Hello Room! I invite you to register for the upcoming event Women as Carers, Workers and Changemakers: Challenges and Opportunities at the Intersection of the Care Economy, Early Childhood and The Future of Work. The event is co-organized by the Harvard Kennedy School Women's Network (https://www.hkswomensnetwork.com) and the W20 India (https://w20india.org), the official women's engagement group of the G20 India presidency. It will take place virtually on Wednesday, September 6 at 10am Eastern Time.  For more information and to register, please visit our landing page for the event: https://mailchi.mp/8a4c48a8f9e7/w20-hkswn-careeconomy-earlychildhood?e=c18184cf7b Looking forward to having you and your networks!

The potential of telemedicine is well observed during the pandemic time as several consultations with doctors/health experts happened without going to the clinic or hospital. This was a positive sign and urges to look into new business models to help further telemedicine across the world. On this front, it is a time to encourage companies to come to the forefront with a wide range of tech-driven digital healthcare tools and products. It was predicted by the health industry experts that tele-health market across the world is likely to witness a massive spike both from the demand and supply sides. The service providers are assessing capacities and avenues, pursuing evidence-based innovations and technologies across the board, including diagnostic and telemedicine tools, cellphone apps for fitness, well-being, medical and healthcare, and data-driven software. But the argument is that maybe it is the pandemic which compelled to explore and extend these technologies to deal with the special and temporal gaps to access healthcare. The concern shall be to look into how these technologies and innovations will be used in a post-covid world to deal with public health issues. How in coming days, technologies and innovations will be integrated with public health response system for greater accessibility and affordability to health care services should be a priority area of research in public health studies. The pandemic has unraveled the myriad avenues and opportunities in boosting healthcare and life sciences in the world, it would be interesting to look into how health shall be observed as wealth in the post Covid world with technology and innovations as its greatest investment. The challenge in a post-Covid world will be to validate the new technologies and innovations without assuming that they will work because they worked in an uncontrolled emergency situation during the pandemic. This requires new observations regarding the adoption and use of digital health tools and services to receive information and seek social and medical assistance and support in a post-covid world when again the people will have physical access to socio-economic infrastructure, facilities and services. The concern will be to look into how medium and low-income countries will refocus on preventive healthcare in a post-covid world with diverse and massive population, with disproportionate health infrastructure that often impacts medical responses to health emergency situations. When the world will regain its feet in post-covid realties, the challenge will be to recalibrate public health strategies with the help of emerging digital healthcare technologies to strengthen preventive healthcare. Investigations are required to explore the role of government in incentivizing and encouraging healthcare industries to deal with the issues of post-covid safety and care. The integration of health technologies and innovations into health policies and response strategies could be one of the concerned areas of research in post-covid world. The understanding of comprehensive responses of countries that have been successful to deal with covid through the timely and effective deployment of health technologies to facilitate planning, surveillance, testing, contact tracing, quarantine, and clinical management will help other countries to improve their health strategies and response systems.  

The sixth Global Education Monitoring Report, Technology in education: A tool on whose terms? advocates that technology should complement, not replace, real teacher interaction. It's good to see this shift in focus from overhyped technology solutions to learning outcomes. However, there are still challenges with the technology-versus-teachers approach. For a start, it can lead to oversimplification. After COVID19, and prolonged online teaching globally, newspapers have emphasized the negative sides of technology, overshadowing its initially promising potential. Examples of technology bans have been highlighted, making them appear as noteworthy examples for others to follow. Netherlands, Denmark, and Sweden caught the world’s media spotlight after they have implemented rules to restrict the use of phones, Chromebooks, and digital textbooks in post-pandemic teaching. The tech-versus-teachers debate can lead one to perceive technology as an adversary. The story can quickly shift to blaming technology for bigger societal issues and pointing fingers at the rapid development and commercialization of tech in today's fast-paced economy. In this system, children are treated as customers, and their actions are turned into business profits. This may be true in some cases, but making profit is not necessarily a bad thing. There are international companies dedicated to children that solve problems while making a profit (consider the LEGO company). It is about the companies’ profit-making strategies, the quality of their products, and their role in addressing (and not creating) problems. Inflexible positions on children's technology have obstructed national digitization policies that solely concentrate on screen time regulations. While well-intentioned, the regulations typically mobilise research studies that rely on inadequate measures. The measures lack the rigor needed to draw powerful conclusions about the impact required for national regulations. Despite this flaw, these studies are still employed to shape national policies on screen time. There is a paradox in this: While technology is evolving towards more personalized experiences, national policies are evolving towards generic bans. Further contradiction is apparent in school or national technology bans. Policy-makers speak of empowering children and valuing their agency, yet they suggest national bans decided and imposed by adults. While it's crucial to protect children with rules and safety measures - and some poorly designed educational technology can indeed be harmful- simply banning it won't lead to the creation of better technology or better learning. Besides, not all technologies in schools are bad; many technologies are beneficial and in some contexts, essential for learning. In developing countries, technology is vital for online tutoring. So, in that case, national technology ban might unintentionally harm children who don’t have other alternatives. The key is to choose technologies purposefully and based on evidence- which calls for some rules and regulations. The bottom line is: empowering children in technology use doesn't start with outright bans, and creating better technology doesn't come from oversimplifying it as screens versus no screens questions. Let us adopt a fresh perspective for children’s technology use in schools, one that directs attention towards the potential of children’s perspectives in creating better technologies and the uplifting impact that high-quality technology can have on their learning journey.

In any climate action, one of the prime concerns is to engage communities to mitigate climate change. Whether it is a large organization, small collective or even a civil society organization, facilitating dialogues between citizens and governments and mobilizing communities to increase their participation in climate consultations is a challenging task.   In middle and low income countries, lack of awareness about the process and difficulty in understanding policy documents limits community participation in climate consultations. Raising awareness about public consultations ensures that communities are engaged in the decision-making process. Generally, communities don’t participate in public consultations as they aren’t aware that their participation plays an important role in the process of policy implications. Disseminating information on how to participate in public consultations through flyers, posters, social media and WhatsApp helps the community people and opinion leaders in sharing their experiences which can further help the policy makers in developing well rounded policies.   Another hurdle in understanding policy deliberations is the language of the policy document itself. Often it was observed that the language of the draft policy document is technical and complex and the research and data sets are difficult for the community people to comprehend. Institutional interventions are required to simplify the language of the policy draft with a clear description of how it has socio-economic impact on the people. Allowing people to discuss in their native language can make the process more participatory.   Environmentalists were using Instagram providing summaries of climate action plan supported by short videos explaining the important provisions of environmental laws and police open for public feedback on websites and social media handles and found useful in encouraging community people to participate in public consultations to help shaping climate policy decisions.   Hosting town hall meetings, creating public forums for people to share their thoughts and ideas about climate change can help to build consensus around climate action. Organizing educational campaigns about the effects of climate change and importance of taking actions is also effective in mobilizing communities. Use of social media platforms in promotion of events, sharing information and encouraging people to participate in consultations can be useful to promote sustainable practices. Showcasing of successful public consultations will help the advocacy groups to convince the government about the importance of positive and sustainable community engagement in climate policy-making. Government partners need to be encouraged to publish the results of public consultations regularly to promote transparency, accountability and legitimacy in the policy making process. Publishing explainer blogs, opinion pieces and small narratives based on learning from experiences will help the common people to understand the impact of the proposed changes on their lives in reality thus allowing them to respond on policy documents. Mediums beyond text-based communications of blog and opinion pieces, such as videos, podcasts are also useful to take the policy concerns to a larger audience. The new social concepts like live reporting, narratives and conversations between domain experts and stakeholders will be useful in understanding the different aspects of climate policies. All these collaborative actions are useful in mobilizing communities to effectively participate in climate consultations.      

Considering the rapidly changing world of work and employment, what are the most common challenges a young university graduate would have to face when integrating the labour market? Do you think that underemployment(over-education) phenomenon is still a challenge for young university graduates? 

The following is my Q&A with Google Bard about the Future of Work in America. Note, the AI answers to my questions (Q:) closely align with my own perspective. A leader's retrospective mindset merely demonstrates their lack of imagination. Q: In a post-pandemic environment that has created an opportunity to change and evolve our work-life balance, why are so many business leaders craving a "return to normal" in America. Why can't they imagine a better scenario than the prior status quo? The pre-pandemic Normal actually was problematic on several levels for most Americans. A: There are a few reasons why business leaders might be craving a return to the pre-pandemic normal. Fear of the unknown. The pandemic has been a time of great uncertainty for businesses, and many leaders are simply looking for a return to stability. They may be concerned about the impact of remote work on productivity, collaboration, and culture. They may also be worried about the cost of maintaining a hybrid workforce, or the difficulty of attracting and retaining top talent in a competitive market. Lack of trust in employees. Some business leaders may not trust their employees to be productive when working from home. They may believe that employees are more likely to slack off or take advantage of the flexibility of remote work. They may also be concerned about the security of confidential information when it is stored on employees' personal devices. A focus on the bottom line. Some business leaders may be more concerned with the bottom line than with the well-being of their employees. They may believe that remote work is less efficient and that it leads to higher costs, such as increased IT support and office space. They may also be concerned about the impact of remote work on customer service, as employees may be less available to answer questions or resolve issues. It is important to note that not all business leaders are opposed to a hybrid workforce. Many leaders are open to the idea of allowing employees to work from home part-time or full-time, as long as it is done in a way that is productive and efficient. However, the pandemic has highlighted the challenges of remote work, and it is likely that some businesses will continue to favor a traditional office environment. It is also important to note that the pre-pandemic normal was not ideal for most Americans. Many people were working long hours, commuting long distances, and struggling to balance work and family. The pandemic has given many people a chance to reassess their priorities and to demand a better work-life balance. It is possible that the post-pandemic normal will be a better one for most Americans, but it will require businesses to be flexible and to adapt to the changing needs of their employees. Q: The Gallup study of "employee engagement" (or the ongoing lack of it) seems to indicate that "a traditional office environment" may be a significant contributing cause to the cultural failings of the pre-pandemic Normal. So, why do some business leaders crave a return to low levels of employee engagement? That seems like irrational behavior. A: I agree that it seems irrational for business leaders to crave a return to low levels of employee engagement. However, there are a few possible explanations for this behavior. Leadership style: Some leaders may be more comfortable with a traditional top-down management style, in which employees are expected to follow orders without question. This style of leadership can be effective in some situations, but it is often not conducive to employee engagement. Fear of change: Some leaders may be afraid of change, and they may see a return to the pre-pandemic normal as a way to avoid having to make changes to their business. However, change is inevitable, and businesses that fail to adapt to change will eventually be left behind. Short-term thinking: Some leaders may be focused on short-term profits, and they may see a return to the pre-pandemic normal as a way to save money on things like office space and IT support. However, businesses that focus on short-term profits at the expense of employee engagement are likely to suffer in the long run. It is important for business leaders to recognize that employee engagement is not just a nice-to-have, it is essential for business success. Engaged employees are more productive, more creative, and more likely to stay with their company. Businesses that want to succeed in the long run need to invest in employee engagement. Tips for improving employee engagement: Create a culture of trust and respect: Employees need to feel like they are trusted and respected by their managers and colleagues. This means giving employees autonomy and decision-making power, and it means listening to their ideas and feedback. Provide opportunities for learning and development: Employees need to feel like they are growing and developing in their careers. This means providing them with opportunities for training, development, and mentoring. Foster a sense of community: Employees need to feel like they are part of a team and that they are working towards a common goal. This can be done by creating opportunities for social interaction, celebrating successes, and providing recognition for individual and team accomplishments. Balance work and life: Employees need to be able to balance their work and personal lives. This means providing them with flexible work arrangements, such as telecommuting and flextime, and it means understanding that sometimes employees need to take time off for personal reasons. By following these tips, businesses can create a workplace where employees are engaged, productive, and happy. Q: Okay, so what is your assessment, are there enough progressive American business leaders that will join a "Work Passion Movement" that combines the benefits of Flexible Working models with Digital Transformation methodologies? A: I believe there are enough progressive American business leaders who would be interested in joining a "Work Passion Movement" that combines the benefits of flexible working models with digital transformation methodologies. A recent survey by the Society for Human Resource Management found that 70% of employees want to work remotely at least part-time. And a study by the Boston Consulting Group found that companies that offer flexible work arrangements are more likely to attract and retain top talent. Digital transformation can also help businesses to improve employee engagement and productivity. For example, by using tools like video conferencing and project management software, employees can collaborate more effectively and stay connected even when they are working remotely. Of course, there are some challenges to implementing a "Work Passion Movement." For example, businesses need to make sure that they have the right technology in place to support remote work. And they need to create a culture of trust and flexibility so that employees feel comfortable working in a non-traditional way. However, I believe that the benefits of a "Work Passion Movement" outweigh the challenges. By embracing flexible working models and digital transformation, businesses can create a more productive, engaged, and happy workforce. Benefits of joining a Work Passion Movement: Increased productivity: Studies have shown that employees who work from home are more productive than those who work in the office. This is because they are able to work in a distraction-free environment and they have more control over their work-life balance. Improved employee morale: Employees who are able to work from home are more likely to be happy and engaged in their work. This is because they have more flexibility and they are able to spend more time with their families and friends. Reduced costs: Businesses that allow employees to work from home can save money on office space, utilities, and other expenses. If you are a business leader who is interested in joining a "Work Passion Movement," here are a few things you can do: Survey your employees to see if they are interested in working from home, or any location other than a traditional office. Create a policy that outlines the rules and expectations for remote work. Provide your employees with the technology and training they need to be successful working from home. Trust your employees and give them the flexibility they need to do their jobs. Learn more from my thoughts on the quest for Work Passion advancements. We are engaged, fearless and passionate. Join us.

Over the decades, fashion has evolved as a form of self-identity expression and an integral part of an individuals’ personality. However, seldom do people think about how their fashion choices impact the environment and its inhabitants. According to Mahatma Gandhi, “there is no beauty in the finest cloth if it makes hunger and unhappiness.” This sentiment aptly echoes in the current discourse around the promotion of sustainable fashion choices. There are several factors that influence an individual’s fashion choices, such as improved access to technology through social media platforms and websites, social norms as a result of socialization, psychological, economic and, aesthetic aspects to name a few. Sustainable fashion comprises of environmental friendly ways to design, manufacture, distribute, and use clothing. Globally, the unsustainable ways of production by fast fashion industries have played a significant role in the present state of the world with increasing environmental threats posing risk to lives and causing social injustice. Clothing products meeting a primary need have continuous consumer demand from every strata of society but the style they prefer changes consistently due to change in fashion trends driven by fashion influences. For some, the trigger to buy a new cloth can be after their wear is worn and torn and for others it can be at the sight of something new making their existing wardrobe psychologically obsolete. That’s why, fashion phenomenon especially that of fast fashion expedites the psychological obsolescence. The demand for newer clothes tracts the fashion value chain to respond to market demand. More demand for clothes implies more production of clothes, fabric, yarn, fibre and the like. Thus, in the fast-paced competitive fashion world, brands are continuously working towards newer collections throughout the year to meet this high demand and consumption. This result in their choice of fibres and materials, dyes used, low waste design, processes which engage human resources and systems to manage industrial waste. It also implies increased requirements of resources some that are immediately irreplaceable, some that pollutes the water, air, habitat and the entire eco system. Thus, there is a compelling for consumers to alter their fashion consumption as environmentalism and equitable practices are intricately linked. Fashion brands, though are sensitive to the environmental aspects, tend to be more concerned about their bottom line of profit making. Their acts are termed as green-washing and such measures offer no solutions to climate change, biodiversity loss and other larger environmental issues. Even the so-called sustainable brands are sold at a premium, thus tilting the demand to the brands that are output of unsustainable processes. Consumers are easily lured by cheap prices offered during sale and are seldom aware that these clothes are a result of inaccurate forecasts. In other words, brands inability to dot consumers’ preferences ends up in over production and forced sales. The ones that are unsold with all those efforts end up in landfills and ocean. A study conducted in Sweden aimed to clarify what sustainable fashion meant for the Swedish fashion industry using the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA), to examine raw material extraction, material processing, product manufacture, distribution, use, disposal and recycling. The study found examination of scenarios which reduced the pre-user environmental burden of clothing more feasible. Another study employed the comprehensive action determination model (CADM) to identify psychological factors linked to reduce clothing consumption across five different countries. The study results showed that personal and social norms are key determinants of fashion choices. An increase in perceived personal norms potentially could be reached with focused messages, on the environmental impact of choices and the possibilities to lessen it through own reduced consumption (outcome efficacy). Many studies found that people are more  likely to engage in pro-environmental behaviours when the message or context leverages psychological factors such as social influence, habits, feelings and cognition, and tangibility. While businesses shall thrive, the planet must maintain its ecological balance. The responsibility is with the industry to ensure brand transparency so that consumers are better equipped to make more ethical purchasing decisions.

The present scholarly attention on fake news is heavily western centric with limited comparative perspectives. Many of these academic narratives are primarily focused on finding technological solutions to the issue by making the networks and the algorithms more responsible. However, just addressing the technological aspect may not be a viable long-term solution to fake news, especially in media markets like India.  With several instances of Indian mainstream journalists mistaking fake news for real, it can be seen that the issue is not just proliferation, but also how it is perceived by its audience, including journalists. Any attempts to develop a pedagogic approach to tackle an issue like fake news should be situated in temporal reflexivity, which takes account of the changing contexts of the post-truth reality, rather than focusing too much on a set of the technological advancements making such phenomena like fake news possible. Attempts which seek technologically militant solutions to tackle fake news, in terms of developing algorithms or apps to do it, often lack this. This argument is not meant to downplay the immediate importance of such solutions in fighting the proliferation of fake news. However, attempts with an aggressive focus on imparting training to develop or handle such technological tools may not suffice to facilitate existing journalism education framework to adapt to post-truth realities. Technological solutions pop up and turn invalid over a short span of time unless they sustain with fast-paced updates.