Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
This strategic move aligns with LSU’s Scholarship First Agenda, where energy is one of five core focus areas for research critical to the future of Louisiana and the nation. It also builds on the successes of LSU’s Institute for Energy Innovation, Center for Energy Studies, Louisiana Geological Survey, and the LSU-led FUEL team while assuming a leadership role in how the university engages with its partners—industry, communities, donors, and state and federal agencies—through collaboration and service. “As Louisiana’s flagship research university, LSU is committed to organizing our efforts in ways that maximize impact and reflect institutional priorities,” said Robert Twilley, LSU vice president of research and economic development. “The LSU Energy Institute will provide a platform for faculty across multiple colleges and disciplines to collaborate on solutions to Louisiana’s most pressing energy and environmental challenges.” The LSU Energy Institute will unify and expand several longstanding programs, chiefly the Center for Energy Studies, the Louisiana Geological Survey, and a range of externally funded initiatives, including cutting-edge energy research catalyzed by the LSU Institute for Energy Innovation through a dedicated $25 million investment from Shell. This results-focused realignment reflects a broader effort across LSU to improve coordination between strategic research projects and teams with increased support from research centers, institutes, and core facilities. As LSU’s flagship unit in the energy domain, the Energy Institute will enhance the university’s ability to align interdisciplinary research and policy with Louisiana’s energy economy and environmental stewardship goals. “The reorganization of LSU energy efforts into this institute reflects both a long-standing legacy of service and a renewed vision for the future of energy research in Louisiana. It’s about building on 40 years of trusted work while expanding our capacity to innovate, support decisionmakers, and serve the people of our state, said Greg Upton, interim director of the LSU Energy Institute and executive director of the LSU Center for Energy Studies. The LSU Energy Institute will serve as a central hub for faculty, students, industry, and public agencies working at the intersection of energy technology, resource economics, environmental protection, and policy. The integration of the Louisiana Geological Survey will further reinforce the university’s role in providing critical data and analysis to support state planning and hazard assessment. The institute will also continue to seed competitive, high-quality research focused on energy systems resilience, carbon management, and economic opportunity. These investments reflect LSU’s broader vision to translate research into impact and fuel new jobs and technologies to power Louisiana’s future. Original article posted here.
Play, Learn, Lead: How Aston’s Gamification-Driven MBA Is Redefining Business Learning
Professor Helen Higson OBE of Aston Business School, discusses why gamification is embedded in all of the School's postgraduate portfolio of degrees Give the students something to do, not something to learn; and the doing is of such a nature as to demand thinking; learning naturally results. (attributed to John Dewey, US educational psychologist (1859-1952) Imagine you’re the CEO of a cutting-edge robotics firm in 2031, making high-stakes decisions on R&D, marketing and finance; one misstep and your virtual company could collapse. You win, lose, adapt, and grow. This isn’t a case study, it’s your classroom experience at Aston Business School in Birmingham. Imagine you’re participating in Europe’s biggest MBA tournament, the University Business Challenge, where your strategic flair and financial acumen will be tested against the continent’s sharpest minds. Then you’re solving real-world sustainability crises in the Accounting for Sustainability Case Competition, crafting solutions that could be showcased in Canada. What if you could do all this from your classroom seat, armed with only your MBA learnings, teamwork and the thrill of gamified learning. At Aston, we believe the best way to master business is by doing business. That’s why we’ve embedded active learning through games, simulations, and competitions across all our postgraduate programs. The results? Higher engagement, deeper learning, and students who graduate with confidence and real-world skills. Research says gamified learning boosts motivation, lowers stress, and helps students adopt new habits for lifelong success. As educational researchers Kirillov et al. (2016) found, “Gamification creates the right conditions for student motivation, reduces stress, and promotes the adoption of learning material—shaping new habits and behaviours.” This has led to what Wiggins (2016), calls the “repackaging of traditional instructional strategies”. In Aston Business Sschool we have long embraced this approach as a way of increasing student outcomes and stimulating more student engagement in their learning. Our Centre for Gamification in Education (A-GamE), launched in 2018, is dedicated to advancing innovative teaching methods. We run regular seminars with internal and external speakers showcasing gamification adoption, design and research and we use these techniques across the ABS in a wide range of disciplines. (We have included two examples of this work in our list of references.) Furthermore, in 2021 we published a book which outlines the diverse ways in which we use these methods (Elliott et al. 2021). Subsequently, during 2024 we redesigned all our postgraduate portfolio of degrees, and as part of this initiative games and simulations were embedded across all programmes. Why Gamification Works Through simulations like BISSIM, students step into executive roles, steering futuristic companies through the twists and turns of a dynamic marketplace. A flagship programme running since 1981, BISSIM was developed in collaboration between academics from ABS and Warwick Business School, and every decision on R&D, marketing, or HR has real consequences as teams battle each other for the top spot. After each year of trading the results are input into the computer model. The results are then generated for each company in the form of financial reports, KPIs and other non-financial results and messages. Each team’s results are affected by their own decisions and the competitive actions of the other teams, as well as the market that they all influence. This year one of our academics, Matt Davies, has been awarded an Innovation Fellowship further to commercialise the game. Competitions with Global Impact We also encourage students to take part in national and international competitions which have the same effect of developing their engagement with real-life business problems on a global scale. Beyond the classroom, Aston students represent the university in major competitions like the University Business Challenge (in which ABS had the highest number of UK teams this year) and the Accounting for Sustainability (A4S) Case Competition, for which we are an “anchor business school”. Here, theory gets stress-tested against real-world scenarios and top talent from around the globe. The result? Award-winning teams, global experience, and friendships built under pressure. At the heart of this approach is Aston’s Centre for Gamification (A-GamE), dedicated to making learning interactive, motivating, and fun. Regular seminars, fresh research, and close ties to industry keep the curriculum evolving and relevant, so students graduate ready to lead, adapt, and thrive in any business environment. Why does it matter? In a volatile, fast-paced economy, employers appreciate agility, teamwork and decisiveness. At Aston, every simulation and competition is geared towards sharpening these skills. Graduates emerge not only knowledgeable, but prepared for the job market. Engagement Our students have been embracing these opportunities. Six MBA/Msc teams developed their A4S videos, hoping to reach the final in Canada early in 2025, and three teams out of nine reached the national UBC finals. Additionally, the BISSEM simulation has just finished inspiring another group of MBA students (particularly as the prize for the winning team was tickets to a game at our local Aston Villa premiership football (soccer) club, currently riding high in the league!). Typical feedback from non-Finance specialists is that they suddenly surprised themselves during their participation in the simulation and were reconsidering the options of taking a career in Finance. It seems that our original purposes have been met – increased confidence, passion, deep learning and engagement have been achieved. To interivew Professor Higson, contact Nicola Jones, Press and Communications Manager, on (+44) 7825 342091 or email: n.jones6@aston.ac.uk Elliott, C., Guest, J. and Vettraino, E. (editors) (2021), Games, Simulations and Playful Learning in Business Education, Edward Elgar. Kirillov, A. V., Vinichenko, M. V., Melnichuk, A. V., Melnichuk, Y. A., and Vinogradova, M. V. (2016), ‘Improvement in the Learning Environment through Gamification of the Educational Process’, International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(7), pp. 2071-2085. Olczak, M, Guest, J. and Riegler, R. (2022), ‘The Use of Robotic Players in Online Games’, in Conference Proceedings, Chartered Association of Business Schools, LTSE Conference, Belfast, 24 May 2022, p. 79-81. Wiggins, B. E. (2016), ‘An Overview and Study on the Use of Games, Simulations, and Gamification in Higher Education’, International Journal of Game-Based Learning (IJGBL), 6(1), 18-29. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJGBL.2016010102
Intangible assets now make up more than 90% of S&P 500 market value — yet many organizations still lack a dedicated executive role to manage them strategically. This is where the Chief Intellectual Property Officer (CIPO) comes in. In this expert-backed piece, J.S. Held's Chief Intellectual Property Officer James E. Malackowski, CPA, CLP, and his colleague David Ngo unpack the economic forces shaping this role, the skills CIPOs bring to the table, and why forward-thinking companies are making IP leadership a boardroom priority. What you’ll learn: • The economic forces driving the rise of CIPO leadership • How CIPOs bridge legal, technical, and commercial priorities to unlock value • The growing relevance of CIPOs in consulting, insurance, and AI-driven industries • Practical strategies for integrating IP leadership into portfolio and risk management • Why the next decade will define the CIPO’s role in corporate success With deep expertise in IP strategy, valuation, and litigation, Malackowski and Ngo offer a clear, compelling case for elevating IP leadership to the C-suite. Looking to connect with the experts? Click on their profiles to arrange an interview or gain deeper insights into intellectual property strategy, risk, and valuation. James E. Malackowski, CPA, CLP Chief Intellectual Property Officer, J.S. Held | Co-founder and Senior Managing Director, Ocean Tomo Global leader in intellectual property valuation, strategic advisory, and expert testimony. Recognized among IAM’s “World’s Leading IP Strategists” and a pioneer in IP exchange models. David Ngo Senior Analyst, Intellectual Property Disputes Financial Expert Testimony, Ocean Tomo, a part of J.S. Held Specialist in quantifying economic damages in IP disputes and valuing intangible assets, with expertise in applying economic and financial analysis to complex litigation. For any other media inquiries, contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com.
New National UMass Amherst Poll Finds President Trump’s Job Approval Gap Slides 6 Points Since April
Topline results and crosstabs for the poll can be found at www.umass.edu/poll Public approval of Donald Trump’s presidency has dropped by 6 percentage points since April and his approval rating is now 20 points underwater, 38-58, according to a new national University of Massachusetts Amherst Poll of 1,000 respondents conducted July 25-30. “Six months into his second term as president, Donald Trump looks to be on the ropes with the American public,” says Tatishe Nteta, provost professor of political science at UMass Amherst and director of the poll. “Trump’s approval ratings, already historically low for a newly elected president, continue to sink with close to 6-in-10 Americans (58%) expressing disapproval of the job that Trump is doing in office. While Trump remains a popular figure among Republicans and conservatives, Trump’s time in office is viewed more negatively across genders, generations, classes and races, with majorities of each of these groups disapproving of Trump’s performance. With over three years left in the Trump administration, there is still time for him to right the ship and fulfil the promises that catapulted him to the presidency, but the president is not off to the start he or his supporters envisioned.” In the previous UMass Poll, conducted as Trump approached the three-month anniversary of his return to the White House, Trump held a 44-51 approval rating, buoyed by a positive overall approval on his handling of immigration. The new poll, however, has found a significant shift in views on this issue. “Immigration has been central Trump’s political campaigns and his strongest issue in his first few months in office, but the percentage of people who say he is handling it well has dropped substantially from 50% four months ago to just 41% today, a 9-point drop,” explains Raymond La Raja, professor of political science at UMass Amherst and co-director of the poll. “Trump came into the presidency promising change, and he’s made significant alterations in many areas of federal policy,” says Jesse Rhodes, professor of political science at UMass Amherst and co-director of the poll. “He came into office believing that he had limited time to make the changes he promised his most ardent supporters, and moved with unparalleled speed to enact these changes, including sometimes by legally questionable means. Now, it seems, he’s reaping the consequences as a large majority of Americans don’t like these changes. Clear majorities say that Trump has handled his key issues – immigration (54%), inflation (63%), jobs (55%) and tariffs (63%) – not very well or not well at all. With so many Americans grading his handling of public policy poorly, it’s no wonder they disapprove of his presidency.” Rhodes also notes that the president is seeing an erosion in support from one of his most reliable groups of supporters: men. “Trump has cultivated a ‘masculine’ reputation and sought to build support among American men but, strikingly, we find that support for Trump has deteriorated most substantially among members of this group,” says Rhodes. “In April, Trump enjoyed approval from 48% of men, compared with 39% of women. Now, only 39% of men express approval of Trump, compared with 35% of women. “In addition to losing support among men, Trump has seen approval for his presidency crumble among political independents, a critical swing constituency,” Rhodes adds. “While 31% of independents approved of his presidency in April, that number is now down 10 percentage points to 21%. This is really bad news for Trump, and for Republicans who depend on support from independents in close elections.” “Polarization has changed the interpretation of presidential approval ratings,” says Alexander Theodoridis, associate professor of political science at UMass Amherst and co-director of the poll. “Partisans just aren’t willing to evaluate presidents from the other side positively and are reluctant to say negative things about presidents from their own party. So, approval numbers fluctuate within a narrower range. Gone are the days when George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush both achieved approval numbers over 90%. This is certainly true for Trump, who is likely the most polarizing figure in modern American politics. Even in this polarized environment, though, Trump’s approval ratings are low by any standard – he is very close to the practical floor. Especially noteworthy is that nearly half of Americans say they strongly disapprove of Trump and the percentage of Americans who say they strongly approve of Trump has decreased substantially. Even among Republican respondents, only half strongly approve of the president. The GOP should be concerned about these numbers heading into the odd-year elections in 2025 and, especially, the midterm elections in 2026. It is very difficult for a party to win when its leader is this unpopular.” Americans’ views on Epstein and Trump Of all issues surveyed in the latest University of Massachusetts Amherst Poll, one appears to be the greatest drag on Trump’s presidency: Jeffrey Epstein and Trump’s handling of the evidence gathered in the federal investigation of the accused sex-trafficker and his long-time friend. “The Epstein scandal remains a serious vulnerability – indeed, quite possibly, the most serious vulnerability – for Trump right now,” Rhodes says. “Fully 70% of Americans believe he has handled this issue ‘not too well’ or ‘not well at all,’ and nearly two-thirds (63%) believe his administration is hiding information about Epstein. The Epstein scandal is also likely undermining public confidence in Trump more broadly. Indeed, we find that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe that Trump is corrupt and nearly 70% believe he is dishonest. Critically, these numbers mean that many Republicans and conservatives are disappointed with Trump’s handling of the Epstein situation. Republican frustration with Trump’s handling of the Epstein case could erode enthusiasm for his presidency and for Republicans in 2026.” “If Trump and those around him have been wishing the Jeffrey Epstein story would disappear, their wishes have not been granted,” Theodoridis says. “Most Americans (77%) tell us they have heard a lot or some about the Epstein case. In addition to believing that the Trump administration is hiding important Epstein case information, the vast majority of respondents say that a special prosecutor should be appointed to investigate the Trump DOJ’s handling of the Epstein case (59%), that Donald Trump was good friends with Epstein (67%), and that a list of Epstein’s clients exists (70%). Even substantial numbers of Trump voters believe these things. And, when it comes to an Epstein ‘cover-up,’ it seems the buck stops with Trump himself. While a lot of Americans blame Attorney General Pam Bondi (59%), FBI Director Kash Patel (49%), and House Speaker Mike Johnson (47%) for hiding information about the Epstein case, a whopping 81% blame President Trump.” “The controversy over the handling of the Epstein files by the Trump administration has – interestingly – brought Americans together,” Nteta adds. “While on most issues, we see clear and persistent generational, class and racial divisions; on Epstein, Americans across these divides speak with one voice. This controversy has even resulted in agreement across partisan lines as majorities of Democrats and Republicans support a special prosecutor and believe a list of clients exists, and disapproval of Trump’s handling of the whole matter is surprisingly seen among members of Trump’s base, as 43% of Republicans and conservatives indicate that Trump has not handled this issue well.” “Where Trump faces his poorest rating in our poll is on perceived corruption and dishonesty,” adds La Raja. “A clear plurality (49%) sees Trump as ‘very dishonest,’ with an additional 20% saying that he is ‘somewhat dishonest.’ And 45% see him as ‘very corrupt,’ with an additional 20% as ‘somewhat corrupt.’ Only about one-third reject those labels entirely. Trump also gets low ratings on transparency – a majority (52%) say Trump is not at all transparent, his weakest score after dishonesty. Only 23% believe that he’s very transparent. For a candidate who brands himself as a truth-teller and disruptor, this appears to be a credibility gap.” “Strength is Trump’s strongest attribute,” La Raja explains. “Fifty-eight percent see him as very or somewhat strong, indicating appeal among his base and possibly swing voters who value ‘toughness.’ However, views on his competence are split evenly, with 52% saying he’s competent to some degree, while 48% say not at all.” Voter Regret? “Since President Trump took office, a number of reports of regretful Trump voters have been covered in the nation’s leading media outlets,” Nteta says. “From voters upset with Trump’s immigration policies to supporters who take issue with the president’s unwillingness to release the files associated with the Epstein case, there seemed to be a wellspring of regret among Trump’s once loyal base. Our results suggest that while there are, in fact, areas where the president is weak, most notably on his handling of the economy and the Epstein controversy. When asked directly, close to 9-in-10 (86%) would vote for Trump again if given the opportunity to revisit their 2024 presidential vote choice. These results indicate that the number of regretful voters covered in the mainstream press may be overblown, as the overwhelming majority of Trump voters remain in the president’s camp.” “Only 1% of Trump voters say they regret their vote and would choose differently, 2% say they ‘might’ choose differently and 3% say they wish they hadn’t voted at all,” Theodoridis says. “When we simply ask voters how they would vote if they could go back and recast their ballot, 6% of Trump voters tell us they would vote for Harris, while only 2% of Harris voters say they would switch to Trump. There is clearly more erosion in support among Trump voters than among Harris voters and, in what is likely small consolation to Harris and her campaign team, significantly more 2024 non-voters who say they wish they had voted indicate they would now cast a vote for the former vice president. In a relatively close election, shifts of these magnitudes might have been decisive, but there are no ‘take-backs’ in electoral politics, so these numbers are best used to inform choices going forward.” “Our results are not wholly positive for President Trump, and there exist areas of concern for his team moving forward,” Nteta warns. “Since April, the number of Trump voters expressing strong confidence in their vote for Trump has declined by 5 percentage points. Additionally, we find small increases in the number of Trump supporters who have mixed feelings about their vote and who indicate that they would ‘rather not have voted.’ Finally, 14% of Trump voters indicate that they would not vote for Trump if given the chance to revisit, while only 8% of Harris voters express a similar sentiment. Time will tell whether the growing number of disaffected Trump voters are the canaries in the coal mine, indicating a larger problem among the Trump coalition and the MAGA movement more generally.” “We do find a meaningful percentage – 31% – of Trump voters unwilling to say they feel very confident they made the right choice,” Theodoridis adds. “Nineteen percent of Trump voters tell us they are still confident but have concerns, and 6% tell us they have mixed feelings about their vote. Given what we know about the psychological predispositions against admitting to having been wrong, these numbers suggest some softening in support for Trump among the very voters who returned him to the White House last November. This should certainly be alarming for Republican politicians. However, for Democrats or journalists looking for a mass mea culpa from Trump voters, our numbers are, perhaps, sobering.” Methodology This University of Massachusetts Amherst Poll of 1,000 respondents nationally was conducted by YouGov July 25-30. YouGov interviewed 1,057 total respondents who were then matched down to a sample of 1,000 to produce the final dataset. The frame was constructed by stratified sampling from the full 2023 American Community Survey (ACS) one-year sample with selection within strata by weighted sampling with replacements (using the person weights on the public use file). The matched cases were weighted to the sampling frame using propensity scores. The matched cases and the frame were combined, and a logistic regression was estimated for inclusion in the frame. The propensity score function included age, gender, race/ethnicity, years of education, region, and home ownership. The propensity scores were grouped into deciles of the estimated propensity score in the frame and post-stratified according to these deciles. The weights were then post-stratified on 2020 and 2024 presidential vote choice as ranked on gender, age (4-categories), race (4-categories) and education (4-categories), to produce the final weight. The demographic marginals and their interlockings were based on the sample frame. The marginal distribution of 2020 presidential vote choice and its demographic interlockings were based on a politically representative “modeled frame” of US adults, using the 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) public use microdata file, public voter file records, the 2020 Current Population Survey (CPS) Voting and Registration supplements, the 2020 National Election Pool (NEP) exit poll, and the 2020 CES surveys, including demographics and 2020 presidential vote. The marginal distribution of 2024 vote choice was based on official ballot counts compiled by the University of Florida Election Labs and CNN. Demographic interlockings for 2024 vote choice were based on CNN’s 2024 Exit Polls. The margin of error of this poll is 3.5%. Topline results and crosstabs for the poll can be found at www.umass.edu/poll
How AI will transform the economy: Predicting the next breakthroughs
AI is already revolutionizing the world around us. University of Delaware experts are at the forefront of this innovation, researching and inventing new ways to use AI in everyday life. Below are a number of UD experts who can discuss these topics and the breakthroughs being made. AI meets the edge – Weisong Shi, Alumni Distinguished Professor and Chair of Computer and Information Sciences, explains how AI and edge computing will transform everything from self-driving cars to real-time healthcare. AI’s energy appetite – Steven Hegedus, Professor, dives into the massive energy demands of AI, with expertise in photonics and chip-level signal processing. Building AI from the hardware – Sunita Chandrasekaran, Associate Professor and leader of the First State AI Institute, focuses on AI hardware innovations shaping the future of computing. Email mediarelations@udel.edu to speak to any of these experts.
Tariffs fuel global sourcing shakeup for fashion in the U.S.
Be prepared to see more Made in Vietnam or Made in Bangladesh labels on clothing in the coming years. That’s because U.S. fashion companies are rethinking their global sourcing strategies and operations in response to the Trump administration’s trade policies and tariffs, according to new research by the University of Delaware's Sheng Lu. Lu, professor and graduate director in the Department of Fashion and Apparel Studies, partners with the United States Fashion Industry Association (USFIA), on an annual survey of executives at the top 25 U.S. fashion brands, retailers, importers and wholesalers doing business globally. Members include well-known names like Levi’s, Macy’s, Ralph Lauren and Under Armour, among others. The report covers business challenges and outlook, sourcing practices and views on trade policy. “We wear more than just clothes; we wear the global economy, the supply chain and the public policies that jointly make fashion and affordable clothing available to American families,” Lu said. “We want to know where these companies source their products and what factors matter to them the most. It’s a classic question and it evolves each year.” This year’s report, released on July 31, shows tariffs and protectionist policies are the top business challenge for companies, with nearly half reporting declining sales and more than 20% saying they have had to lay off employees. This was followed closely by uncertainty around inflation and the economy, increasing sourcing and production costs, and changes in trade policies from other countries. In response, more than 80% of companies said they will diversify the countries from which they source their products, focusing on vendors in Asian countries such as Vietnam, Bangladesh, Cambodia and Indonesia. Despite the push for “Made in USA” garments, only 17% of respondents plan to increase sourcing from the U.S. Lu shared his findings in the following Q&A: What surprised you about the survey results? Two things surprised me. First, contrary to common perception, the results do not indicate that the tariff policy so far has effectively supported or encouraged more textile and apparel production in the U.S. This actually makes sense. U.S. mills are as uncertain about the tariff rates as our trading partners are. A U.S. company may manufacture the clothes here, but use yarns, fabrics and zippers from other countries. When tariffs drive up the cost of these raw materials, it reduces the price competitiveness of apparel “Made in the USA.” Many domestic factories are in a “wait and see” mode, holding back on making critical investments to expand production due to the lack of a clear policy signal. Second, I was struck by the wide-ranging impact of the tariffs, which has gone far beyond what I originally imagined. Tariffs have not only increased U.S. fashion companies’ sourcing costs but have also affected their product development, shipping and overall supply chain management. Nearly 70% of the survey respondents said they have delayed or canceled some sourcing orders due to tariff hikes. Should consumers be prepared for less variety in clothing or shortages? Later this year, we may see fewer clothing items from our favorite brands on store shelves — especially during the holiday shopping season — and many of those items may come with a higher price tag. That said, fashion companies are doing what they can to avoid passing on tariff costs across the board, as they recognize that consumers are price sensitive. Many surveyed U.S. fashion companies say they intend to strengthen relationships with key vendors as a strategic move, and there is a growing public call for U.S. companies to provide more support and resources to their suppliers in developing countries. Sustainability is a huge issue in the fashion industry, as millions of tons of textiles end up in landfills every year. Companies say they are spending less on sustainability efforts. What would you tell companies about their sustainability efforts? Our survey suggests that sustainability can open up new business opportunities for U.S. fashion companies. Respondents said that when sourcing clothing made from sustainable fibers — like recycled, organic, biodegradable and regenerative materials — they are more likely to rely on a U.S. sourcing base or suppliers in the Western Hemisphere. In other words, even if apparel “Made in the USA” or nearby cannot always compete on price with lower-cost Asian suppliers, there is a better chance to compete on sustainability. Based on what I’ve learned from our Gen Z students — who expect better quality and more sustainable products if they have to pay more, and are critical consumers for many brands and retailers — it is unwise to hold back on investments in sustainability. What do you see as the biggest takeaway from the survey? One key takeaway is that the $4 trillion fashion and apparel business today is truly “made anywhere in the world and sold anywhere in the world.” In such a highly global and interconnected industry, everyone is a stakeholder — meaning there are no real winners in a tariff war. The study is also a powerful reminder that fashion is far more than just creating stylish clothing. Today’s fashion industry is deeply intertwined with sustainability, international relations, trade policy and technology. I hope the findings will be timely, informative and useful to fashion companies, policymakers, suppliers and fellow researchers. I plan to incorporate the insights, as well as the valuable industry connections developed through my long term partnership with USFIA, in my classroom, giving UD students fresh, real-world perspectives on the often “unfashionable” but essential side of the industry. Reporters interested in speaking with Lu can contact him directly by visiting his profile and clicking on the contact button. UD's media relations team can be reached via email.
Inflation: It’s Not Just for Prices Anymore
Lately, headlines are full of talk about inflation — a response to the economy and the looming tariffs. I’ve experienced many inflationary periods, but it feels different in retirement. When I was earning a paycheque, inflation was just an annoyance, something I needed to pay attention to and maybe buy a cheaper cut of steak. Now, as someone on a “fixed income,” it feels like a real threat. Recently, Ben McCabe, CEO of Bloom Financial, appeared on Breakfast Television and delivered a truth bomb: “We’re approaching a perfect storm. Longer life expectancy, fewer defined benefit pensions, and rising inflation.” Well, that storm has arrived — and it’s inflating more than just prices. It’s also expanding our waistlines, prescription lists, and emotional baggage. Inflation, at its core, means “the condition of being inflated.” And it turns out that definition applies to more than the grocery bill. So, grab a cup of green tea (or a celery stick if you’re feeling virtuous). Let’s explore the three sneaky forms of inflation threatening your retirement — and what you can do about them. This blog will appeal to individuals who have retired or aspire to retire in the future. Let’s light this candle! 1. Financial Inflation: The Usual Suspect Let’s start with the obvious: inflation means your money won’t stretch as far as it used to. In 2022, Canada’s Consumer Price Index increased by 6.8% — the highest rise in 40 years. Although it slowed down a bit in 2023, essentials such as food, rent, and fuel continue to grow. Your retirement income might be fixed, but prices definitely aren’t. Retirement Risks from Financial Inflation: • Longer lives mean longer bills. A 65-year-old woman today has a 50% chance of living past 90 years old. That’s over 25 years of expenses. • Vanishing pensions. Defined benefit pensions are disappearing faster than good manners on Twitter. • Healthcare creep. Public healthcare doesn’t cover everything, especially if you want care that wasn’t designed in 1978. As Ben McCabe aptly put it: “We need to stay healthy so our health span matches our lifespan,” huh?— “otherwise, inflation will affect us through the cost of medications, home care, and long-term care facilities.” What You Can Do: • Review your income sources. Prioritize indexed income sources, such as CPP, OAS, and annuities with COLA (Cost of Living Adjustment) riders. • Use home equity sensibly. If you’re house-rich but cash-poor, consider a reverse mortgage or other equity release products. • Adjust your spending habits. Host themed nights, like “Tuna Tuesdays” — a nostalgic, fun, and budget-friendly option. How to Support Others: • Discuss money matters with kindness. Many retirees feel ashamed of their finances. Show compassion, listen more, talk less. • Bring food, not judgment. A regular Saturday brunch with Sadie can make a significant difference, not just financially. • Foster social connections. Financial stress can cause isolation. Encourage hosting potlucks, card nights, or joining a community group. 2. Physical Inflation: The Expanding Middle Retirement brings more free time… and more room. Waistlines, cholesterol, and prescriptions all seem to rise in tandem. Signs you’re experiencing physical inflation: • Pants that used to be snug are now aspirational • Your Fitbit died months ago — and so did your motivation • Your pharmacy knows you by name... and birthday The bad news? Poor physical health is expensive. Chronic illness can deplete savings faster than a grandchild with your credit card. What You Can Do: • Keep moving. Walk, garden, spin — whatever gets you vertical and vibrant. • Lift weights. Muscle mass starts declining at 40. Resistance training isn’t just for 20-somethings. Strong is the new sexy, pass it on! • Meal plan smart. Grocery inflation peaked at 8.9% — eat better, waste less, save more. Consider shopping daily and buying only the amount of food needed for that day. Your health span should align with your lifespan. Stay strong, stay mobile, and yes, stretching counts — but not if you’re reaching for the TV remote. Inflammation — The Silent Saboteur If inflation is bad, inflammation is worse. Chronic inflammation contributes to: • Heart disease and stroke • Type 2 diabetes • Alzheimer’s disease and brain fog • Arthritis, osteoporosis, and varicose veins • Mood disorders such as anxiety and depression • Certain Cancers Even CNN and Al Jazeera recently reported that Donald Trump was diagnosed with chronic venous insufficiency (CVI) — a common, often overlooked condition among those over 55. Small veins, big problem. (Insert your own “tiny vein, tiny…” joke — I’m staying classy.) Inflammation is the unwelcome guest that never departs. If inflammation had a personality, it would be the dinner guest who drinks all your wine, insults your cat, and brings up politics at dessert. Whether it's fueling joint pain, causing swelling in your ankles, or messing with your metabolism, chronic inflammation is one of the biggest saboteurs of aging gracefully. It often hides in plain sight, presenting itself as: • Low-grade fatigue • Weight gain (especially belly fat) • Mood swings or brain fog • Increased pain and stiffness • Slow healing. What You Can Do: • Eat anti-inflammatory foods, such as leafy greens, whole grains, and healthy fats. Cut out the sugar. • Move each day. Yes, again. It’s that important. • Lower stress to improve sleep. Stress and poor sleep fuel inflammation. • Maintain social and emotional bonds. Loneliness and inflammation are frequently connected — break the link. De-Inflation — The Great Slowdown • So, we’ve discussed inflation... but what about its quieter, sneakier cousin: deflation? • No, not the economic kind. We’re talking about the physical “poof” that occurs when we reach our late 70s and 80s — when the padding diminishes, posture declines, and everything else… well, just seems a little less buoyant. • Suddenly, you’re shrinking. Your weight drops — but not in a sexy, "I’ve been intermittent fasting" kind of way. More like "my pants are falling down and my doctor says I’m 2 inches shorter" sort of vibe. Welcome to the gravitational pull of aging. Signs of De-Inflation: • Pants fit strangely, but not in a bragging way • You’re hunched over as if you’re forever bowing to the Queen • Your arms and legs have that crepey, crinkly look — like tissue paper with a gym membership • And let’s not forget the wrinkles on your face — a stunning topographical map of your life Let’s be honest: gravity always wins. Biology always wins. And yes, our skin thins — insert your own joke about being “thin-skinned” here. But we are not entirely powerless. Here’s How to Push Back (Gently — you don’t want to break a hip): • Check your posture monthly. Have a friend take a quick side photo. Are you upright and confident — or resembling a question mark? • Stretch regularly. Yoga, fascia stretching, and massage can help combat the hunch. • Move intentionally. Gentle strength training and balance exercises can maintain muscle and stability. • Moisturize and hydrate. For your skin, your joints, and your soul. • Celebrate your lines. They’re not “flaws” — they’re proof you’ve felt joy, sorrow, surprise, and a few good martinis. They’re not signs of aging; they’re signs you’ve been living. Remember: frowning only causes more wrinkles. So, smile — or better yet, laugh. Loudly. Often. Preferably at inappropriate moments. Oh — and take my advice on this: never (and I mean never) open your eyes during downward-facing dog. Some things just can’t be unseen. 3. Emotional Inflation: When Grudges Accumulate Like Interest Here’s the sneaky one. Emotional inflation appears as: • Bitterness over who got what in Mom’s will • Inflated egos and “right-titis” (a chronic need to be right) • Replaying 1983 arguments in your head like they’re Oscar contenders. • Giving not-so-nice nicknames to your former coworkers (and using them… publicly) • Keeping a mental spreadsheet of injustices — now colour-coded for quick reference (who says seniors are not tech-savvy?) Here’s the thing: emotional inflation isn’t just about what others have done. It’s also about how we interpret our role in those stories. Ready for a bold idea that can free you from decades of emotional baggage? What if we stopped keeping score and instead focused on how we want to show up in our relationships? What if you chose, intentionally, to be a generous sister, a supportive friend, a gracious parent, or a collaborative co-worker — not because they "deserve it," but because that's who you want to be? It’s not easy. It may require deep breathing and the occasional muttering in the car. However, for those willing, this mental reframe can be a total game-changer. What to do: • Let go. You can’t carry joy and a grudge at the same time — and joy is lighter. Lighten the emotional load. You don’t need to wait for someone to say sorry to feel free. • Choose your character. Think of it as casting yourself in the movie of your life. Be the wise one, the peacemaker, the person who breaks the cycle, not the one still angry about a forgotten birthday in 1996. • Write your own story. Present yourself as the person you want to be, even if others haven’t read the same script. You can’t control other people, but you can control how much space they occupy in your mind (especially if they’re not even paying for snacks). • Reframe your perspective. Instead of keeping score, focus on who you want to be: a generous sibling, a gracious friend, or a person at peace. Let go of the scorekeeping. It rarely results in a tie, and even if you win… You still feel empty. • Define your role. Be the big-hearted sibling, the calm presence, the one who lets go, not the person who stores bitterness in Tupperware containers. • Invest in joy. Dance classes, martinis, laughter — choose your remedy. • Talk it out. Therapy is more affordable than wine-fuelled Facebook rants and far more effective. Take the high road. There’s less traffic and better scenery. You can’t always avoid emotional hurt, but you can avoid living in a constant state of emotional inflation. And trust me, nothing deflates retirement faster than a bloated list of resentments. And if you’re feeling weighed down by the bloat of what life has thrown at you, remember: you can’t control inflation, but you can choose your response. Choose grace over grudges. Choose strength over stagnation. Choose the version of yourself that makes you proud. Because guess what? You’re still becoming who you are. Trust me — it’s better than a juice cleanse and more affordable than therapy. Some people age like fine wine; others age like vinegar. Emotional inflation is the burden you carry that doesn't show on the scale, but it weighs everything down. You can’t rewrite someone else’s story, but you can decide how to present yourself in your own. Taking the high road is less crowded and provides better perspectives. Inflation May Be Inevitable — But Misery? That’s Optional. Inflation has seeped into our lives like glitter at a craft table — impossible to contain and popping up in the most unexpected spots. It’s not just your budget that’s swollen (thanks to blueberries and Botox), but also your belly, your prescription drawer, and — if you’re not careful — your resentment list. But here’s the good news: While you can’t control how high prices go, how slow your metabolism becomes, or how long Uncle Jerry holds a grudge… You can control your response. So, here’s your call to calm, intentional, fabulous action: 1. Reclaim your power — in your spending, your body, and your mindset. 2. Choose curiosity instead of crankiness. Move more instead of staying still. Salad rather than salt (well… sometimes). 3. Be the kind of person who ages like disco — a little dramatic, slightly sparkly, and always ready to dance. And if you absolutely must inflate something… make it your sense of humour. Because in the grand game of Retirement Inflation Nation, laughter is your best hedge — and it’s fully indexed to joy. Oh — and if you're wondering whether I practice what I preach: I'm a certified fitness instructor and teach 5 jam-packed fitness classes a week at Canada’s largest gym. Movement isn’t just medicine — it’s music, community, and yes, a fabulous way to earn the right to your next martini. So, take it from someone still riding the rhythm of life — gravity is real, but so is joy. And we’re still dancing under the stars. (Here’s proof from the Coldplay concert — yes, I was the one yelling “Fix You” with both hands in the air and not a single regret.) Keep inflating the things that matter: your laugh lines, your playlist, and your purpose. With love, lunges, and a little glitter, Sue Don’t Retire... Rewire!
Impact of High Home Prices “Not Sustainable for the Economy”
Lawrence Levy, associate vice president and executive dean of the National Center for Suburban Studies, was interviewed by Newsday about high home prices on Long Island. The article says the average household now needs to earn at least $242,000 annually to afford a median-priced home. Levy said the long-term impact of high home prices “is not sustainable for the economy, for the school systems, because we need to be able to find places where younger or lower-earning people can live and take their rightful place in the economy, even if it’s not at the top rung of the earnings ladder.”
Poll finds bipartisan agreement on a key issue: Regulating AI
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here. In the run-up to the vote in the U.S. Senate on President Donald Trump’s spending and tax bill, Republicans scrambled to revise the bill to win support of wavering GOP senators. A provision included in the original bill was a 10-year moratorium on any state law that sought to regulate artificial intelligence. The provision denied access to US$500 million in federal funding for broadband internet and AI infrastructure projects for any state that passed any such law. The inclusion of the AI regulation moratorium was widely viewed as a win for AI firms that had expressed fears that states passing regulations on AI would hamper the development of the technology. However, many federal and state officials from both parties, including state attorneys general, state legislators and 17 Republican governors, publicly opposed the measure. In the last hours before the passage of the bill, the Senate struck down the provision by a resounding 99-1 vote. In an era defined by partisan divides on issues such as immigration, health care, social welfare, gender equality, race relations and gun control, why are so many Republican and Democratic political leaders on the same page on the issue of AI regulation? Whatever motivated lawmakers to permit AI regulation, our recent poll shows that they are aligned with the majority of Americans who view AI with trepidation, skepticism and fear, and who want the emerging technology regulated. Bipartisan sentiments We are political scientists who use polls to study partisan polarization in the United States, as well as the areas of agreement that bridge the divide that has come to define U.S. politics. In April 2025, we fielded a nationally representative poll that sought to capture what Americans think about AI, including what they think AI will mean for the economy and society going forward. The public is generally pessimistic. We found that 65% of Americans said they believe AI will increase the spread of false information. Fifty-six percent of Americans worry AI will threaten the future of humanity. Fewer than 3 in 10 Americans told us AI will make them more productive (29%), make people less lonely (21%) or improve the economy (22%). While Americans tend to be deeply divided along partisan lines on most issues, the apprehension regarding AI’s impact on the future appears to be relatively consistent across Republicans and Democrats. For example, only 19% of Republicans and 22% of Democrats said they believe that artificial intelligence will make people less lonely. Respondents across the parties are in lockstep when it comes to their views on whether AI will make them personally more productive, with only 29% − both Republicans and Democrats − agreeing. And 60% of Democrats and 53% Republicans said they believe AI will threaten the future of humanity. On the question of whether artificial intelligence should be strictly regulated by the government, we found that close to 6 in 10 Americans (58%) agree with this sentiment. Given the partisan differences in support for governmental regulation of business, we expected to find evidence of a partisan divide on this question. However, our data finds that Democrats and Republicans are of one mind on AI regulation, with majorities of both Democrats (66%) and Republicans (54%) supporting strict AI regulation. When we take into account demographic and political characteristics such as race, educational attainment, gender identity, income, ideology and age, we again find that partisan identity has no significant impact on opinion regarding the regulation of AI. State of anxiety In the years ahead, the debate over AI and the government’s role in regulating it is likely to intensify, on both the state and federal levels. As each day seems to bring new advances in AI’s capability and reach, the future is shaping up to be one in which human beings coexist – and hopefully flourish – alongside AI. This new reality has made the American public, both Democrats and Republicans, justifiably nervous, and our polling captures this widespread trepidation. Lawmakers and technology leaders alike could address this anxiety by better communicating the pitfalls and potential of AI, and take seriously the concerns of the public. After all, the public is not alone in its trepidation. Many experts in the field also have substantial worries about the future of AI. One of the fundamental political questions moving forward, then, will be to what degree regulators put guardrails on this emerging and transformative technology in order to protect Americans from AI’s negative consequences. Adam Eichen is a doctoral candidate in political science at UMass Amherst. Alexander Theodoridis is associate professor of political science and co-director of the UMass Amherst Poll at UMass Amherst. Sara M. Kirshbaum is a postdoctoral fellow and lecturer of political science at UMass Amherst. Tatishe Nteta is provost professor of political science and director of the UMass Amherst Poll at UMass Amherst.
Are China's New Policies Opening Up China?
For centuries China has been known as a closed country. When the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644) started enforcing immense cultural and political influence, it acted as a catalyst for China's closed country status. Then the Qing dynasty (1644-1912) made the closed country status official by expanding China's political, cultural and administrative structures. Now after over 600 years, China is announcing they may become more open than they have in past centuries. China is not fully becoming open, but there are two ways China is hoping to re-establish its reputation among other countries. In 2024 China announced they are enabling a temporary visa-free policy, that permits visitors from 43 countries to visit China without visas for short trips lasting only a few days. China installed this policy with hopes of promoting global goodwill and to encourage tourism and business travel. Now in 2025, China says they will implement policies that will promote stable foreign trade growth and improve services for enterprises. While this new policy is just beginning, the visa-free policy will end at the end of 2025. So, while China says they are becoming more open, they mean they are welcoming foreign businesses and investors. They are currently not becoming open religiously, politically, socially or economically. Citizens, even visitors, still remain under strict censorship, surveillance and political control. These policies also don't mean that foreign companies will no longer experience restrictions, forced partnerships with Chinese firms, data rules, and unexpected regulatory pressure. These things will still continue to occur. China is being selective on what these policies entail and how long they will last. Since the COVID lockdowns and now with the real estate crashes and youth unemployment, China has felt its economy slowing. It's their hope that these new policies will help boost China's economy. Economic Perspective: Dr. Jared Pincin is an expert on economics and is available to speak to media regarding China's economy – simply click on his icon or email mweinstein@cedarville.edu to arrange an interview. International Relations Perspective: Dr. Glen Duerr, professor of international studies at Cedarville University and a citizen of the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States, is a nationally known expert on this subject and is available to speak to on China's new policies. To schedule an interview, email Mark D. Weinstein, executive director of public relations at Cedarville University at mweinstein@cedarville.edu or click on his icon.
