economic benefits but also health and enjoyment. My research has found that the public values national park land, waters, and programs at $92 billion per year — at least 30 times the annual budget they receive from Congress. The public is now appreciating the outdoors as never before and calling on its elected representatives to provide adequate financial support. But professor warns agency is underfunded, and behind $12 billion in maintenance Related
MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — The Australian Open tournament director expects the year’s first tennis major to start as scheduled next week despite 160 players being among the 507 people forced back into isolation after a hotel quarantine worker tested positive for COVID-19. Craig Tiley says “We will be starting on Monday and we have no intention of changing times.” Melbourne Park was almost empty as Tiley spoke to media. All matches in all six warmup events were postponed Thursday after the state government announced the new coronavirus case overnight. Tiley says all 160 players would undergo testing and the tuneup tournaments will resume Friday.
Janie Dee in rehearsal for ‘Hand to God’ Janie Dee has won two Olivier Awards and moved from classics to new plays, Shakespeare to musicals. But the protean talent is shifting gears big-time to inherit 2015 Tony nominee Geneva Carr’s role as the Texan mom Margery in the British premiere of Robert Askins’ subversively funny Broadway play Hand to God at the Vaudeville Theatre. Broadway.com met the ever-spirited Dee prior to the start of previews to talk sock puppets and more.Did you know much about Hand to God before the role of Margery came your way?The first I heard of it was when they asked me if I would come and meet the team. I read it at home and was sort of agog. At the end, my mouth opened and my jaw dropped. I’d never read anything quite like it!The play is set in and around the world of a Christian puppet ministry in Texas, which must seem a world away.What’s interesting as an actor is that your mind does things for you, and it’s pretty well painted on the page. More challenging in a way was that people kept saying to me “it’s a comedy” when in fact any good play has everything: in Shakespeare’s comedies, there can be moments of great sadness and in his tragedies moments where you want to laugh.This play gets very dark.It does, and our job is to set the audience up to go on that journey. Moritz [von Stuelpnagel], our director, keeps emphasizing with our characters that they don’t think what’s happening is funny. The audience may laugh, but the people in the play aren’t finding it funny.Faith is hugely important to you, so did that make it difficult to sign on to a script that some might find blasphemous?I do go to church and more than anything I feel close to God and don’t know what I would do without God: I talk to Him a lot. So I was worried about what the play might be saying about God, and it was wonderful to have Rob [Askins, the playwright] here to talk about it.How then did you make the decision to join the show?One thing I did was speak to my vicar. The wonderful thing is that whenever I told him anything I was worried about, he just wasn’t phased by it, and that gave me great hope. Good plays are always about holding up a mirror to nature and asking what are we and how are we behaving and how are we lying sometimes to ourselves—Hand to God does all of that.Will your fellow congregants be in attendance?Well, most are my age or around that, so they’ll be on the same page. And besides I’ve already done a TV thing called Crashing, which really has no boundaries and goes further than I’ve known comedy to go on telly. And yet I like it because somehow it holds on to humanity, and that’s what I feel Rob [Askins] has done. Do you know the terrain that this play inhabits?Mostly from watching Dallas or Friday Night Lights [set in a fictional town called Dillon, Texas]. Friday Night Lights is probably closer and more accurate to where we are in the play. For me personally, going to church is the closest kind of idea I have of the situation Margery is in. I totally get her.She’s a pretty extraordinary character.She is, and I get the feeling a quite lonely one, too. She seems to be pretty alone with this boy [her son Jason, played by Harry Melling of Harry Potter fame] but for all the wrong reasons. I think she feels like a failure and as if she is trying to prove herself and that is proving very difficult for her. Even her Christian puppet ministry is not going very well, so I’ve got loads of backstory for why she is how she is.How is Harry coping with the dual demands of Jason and his rather outspoken sock-puppet alter ego, Tyrone?He is absolutely brilliant! He’s been compulsive about working on it while managing to be very laidback, as well. He’s got a lovely balance. There are times when I forget it’s him and I think he’s become Tyrone—it’s like a wonderful magic trick. View Comments
By Dialogo July 15, 2011 Judo fights take place on an 8m x 8m tatami. Each fight lasts up to five minutes, if no athlete succeeds in applying the ippon, the perfect move in this sport and one that ends the fight independently of the moment at which it is executed. In the case of a tie, there is an extension of up to three minutes, in which the winner is determined by any point scored. If the tie persists, the referees decide the winner. There are three referees, and each has one vote. Judo points are classified as yuko, wazari, and ippon. A yuko happens when the opponent falls sideways or when he or she is immobilized for between 15 and 19 seconds. A wazari is scored when the rival is thrown backward without the force or speed characteristic of an ippon. Immobilization for 20 to 24 seconds also characterizes a wazari. A wazari is worth half a point. Two wazaris equal one ippon. An ippon determines the winner. It happens when the opponent falls down on his or her back, at the end of a perfect move, finalized by a stranglehold or chokehold, or when he or she is immobilized for 25 seconds.
48SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr,Michael Ogden Michael has been in the social media business for more than a decade inside the credit union, technology, financial and food industries. He’s the founder of For3, LLC, which … Web: www.for3forgood.com Details LinkedIn is more popular than Twitter. In fact, 28 percent of U.S. adults on the Internet have used LinkedIn, compared to 23 percent who’ve used Twitter.LinkedIn has figured itself out over the past few years. It’s finally coming into its own as far as becoming THE go-to place for the professional and highly educated audience looking for relevant information for their professional lives.I know…I know. You’re thinking, “Really, Ogden? Really….another damn platform? You’re killing me!”Hey, I’m looking out for CUs all over to make sure you’re showing up in front of the right eyeballs that are looking for your help. (Plus, you’ll be really ticked once I share what I know about Pinterest….but that’s another article.)For credit unions, LinkedIn holds a few pieces of social media gold: SEO, branding, marketing and networking.SEO – not being on LinkedIn is a huge miss for credit unions. Google indexes your credit union’s company page and therefore, helps you show up in the right ways during searches. Here’s a great step-by-step guide to help you do this.Branding – expanding on the SEO portion….if you have a LinkedIn company page set up properly, this turns into a powerful connection to you, your business and to the Google universe. Typically, your LinkedIn profile and company page show up in the top three or five search results for you. Here’s a secret: if you also connect your Google+ page, your results will be even better for your personal and professional brand.Marketing – LinkedIn is not a replacement for your Website! It’s an excellent addition. It’s a platform for you to market your strongest points about who and what you are as a company. This platform is more “values-based.” Meaning, what do you stand for? What’s your culture? What are you an expert in? Use posts with videos, photos and industry trends from your experts to highlight your CUs culture and values.Networking – nothing…and I mean nothing beats the LinkedIn groups when it comes to networking. I’ve even known clients who’ve cancelled their local Chamber of Commerce memberships because they were getting more out of LinkedIn. The thing is, you don’t have to go to some happy hour or early networking breakfast to make the connections important to your business goals. If done right, you can expand the reach of your CU in the groups and you can just have your own happy hour at your desk (please talk to your HR representative to discuss your “Drinking At Work” policy). Yes, LinkedIn is still currently free (with paid options like everyone else). But other than Google+, I haven’t seen a better social media platform that covers all of the things I listed above better than LinkedIn.Not being on LinkedIn is like someone handing you the keys to a new house, but you’d rather just live in your car. Come inside, check it out and see how good your LinkedIn home can be for your credit union.
continue reading » “Returning to the workforce is not without its challenges” says Anne Gadd Grandy, Senior UX Designer. “When I took time off early in my career to raise my children, potential employers felt I wasn’t serious about my job. Later, when I took time off, ageism became a challenge.”The earnings gap is one of the harsh realities women face of returning to work. According to a recent US Census commissioned report, women’s earnings fall drastically at the time a child is born, and their earnings do not recover until the child is 9 or 10 years old*. Recognizing this gap and the challenges of a pause in career journeys, Visa has recently helped over 2,000 Bay Area job seekers who have left work due to life circumstances or family care prepare for future career opportunities.With Visa’s annual Ready to Return program, women and men are provided both inspiration and enablement with learning resources, networking opportunities and live workshops with an aim to empower. Visa places candidates with jobs and provides meaningful connections to recruitment networks to get them back in the game. Beyond job placement – Visa’s focus is on elevating these individuals and recognizing the value of their talent. ShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr
Beyond ensuring enough food, food must be nutritious, the study underlined, citing costly “health and environmental consequences” of sub-par diets. Nearly 690 million people, or 8.9 percent of people around the globe, are hungry, the UN found. That number rose by 10 million people in just one year to 2019, and by 60 million in the past five years, found the study, which said eradicating hunger by 2030 – a goal set five years ago – will be impossible if trends continue.By 2030, over 890 million people could be affected by hunger, or 9.8 percent of the world’s population, it estimated. Five United Nations agencies co-authored the report: the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the World Food Program (WFP) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Last year, the report estimated over 820 million hungry, but estimates were recalculated following revised data from China for prior years.Topics : Nearly one in nine people in the world are going hungry, with the coronavirus pandemic exacerbating already worsening trends this year, according to a United Nations report published Monday.Economic slowdowns and climate-related shocks are pushing more people into hunger, while nutritious foods remain too expensive for many, contributing not only to undernourishment, but to growing rates of obesity in adults and children.”After decades of long decline, the number of people suffering from hunger has been slowly increasing since 2014,” read The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World annual report.