Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
Will Biden’s Plan to Resettle Afghans Transform the U.S. Refugee Program?
Among the high-profile anti-immigration policies that characterized the four years of Donald Trump’s presidency was a dramatic contraction in refugee resettlement in the United States. President Biden has expressed support for restoring U.S. leadership, and increased commitment is needed to help support the more than 80 million people worldwide displaced by political violence, persecution, and climate change, says UConn expert Kathryn Libal. As Libal writes, with co-author and fellow UConn professor Scott Harding, in a recent article for the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, the rapid evacuation of more than 60,000 Afghans pushed the Biden administration to innovate by expanding community-based refugee resettlement and creating a private sponsorship program. But more resources are needed to support programs that were severely undermined in previous years and to support community-based programs that help refugees through the resettlement process: Community sponsorship also encourages local residents to “invest” in welcoming refugees. Under existing community sponsorship efforts, volunteers often have deep ties to their local communities—critical for helping refugees secure housing, and gain access to employment, education, and health care. As these programs expand, efforts to connect refugees to community institutions and stakeholders, which are crucial to help facilitate their social integration, may be enhanced. As Chris George, Executive Director of Integrated Refugee and Immigrant Services in New Haven, Connecticut, has observed, “It’s better for the refugee family to have a community group working with them that knows the schools and knows where to shop and knows where the jobs are.” As more local communities take responsibility for sponsoring refugee families, the potential for a more durable resettlement program may be enhanced. In the face of heightened polarization of refugee and immigration policies, community sponsorship programs can also foster broad-based involvement in refugee resettlement. In turn, greater levels of community engagement can help challenge opposition toward and misinformation about refugees and create greater public support for the idea of refugee resettlement. Yet these efforts are also fraught with significant challenges. Sponsor circle members may have limited capacity or skills to navigate the social welfare system, access health care services, or secure affordable housing for refugees. If group members lack familiarity with the intricacies of US immigration law, helping Afghans designated as “humanitarian parolees” attain asylum status may prove daunting. Without adequate training and ongoing support from resettlement agencies and caseworkers, community volunteers may experience “burn out” from these various responsibilities. Finally, “successful” private and community sponsorship efforts risk providing justification to the arguments of those in support of the privatization of the USRAP and who claim that the government’s role in resettlement should be limited. Opponents of refugee resettlement could argue that community groups are more effective than the existing public–private resettlement model and seek to cut federal funding and involvement in resettlement. Such action could ultimately limit the overall number of refugees the United States admits in the future. December 11 - Georgetown Journal of International Affairs. If you are a journalist looking to know more about this topic – then let us help with your coverage and questions. An associate professor of social work and human rights, Kathryn Libal is the director of UConn's Human Rights Institute and is an expert on human rights, refugee resettlement, and social welfare. She is available to speak with media – click on her icon now to arrange an interview.
ChristianaCare Named a “Most Wired” Health Care Technology Leader for 6th Consecutive Year
ChristianaCare Recognized as one of the Nation’s Best in Both Ambulatory and Hospital Care (WILMINGTON, Del. – Oct. 29, 2021) For the sixth consecutive year, ChristianaCare has earned the “Most Wired” designation from the College of Healthcare Information Management Executives (CHIME), which assesses how effectively health care organizations apply core and advanced technologies to improve health and care in their communities. ChristianaCare was recognized with a Performance Excellence Award for Most Wired’s acute and ambulatory categories. That level is reserved only for organizations that are considered leaders in health care technology who “actively push the industry forward.” The recognition affirms that not only has ChristianaCare implemented advanced technologies, but it leverages those technologies in innovative ways. And it also has encouraged deep adoption of these technologies across the entire health system. “Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, patients and providers have experienced the power of virtual care and the ability for data and technology to improve the health care experience,” said ChristianaCare President and CEO Janice E. Nevin, M.D., MPH. “At ChristianaCare, we believe now is the moment to transform our health care system to a new model of care that doesn’t stop between appointments—it’s continuous, data-driven and technology-enabled. We’re proud to be recognized as a leader in health care innovation, as we work to achieve better health at lower costs.” “We are driving digital into the core of our existing operations and simultaneously creating new digital product offerings,” said Randy Gaboriault, MS, MBA, chief digital and information officer at ChristianaCare. “The concept of the visit as the primary point of interaction between patient and doctor is obsolete. Our unique care foundation is continuous, digital and in the home, driving care with data and producing engagement actions between the visits. Our goal is for the care team, supported by artificial intelligence within the workflow, to determine the next best action for each patient.” The recognition is the latest accolade that highlights ChristianaCare’s success in creating exceptional experiences for its patients and consumers through personalized, proactive communication, which enables people to use the channels that they prefer in order to easily access care. This success was recently illustrated through ChristianaCare’s integration of clinical data with its new customer relationship management (CRM) system, which enabled ChristianaCare to scale and automate outreach to patients due for important preventive health checks. Through this effort and the new capabilities, ChristianaCare initiated patient and consumer outreach to address two common gaps in care – annual wellness checkups and breast cancer screenings. Continuous and automatic, the outreach within weeks resolved 11% of the gaps in annual wellness checkups, and 8% of the gaps in breast cancer screenings. “Success here stems from our commitment to continuously look for opportunities to innovate, from which we can more quickly and effectively partner with each individual on their path toward optimal health, even as we explore new ways to push the boundaries of how technology can further improve the health of our community,” said Lynne McCone, vice president of IT Application Services at ChristianaCare. The 2021 Digital Health Most Wired program assessed the adoption, integration and impact of technologies in health care organizations at all stages of development, from early development to industry-leading. Each participating organization received a customized benchmarking report, an overall score and scores for individual levels in eight segments: infrastructure; security; business/disaster recovery; administrative/supply chain; analytics/data management; interoperability/population health; patient engagement; and clinical quality/safety. Participants can use the report and scores to identify strengths and opportunities for improvement. Participants also received certification based on their overall performance. “Digital transformation in healthcare has accelerated to an unprecedented level since 2020, and the next few years will bring a wave of innovation that empowers healthcare consumers and will astound the industry,” said CHIME President and CEO Russell P. Branzell. “The Digital Health Most Wired program recognizes the outstanding digital leaders who have paved the way for this imminent revolution in healthcare. Their trailblazing commitment to rapid transformation has set an example for the entire industry in how to pursue a leadership vision with determination, brilliant planning and courage to overcome all challenges.” About ChristianaCare Headquartered in Wilmington, Delaware, ChristianaCare is one of the country’s most dynamic health care organizations, centered on improving health outcomes, making high-quality care more accessible and lowering health care costs. ChristianaCare includes an extensive network of primary care and outpatient services, home health care, urgent care centers, three hospitals (1,299 beds), a freestanding emergency department, a Level I trauma center and a Level III neonatal intensive care unit, a comprehensive stroke center and regional centers of excellence in heart and vascular care, cancer care and women’s health. It also includes the pioneering Gene Editing Institute. ChristianaCare is nationally recognized as a great place to work, rated by Forbes as the 5th best health system to work for in the United States and by IDG Computerworld as one of the nation’s Best Places to Work in IT. ChristianaCare is rated by HealthGrades as one of America’s 50 Best Hospitals and continually ranked among the nation’s best by Newsweek and other national quality ratings. ChristianaCare is a nonprofit teaching health system with more than 260 residents and fellows. With its groundbreaking Center for Virtual Health and a focus on population health and value-based care, ChristianaCare is shaping the future of health care.
Squid Game: why you shouldn’t be too hard on translators
By David Orrego-Carmona Squid Game has recently become Netflix’s biggest debut ever, but the show has sparked controversy due to its English subtitles. This occurred after a Korean-speaking viewer took to Twitter and TikTok to criticise the subtitles for providing a “botched” translation, claiming: “If you don’t understand Korean you didn’t really watch the same show.” Only this year, Squid Game, Lupin, and Money Heist – all non-English originals – have consistently been at the top of Netflix’s most-watched shows globally. This growing popularity of productions in languages other than English and streaming platforms investing more in them has led to an increase in the visibility of the work of translators. When it comes to translating films and series, subtitling and dubbing are the most common forms of translation. Subtitles show the dialogue translated into text displayed at the bottom of the screen; while in dubbing, the original voices of the characters are replaced with voices in a new language. Translation is not new to viewers, but the instant, almost frictionless access to different language versions of the same film or show definitely is. Streaming platforms allow viewers to swiftly change from watching a film with subtitles to listening to the dubbed version or the original. This creates an opportunity for viewers to compare the different versions. Why do originals and translations differ? Just because the translation doesn’t say exactly the same as the original, it doesn’t mean it’s wrong. Films and TV series are packed with cultural references, wordplay and jokes that require changes and adaptation to make sure what’s said and seen on screen makes sense across languages. Making allowances and adapting what’s said are common practices in translation because, otherwise, the translators would need to include detailed notes to explain cultural differences. Consider the representations of washoku (traditional Japanese cuisine) which are so beautifully embedded in Studio Ghibli films. While additional explanations about the significance of harmony, kinship and care represented in the bowls of ramen in Ponyo or the soft steaming red bean buns in Spirited Away could be interesting, they might get in the way of a viewer who just wants to enjoy the production. Professional translators analyse the source content, understand the context, and consider the needs of the variety of viewers who will be watching. They then look for translation solutions that create an immersive experience for viewers who cannot fully access the original. Translators, similarly to screenwriters and filmmakers, need to make sure they provide good, engaging storytelling; sometimes that implies compromises. For instance, some original dialogue from season two of Money Heist uses the expression “somanta de hostias”. Literally, “hostia” means host – as in the sacramental bread which is taken during communion at a church service. But it is also Spanish religious slang used as an expletive. Original: Alberto, como baje del coche, te voy a dar una somanta de hostias que no te vas ni a mantener en pie. Literal translation: Alberto, if I get out the car, I’m going to give you such a hell (hostia) of a beating that you won’t be able to stay on your feet. Dubbed version: If I have to get out of the car, I’m gonna beat you so hard you don’t know what day it is. Subtitles: Alberto, if I get out of the car, I’ll beat you senseless. The dubbed version of the dialogue adopts the English expression “to beat someone”. The subtitled version uses the same expression but offers a shorter sentence. The difference between the two renderings reflects the constraints of each form of translation. In dubbing, if the lip movements don’t match the sound, viewers often feel disconnected from the content. Equally, if subtitles are too wordy or poorly timed, viewers could become frustrated when reading them. Dubbing needs to match the duration of the original dialogue, follow the same delivery to fit the gesticulations of the characters, and adjust to the lip movements of the actors on the screen. Subtitles, on the other hand, need to be read quickly to keep up with the pace of the film. We talk faster than we can read, so subtitles rarely include all the spoken words. The longer the subtitle, the longer the viewer will take to read it and the less time they will have to watch. According to Netflix policies, for example, subtitles can’t have more than two lines and 42 characters, and shouldn’t stay on the screen for longer than seven seconds. Additionally, in the above example, the translations do not reflect the reference to religious slang, typical of Spanish culture. Rather than fixating on this reference and assuming it is an essential part of the dialogue, a good translator would consider what an English-speaking character would say in this context and find a suitable alternative that will sound natural and make sense to the viewer. New rules of engagement It is encouraging to see that some viewers are so devoted to the content they watch: foreign films and TV shows help promote cultural understanding and empathy. But not all viewers act in the same way and the solutions provided by the translators need to cater to everyone who decides to watch the show. This leads to different viewing experiences, but it only reflects the reality of watching any culturally charged product, even in our own languages. In English, for instance, consider all the references and nuances that a British viewer could miss when watching an English-language film produced in South Africa, Jamaica or Pakistan. Translators do not blindly look for literal translations. On the contrary, in the translation profession, hints of literal translation often signal low-quality work. Translators focus on meaning and, in the case of films and series, will endeavour to provide viewers with a product that will create a similar experience to the original. The case of Squid Game has been instrumental in bringing discussions about translation to the fore. Of course there are good and bad translations, but the main gain here is the opportunity to debate what determines this. Through such discussions, viewers are becoming more aware of the role and complexities of translation.
A missed opportunity - hospital doctors must stop 'risky' medicines
Hospital doctors and pharmacists should stop ‘risky’ medicines before patients leave hospital - according to researchers at the University of East Anglia. One in two older people are prescribed a medicine which over time has become inappropriate or unnecessary. In a recent National Overprescribing Review titled ‘Good for you, good for us, good for everybody’, the government called on doctors and pharmacists working in GP surgeries to tackle the problem of overprescribing. But research from UEA’s School of Pharmacy has found that nine out of 10 older hospital patients and their family believe that inappropriate or unnecessary medicines should also be spotted and stopped whilst they are in hospital. And the team say that by the time people are back under their GP care, a major opportunity has been missed. Prof Debi Bhattacharya, from UEA’s School of Pharmacy, said: “We know that half of older people admitted to hospital arrive having been prescribed a medicine that over time has become inappropriate for them. These medicines will have more risks than benefits. “And their side effects cause problems, like making them feel drowsy, nauseous or have trouble getting to sleep. These problems impact a person’s quality of life to the extent that they can cause re-hospitalisation. “Our research has shown that very few patients have one of these ‘risky’ medicines stopped whilst in hospital. “Continuing medicines when they are not needed unnecessarily harms people and wastes NHS money. “The time is right to undertake research into ways of safely increasing the number of inappropriate and unnecessary medicines that are stopped,” she added. To tackle the problem, Prof Bhattacharya is leading a £2.4 million trial to stop risky medicines in hospital - in collaboration with researchers at the Universities of York, Newcastle, Leeds and Leicester, the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital and Addenbrooke’s Hospital in Cambridge. Patient and Public Engagement lead for CHARMER, Katherine Murphy, said: “We are working with hospitals and GP organisations across England to see whether the new strategy works, helps people, causes no harm, and is good value for the NHS. “And for this trial to be meaningful to people, we need to make sure that we look at the things that matter to them when testing whether stopping a medicine has had a positive outcome.” The research team recently surveyed 200 people including patients, informal carers, doctors, nurses, pharmacists, physiotherapists and researchers to find out what they should look at in the trial. On reviewing the results Katherine Murphy said: “It was good to see that what people really want us to look at is whether patients can do the things that they want to do, not how much patients can do. “Being able to walk up a flight of stairs, for example, may be important to some patients but not to others. We need to make sure that medicines are prescribed that support people to get the best quality of life. In the trial, we also need to make sure that the way that we stop risky medicines causes no harm and is good value for the NHS.” For more information about the CHARMER study visit https://www.uea.ac.uk/web/groups-and-centres/charmer/about-the-research The research has been funded by the National Institute of Health and Social Care research.
Corporate Social Responsibility Builds Investor Trust
There’s little doubt that corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a good thing for businesses. Whether it’s taking positive action on society, communities, the climate, or the planet, strong corporate citizenship tends to play well with the public, the media, and consumers alike. And that can translate into wins in terms of brand equity and reputation. What is perhaps less clear are the concrete business returns that ethical business practices may or may not generate. Or, whether doing the right thing can create value for firms beyond image, brand, and customer or employee engagement. To shed light on this, Goizueta Assistant Professor of Accounting Suhas A. Sridharan, has taken a rather novel approach. Together with colleagues from the universities of LUISS Guido Carli, Nazarbayev University, and IDC Herzliya, Sridharan has published a new study using measures of disclosure credibility to understand whether CSR builds investor trust and drives tangible benefits for corporations. Corporate Social Responsibility Does Reap Rewards “Disclosure credulity refers to how much your investors trust the information your organization provides – how much faith they have in your company’s ability to accurately convey opportunities for growth, and perhaps more critically, to navigate risk and uncertainty,” says Sridharan. “Because CSR and responsible business practices have a role in addressing a range of risks–from climate change and environmental factors to socio-economic or political uncertainty and the impact on supply chains, talent and so on–we reasoned CSR can impact investor trust and disclosure credibility. And disclosure credibility, in turn, can impact investor decision-making and business outcomes.” To study disclosure credibility, and capture shifts in investor sentiment towards firms, Sridharan and her colleagues decided to use the link between share prices and company earnings announcements–the public statements on profitability that firms are obliged to make over different periods. “Earnings announcements are among the most salient and recurring areas of corporate disclosure, and managers and investors pay very close attention to them,” Sridharan says. “Because of the nature of the information they contain, they have a direct link to security price discovery – the price that firms and investors will agree to buy and sell shares in the company. Simply put, earnings announcements can be used to examine how much investors value a firm.” As reports, earnings announcements are also highly complex and typically time-consuming to process. Because of this, Sridharan and her colleagues opted to look at just how quickly or slowly investors were reading announcements and responding to them – and how quickly or slowly stock prices were adjusting to reflect earnings news within a five-day window after earnings announcements, as well as a longer period to allow for potential overreaction or error. More Disclosure Credibility Equals Faster Results Sridharan explains, “The intuition we brought to the study was that the more investors trust a firm’s disclosures, the more efficient or faster they will be to process its earnings report; in other words, the more they will be likely to take the report on face value and less inclined to dig into the finer minutiae or question its findings.” Adopting this approach, she and her colleagues then compared and contrasted investor response to earnings reports from different firms, with greater or less involvement in CSR activities. In total, they looked at a large-scale sample of more than 19,000 annual earnings announcements from just under 3,000 U.S. firms over a 25-year period, between 1992 and 2017. Using Morgan Stanley Capital International environmental, social, and governance ratings, they were also able to determine the degree of firm-level CSR across their dataset during this period. Crunching the numbers, Sridharan and fellow researchers were able to arrive at a concrete conclusion: CSR measurably increases investor trust and disclosure credibility. “When we estimated our regression models, we found clear evidence that corporate social responsibility does indeed contribute to the average speed of price discovery around earnings announcements; and it does so positively. Our results reveal that CSR increases the speed with which stock prices incorporate earnings news. Breaking it right down, we see that a one unit increase in CSR activities corresponds to 1.96 percent increase in the average timeliness or efficiency of reported earnings.” In other words, investors are reacting more quickly and favorably to performance reports made by organizations with more demonstrated social responsibility. “We know that these types of announcements are lengthy and dense; they take time to process,” Sridharan says. “So, the intuition here is that when your firm plants a flag on responsibility and accountability, investors are more likely to take your disclosures at face value – they’re more likely to trust what you’re saying.” Organizations would do well to take this finding on board, says Sridharan; especially in today’s climate of high volatility and uncertainty. Having investors on board is critical in weathering the bad times along with the good, she adds, and CSR can be a game-changing tool in building that necessary trust. The Wild West of the Regulatory Landscape Sridharan’s paper also informs the regulatory landscape around corporate responsibility which is still in its infancy and which she likens to something of a “Wild West.” “The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and other regulators are increasingly focused on improving the functioning of capital markets and understanding the role of CSR,” she says. “The SEC has included an examination of climate and ESG-related risks among its 2021 examination priorities which also underscores a growing investor interest in these issues. At the same time, research is showing that CSR can be misused or simply deployed to benefit managers looking to score reputational points with stakeholders–at the expense of shareholders. By demonstrating that investor perceptions of firms are materially shaped by firms’ CSR activities, our study highlights the importance of–and helps build the case for–monitoring and regulating firms’ CSR activities.” Suhas A. Sridharan is an Assistant Professor of Accounting at Emory University's Goizueta Business School. Sridharan studies investors' use of information to assess risk and resolve uncertainty, particularly around issues of political economy. She is available to speak with media about the importantance of CSR - simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
Emory Experts - Ad-blockers Shave $14.2 Billion Off Consumer Spending, Says New Research
Digital advertising is big business. So big, in fact, that it is well on track to become the most dominant form of advertising. Estimates suggest that spending on digital ads in the U.S. alone will reach a staggering $201 billion by 2023 – more than two-thirds of total spend. And it makes sense. With consumers increasingly shopping online, advertisers continue to ramp up their use of data and technologies to find innovative new ways to reach target audiences. The Flip Side to Digital Advertising Success The sheer ubiquity of online advertisements is driving a corollary upswing in the use of another digital technology. Ad blockers are easy-to-install and free-to-use software that consumers can deploy to hide unwanted ads on their screens, and they are gaining huge popularity worldwide. The numbers are hard to determine, but some evidence points to anywhere from 600 million to two billion Internet users having downloaded some form of ad-blocking in the last three years or so – well over 11% of the global internet population. Also hard to gauge is the impact on advertising revenue that ad-blockers are having – that is, until now. A new paper by Vilma Todri, assistant professor of information systems and operations management at Goizueta, sheds stunning light on the effect of ad-blocking on online search and purchasing behaviors among internet users. And what she has found should give advertisers serious pause for thought. According to her analysis, ad-blockers decrease consumer online spending by an average of 1.45%. Now, assuming that around 615 million internet users have downloaded some kind of ad-blocking software in recent years, the actual impact puts the loss in revenue from digital advertising around the $14.2 billion mark, year over year. And that’s not all. Todri also finds that ad-blocking seems to have the effect of limiting consumer spending disproportionally on certain brands over others. Users who opt out of seeing digital ads tend to continue to purchase mostly those products or services they are already familiar with, and not engage with new brands; they are less likely to use different search channels or visit new e-commerce websites as a result of ad-blocking. Analyzing Customer Engagement from 300 Million Internet Visits To get at these insights, Todri analyzed data from a U.S. web behavior dataset spanning a three-year period, from January 2015 to December 2018. She looked at web-wide visits, transaction behaviors and demographic identifiers across a total of 92,000+ users and more than 300 million internet visits. To measure the effect of ad-blocking, Todri matched all of this data with an ad-blocker dataset from the same source – a well-known U.S. measurement and analytics company – which shows that around 10% of users had installed an ad-blocker at some point during this three-year window. Crunching the numbers, Todri finds that the effect of using ad-blocking software on these users is to reduce their online search engine sessions by 5.6%. They also spend 5.5% less time visiting e-commerce websites. In other words, consumers who opt out of seeing ads end up browsing and shopping significantly less than others. And in terms of what these users are buying, the data shows that they are much less likely to spend on brands they don’t know or have not experienced before (and conversely, more likely to stick to familiar brands.) Digging even deeper, Todri also finds that this negative effect penalizes the brands that invest most heavily in advertising online more that those that don’t. In other words, ad-blockers are hurting those who advertise online most. Todri’s paper is the first to expose the quantitative, negative impact of ad-blocking on consumer spending. And her findings should be on the radar of any company looking to market its products and services online, she says. “The data clearly shows that ad-blockers reduce online spending by 1.45%, which amounts to something in the order of $14.2 billion in lost revenue given that about 600 million people around the world have installed this kind of software,” she says. “And the figures suggest that it’s the brands that heavily invest on online advertising who are bearing the brunt of this drop-off in consumer spending.” Search Behaviors, Interrupted “Advertisers also need to look at the fact that ad-blockers inhibit search behaviors,” adds Todri. “The figures point to a drop of around 5% when users have installed ad-blockers, which in turn means that they are not discovering and spending on new brands. They’re sticking with what they already know.” There’s an imperative here for companies to interpret these findings and reflect on what they say about ad-blocking, and also about what constitutes “acceptable advertising practices,” she says. “It’s reasonable to assume that people who use ad-blockers simply don’t like ads and aren’t influenced by them. Yet the data points to a different conclusion: if consumer purchasing falls after installing ad-blockers, it would suggest that advertising does work – seeing advertisements does drive searching and purchasing behaviors. So taken together, there’s a likely imperative here for advertisers to find new formats in terms of reaching their targets, and to strengthen their organic channels and social presence online.” Digital advertising clearly does impact search and purchasing behaviors, says Todri, so firms need to get creative while being cognizant of the fact that some consumers find current advertising practices annoying. Vilma Todri is an Assistant Professor of Information Systems & Operations Management at Emory University’s Goizueta Business School. Previously, she worked for Google where she was developing integrated cross-platform advertising strategies for large business clients that partnered with tech giant. Vilma is available to speak with media about this subject – simply click on her icon now to arrange an interview today.
Media, gender and celebrity culture expert on Britney Spears news developments
Claire Sisco King, associate professor of communication studies, is available for commentary on the recent resurgence in media interest in Britney Spears's personal life, including the #FreeBritney movement and the pop star's recent engagement. Sisco King teaches about Spears in a celebrity culture class, as part of a discussion on gender and trauma as they relate to fame. She can discuss: Spears and the public’s emotional investments in the lives of celebrities The misogyny that often typifies celebrity culture Our culture’s general fascination with trauma
Early-stage entrepreneurial activity in 2020 had fallen sharply from its pre-pandemic high in the UK as the economy was essentially shut down for long periods due to COVID-19 This decline was due to fewer nascent entrepreneurs than normal – that is, individuals in the first three months of starting their new business venture Nevertheless, around two-thirds of working-age adults looking to set up a business within three years said the pandemic had influenced their decision to re-assess their future engagement with the labour market As in previous economic downturns it is the small business community that drives the recovery across all sectors of the economy. UK entrepreneurs once again stand ready to rise to the challenges and opportunities created by the Coronavirus pandemic and the economic fallout from Brexit, a new report says. The latest Global Entrepreneurship Team (GEM) UK report found that although around of half budding entrepreneurs said that the UK government had so far dealt effectively with the economic consequences of the pandemic, there must be improved programmes, financial support and advice to start-ups and scale-ups through different stages of the business life cycle. GEM is the world’s largest survey of entrepreneurship and is the only global research source that collects data on entrepreneurship directly from individual entrepreneurs. It measures various rates of entrepreneurship in 43 countries in 2020. GEM’s UK team – which is led by Professor Mark Hart of Aston University – compared attitudes, activity and aspirations in the UK, Germany and the United States as well as the four home nations of the UK. Access to finance remained one of the major obstacles to entrepreneurial activity in the UK. Enhanced tax benefits for entrepreneurs, such as tax breaks for start-ups and businesses in difficulty to reduce early exits and better tax incentives for recruitment, investment in managerial and digital practices and skills were also highlighted1. The report also called for more entrepreneurial education, especially at school age as well as improved technical education and improved links between the educational system and industry to boost growth post-COVID and post-Brexit. It found that the UK still lags behind many comparable economies in this respect. Mark Hart, professor of small business and entrepreneurship at Aston Business School and deputy director of the UK’s Enterprise Research Centre, said: “The GEM survey undertaken in the last few months of 2020 showed a sharp fall in the number of individuals in the early stages of setting up a new business compared to the pre-pandemic high in 2019. “This is hardly surprising, but the analysis has also shown that the entrepreneurial foundations of the economy and society are still strong and these will be crucial for the recovery after the pandemic and in dealing with the ongoing economic fallout from Brexit. “Those ethnic-minority communities that have borne the brunt of the pandemic in terms of infection, hospitalisation and sadly deaths demonstrated their resilience by maintaining their previous levels of early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA rate) which were significantly higher than for the non-ethnic minority population. “Clearly, the pandemic has had no damaging impact on the level of entrepreneurial activity by immigrants and ethnic-minorities although it has depressed it for life-long residents and the non-ethnic population. “There is undoubtedly an appetite for people to start their own businesses in the next three years and many report new opportunities because of the pandemic but they are delaying the actual decision to get the business operational.” The full GEM UK impact report, sponsored by NatWest, is available for download here.
Next biochar webinars announced to reach global market
• Next series of biochar online events scheduled for August and September • Benefits of using sustainable form of charcoal to be highlighted • Original event attracted people from around the globe Two more virtual events have been planned to highlight the benefits of using biochar, which is a sustainable form of charcoal made from organic waste. The free events will be taking place on 24 August and 29 September and follow the popular presentation held last month by the Energy and Bioproducts Research Institute (EBRI) at Aston University. Organisers of the event, Biochar Webinar: Challenges, Benefits and Applications, were inundated with hundreds of businesses from across the globe, including in New Zealand and South Africa, signing up to find out more about how they could benefit from using the fuel source. Tim Miller, director of engagement at EBRI said they had received positive feedback from the first event, and so wanted to make sure a wider audience could find out more about it. “In the build-up to COP26 which will be happening in November, the world is going to be talking more and more about energy, sustainability and the path to net zero. This is why it’s so important for us to be able to showcase what we do within EBRI, along with the research, but also be the thought leaders in such an important subject which will be affecting us all. “This is why we have decided to release two more dates for the talk, and have also been mindful to host one later in the day so our counterparts in countries such as America will also be able to log in and find out more about biochar,” he said. Biochar has a wide variety of uses, including carbon capture, water treatment, soil improvement, odour control and industrial applications. The expert-led virtual session will help anyone with an interest in biochar to be able to find out more about how the multi-purpose material can help decarbonise rural and urban environments. The talks will be held on 24 August between 10am – 11am, and 29 September between 3 - 4pm. To sign up for the event, visit www.bioenergy-for-business.org/ebri-out-and-about/ For more details about the world-leading research taking place at EBRI, visit: https://www.aston.ac.uk/research/eps/ebri
Rishi Sunak kickstarts Help to Grow scheme at Aston Business School
"It was a pleasure to host the chancellor at Aston Business School today. As a small business leader you have to know about all the key business functions and how to optimise them to drive high performance in your business." Paula Whitehouse, Aston Business School Paula Whitehouse (L) & Rishi Sunak (R) The Chancellor of the Exchequer met with Aston University’s deputy vice-chancellor engagement and associate dean enterprise of the College of Business and Social Sciences to launch Help to Grow: Management The scheme will support senior managers of small and medium-sized businesses to boost performance, resilience, and long-term growth The 12-week programme is 90% funded by the Government and participants can complete it alongside full-time work. The Chancellor has called on the leaders of small and medium-sized businesses to sign up to a new programme designed to hone their expertise as he attended one of the first courses in the UK today (August 2). Rishi Sunak joined a class taking part in the government-funded Help to Grow: Management scheme at Aston Business School, Aston University, alongside small business owners, to see first-hand how it is giving them the tools they need to innovate, grow and help drive the recovery from the pandemic. The Chancellor delivered a talk to participants at Aston Business School on the critical role small businesses can play in boosting UK productivity. He then took part in a group activity and led a discussion about their own business models and opportunities for growth. The scheme, which was announced at the March Budget and opened for applications in May, will give 30,000 SMEs access to world-class business expertise on everything from financial management to marketing and is a pivotal part of the government’s Plan for Jobs. Rishi Sunak, the chancellor of the exchequer, said: “Small businesses are key to our innovation and economy and will therefore be an essential part to our recovery from the pandemic, which is why we are levelling up their skills through the Help to Grow schemes. “I want to bring some of the best bits of management training from around the world to help boost productivity here in the UK. “Help to Grow: Management will ensure our brilliant SMEs seize every opportunity to grow, fuelling our Plan for Jobs by boosting productivity in all corners of the UK.” Experts in small business and entrepreneurship from Aston University have played a significant role in developing the programme. Paula Whitehouse, curriculum director for Help to Grow: Management and associate dean enterprise of the College of Business and Social Sciences, said: "It was a pleasure to host the chancellor at Aston Business School today. As a small business leader you have to know about all the key business functions and how to optimise them to drive high performance in your business. “Help to Grow: Management will combine this essential business education with the creation of a like-minded business network and support for the practical application of the learning to ensure businesses get immediate results. “I am excited to be working with Small Business Charter business school colleagues all over the country to roll out the Help to Grow: Management curriculum and ultimately to be introducing many more business leaders from the West Midlands into Aston's vibrant entrepreneurial community." Mark Hart, professor of small business and entrepreneurship at Aston University and associate director of Aston Centre for Growth, said: “The launch of the Government’s Help to Grow: Management programme for SMEs is a welcome addition at a critical time to the range of support available to small business leaders across the UK. “Small firms will drive the recovery as they have always done in previous economic downturns and equipping their leaders with the leadership and management skills from the UK’s leading business schools will ensure that they will build even more resilient, innovative and sustainable businesses capable of responding to the emerging opportunities in their chosen markets. “This is a practical, intensive 12-week programme designed by some of our top academics to provide the skills required to improve the performance and productivity of small firms across all sectors of the economy”. Mark Hart (L) & Rishi Sunak (R) take part in a class at Aston Business School