Experts Matter. Find Yours.
Connect for media, speaking, professional opportunities & more.
“With Global Antisemitism Rising, ‘Never Again’ Rings Hollow”
Hofstra Professor of Political Science and Director of the European Studies Program Carolyn Dudek wrote a guest essay for Newsday: “With global antisemitism rising, ‘Never Again’ rings hollow.” Dr. Dudek was awarded the 2024 Jean Monnet Chair to expand research, teaching, and course development on the European Union, with a specific focus on EU anti-discrimination policies that address marginalized groups, such as Jews, Muslims, Roma, women, communities of color and the LGBTQ+ community.
Georgia Southern University expert available to provide geopolitical analysis on the Iran war
The Middle East has entered an active state of war marked by a cycle of retaliatory strikes across Iran and the Persian Gulf. Three major uncertainties now dominate the global outlook: the long-term survival of the Iranian government, the fate of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, and the security of critical oil transit routes. Georgia Southern University Professor of Political Science and International Studies Jacek Lubecki, Ph.D., is available to speak about the military operation in Iran and its implications for regional stability and global security. Lubecki is an expert in comparative politics and military security studies, with a focus on the Middle East and Eastern Europe, particularly Poland. His research examines terrorism, counterinsurgency and military strategy. His work has been published in journals including Europe-Asia Studies, East European Politics and Societies, The Polish Review, The New Ukraine and The Armchair General. He has co-authored several books, including Globalization, Nationalism, and Imperialism: A New History of Eastern Europe (2023), which examines domestic and global security challenges, and Defending Eastern Europe: The Defense Policies of New NATO and EU Member States (2021). Lubecki speaks Polish, English, French, Russian, Spanish, Italian, German and Arabic with varying levels of fluency. Lubecki is available for interviews in person at Georgia Southern’s Statesboro Campus or virtually.
Aston University economists say Prime Minister can reduce UK trade vulnerability with China visit
Greenland episode exposed UK’s lack of effective response to economic coercion from allies Research shows tariff retaliation would have cost the average UK household up to £324 per year Economists say China visit is “portfolio risk management” – diversification reduces vulnerability. The Prime Minister’s visit to China – the first by a British PM since 2018 – is an opportunity to reduce the UK’s vulnerability to economic coercion, according to new research from Aston University. A policy paper from Aston Business School’s Centre for Business Prosperity analyses the January 2026 Greenland tariff episode, when President Trump threatened and then withdrew tariffs on eight European countries. The researchers found that the UK had no good options: retaliation would have made Britain worse off, while absorbing the tariffs left Europe without credible deterrence. Director of the centre for business prosperity, Professor Jun Du, said: “The Greenland episode was a wake-up call. When your principal security ally threatens economic coercion, the old assumptions about who is safe and who is dangerous no longer hold. “The PM’s China visit should be framed as portfolio risk management – building diversified trading relationships that reduce the UK’s exposure to any single partner. Just as investors don’t put all their money in one stock, countries shouldn’t put all their trade into one basket. A UK with multiple strong partnerships is harder to pressure, whether the pressure comes from Washington or Beijing.” The research found that coordinated UK–EU tariff retaliation would have cost British households up to £324 per year – the worst outcome modelled. But the authors argue that Europe has untapped leverage elsewhere: the US runs a €148 billion annual services surplus with the EU, and mutual investment exceeds €5.3 trillion. Associate professor of economics and co-author, Dr Oleksandr Shepotylo, said: “Tariff retaliation fails because it hurts consumers and distorts the economy – the retaliator suffers similarly to the target. But Europe has cards it isn’t playing. Services, investment screening, and regulatory access are pressure points where Europe can respond effectively.” UK exports to China fell by 10.4% in the year to Q2 2025, with goods exports down 23.1% – the sharpest decline among major trading partners. The researchers argue that this closes off the UK’s largest alternative market at precisely the moment US reliability is in question. The paper identifies three priorities for UK policy: Recognise the permanent incentives behind US tariffs. US tariff revenue hit $264 billion in 2025. Trade negotiations alone cannot resolve revenue-driven policy. Build UK–EU coordination on non-tariff instruments. Services, investment, procurement, and regulation offer leverage that tariffs do not. Treat China engagement as portfolio risk management. Concentration in any single market creates vulnerability. Diversification is not about picking sides – it’s about resilience. Professor Du added: “The question for the Prime Minister is whether to use this breathing space to build resilience – or wait for the next Greenland.” To read the policy paper in full, click on this link:
A Roadmap or a Rift? Examining Trump’s 28-Point Ukraine Peace Proposal
As negotiations around the war in Ukraine continue to dominate global headlines, a newly surfaced 28-point peace proposal associated with former U.S. President Donald Trump has triggered intense debate across NATO capitals, Kyiv, and Moscow. The document — described in reporting by Reuters, Axios, Sky News, Al Jazeera and other outlets — outlines a framework aimed at ending the conflict but includes provisions that many analysts say could significantly reshape Europe’s security landscape. A Plan Built Around Ceasefire, Guarantees, and Reconstruction At its core, the plan calls for a formal ceasefire, a non-aggression pact between Russia, Ukraine, and European states, and a set of “security guarantees” meant to deter future conflict. Reporting indicates that Ukraine would receive assurances that any renewed Russian offensive would trigger a coordinated international response. The plan also proposes the creation of a major reconstruction program — potentially financed in part with frozen Russian assets — to rebuild infrastructure and modernize Ukraine’s economy. The proposal references pathways for deeper Ukrainian integration with Europe, including support for progressing toward EU membership and providing enhanced access to European markets. A large “Ukraine Development Fund” is also mentioned in multiple summaries of the plan. Provisions Driving the Most Global Pushback The most controversial elements relate to Ukraine’s territorial integrity and long-term security posture. Outlets such as Sky News and Al Jazeera report that the draft would recognize Russian control over Crimea and large parts of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson — areas currently occupied by Russian forces. Ukraine would also be required to formally abandon NATO membership and cap its military at 600,000 personnel. Additional provisions include restrictions on the presence of foreign troops in Ukraine, phased lifting of sanctions on Russia, full amnesty for war-related actions, and the reintegration of Russia into global economic and political structures. These components have drawn sharp responses, particularly from European leaders who argue the plan could reward aggression and undermine international legal norms. Dr. Glen Duerr is a citizen of three countries. He was born in the United Kingdom, moved to Canada as a teenager, and then to the United States to obtain his Ph.D. His teaching and research interests include nationalism and secession, comparative politics, international relations theory, sports and politics, and Christianity and politics. View his profile. What Remains Unclear or Still Under Discussion Reporting from Reuters and AP notes that many sections of the plan remain undefined or are still in flux. The exact mechanism behind the proposed security guarantees is not detailed. Oversight of reconstruction funds, timelines for reintegration of Russia, and the legal handling of frozen assets also require further clarification. Some reporting suggests parts of the plan draw from a prior informal Russian “non-paper,” raising questions about the provenance and intent of specific provisions. Why the Proposal Matters With the war approaching four years of fighting, any formal proposal for ending hostilities carries significant geopolitical weight. Supporters of the plan frame it as a pragmatic attempt to halt loss of life and begin rebuilding. Critics argue it risks legitimizing territorial conquest and weakening the broader post-Cold-War security order. As governments evaluate the implications, journalists covering defense, diplomacy, and international law will find this evolving proposal central to understanding where U.S., European, Russian, and Ukrainian negotiators may — or may not — be willing to go next.
The Impact of Counterfeit Goods in Global Commerce
Introduction Counterfeiting has been described as “the world’s second oldest profession.” In 2018, worldwide counterfeiting was estimated to cost the global economy between USD 1.7 trillion and USD 4.5 trillion annually, as well as resulting in more than 70 deaths and 350,000 serious injuries annually. It is estimated that more than a quarter of US consumers have purchased a counterfeit product. The counterfeiting problem is expected to be exacerbated by the unprecedented shift in tariff policy. Tariffs, designed as an import tax or duty on an imported product, are often a percentage of the price and can have different values for different products. Tariffs drive up the cost of imported brand name products but may not, or only to a lesser extent, impact the cost of counterfeit goods. In this article, we examine the extent of the global counterfeit dilemma, the role experts play in tracking and mitigating the problem, the use of anti-counterfeiting measures, and the potential impact that tariffs may have on the flow of counterfeit goods. Brand goods have always been a target of counterfeits due to their high price and associated prestige. These are often luxury goods and clothing, but can also be pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and electronics. The brand name is an indication of quality materials, workmanship, and technology. People will pay more for the “real thing,” or decide to buy something cheaper that looks “just as good.” In many cases, “just as good” is a counterfeit of the brand name product. A tariff is an import tax or duty that is typically paid by the importer and can drive up the cost of imported brand name products. For example, a Yale study has shown that shoe prices may increase by 87% and apparel prices by 65%, due to tariffs. On the other hand, counterfeit products don’t play by the rules and can often avoid paying tariffs, such as the case of many smaller, online transactions, shipped individually. Therefore, we expect to see an increase in counterfeit products as well as a need to increase efforts to reduce the economic losses of counterfeiting. The Scale of the Counterfeit Problem In their 2025 report, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), estimated that in 2021, “global trade in counterfeit goods was valued at approximately USD 467 billion, or 2.3% of total global imports. This absolute value represents an increase from 2019, when counterfeit trade was estimated at USD 464 billion, although its relative share decreased compared to 2019 when it accounted for 2.5% of world trade. For imports into the European Union, the value of counterfeit goods was estimated at USD 117 billion, or 4.7% of total EU imports.” In a 2020 report, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) estimated the size of the international counterfeit market as having a “range from a low of USD 200 billion in 2008 to a high of USD 509 billion in 2019.” According to the OEDC / EUIPO General Trade-Related Index of Counterfeiting for economies (GTRIC-e), China continues to be the primary source of counterfeit goods, as well as Bangladesh, Lebanon, Syrian Arab Republic, and Türkiye. Based on customs seizures in 2020-21, the most common items are clothing (21.6%), footwear (21.4%), and handbags, followed by electronics and watches. Based on the value of goods seized, watches (23%) and footwear (15%) had the highest value. However, it should be noted that items that are easier to detect and seize are likely to be overrepresented in the data. Although the share of watches declined, and electronics, toys, and games increased, it remains unclear whether this represents a long term trend or just a short term fluctuation. In general, high value products in high demand continue to be counterfeited. Data from the US Library of Congress indicates that 60% – 80% of counterfeit products are purchased by Americans. The US accounts for approximately 5% of the world’s consumers; however, it represents greater than 20% of the world’s purchasing power. Though it is still possible to find counterfeit products at local markets, a large number of counterfeit goods are obtained through online retailers and shipped directly to consumers as small parcels classified as de minimis trade. This allows for the duty-free import of products up to USD 800 in value. Counterfeit items may be knowingly or unknowingly purchased from online retailers and shipped directly to consumers, duty-free. Purchased products can be shipped via postal services, classified as de minimis trade. Approximately 79% of packages seized contained less than 10 items. Given the size and volume of the packages arriving daily, many or most will evade scrutiny by customs officials. This means of import is increasing over time. In 2017-19 it was 61% of seizures. By 2020-21, it was 79%. Economic Impact of Counterfeiting The scale of the counterfeiting problem has significant impacts on the US economy, US business interests, and US innovations in lost sales and lost jobs. Moreover, counterfeit products are often made quickly and cheaply, using materials that may be toxic. The companies producing these goods may not dispose of waste properly and may dump it into waterways, causing significant environmental consequences. Counterfeit products from electrical equipment and life jackets to batteries and smoke alarms may be made without adhering to safety standards or be properly tested. These products may fail to function when you need it and may lead to fire, electric shock, poisoning, and other accidents that can seriously injure and even kill consumers. Counterfeit cosmetics and pharmaceuticals can also lead to injuries by either including unsafe ingredients or by failing to provide the benefits of the real product. The Tariff Counterfeit Connection Tariffs may be seen as a tax on consumers and raise the price of imported products that are already the target of counterfeiters such as luxury leather products and apparel. It’s commonly understood that raising prices on genuine products can only drive up the demand for counterfeit goods. In general, consumers will have less disposable income and the brand goods they desire will cost more which is bound to increase the demand for counterfeit goods. Although recent changes removing the USD 800 tax exemption on de minimis shipments from China and Hong Kong will make it more expensive for counterfeiters to ship their goods internationally, tariffs are typically applied as a percentage of the cost of an object. This will cause the price of more expensive legitimate goods to increase even more than the cheaper counterfeit goods and likely make the counterfeit products even more attractive economically. Therefore, we expect to see an increase in counterfeit products as well as an increase in efforts to reduce the economic losses of counterfeiting. The Role of Technical Experts in Counterfeit Detection Technical experts play an important role in both the prevention and detection of counterfeits and helping to identify counterfeiting entities. Whether counterfeit money, clothing, shoes, electronics, cosmetics or pharmaceuticals, the first step in fighting counterfeits is detecting them. In some cases, the counterfeit product is obvious. A leather product may not be leather, a logo may be wrong, packaging may have a spelling mistake, or a holographic label may be missing. These products may be seized by customs. However, some counterfeit products are very difficult to detect. In the case of a counterfeit memory card with less than the stated capacity or a pharmaceutical that contains the wrong active ingredient, technical analysis may be needed to identify the parts. Technical analysis may also be used to try and identify the source of the counterfeit goods. For prevention measures, manufacturers may use radio frequency identification (RFID) or Near Field Communication (NFC) tags within their products. RFID tags are microscopic semiconductor chips attached to a metallic printed antenna. The tag itself may be flexible and easy to incorporate into packaging or into the product itself. A passive RFID requires no power and has sufficient storage to store information such as product name, stock keeping unit (SKU), place of manufacture, date of manufacture, as well as some sort of cryptographic information to attest to the authenticity of the tag. A simple scanner powers the tag using an electromagnetic field and reads the tag. If manufacturers include RFID tags in products, an X-ray to identify a product in a de minimis shipment (perhaps using artificial intelligence technology) and an RFID scanner to verify the authenticity of the product can be used to efficiently screen a large number of packages. Many products also may be marked with photo-luminescent dyes with unique properties that may be read by special scanners and allow authorities to detect legitimate products. Similarly, doped hybrid oxide particles with distinctive photo-responsive features may be printed on products. These particles, when exposed to laser light, experience a fast increase in temperature which may be quickly detected. For either of these examples, the ability to identify legitimate products, or – due to the absence of marking – track counterfeit products, allows authorities to map the flow of the counterfeit goods through the supply chain as they are manufactured, shipped, and are exported and imported to countries. For many years, electronic memory cards such as SD cards and USB sticks have been counterfeited. In many cases, the fake card will have a capacity much smaller than listed. For example, a 32GB memory card for a camera may only hold 1GB. Sometimes, these products may be identified by analyzing the packaging for discrepancies from the brand name products. In other cases, software must be used to verify the capacity and performance of each one, which is time-consuming when analyzing a large number of products. Forensic investigators, comprised of forensic accountants and forensic technologists, are heavily involved in efforts to combat this illicit trade. By analyzing financial records, supply-chain data, and transaction histories, they trace the origins and pathways of counterfeit products. Their work often involves identifying suspicious procurement patterns, shell companies, and irregular inventory flows that signal counterfeit activity. Forensic investigators often begin by mapping the counterfeit supply chain, an intricate web that often spans continents. Using data analytics, transaction tracing, and inventory audits, they identify anomalies in procurement, distribution, and sales records. These methodologies help pinpoint the origin of counterfeit goods, the intermediaries involved, and the final points of sale. By reconstructing the flow of goods and money, forensic investigators can begin to unmask activities. Cross-border partnerships are essential for tracking assets, sharing insights, and coordinating with financial regulators. Public-private partnerships further enhance the effectiveness of anti-counterfeiting efforts. Forensic investigators often serve as bridges between government agencies, brand owners, and financial institutions, facilitating the exchange of key information. These partnerships increase information-sharing, streamline investigations, and amplify the impact of enforcement actions. A promising development in this space is the World Customs Organization’s Smart Customs Project, which integrates artificial intelligence to detect and intercept counterfeit goods. Forensic investigators can leverage this initiative by analyzing AI-generated alerts and incorporating them into broader financial investigations, which allows for faster and more accurate identification of illicit networks. Jurisdictional complexity is a major hurdle in anti-counterfeiting efforts. Forensic investigators work closely with legal teams to navigate these challenges to ensure that investigations comply with local laws, and evidence is admissible and can withstand scrutiny in court, especially when dealing with offshore accounts and international money laundering schemes. Forensic investigators follow the money, tracing illicit profits through bank accounts, shell companies, and cryptocurrency transactions. Their findings not only help recover stolen assets but also support disputes by providing expert testimony that quantifies financial losses and identifies the bad actors. Conclusion Imitations of brand name products have become more convincing, harder to detect, and the sources of the counterfeit goods more difficult to identify. While counterfeiting clearly has evolved because of technological advancements, e-commerce, and the growing sophistication of bad actors, the process has now been complicated even further by the unpredictable tariff and trade policies that are affecting businesses worldwide. Consequently, companies need to take a multi-faceted approach to these new challenges introduced into the counterfeiting of products by tariffs. By engaging high-tech product authentication measures, utilizing technology-based alerts about counterfeits, and retaining the specialized skills of forensic investigators and other experts, companies will be able to navigate the risks posed by the complex and changing relationship between tariffs and counterfeit goods. To learn more about this topic and how it can impact your business or connect with James E. Malackowski simply click on his icon now to arrange an interview today. To connect with David Fraser or Matthew Brown - contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com
Covering the latest developments in Iran? Our experts are here to help with your coverage.
Iran’s nuclear program remains one of the most closely watched issues in international security, diplomacy, and nonproliferation. Originally launched in the 1950s with Western support, the program has since evolved into a focal point of global concern over nuclear weapons, regional stability, and international trust. As negotiations continue to stall and enrichment capabilities increase, understanding the historical context, scientific progress, and geopolitical consequences of Iran’s nuclear ambitions is critical for public awareness. This topic provides journalists with high-impact angles spanning diplomacy, science, and security. Key story angles include: Origins and Evolution of the Program: Tracing the nuclear program from its U.S.-backed beginnings under the Shah to its secret expansion after the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The JCPOA (Iran Nuclear Deal): Examining the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, its successes, its unraveling after the U.S. withdrawal in 2018, and current attempts to revive it. Scientific Advances and Enrichment Capacity: Analyzing Iran’s current uranium enrichment levels, centrifuge technology, and what experts say about its "breakout time." Regional and Global Security Concerns: Investigating how Iran’s program affects Middle Eastern tensions, Israeli security policy, and broader nuclear proliferation risks. Diplomatic Stalemates and Sanctions: Reviewing the impact of international sanctions, diplomatic efforts by the EU, China, and Russia, and the political dynamics within Iran. The Risk of Escalation or Military Conflict: Exploring scenarios that could lead to open confrontation and what military analysts say about preemptive strikes or deterrence strategies. Iran’s nuclear program is not just a regional issue—it’s a global flashpoint at the intersection of science, diplomacy, and international law. Journalists covering this story have an opportunity to unpack a decades-long narrative with renewed urgency. Connect with our experts about Iran’s Nuclear Program: History, Progress, and Global Risks: Check out our experts here : www.expertfile.com
ExpertSpotlight: American Steel Tariffs – A Brief History
The history of steel trade and tariffs in the United States is deeply intertwined with the nation’s industrial rise, global economic strategy, and political maneuvering. From the late 19th century through the 21st, steel has symbolized both national strength and international tension. Trade protections—such as tariffs—have been used to shield American steel producers from foreign competition, often sparking international disputes and shaping the direction of U.S. economic policy. This topic matters to the public because it affects manufacturing jobs, infrastructure costs, international relations, and the price of goods in everyday life. Understanding steel tariffs offers a lens into larger debates about globalization, economic nationalism, and trade fairness. Key story angles that may interest a broad audience include: The origins of U.S. steel tariffs: Tracing the first protective tariffs in the late 1800s and their role in America’s industrial expansion. The role of steel in national security and economic independence: Investigating why steel has been labeled a “strategic industry” across administrations. Tariff flashpoints: Highlighting major tariff battles—such as the 2002 and 2018 steel tariffs—and their economic and diplomatic consequences. Impact on American manufacturing and jobs: Examining whether tariffs have protected or hindered employment in steel-producing regions. Global trade tensions: Exploring how tariffs have affected relationships with allies such as Canada, the EU, and China. Future of steel trade policy: Discussing evolving views on protectionism, globalization, and climate-linked trade strategies. Connect with our experts about the history of tariffs and steel in America: Check out our experts here : www.expertfile.com
Researchers to explore how AI can help urban mobility planners They are to investigate AI-driven policy tools’ potential to create greener cities Project to benefit from expertise of five European universities. A European group of researchers led by Aston University is taking the first steps to explore how AI can help urban mobility planners. As city populations grow causing strain on resources, the experts are to investigate AI-driven policy tools’ potential to create greener cities. The team have received £10,000 in funding from the British Academy which they hope will set them on the road to further research. Taking part in the project will be experts from University College London, Ruralis University in Norway, the University of Turin, Italy and Lisbon University Institute, Portugal. Dr Dalila Ribaudo from the Centre for Business Prosperity at Aston Business School and Dr Alina Patelli from the Aston Centre for Artificial Intelligence Research and Application will co-lead a UK-EU consortium consolidation project. The interdisciplinary project will benefit from expertise in applied business and specialist insight into global economics, policymaking and urban transport planning. Dr Patelli said “Policymakers and society could all benefit from our research into innovative ways of managing the strain on urban infrastructures and resources. "The AI-powered policy tools we are developing are meant to support decision managers at all levels of urban governance with reducing emissions, optimising transportation as well as predicting and preventing environmental hazards. Such changes would improve the quality of life for the millions of people living in towns and cities across the UK, Europe and, in the long term, the entire world.” Following the successful bid for the British Academy pump priming grant the team will apply for Horizon Europe funding to continue developing impactful AI-driven policy tools for greener cities.
Managing cyber risk is no longer a technical necessity but also a strategic imperative in global business. As companies are more interconnected and reliant on artificial intelligence (AI), the Internet of Things, and the rest of the digital ecosystem, they are exposed to greater opportunities and risks. In this video, Senior Managing Director and cybersecurity expert Denis Calderone shares topics covered in the 2025 J.S. Held Global Risk Report focused on managing cyber risk in the year ahead. The global regulatory landscape is evolving rapidly in response to the increasing severity of cyber threats. Governments and regulatory bodies, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the European Union (EU), and the U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA), have introduced cybersecurity mandates that require businesses to strengthen their defenses, improve incident reporting, and ensure compliance with new industry standards. The 2025 Global Risk Report by J.S. Held provides perspectives on these regulatory shifts, helping businesses navigate the complexities of cyber risk and compliance. The growing frequency and severity of cyberattacks are reshaping how businesses approach risk management. The J.S. Held 2025 Global Risk Report explores key issues facing business today, including: Business Interruption from Cyber Incidents: High-profile cases like Change Healthcare’s 2024 breach demonstrate how cyberattacks can halt operations, lead to regulatory scrutiny, and result in massive financial losses. Reputational and Legal Fallout: Cyber incidents can trigger lawsuits and damage a company’s reputation, often leading to prolonged trust recovery periods with customers and investors. Loss of Sensitive Data: Data breaches can expose critical information, including personal, financial, and proprietary data, amplifying risks of identity theft and fraud. Tightening Regulatory Landscape: New cybersecurity laws, such as the EU’s NIS2 Directive and Cyber Resilience Act, alongside the US SEC’s disclosure rules, demand stricter compliance from businesses in key sectors. Complexities in Cyber Insurance: Many companies lack clarity on whether their policies cover ransomware or meet legal and operational needs, leaving them exposed to potential financial risks. Ransomware Dilemmas and Legal Risks: Paying a ransom may violate international sanctions, creating additional legal complications for organizations already dealing with cyberattacks. Proactive Cybersecurity Enhancements: Companies implementing advanced cybersecurity measures like MFA, EDR, and immutable backup systems improve their defenses and reduce risks of disruption. AI-Powered Threat Detection: Artificial intelligence enables companies to identify fraud and cyberattacks faster by analyzing patterns and anomalies in real time, minimizing damage, and reducing costs. Increased Demand for Cyber Insurance: As companies across industries seek better coverage, insurers have opportunities to innovate new products, though exclusionary clauses are becoming more common. Business Continuity and Resilience: Organizations with strong cyber hygiene, incident response plans, and dependency mapping are better prepared for attacks and may benefit from reduced insurance premiums. Cybersecurity risk is just one of the five key areas analyzed in the J.S. Held 2025 Global Risk Report. Other topics include sustainability, supply chain, cryptocurrency and digital assets, AI and data regulations. If you have any questions or would like to further discuss the risks and opportunities outlined in the report, email GlobalRiskReport@jsheld.com. To connect with Denis Calderone simply click on his icon now. For any other media inquiries - contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com
J.S. Held Experts Examine Sustainability Investments and Headwinds in Annual Global Risk Report
In the 2025 J.S. Held Global Risk Report, scientific, technical, financial, and risk management experts explore the implementation of new and existing Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG) regulations across different regions along with significant compliance challenges for organizations operating on a global scale. As sustainability continues to be a critical issue worldwide, businesses are facing an increasingly complex regulatory landscape. While some jurisdictions are advancing sustainability frameworks, others, most notably the United States, are likely to see new environmental and energy policies which disfavor sustainability advancements as reflected by recent executive orders following the change in administrations. The European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CS3D), adopted in 2024, is a landmark regulation requiring both EU and non-EU companies to conduct due diligence to identify and prevent adverse environmental and human rights impacts throughout their operations and supply chains. J.S. Held environmental risk and compliance expert John Peiserich, Esq., observes, “Compliance with CS3D poses significant challenges for multinational corporations, especially those selling into the EU market, as they navigate conflicting regulatory requirements across jurisdictions.” In the United States, ESG-related policies have become a polarizing issue. Some states have mandated ESG criteria—such as climate risk assessments—for state-related investment decisions, while others have actively opposed such measures. Kim Logue Ortega, Associate Vice President at J.S. Held, adds, “Despite these contrasting approaches, businesses must continue addressing sustainability concerns, as environmental considerations are increasingly tied to permitting and regulatory approvals.” Following the June, 2024 United States Supreme Court ruling in Loper Bright, a team of environmental risk experts at the Verdantix Green Quadrant recognized consultancy J.S. Held, examined in Crosscurrents: Companies Face Regulatory Uncertainties in Wake of SCOTUS Decisions, how the Supreme Court further complicated the regulatory environment by undermining agency authority to define compliance standards. This ruling is expected to lead to increased legal challenges to environmental and sustainability-related regulations, adding further uncertainty for businesses seeking to comply with evolving standards. With the second Trump administration expected to roll back key environmental justice directives and sustainability-related incentives introduced under the previous Administration, businesses must remain vigilant in monitoring regulatory developments. Strategic planning and proactive risk management will be crucial for navigating the evolving ESG landscape and maintaining compliance across multiple jurisdictions. J.S. Held experts present insights into how organizations can align with evolving frameworks while driving innovation and managing risk, as they explore: 1. EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive, where non-compliance could lead to fines and civil liability, necessitating companies to rigorously assess environmental and human right impacts. 2. Regulatory Fragmentation and Greenwashing / Greenhushing, summoning businesses to avoid exaggerated or underreported sustainability claims to mitigate the rising threat of litigation and regulatory scrutiny. 3. Shareholder Activism and Litigation, as investors demand greater transparency on sustainability goals, which may present legal consequences for failing to meet expectations. One week into the new Administration in the United States, the anticipated rollback of environmental justice directives and sustainability-related incentives introduced under the previous Administration have begun to take shape in the form of various Executive Actions and other directives. J.S. Held experts are actively monitoring regulatory developments, providing strategic guidance to multinational clients as they navigate the evolving ESG landscape and compliance requirements across multiple jurisdictions. Sustainability is just one of the five key areas analyzed in the J.S. Held 2025 Global Risk Report. Other topics include global supply chain challenges, the rise of crypto and digital assets, AI and data regulations, and managing cyber risk. If you have any questions or would like to further discuss the risks and opportunities outlined in the report, please email GlobalRiskReport@jsheld.com. For any other media inquiries - simply contact : Kristi L. Stathis, J.S. Held +1 786 833 4864 Kristi.Stathis@JSHeld.com
