Exhibition curated by Salzburg Global Fellow Olena Prokopenko is on display in Schloss Leopoldskron's Max Reinhardt Library
A photo exhibition highlighting the lives and experiences of children in Ukraine affected by war is now on display at Salzburg Global Seminar.
In cooperation with the Ukrainian Institute of Public Diplomacy, the "Children in War" exhibition was launched on December 14 in Schloss Leopoldskron's Max Reinhardt Library.
The exhibition, which has also been on display in Belgium, the US, Israel, and the Vatican, was curated by Salzburg Global Fellow Olena Prokopenko.
On Wednesday, Olena was present at Schloss Leopoldskron to launch the exhibition alongside fellow Salzburg Global Fellow Yuliia Kravchenko. Olena said, "The heroes of this exhibition sleep under rocket fire and live in the midst of destroyed schools and houses. All of them have their own tragic history."
Earlier this year, Olena and Yuliia both attended the Salzburg Global program, "Connecting and Supporting Ukrainian Civil Society in Time of War." An output of this program was theSalzburg Statement of Ukrainian Civil Society, a document that outlines the crucial role of civil society and rethinking Ukrainian reconstruction.
The program followed an initiative by Salzburg Global, which saw around 100 refugees accommodated in the Meierhof following Russia's invasion of Ukraine at the beginning of 2022.
Martin Weiss, president and CEO of Salzburg Global Seminar said, "Our future will be decided in Ukraine, you can't look the other way here... Looking at these young faces [at the "Children in War" exhibition] shows the immediacy of what is happening. It's about much more than a war on a battlefield. The future is being taken away from a whole generation here.”
The exhibition is open to the public on December 22 and January 3 and 4, between 14:00 and 16:00. If you are interested in attending, please register first by emailing events@schlossleopoldskron.com.
Salzburg Global Fellow Atiya Anis writes about her experience at Salzburg Global's latest Health and Health Care Innovation session
While the world is emerging from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, new emerging threats like the deepening climate crisis, and geopolitical conflicts are further threatening to overturn the progress made so far. The global indices (Global Gender Gap index) and gender empowerment measures paint an equally dismal picture stating it will take another 132 years to bridge the global gender gap. Falling women’s participation in labour force is a major contributor to this, exacerbated by the aftermath of the pandemic, which can be attributed to long-standing structural barriers, including childcare, occupational segregations, infrastructure, safety and mobility, social identities, and violence against women and girls.
With the goal to deliberate, discuss and find innovative solutions to the pressing issue of gender equity in the post-pandemic rebuilding, leaders and changemakers from over 26 countries met at Salzburg Global Seminar, as part of the Health and Economic Well-being: Gender Equity in Post-Pandemic Rebuilding program, organized from Oct 15-19, bringing in experts and leaders working around the issue of gender to inspire new thinking and action.
Salzburg Global Seminar is an independent non-profit organization founded in 1947 with the aim to challenge current and future leaders to shape a better world. Being at the forefront of global movements for change, Salzburg Global has works with partners around the globe to bridge divide, transform systems and expand collaboration.
This October, I got the opportunity to be a part of the Salzburg Global program. It has been a proud and inspirational moment for me to engage with experts from all over the world bringing in their perspectives and learnings and co-create innovative solutions to address long standing challenges about ways in which gender continues to impact outcomes. Health and Economic Well-being: Gender Equity in Post-Pandemic Rebuilding tried to establish the strong linkage that health has with wellbeing and prosperity, and how it is inevitable to creating an equal and equitable world. Gender transformative structures, leadership and policies have the potential to enhance the agency of women and girls and bring about sustainable change and transformation.
The Salzburg Global session was inspiring not only in terms of the thematic focus but the design that helped leverage the discussion, enabling effective interaction and tangible outcomes. The format was democratic and structured, and gave a voice to each participant and region.
Sessions included open conversation, knowledge cafes and working groups, lending the opportunity to all Fellows for inclusive and focused reflections, achieving better learning outcomes. Sessions revolved around themes like reimagining the future of work, lessons learned from leadership, innovation in work and social supports, centring women and marginalized groups in decision making and the pandemic recovery. Other topics revolved around the care economy mission, building a gender responsive government, creative solutions to gender-based violence, and political playbooks for sustainable progress. Salzburg Global also offered media and communication opportunities to Fellows interested in extending and publishing their work, and working groups were organized to define a proposal and build an agenda for collaboration.
Salzburg Global Seminar helped connecting an international community of outstanding leaders and brought together inspiration and learnings from across the globe, creating avenues for coalition-building under the vast umbrella that is the Salzburg Global Fellows network. While Fellows have gone back to their respective workplaces and countries after the end of the program, they are still connected by a strong sense of commitment to work together to ensure that economic recovery and strategies are gender responsive, integrated and resilient.
As I head back home, I am astounded by the immense learning and exposure Salzburg Global has brought me in the span of five days. And the connections don’t stop there. Fellows have a lifelong access to collaborate, engage and share ideas and best practices. I am grateful for the opportunity to be part of the Fellowship that nourishes a culture of learning, sharing and cooperation. If you are in search for high-stakes, challenging, and meaningful work, and want to become a transformational leader, there cannot be a better platform than Salzburg Global Seminar.
Atiya Anis is an advocacy and communications specialist, working in the social impact sector in India for the past decade around themes of health, sanitation, gender and environment.
What strategies and policies have proven effective at addressing intersectionality of gender with race/ethnicity, ability, age and other factors as well as the experience of those with diverse gender identities? What are the greatest challenges to these strategies and tools; and how can they be mitigated?
Centering intersection gender lens and mainstreaming have become a box ticking exercise and perfunctory extrapolation of intersectional segments. Sometimes, we consider intersectionality as linear with single and distinct characteristics. It's therefore more important than ever that global diverse identities with lived experiences are heard and understood in conversations about intersectionality, in order to design a better and safer world that truly, not only leaves no one behind, but brings and uplifts people alongside. That was the message and what was achieved at the Problem-Solving Lab: Strategies, and Mitigation policies effective at addressing intersectionality of gender with race/ethnicity, ability, age and other factors, hosted at the Health and Economic Well-being: Gender Equity in Post-Pandemic Rebuilding program by Salzburg Global Seminar, in Salzburg, Austria.
"The solution lies in re-centering the needs of diverse group"
"Intersectionality has become a single buzzword form. While it has proven to be a useful tool for highlighting multiple forms of discrimination and how they intersect, we need to give a broader picture on the nuances of the lived experiences of intersectional segments. Be it race, gender, and ethnicity. The solution lies in re-centering the needs of diverse group” said Jocelyn Frye, president of the National Partnership for Women & Families with an opening statement at the problem-solving lab.
Furthermore, some of the development principles included, asking important and challenging questions such as how centralized or diverse should intersection be? So much contradiction is embedded in the themed question of intersection depending on the lens being used. Krishanti Dharmaraj, Executive Director, Center for Women's Global Leadership, New Brunswick, NJ, USA highlighted the ideology, assumption bias and institutionalized polarizations for intersection. "Even the most seemingly straightforward ideas and words can contain quite diverse and even incompatible assumptions and expectations, depending on the people ‘in the room'."
True to form, considering the existing framework that we have - from our culture, our politics, policy, law and interaction - do not automatically lead people to being conversant and literate in intersectionality or want to make changes. Understanding the need to shift repressive power dynamics can strengthen the rights and influence of those most affected by inequities, violence, oppression and injustice across the globe. We need to reimagine not just what intersection should look like but what it can potentially be as a lens for seeing the world of oppression and a tool for eradicating it.
"People with problems are not problem people"
Most of the time, intersectionality co-exists and overlaps with marginalization. People with problems are not problem people. Seeing people as rights holders (as opposed to beneficiaries) in shared spaces, communities and institutions has the potential to uphold gender and intersectional equality. This approach demands not just seeing them as "marginalized" communities but equal and deserving communities.
"While we may all be weathering the same storm, we are in drastically different boats with more cushioning effect than others"
Structural inequality is embedded in our society, and it requires bold, concerted action to eliminate it. "There are many many different kinds of intersectional exclusion — not just black women, but other women of color. Not just people of color, but immigrants, indigenous people and ethnic minority group,” says Professor Jarpa Dawuni, Associate Professor, Howard University, Washington, DC, USA. While we may all be weathering the same storm, we are in drastically different boats with more cushioning effects than others. For example, within gender and Intersection, an Asian woman will likely have a very different experience than a black African woman living in the United States.
Council of Women Leaders Secretary General Laura Liswood’s words set the tone during the program, as she talked about earning "two points for identifying the problem, eight for finding a solution”, and moving beyond the illusion of “building back better: strategies to re-envision intersectionality.”
Our conception of “intersection” and what counts must change, to include the centrality of multiple forms of intersecting inequality. The awareness of what we bring to the conversations and groups we find ourselves in is always worthwhile, helping us identity and talk through sometimes subtle yet substantial differences in how we understand the problems and worlds around us.
The "Simultaneousity" as coined by Jarpa Dawuni during the problem-solving lab simply means doing different things at the same time, directing struggle and support, and not wait until we achieve one victory before commencing the journey of another struggle. Demanding healthy and meaningful conversations from ourselves and the spaces we’re in is one vital step in being part of an equitable, just and sustainable present and future for all.
Valuing voice means lifting up, promoting, and supporting the leadership and storytelling of those most affected by policies and practices. Lebohang Liepollo Pheko, Senior Research Fellow, Trade Collective, Johannesburg, South Africa emphasized that we are in a unique moment, "where we need to value voices, promote and support leadership of diverse voices." This applies to many situations where underrepresented or historically excluded people are asked to participate in an activity or contribute to a project.
Too often they are still included only for tokenized participation, conferred with "the first black or women of color label" and without much context to give their perspective that’s supposed to represent the "intersection voice." "You cannot be at the forefront of a cause where you don’t identify with its struggles and possess lived experiences." Respect the voice of those most affected by issues by centering their voices, respecting their goals for their communities, and stepping aside and allowing them to serve as spokespeople for their own causes.
We need data, and storytelling narratives for evaluation "Where we can hear from people telling their own stories of intersectionality and ways they have felt accepted or rejected based on their unique experience and factoring all this in,” said Teresa Younger, President and CEO, Ms. Foundation for Women, Brooklyn, United States with inspiring and final words. “We need to embrace and welcome these differences to continue building balance that can overcome the times we are living in especially when looking at intersectionality. For example, the experiences of racism and sexism intersect and create unique experiences for black women and women of color, leading to varied compounded, systemic barriers.
“Contextualizing gender, intersectionality and human rights in a development paradigm promotes a balance for multi-strengthened synergy. We are all in the fight together and should develop narratives that push intersection in a way that perhaps before we were not able to push and ensure everyone is brought along. Building community and encouraging alliances, coalitions, critical reflection, collaboration across sectors, and looking out for each other will help us solve problems. That’s why this conversation is happening at the right time and we need to have more conversations like it.”
Taofeekat Adigun is a public health and development specialist working at the intersection of policy, advocacy and research. She currently leads Outreach and Partnership for Our Generation for Inclusive Peace.
British-Pakistani film and theater producer Anwar Akhtar reflects on Pakistan's 75th anniversary of independence and the recent flooding that has devasted large parts of the country
I want to start this article by congratulating Pakistan for reaching 75 years of independence. I also wish the people of India and Bangladesh the very best as they also mark freedom from the exploitation, cruelty, and violence of the British Raj.
Pakistan is a difficult, challenging, complex country to work in. Suppose I have learned one thing from many years of work and several major projects between Pakistan and Europe. In that case, it is to work with the institutions, organizations, and NGOs that function and just about prevent Pakistan from becoming a failed state despite, at times, the efforts of the Pakistani establishment and Western foreign policy.
Many welfare and education groups such as the Edhi Foundation, the Citizens Foundation, Human Rights Commission Pakistan, Simorgh Women's Welfare Project, Azad Street Children Welfare, Care Pakistan, and Citizens Archive Project work tirelessly to alleviate poverty and provide education, health, and justice for some of the poorest, most exploited people on the planet.
I have just spent a few weeks in Pakistan, working with Ajoka Theatre to help put on a peace concert in Lahore (watch below).
With the 75th anniversary of independence on my mind, I asked Shahid Nadeem, writer, and director of Ajoka, for his thoughts about the legacy of Partition.
"The creation of Pakistan in 1947 was accompanied by unprecedented migration of millions of Muslims, Sikhs, and Hindus on communal grounds," he told me.
"Exodus of Hindu artists and performers was a big setback for the development of art and culture in Pakistan. This was further compounded by the imposition of an 'Islamic ideology of Pakistan.' Pakistani artists and writers were censored, banned, persecuted, demonized, imprisoned, but they braved these challenges and continued high-quality and socially meaningful art.
"As the 75th anniversary of Pakistan's independence was an important occasion to reflect on the achievements and challenges faced by cultural activists in the past 75 years, we decided to have an event titled '75 Years of Cultural Resilience' and invited scholars, artists, and performers to pay tribute to artists and cultural activists who suffered censorship, bans, persecution, and imprisonment but steadfastly carried on their creative struggle."
One of the main reasons for Pakistan's disastrous social and economic situation today is that its establishment remains stuck in a Dr Strangelove zero-sum cold war with India.
In April 2021, I wrote an article outlining 10 reasons for peace between the two countries, covering some of the many challenges the two countries face from poverty to the climate crisis.
No amount of tub-thumping nationalism, flag-waving, and arguments about which religion is supreme and which is indigenous can cover just how awful the social, welfare, health, and education situation is today in Pakistan and India.
Sadly, India prime minister Narendra Modi seems set to follow the mistakes made by the Pakistani establishment and seek to define India by one majority religion while turning on minority communities, a recipe for endless conflicts about the past and the present. Recently, Anish Kapoor, a Turner Prize winner celebrated and lauded in India, described his own fears for the direction in which India is heading, which I'd recommend reading for further insight.
Pakistan's animosity toward India is actually a fear of India. India shares the same fear as Pakistan. Unfortunately, both countries' leaderships seem unable to bridge the divides and heal any of the hurt, animosity, and trust deficits between the countries, the legacy of Partition 75 years on.
This legacy extends to Afghanistan, a proxy battleground between India and Pakistan fed, like Kashmir, by the rivalry and bitterness between the two countries. The conflicts in Afghanistan and Kashmir will not stop until both countries make peace and understand that neither side can win this cold and, at times, hot war that curses the region to a cycle of endless violence, poverty, and instability.
Any sane person with knowledge of South Asia knows that until there is peace between India and Pakistan, the region cannot stabilize and face the challenges of poverty, education, health, and climate change.
Last month, more than 33 million people, or one in seven Pakistanis, were – and continue to be - affected by catastrophic flooding. Half a million displaced people are living in organized camps, and many others have had to find their own shelter. Hundreds of thousands of houses were destroyed, leaving millions homeless.
Pakistani officials estimate around $10bn worth of damage, raising concerns about food shortages with crops wiped out. The Pakistani state lacks the infrastructure to provide for its poor, the majority of its population. These floods, caused by climate change, may make the regional tensions worse, as Pakistan and India compete for natural resources rather than share and trade together.
After World War Two, the great Western powers laid the groundwork for decades of peace and prosperity in Europe via the Marshall Plan. It speaks to the racism of the West, where leaders prioritise short-term trade and malevolent Kissinger-style maneuvers in the region, as well as the failure of leadership in Pakistan and now, sadly in India, that to even call for such a plan for South Asia, seems an act of hope and optimism over reality.
The UN's admirable Sustainable Development Goals are just a vision – a hope detached from the reality of what's happening in India and Pakistan.
So, I live in hope and will keep working with those seeking peace between India and Pakistan. I do so because we cannot curse another generation in both countries and in their huge diasporas to grow up with sectarian tensions, wondering when, if ever, there can be good relations and peace between us.
Anwar Akhtar is a Salzburg Global Fellow. He is also the founder and director of The Samosa, a UK arts and journalism charity that works to embed diversity in the arts and humanities curriculum in schools, colleges and universities, and produces arts and media that explores cultural and social issues.
Salzburg Global Artist in Residence reflects on his experience of working on the Townships into Towns hybrid exhibition while resident at Salzburg Global during its 75th anniversary celebrations
A niece remembers her gay uncle’s suicide and calls upon her Muslim community to include and protect their LGBT family members in the latest blog of the Salzburg Global Online Forum on LGBT* and Faith
Muhong Lee and Hanna Suh attended two-week program at Schloss Leopoldskron
Muhong Lee and Hanna Suh from South Korea were among the 46 participants who joined the 16th program, After the Pandemic: How Can Media Advance Equitable and Just Civic Futures? of the Salzburg Academy on Media and Global Change as part of the Korea Foundation Fellowship.
Muhong recently completed his dissertation as part of his master’s degree in international economics and governance at the University of Bayreuth in Germany. He works as a political research writer at German Bundestag for a member of parliament for the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD).
Hanna Suh is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in communication at Seoul National University (SNU). She is a researcher at the SNU FactCheck Center, lending support to different projects to provide fact-checking training to journalists. She is also involved in peace building activities as an advisory committee member of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of Korea, which focuses on the reconciliation between North and South Korea.
Speaking to Salzburg Global, Muhong and Hanna reflected on their experiences at the Academy.
“People gathered here at Schloss Leopoldskron after the Second World War for the first session of the Salzburg Global Seminar in 1947. Because of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, we need more international communication in the same spirit as 1947. The Academy was a timely event to gather and reimagine how media can advance equitable and just civic futures,” said Hanna.
“Governments across the globe struggled with political communication during the pandemic, and we all underestimated the importance of media. Many people focused on political communication with other stakeholders, but not much on citizens. The program taught me how important it is to simplify information, so it's understandable for everyone.
“My takeaway from the Academy would be gaining valuable insights into how media works through different lectures and seminars, exchanging ideas with people from all over the world, understanding the issues different countries are facing and their approach to tackle them,” said Muhong.
Both Fellows expressed their gratitude to the Korea Foundation for giving them the opportunity to be part of such an insightful and transformative program where they met a diverse group of people. Their hope is that more South Koreans will join the Academy in the future.
Susan Moeller delivers 2022 Bailey Morris-Eck Lecture on International Media, Economics and Trade
On Wednesday, July 27, the Bailey Morris-Eck Lecture on International Media, Economics and Trade took place at Schloss Leopoldskron, during the Salzburg Academy on Media and Global Change 2022 – After the Pandemic: How Can Media Advance Equitable and Just Civic Futures?
The lecture is a yearly occurrence at the Salzburg Academy, and this year, Susan Moeller spoke on the topic of the Ember of Democracy: Storytelling, Empathy and Responsibility.
Susan Moeller is the director of the International Center for Media & the Public Agenda and a professor at both the College of Journalism and the School of Public Policy at the University of Maryland.
Prior to coming to Maryland in 2001, she was a senior fellow in the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, the director of the journalism program at Brandeis, and a lecturer in the history department at Princeton. She has also taught at universities in Islamabad, Pakistan and Bangkok, Thailand. She has written a number of books on media coverage of international affairs and has lectured all over the world.
She is frequently interviewed on TV and radio, and quoted in print and online media, on the topics of war, terrorism and human rights. After her undergraduate studies Susan was a photojournalist (including a very brief time covering the war in El Salvador), a cartoonist and caricaturist (for The Washington Post), and a political consultant. Although she was born in the US, she spent her teenage years in Brussels and Geneva. Susan earned a B.A. at Yale University and has an M.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard University. Susan is a Fellow of Salzburg Global Seminar.
The Bailey Morris-Eck Lecture on International Media, Economics, and Trade was established in 2004 through the generosity of Bailey Morris-Eck and her family. Since then and her passing in 2019, friends and colleagues have continued to supplement the existing lectureship and support program related residencies by leading journalists at Schloss Leopoldskron.
Watch the full Bailey Morris-Eck lecture below.
Olena Orzhel on knowledge sharing and the role of universities during and after the war
“The voice of higher education should be heard; we should make it louder. Cooperating with civil society is an opportunity to be heard.”
Olena Orzhel is a senior researcher at the Institute of Higher Education with the National Academy of Educational Sciences of Ukraine. She was a participant at Salzburg Global’s Connecting and Supporting Ukrainian Civil Society in Time of War.
“We are already having very active conversations, and people in my group on education systems change all the time, so we hear the opinions and ideas of different people. It is for me an opportunity to have a broader picture of what people think. For instance, in our last group, we had quite a big representation of people and experts from NGOs who are involved in informal education, working with businesses and adults. (…) It is really nice to know that they are very optimistic, that we think we can advance in our lifelong learning adult education”, said Olena during the program.
Olena has been a Salzburg Global Fellow since 2018, where she attended Session 603 – Social and Emotional Learning: A global Synthesis. Since then, she has attended several other Salzburg Global programs online, ranging from Social and Emotional Learning in the Mediterranean Region, to Designs on the Future: Who Owns the Past?
Olena decided to attend Salzburg Global’s latest session to amplify the role of higher education, especially during, and after the war in Ukraine. But what role do universities have to play in this conflict?
“I strongly believe in knowledge society, and I believe that knowledge today is a major asset, a major tool for problem-solving and peacebuilding. If we apply knowledge properly, we can solve most of our problems, and we can start now”, said Olena.
She believes that while the Ukrainian education system is good at generating and disseminating knowledge, the utilization of that knowledge is lacking.
“Many problems that we have in our society, at least in the social sphere could have been solved with knowledge. We are quite good at resilience, the war has demonstrated this, but for example conflict resolution, tolerance, multicultural communication, conflict between East and West, (these issues) happened partly because there was not enough knowledge sharing. If we now learn to apply knowledge properly, look at our own history but also at the global experience, we might solve these issues.”
Olena believes social, as well as technological issues could find solutions through knowledge sharing. Because of the ongoing war, Ukraine is starting to deal with an enormous amount of construction garbage, ruins of buildings destroyed.
“In other places of the European Union, there are very effective technologies to deal with this construction rubbish. If for instance we come and ask for this technology, for them to give us the knowledge, we could deal with this issue faster. And in my understanding, knowledge is basically concentrated in universities, so they are partners of the recovery process.
“And now, as we are dealing with the war, and rethinking our economy, talking about Europeanization, war traumas, and the rest of the problems we have to deal with, we need people with high quality education. In my opinion, at this moment of our history, Ukraine needs more higher education, not less.”
This might prove difficult as less students are applying to universities due to the war, some of them refugees in other European countries, others afraid to go to big cities that could be a threat to their safety.
“There will be a lot less people this year, but we are discussing in our group about education systems, what we can do so we don’t lose our students to the European countries and so they come back, because we need them in Ukraine”, explained Olena.
What does Olena hope comes out of the Salzburg Global program?
“To prepare a good action plan for education, from preschool to adult education. It is equally important as higher education today. There will be a lot of new skills that will be necessary for this recovery period and reconciliation and revival. I could say we expect more support from international donors, but this is only part of the story, and I think that our leadership, either individual or institutional will also change many things positively.
“And this networking that we are doing during this Seminar is also a very important part of the story as we will be using the expertise of the experts here, our contacts, our colleagues, our friends. When we go back to Ukraine, we can rely on each other and hopefully will be able to implement many projects with or without international support.”
The Fellows of this session have drafted a Salzburg Statement, in which they set out the priorities and recommendations from Ukrainian civil society identified at this meeting.
To read the Salzburg Statement, click here.
Buddhist monastic shares their journey of forging a healthy relationship between their queerness and their faith
Renowned anthropologist on cross-cultural gender and women’s same-sex relations looks back at her personal faith journey through three religions
In June, Fellows from the Public Policy New Voices Europe program will host a session titledDisrupting Bureaucracy: Equitable and Just Policymaking
Taking place during the Creative Bureaucracy Festival, the session Disrupting Bureaucracy: Equitable and Just Policymaking, hosted by Salzburg Global Fellows from the Public Policy New Voices Europe program, is in a fishbowl conversation format. The session sets a space to discuss how common exclusionary practices in the policy-making sphere can be disrupted and aims to diagnose the sector’s issues, enabling bureaucrats to take action and centre their policy work on marginalised communities acutely affected by a lack of thoughtful, inclusive policy.
“Representation and inclusion in policy-making are not buzzwords; they are principles we must meaningfully adhere to when formulating policy. If not, we risk reproducing the harmful assumptions and structures already ingrained within the status-quo of the policy-making field.”
Speakers will include Salzburg Global Fellows Róquia Gonçalves Guerra Camara, Nadia Hafedh, Lauri Heikkinen, Diana Zsoldos, Alex Kuch, Sude-Mariam Fidan, and will be moderated by Helia Nazari, Program and Engagement Associate for Salzburg Global Seminar.
This session is part of the capacity-building element of Salzburg Global’s Public Policy New Voice Europe program, which connects, supports and empowers a new generation of diverse leaders in public policy across Europe.
About the Creative Bureaucracy Festival
The Creative Bureaucracy Festival celebrates outstanding innovation in the public sector and its contribution to a better, more sustainable, and more just world. It brings together bureaucrats and their allies – those who, at all levels of government, fight for the common good and make a difference.
Their mission: "We want to cultivate a more positive attitude towards the public sector as well as more drive and eagerness to experiment within the public sector."
To find out more about Public Policy New Voice Europe, click here.
To find out more about the Creative Bureaucracy Festival, click here.
Suspended Methodist minister and current director of Inclusive and Affirming Ministries reflects on a journey of becoming vulnerable and courageous
Salzburg Cutler Fellows discuss how international law and legal systems can tackle challenges ranging from human rights to climate change and global economic issues at tenth annual program
Students from 13 top law schools across the United States were selected to explore the future of public and private international law at the tenth annual Salzburg Cutler Fellows Program.
The online program, spread across two weeks, (February 24 - March 12, 2022) saw top law students engage with prominent legal professionals, public servants, and leaders in the fields of international law and public service.
Speakers this year included John B. Bellinger III, former Legal Adviser to the US Department of State and National Security Council Pavel Baev, Research Professor at Peace Research Institute Oslo and Senior Non-Resident Fellow at Brookings Institution Svitlana Starosvit, former staffer at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine and Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.
The 13 law schools taking part in the program this year were Berkeley, Chicago, Columbia, Cornell, Duke, Harvard, Michigan, New York University, Northwestern, Penn, Stanford, Virginia and Yale.
The Cutler Fellows Program is always looking to respond to current world events, but this year’s opening event happened at a particularly crucial time in history, as the most “notable use of force that we have ever seen on the European continent since World War II” happened simultaneously. The opening keynote session looked to cover the future of international law after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the future of the Western order and the future of Ukraine.
In addition, Fellows received individual critique on their student papers from faculty of the participating law schools, as well as further advice on how to seek publication in journals. This year’s papers covered diverse topics, ranging from cyberwarfare and space weapons, Black Lives Matter, gender-based violence and climate justice amongst many others.
In the program’s Knowledge Café, students discussed personal ambitions and potential career routes in international law with mentors from Covington & Burling LLP, the International Monetary Fund and New Markets Lab.
At the end of this year’s program, Salzburg Global Seminar President Stephen L. Salyer spoke about what it means to be a Salzburg Global Fellow and the value it can bring to their lives. “I hope as you move forward in your careers that you will find those in this network to be valuable mentors and counterparts in helping you to shape a more just and sustainable world.”
Throughout the year, Salzburg Global Seminar also convenes current and rising leaders on topics such as:
As Cutler Fellows, students are part of the wider Salzburg Global Fellowship and can connect with Fellows from around the world, giving them access to a rich and varied network.
About the Program
The Salzburg Cutler Fellows Law Program is held by Salzburg Global Seminar under the auspices of the Lloyd N. Cutler Center for the Rule of Law. The annual program collaborates with eleven of the leading US law schools. This year’s program was sponsored by NYU Washington and Arnold & Porter.
The Cutler Fellows Program is named in memory of Lloyd N. Cutler, the Washington “Super Lawyer” who served as White House Counsel to Presidents Carter and Clinton.
Cutler also served as Chair of Salzburg Global Seminar’s Board of Directors for a decade and believed firmly in the power of mentoring young leaders with a commitment to making the world a better place through legal practice and the rule of law.
The Cutler Fellows Program was founded in 2012 by Salzburg Global Seminar to carry forward Lloyd Cutler’s legacy and to empower the next generation of legal professionals.
About Salzburg Global Seminar
Salzburg Global Seminar is an independent non-profit organization with a mission to challenge current and future leaders to shape a better world.
For 75 years, whether at our home of Schloss Leopoldskron, online or in locations around the world, our retreat-like programs have provided a forum for global exchange and transformation. Our inspiring environment, remote from the day-to-day buzz, allows participants from across the globe to come together and speak candidly, learn from each other, and return to their communities, organizations, and companies with renewed purpose and fresh perspective.
We have been at the forefront of major global movements for change since in 1947. We convene diverse Fellows across generations, geographies, and sectors, most of whom would otherwise never meet to exchange views or collaborate on new ideas. Together they create outside-the-box solutions and expand their networks in unprecedented ways.
Our focus is on tough issues that require cross-sector and interdisciplinary dialogue and the space to step back and explore innovative approaches. As part of our evolving strategy, our programs focus on creative & healthy societies, long-term & sustainable development, and rule of law & social trust.
We are supported by a combination of institutional partnerships, generous individual donations and revenue generated from our social enterprise, Hotel Schloss Leopoldskron.
For more information about the program, please contact:
Nabil Saad, Davidson Impact Fellow, nsaad@salzburgglobal.org
For more information about Salzburg Global Seminar, please contact:
Louise Hallman, Director of Communications, lhallman@salzburgglobal.org
Executive director of the Cultural Strategies Council, Kiley Arroyo reflects on how a soil keeping ethos can advance reparative justice and transformational change
Behavior change scientist at Silicon Valley's Center for Humane Technology, Pireeni Sundaralingam examines how arts and culture might benefit our brains and how we should combat "cognitive shut-down"
The Salzburg Global Seminar – Korea Foundation Fellowship connects Korean leaders with a diverse, innovative, and global network of Fellows
Salzburg Global Seminar asked Eunsil Bak, a Fellow taking part in the first year of the program, about her experience.
“My name is Eunsil Bak. I'm currently working as a project coordinator in the Social Work Department at the Royal University of Phnom Penh in Cambodia. I have been interested in how the school teachers and social workers help the vulnerable youth in Korea to have a healthy mind and succeed in school.”
After her internship in 2019, Eunsil returned to Salzburg Global Seminar three years later as a Fellow.
“I was an intern [at Salzburg Global Seminar] in 2019 and one of my dream was to become a Fellow to have a global network and have discussions with diverse people across the globe. I found that Salzburg Global Seminar provides the education sessions about the social emotional learning which is connected to my interest.”
Eunsil shares how the Fellowship Program has shifted her perspective in the field of education.
“[Before] I only focused on methods for the low-income students to have academic achievements, but I realized that just only focusing on the academic goal cannot make students happy, and there is more. It was social emotional learning like education is knowing who you are and how you fit into the world and how I can contribute to the world. Through that concept I want to help the vulnerable students in Korea.”
Each Fellow is assigned with a mentor from their respective field of interest as part of the Fellowship Program.
“I met my mentor, Joanne. She told me that many teachers and even the government, they focused on academic achievement as well. We did a process to think about how my school life was. So, I found out why I focused on only the academic achievement, but [I realized that] the social emotional learning should be considered first. If time allows, I want to rewrite my research based on what I learned.”
Salzburg Global Seminar: What does being Korean mean to you in this global age?
“Being Korean [means to] have a more understanding of other countries because we experienced the Korean War, and we were one of the most poorest countries and we have a sad history, so I think that kind of experience, we can have a better understanding of other cultures. Through that better understanding, I think we can embrace more people from diverse countries.”
Who would you recommend this Fellowship Program to?
“By attending this Fellowship Program, I realized that there were many others like me working hard with passion in their own fields. I very much look forward to the future that such people will create and although the future I envision may seem impossible, there is meaning in being part of the movement together. This gives me the courage to try harder and challenge myself.”
For more information, check out our program!
Founder and Director of ImagiNation Afrika, Karima Grant explains the importance of visualization
Musician and consultant in the cultural, creative and development sectors, Pedro Ivo Franco talks about the impact culture had on his community Chao de Estrelas
Some of the top law faculty in the US offer law students advice on how to make their argument more effective and how to successfully get their papers accepted by journals across the world
On Saturday, February 26 and March 3, the Salzburg Cutler Fellows Program continued with back-to-back Paper Workshops. 13 Law School Professors and 50 Law School students were split into seven groups to discuss their papers and receive feedback from not only their peers, but from professors at the other leading legal institutions in the country. Paper groups met for three hours on each Saturday and each student received approximately 40 minutes of attention. This year, Fellows’ papers covered a variety of topics, such as War, Human Rights, Trade, and Climate, amongst others.
“The Cutler Fellows Program was one of its kind, bringing young scholars in the international law space to elaborate on cutting-edge research topics. (…) I appreciate the opportunity to be connected to a brilliant cohort of future international lawyers who share an interest in China and Asia-Pacific-focused research, and the valuable experience of having peer-to-peer feedback will really help take our projects to the next level”, said Boguang Yang, law student at the University of Pennsylvania.
The Salzburg Cutler Fellows Program is a program for students from the top 14 US law schools who intend to pursue careers in international law, legal practice, and public service. The Program identifies and empowers outstanding talents, fosters leadership skills, and builds lasting collaborative networks within the legal and public service sectors.
Through these Paper Workshops, Fellows contributed to a decade’s worth of intellectual publications and hope to follow the footsteps of former Fellows, such as Nathan Yaffe, who saw his paper “Indigenous Consent: A Self-Determination Perspective” published in the Melbourne Journal of International Law, based on an earlier draft he had workshopped with other Fellows and expert faculty at the 2017 Cutler Fellows Program.
“Being a Salzburg Cutler Fellow has been a life-changing opportunity in many ways. First, it has given me the chance to present my research before experts in international law, human rights and comparative law, and I believe that the comments and advice that I received from them will certainly bolster the quality of my own scholarship. Secondly, it has considerably strengthened my network, something that will surely prove crucial as I look further to develop my career”, reflected Cristian Eyzaguirre, from Stanford University.
To find out more about the Salzburg Cutler Fellows Program, check out our program page.
How do we change a justice system that fails so many? From the US to Ukraine the root answer might be the same
CEO of Discover ME/Recover ME, David Fakunle reflects on how creative expression connects us all
Egyptian neuroscientist and political activist makes a case for the secularization of politics and society as the only way of LGBT inclusion
World Obesity Federation Policy and Projects Coordinator Claudia Selin Batz tells us about her organization and its role in public policy
Can you tell us a little bit about yourself?
My name is Claudia, and I have a background in Public Health with four years of experience in using communications and advocacy to influence public policy. I am particularly passionate about finding solutions to address the growing burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) across the globe. I am currently pursuing a role at the World Obesity Federation managing communication and dissemination activities for two EU-funded childhood obesity projects – CO-CREATE and STOP. Through this, I have been fortunate to fulfill my passion to consistently incorporate the perspectives of young people into the development and refinement of policies, fostering partnerships and convening stakeholders to ensure that public policy is more inclusive and equitable.
How does the World Obesity Federation support and evaluate underrepresented communities in the field of public policy?
By 2030, 1 billion people are projected to be living with obesity. Over the past decade, we have learned a lot about its root causes, clearly exemplifying that a variety of factors, including biology, mental health, genetic risk, and food environments play a role in an individual’s likelihood of gaining weight. Regardless of this, in many countries, people living with obesity are regularly blamed for their disease. Weight stigma perpetuates the idea that obesity is solely the fault of the individual. It harms people's emotional and physical health, as well as hinders them from seeking medical care.
At World Obesity, we call this behavior out and collaborate with experts, advocates, youth, patients, and practitioners in high-medium and low-income nations to address the systemic bias that hinders the adoption of healthier habits. We make it a point to integrate a diverse range of perspectives in the global response to obesity, as well as in the development of policy measures. Our flagship campaign, World Obesity Day, is held on March 4 every year, and it is just one of the ways we use our platform to support people throughout the world who are calling for change.
What is the theme of World Obesity Day this year?
The topic for this year's World Obesity Day is "Everyone Needs to Act." The Federation and its members are urging action to halt rising levels of obesity, to shift narratives that perpetuate weight bias, and to create healthier societies. Our message to governments around the world is straightforward: a fragmented response, a lack of ambition, and inaction harm those who most need support. Because the ramifications may be experienced across society, we must unite again and take measures at the local, national, and global levels.
When everyone works together, we have already seen glimmers of optimism. We have achieved significant milestones in our collaborative advocacy to secure momentum on global obesity policy and action over the last year. The World Health Organization has recently adopted recommendations for the prevention and management of obesity and is working on an Obesity Acceleration Plan to help achieve global obesity targets. We should now ensure that these initiatives are grouped into a single package to provide a global, coordinated, and comprehensive response to obesity.
What action do you commit to this World Obesity Day? How will the Public Policy New Voices Europe Programme support you in achieving this goal?
At a personal level, I commit to elevating obesity within broader discussions about NCDs. After we saw that living with obesity increases the risk of hospitalization due to COVID-19 infections, it has received significant attention, but there’s more work to be done. I will continue to facilitate these discussions and support youth advocates who are striving to build a healthier future for us all – after all, I was at the start of my advocacy journey not too long ago, I can resonate with them!
The Public Policy New Voices Fellowship will equip me with a theoretical understanding of policy processes and structures, but also serve as a platform to share my experiences working in a civil society organization and with young people to transform policy.
And finally, how can one get involved in World Obesity Day?
To learn more and get involved in World Obesity Day you can visit our campaign website here. We have compiled case studies and resources with three target audiences in mind: people living with obesity, healthcare professionals, and employers. The team has also created editable social media materials and guidelines for anyone planning activities.
From the economical to the emotional, how we frame nuanced narratives around criminal justice reform can make or break its success
How capturing better data and measuring social trust could help build better criminal justice systems—for the people within it and their communities
Executive director of the Cultural Strategies Council, Kiley Arroyo explains nature's role in change and healing
How the UK is shifting the focus of a long-running problem and taking a whole-system approach to stop youth violence
New Salzburg Global Fellows share thirst to create more inclusive, welcoming communities through public policy
Public policy is the action a government does or does not take in response to a matter of public concern, including laws, regulations and funding allocations. While ideas for these actions can be influenced by the outside world, policy itself is ultimately made by governments.
Then what is Public Policy New Voices Europe?
The new program is designed to support and elevate underrepresented communities in the field of public policy. The program provides participants with opportunities to build their capacity through virtual and in-person meetings, peer learning, mentorship, networking, and internship opportunities.
“In my professional experience, I am often the only person of color in the room; and in many occasions, I felt illegitimate or inconsistent with my values,” said Roquia Gonçalves Guerra Camara, one of the “New Voices”.
Roquia was born and raised in Lisbon, Portugal, to Bissau-Guinean parents and has been living in Marseille, France since 2013. Now a Ph.D. student in sociology, she is interested in understanding how public policy can forge gender equality, positively impact the lives of diverse people, and foster their social emancipation.
Her interests along with personal experiences brought her to Public Policy New Voices Europe: “Having the possibility to live an empowering journey in this fellowship, learning from others that share similar experiences and goals was an opportunity not to be missed.”
Across Europe, the profiles, backgrounds, and demographics of public policy professionals often fail to reflect the growing pluralism and multiculturalism of society. As governments, corporations, and communities grapple with regional and global challenges, there is a need for diverse perspectives and bold innovative ideas to reimagine and redesign the future of public policy.
That is where our Fellows come in. Although they all come from different social, cultural and professional backgrounds, they all believe that better representation within public policy will lead to better outcomes.
“I applied for this fellowship because of my growing frustration with the invisibility of the struggles of marginalized people in public policy spaces, which keeps the most vulnerable at risk; and deprioritize their knowledge and experiences in favor of so-called expert voices,” explained Nadia Hafedh, Executive Assistant for the Executive Director of Policy, Advocacy and Campaigns at Save the Children UK. “This fellowship’s focus on inclusive communities actively challenges this issue and I hope to use it to uplift and create space for these communities to be part of the decision-making that affects their lives so acutely but currently lock them out.”
Fellows see the New Voices program as a way to gain the knowledge they might lack to create change in their communities, so that people like them might see themselves represented and supported in laws and regulations.
Chougher Maria Doughramajian is currently pursuing an M.Phil degree in Conflict Resolution and Reconciliation at Trinity College Dublin, Ireland. She is also the president of Voices of Young Refugees in Europe and a program assistant at Pink Armenia.
However, her motivation to become a Public Policy New Voices Europe Fellow goes beyond her interest in her degree, but instead revolves around her experience as a refugee.
“Witnessing war as a teenager back in my birth town, Aleppo, and embarking on a challenging journey as a refugee shaped me as an individual. I choose to perceive the never-ending tragedies in Syria, the unpredictability of life in Armenia and the transitional period in Northern Ireland as constant reminders of how much my home countries need me and the expertise that would be afforded to me by the opportunity to become a Public Policy New Voices Europe fellow.”
The Public Policy New Voices Europe program is not only a way for Fellows to connect with peers motivated by the same goals, but to gain a feeling of legitimacy in the field of public policy.
Hannelore Pourier, a student enrolled in a double-degree master’s program in Public Policy and Human Development at Maastricht University in The Netherlands, hopes to gain just that.
“The fellowship offers a rich environment to further my existing knowledge and skills, learn from those already in the field and broaden my network. Through participating, I hope to grow on a personal and professional level, leaving me feeling confident to take the next step in my career.”
When asked what she expects to achieve in the next few months, Hannelore envisions connecting with her peers through sharing their distinct experiences.
“I foresee that our discussions and varying perspectives can establish something meaningful: a knowledge and skill mix that allows us to generate positive impact and foster inclusive systemic societal change.”
Great Udochi, Master of Public Policy student at the Willy Brandt School of Public Policy in Germany, fears his lack of experience might be a barrier to being involved in public policy. His hope through the fellowship is to collaborate with organizations that are involved in addressing migration challenges at a national or international level.
“I am confident that this fellowship will offer me more insights into the dynamics of policymaking in the EU that can be helpful in addressing gaps in EU asylum policies, and provide a platform for learning, interaction, and collaboration with other future leaders.”
As an independent non-profit organization, Salzburg Global is always looking for partners to help us scale this work, if you are interested in supporting the next generation of public policy leaders, please contact the program team by emailing: Faye Hobson at fhobson@salzburgglobal.org.
Gayoung Imm, Impact Fellow at Salzburg Global Seminar, reflects on South Korean public health expert's response to the COVID-19 pandemic
The Impact Fellowship with Salzburg Global Seminar's health program not only has been a wonderful experience for me to grow professionally to become a global leader in the future, but it has also been a valuable time for me to think about what good leaders should look like. Among lots of important qualifications that leaders must be equipped with, I think that great leaders must be able to make the public voluntarily follow them. We can see how important it is by looking at how South Korean leader, Eun-Kyeong Jung successfully managed the COVID-19 crisis.
Cooperation at the societal level is essential to overcome the international health crisis COVID-19, given its infectious nature and the detrimental effects on public lives. At the beginning of the breakout, we have witnessed many societies that failed to manage the situation because of the distrust, mis- and disinformation around the virus. However, looking at various countries around the world with high rates of vaccination take up, such as Denmark, Korea and Portugal, trust in leaders managing the health crisis has been key to successfully beating the epidemics.
Eun-Kyeong Jung, the Commissioner of the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA), was applauded for her leadership in managing the COVID-19 pandemic situation worldwide. Thanks to her, South Korea's response to the pandemic at the beginning of the breakout has become a global example. The Wall Street Journal described Commissioner Jung as “a national hero”, with emphasis on her leadership style of “straight talk, informed analysis and stoical calm." Further, she was selected as one of the 100 most influential people in 2020 by Time and 100 Women 2020 by BBC.
What can the world learn from Commissioner Jung's leadership? What made the world pay attention to her leadership during COVID-19? And furthermore, what should good leadership look like in a national health crisis?
1) Evidence-based decision making
As head of the KDCA, Commissioner Jung sees managing infectious diseases based on scientific evidence and expertise as philosophy and organizational mandate. As the infodemics evolved and the leading opposition party utilized the situation for political purposes, she was not swayed by the political scheme. Instead, she calmed the dispute by sharing existing evidence at the daily national briefing.
It is well-known that Commissioner Jung writes down as much information as possible during the regular national reporting on her personal notebooks. She was often seen reviewing her notebook before the new report or public briefing. Her close staff said that whenever her team members mistakenly reported incorrect information to her, she would set the record straight right away. With this high emphasis on details and accuracy, she managed to reduce mistakes when making important decisions.
2) Direct and candid communication
Commissioner Jung does not pretend to know everything. As her first priority is national safety, she candidly admitted that when she did not have a clear answer. With evidence in her personal notebook, she was able to answer spontaneous questions from the reporters. However, when she didn't have an answer to the question, she was often clear about this rather than giving an evasive answer. In this situation, she took the substantial personal initiative, not only to understand the facts but to quickly follow up with reporters after the briefing by text message as information became available.
At the height of the panic, Commissioner Jung’s message came not only with volumes of health guidance, but it was also a source of courage. Confidently reassuring the nation, she emphasized that “the virus will not overtake Korea” at the national briefing. As it is well-known that she rarely says empty words, the public felt her confidence and started to trust her. She took charge of every single national briefing since the breakout of COVID-19. Not only as the head of KDCA but also as a national renowned expert in the field, she communicated directly and candidly on the subject.
3) Solidarity in leadership
One of Commissioner Jung's close staff members said, “People don't want to leave her. She knows the most, makes clear decisions, is always patient, and never gets angry. She is just the best boss.” By building strong solidarity in leadership, she makes her staff voluntarily devote themselves to the organizational mission.
One well-known anecdote shows how Commissioner Jung treats her staff. When she was a manager of Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, her staff member was censured for improperly managing MERS, Middle East respiratory syndrome. Whenever that team member was at a loss for words, Commissioner Jung interrupted and protected her from the blame.
As a leader, Commissioner Jung willingly takes responsibility and always tries to protect her staff from difficult, unfair situations. There was no doubt that her staff does not want to leave her and this becomes a powerful advantage for the organization to do their work in a safe environment.
To maintain national health and well-being, public authorities must acquire wide support from the public. Even if the guidance and regulations are perfectly designed by public bodies, it is of no use when only a few people proactively follow them. Then how can leaders mobilize the public? Building trust can be the answer. When people are certain that public authorities will successfully handle the situation, they will willingly cooperate to keep their own health.
Eun-Kyeong Jung succeeded in gaining trust, which led to the success of her leadership. With evidence-based decision-making and candid communication, she fostered trust with the public. Furthermore, due to the solidarity and attitude towards upholding accountability, she was able to acquire trust from political leaders. Thanks to this, Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention was elevated to the Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency. It was of no surprise when she was appointed as the first Commissioner of this new organization. With greater authority and accountability, she became able to mobilize citizens more proactively.
The Salzburg Global Seminar – Korea Foundation Fellowship connects Korean leaders with a diverse, innovative, and global network of Fellows
Salzburg Global Seminar asked Emilia Heo, a Fellow taking part in the first year of the program, about her experience.
"My name is Emilia Heo, I am currently an associate professor of International Relations and Peace Studies at Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University in Japan. My research interest is framed around actors committed to reconciliation between enemy states. I found this program to be a great chance to explore other Korean scholars in similar fields, raise my international exposure and work together since sometimes there are sections that you can't work on alone with but work with others to have things out of it."
Through the Fellowship, Emilia has been involved in multiple programs offered by Salzburg Global Seminar.
"There is one section: the Asia Peace Innovator Forum. The other one is Contested Histories in Public Places. It's not like I am focused on one program, but I am actually creating a new field with scholars there and with my Fellows."
Each Fellow produces a capstone project that builds on the learnings of their Fellowship and contributes to the impact in their respective areas.
"The capstone project is called 'Through the Eyes of Others.' At my current institution, we have students from more than 30 nationalities in one classroom. And here, everyone is exposed to what we call a 'competing national narrative.' So what brought us glory might have brought them pain. I found it very difficult to teach international relations when you have these students all together sitting in one classroom. My capstone project aims at developing several pedagogical methods to help students not to ignore or to fight, but to learn how to listen and to talk to each other for a better cause later on. That’s the main project I have in my mind."
Salzburg Global Seminar: What does being Korean mean to you in this global age?
"Today, Korea has become a great power I would say in its soft power field. This year you have seen Korea everywhere and people now listen to us, and they respect what we say. I think it's the perfect time to speak up and also to look at other parts of the world that have been suffering, that do not have enough resources. Korea has both sides. They know what it means to be vulnerable, but they also have the power to step up and speak and give their hands to others."
Who would you recommend the Korea Foundation Fellowship to?
"I recommend the program to people like me, people who have made the effort to reach a certain level in their own field but had to compromise with reality or remained satisfied within their comfort zone in the post-pandemic era. This program offered me an opportunity to meet people working with passion in various fields and to regain energy to get back up. Being together, I felt on fire again, impossible to feel when left alone. I thus recommend this program for people who know what they hold but have yet to make a breakthrough. It will offer you the wings to soar in your field. Meeting diverse Fellows through the program will create a synergy effect that will make you rediscover the passion that you once had.
Once you are a Salzburg Global Seminar Fellow, you stay there forever. I am very much happy to dig into this human relationship with people sharing a similar passion and to create this network globally."
For more information, check out our program!
The Salzburg Global Seminar – Korea Foundation Fellowship connects Korean leaders with a diverse, innovative, and global network of Fellows
Salzburg Global Seminar asked Namhee Joo, a Fellow taking part in the first year of the program, about her experience.
“My name is Namhee Joo. I am a postdoctoral researcher on cultural heritage, specialized in policy network analysis. Now I live in Salzburg, Austria with more than nine years of arts education program management. As a research professor, I manage online training programs on climate change and disaster management of architectural heritage for Cambodia.”
Through the Fellowship, Namhee is taking part in the Emerging Urban Leaders program.
“It's a really amazing opportunity to understand the people who work in the economic field and how to get funds for projects, and to think about other perspectives to understand the city itself. Talking to urban planners and city governments, to all these different stakeholders, allows me to understand a better solution for the city.”
As part of the Fellowship, each Fellow is assigned with a mentor to provide professional guidance and strengthen cross-cultural relationships.
“Salzburg Global Seminar connected me to Patricia Alberth, who is the Head of World Heritage Office in the city of Bamberg, Germany. We talked about the laws and policies around intangible cultural heritage between Korea and Germany. Historically and culturally, to understand conservation and restoration of the heritage itself will make us understand the two countries. We are thinking of publishing an article to make people understand the two countries better.”
Each Fellow produces a capstone project that builds on the learnings of their Fellowship and contributes to the impact in their respective areas.
“Next year in 2022, South Korea and Austria will commemorate the 130th anniversary of establishing diplomatic ties. I would like to develop objectives and strategies for culture and art projects. There was a Royal Palace Festival via YouTube channel. It’s not completely the same as the feeling we can enjoy on-site, but I think those kinds of technologies and devices make us connect together no matter where we are. I really want to make a better way to achieve this goal for Austria and Korea.”
Salzburg Global Seminar: What does being Korean mean to you in this global age?
“Maybe three or four years ago, when you go to Europe people ask: ‘Where are you from? China or Japan?’ But these days, what I experienced is: ‘Namhee, have you ever watched Squid Game? or ‘Have you ever listened to BTS?’ So now people ask me ‘What’s your country?’ more than before. Because my major is cultural heritage management, when people ask me about Korea, I feel more honored and glad to share our philosophy, our history and our culture.”
Why do you recommend the Korea Foundation Fellowship?
“All careers start from an interest. The time that you have accumulated in your career will eventually lead you to people that likewise strived to move forward in their careers. The Korea Foundation Fellowship has allowed me to meet people who have expanded my horizons, which is quite meaningful. I thought that my career was a difficult and lonely journey, but there was comfort just knowing that there are others just like me in this world who are trying their best to build their unique careers. The Korea Foundation Fellowship gave me the opportunity to ask, ‘How can we better contribute to the people and society through our work?’, And that is why I recommend this program.”
For more information, check out our program!
The Salzburg Global Seminar – Korea Foundation Fellowship connects Korean leaders with a diverse, innovative, and global network of Fellows
Salzburg Global Seminar asked Daniel Shin, a Fellow taking part in the first year of the program, about his experience.
“My name is Daniel Shin. I'm based in Seoul, Korea. I am a venture capitalist with 10 years of experience under my belt. I also closely work with the German luxury brand called MCM, which operates in 43 countries with 700 doors. I also teach at Korea University. I received my doctorate degree from Paris Sciences et Lettres or in short, University of PSL, in 2019. I am currently working on my second masters at University of Oxford, Faculty of Law.”
Through the Fellowship, Daniel has returned to take part in the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum as he did in 2019.
“I found that Corporate Governance, ESG, a ‘resilience‘ topic that Salzburg Global Seminar offered were particularly more engaging. Then I found the Korea Foundation Fellowship opportunity, and finally gave it a try. Sessions that I was sitting in were quite diversified, from all different regions, time zones and varying perspectives. By nature, I am learning many new things from my work, but when you hang out with only the same people, it is hard to pick up a new perspective. That's what Salzburg Global Seminar is really good at, bridging many different ideas and providing a safe venue for people to bring themselves as who they are.”
As part of the Fellowship, each Fellow is assigned to a mentor, to provide professional guidance and strengthen cross-cultural relationships.
“Philip Sinclair, a fellow at the Judge Business School at the University of Cambridge, is my mentor appointee. We have had many common grounds. He is an entrepreneur by himself and has been involved in various policy work as a key influencer. I see myself becoming a policy entrepreneur in the coming years. I'm grateful to find this journey that resonates with my future career goal.”
Each Fellow produces a capstone project that builds on the learnings of their Fellowship and contributes to the impact in their respective areas.
“I'm digging in how entrepreneurship will bring forth a major social change in North Korea. I've gotten connected with North Korean refugees who have made various fruitful transitions in their lives with entrepreneurship. During the fellowship, I would like to spotlight a few cases that have felt inspiring so that others can feel the same.”
Salzburg Global Seminar: What does being Korean mean to you in this global age?
“Korea is all about resilience. Korea suffered tremendous oppression. It has been lacking precious resource, but we have a great talent, which is willing to learn and go the extra mile. Korea will shine with its people, their entrepreneurial spirit and creativity. As you can see from a recent saga of very popular K-content around the globe, Korea will also contribute tons to bring forth original stories and creative innovations that will be a source of its soft power.”
What advice would you give to those interested in the Korea Foundation Fellowship?
“‘Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.’ These were the famous words of John F. Kennedy and the motto of Harvard Kennedy School. The doors of the Korea Foundation Fellowship are open to a wide range of people. Before asking whether I am qualified, take time to think about how much you can contribute to Salzburg Global Seminar and the Korea Foundation Fellowship with your unique background and bright mind. Please make sure to apply!”
For more information, check out our program!
‘Adult crime, adult time’? Five experts debunk the need to be tough on crime—and propose impactful alternatives
In the latest installment of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance, Ansie Ramalho, chair of the King Committee on Corporate Governance for South Africa, explores the link between accountability and responsible leadership
This article is part of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance series by the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum
This post follows a discussion on responsible leadership and accountability held among participants at the latest Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum program held in October 2021. It is an important topic. Accountability is what oils the machinery of the checks and balances that operate as part of corporate governance. The legitimacy of our corporations and economic system depends on it.
Accountability is an elusive concept, though. This post attempts to explain some of its nuances and elements and explore how it affects the boards and directors’ demonstration of responsible leadership.
The answer to this question used to be evident, namely, the body of shareholders on the basis that shareholders (as principles) rely on directors (as agents) to run the company properly. Accordingly, the corporation’s primary purpose was viewed as creating wealth for shareholders.
This stance has somewhat evolved. It is now recognized corporations have a growing impact and may, through their operations, adversely affect the rights and interests of others and even cause outright harm. This recognition has widened the scope of accountability of directors beyond shareholders.
Accordingly, the King IV Report on Corporate Governance for South Africa (2016), for example, advocates for a stakeholder-inclusive approach and represents the duty of directors as one that requires the balancing of stakeholder needs, interests, and expectations in the best interests of the company over time.
Even investors themselves, a notable example being BlackRock, are increasingly supporting the broader accountability of companies and, by implication, the directors of those companies. In this regard, reference was made to the newly released ICGN Global Governance Principles that provide, among others, that boards in promoting the company’s long-term success should protect the interests of not only the shareholders but also the relevant stakeholders.
When considering the concept of accountability, our thoughts normally veer towards legal accountability with either criminal or civil sanction, or both. It is the most formal and visible form of accountability but not without its challenges as debated during one of the earlier sessions of the Forum, especially if the concern is about holding directors and executives of corporations (as opposed to the corporation itself) liable.
Market forces function as a lever of accountability alongside the legal system. Shareholders of publicly listed companies enforce accountability formally through voting and otherwise exercise their rights on matters as provided for in the company legislation of the jurisdiction. Investors may also simply “vote with their feet” by selling their shareholding if that is a viable option or in the alternative may even opt not to invest at all.
The third lever of accountability results from the more transparent and connected world that we live in. As represented by civil society organizations, journalists, and activists, society is becoming increasingly critical as a voice in holding companies and their directors accountable. This approach is a less formal and, arguably, more flexible and swiftly functioning form of accountability. In accordance with this, corporations and their directors are held to societal norms and expectations, which in most instances are setting a higher bar than legal accountability.
Market forces and social forces are often acting in concert in that investors take social and environmental concerns on board in their activism and engagements with companies.
Voluntary codes of corporate governance such as King IV that include not only guiding standards on the more traditional governance elements such as board composition and independence but also directors’ responsibility for social and environmental matters (i.e., the full complement of ESG factors) establish an objective norm for the market and society in holding directors to account on how they are performing with respect to ESG.
These levers for accountability carry the potential for the sanctioning of companies or their directors, or both – not only legal sanction but also reputational sanction and its consequential effects. This possibility of consequences is a critical element for effective accountability.
There is a general misconception in governance discourse that accountability equates to disclosure. However, as Keay and Loughrey explain, disclosure does not constitute accountability per se, although it is one of the necessary steps towards achieving accountability.
Therefore, the mere issuing of annual financial statements and other corporate reports does not dispense with the responsibility to account.
Accountability necessitates the information disclosed should provide explanations and justifications against a set of external values and standards as for example, those contained in a code of corporate governance or a remuneration policy. Unfortunately, many corporate reports fall short of this standard as they resemble the company’s promotional material more than being balanced and informative accounts of the company’s performance - good and less so - and its prospects.
An additional step in the accountability process is there must be an opportunity to challenge and debate the information provided. Again, judging by how AGMs are generally organized and structured to be concluded in the shortest time with as little invitation for engagement as possible, accountability is not the default stance of most public companies.
A failure of accountability is a failure of responsible leadership by directors. True accountability is demonstrated by boards that visibly value it and, therefore, ensure transparency as well as authentic and responsive engagement with shareholders and other stakeholders.
Ansie Ramalho chairs the King Committee on Corporate Governance for South Africa, where she has served for more than 12 years. She serves as a professional non-executive director and has been conferred the chartered director (SA) designation by the Institute of Directors South Africa (IoDSA). Ansie is a lawyer by training and considered a leading authority on corporate governance, with both deep and broad theoretical and applied knowledge on the topic. From August 2014 to November 2016 Ansie was the appointed King IV project lead with responsibility for the successful finalization of the King IV Report on Corporate Governance for South Africa, 2016. She is a Fellow of Salzburg Global Seminar.
The Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance is an online discussion series introduced and led by Fellows of the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum. The articles and comments represent opinions of the authors and commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of their corporations or institutions, nor of Salzburg Global Seminar. Readers are welcome to address any questions about this series to Forum Director Charles E. Ehrlich: cehrlich@salzburgglobal.org. To receive a notification of when the next article is published, follow Salzburg Global Seminar on LinkedIn or sign up for email notifications here: www.salzburgglobal.org/go/corpgov/newsletter
In the latest installment of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance, Simon Dodds, of counsel at Shearman & Sterling, considers corporate accountability
This article is part of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance series by the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum
We posed the question above to participants at the opening plenary session of our recent Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum program on Responsible Leadership: How Do We Make Businesses More Accountable? I facilitated a session that engaged current and former members of different countries’ judiciaries, lawyers both in private practice and in-house, corporate directors, investors, civil society voices, and other perspectives. I do not propose to summarise the discussion – it was far too rich to do justice to it in this post – but I would like to highlight three personal takeaways, aspects of the discussion I found particularly thought-provoking.
This question has been a hot topic in the US, driven by the failure to prosecute senior executives of financial institutions for their part in the financial crisis. US prosecutors brought many actions against financial institutions leading to large fines, criminal pleas, and extensive remediation programs. In the UK, where it is harder than in the US to bring criminal prosecutions against corporations, there is pressure to change the law to make corporate prosecutions easier.
The plenary session and regional break-out groups covered this question in-depth, although a consensus view was not reached. Prosecuting the corporate entity and reaching a settlement is clearly an easier route for all involved: prosecutors win their headlines without having to prove their case in court; senior executives close the case without any individuals held to account.
However, there was skepticism about whether corporate prosecutions lead to better corporate behavior, whereas regulatory action against individuals may have a salutary effect. The US Treasury Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)’s actions against various individuals at Wells Fargo, including the General Counsel, is one sobering example of this. In the UK, the Senior Managers’ Regime, which creates an extensive regulatory framework around the responsibilities of senior managers of financial institutions, has served to enhance the discussion about governance and controls within banks.
The debate on whether senior executives should be held liable for wrongs committed by their corporations is one those active in the judiciary, regulators, private practice lawyers, and corporations have engaged in for some time.
Yet, a comment from one participant provided a very different insight. They highlighted that outside our respective bubbles, at least amongst the young people they worked with, the popular view was there was no true accountability for either executives or corporations, and the established system simply does not work fairly.
This observation was an important contribution to the conversation. As we struggle with appropriate ways to make those responsible for misconduct accountable, it is worth reflecting that a considerable segment of society is skeptical of our ability to do so and deeply disillusioned, believing that the cards are stacked in favor of the rich and powerful. This is doubtless one of the long-term effects of the financial crisis, reflecting its scale and how those seemingly responsible suffered less than others.
This observation deserves continued serious consideration by us all. It is critical for legal practitioners to strive to ensure the legal system is explicable to non-lawyers and delivers fair outcomes. There is an educational component to this – legal practitioners need to explain what they do and communicate with non-lawyers – but the delivery of appropriate accountability is fundamental to restoring popular trust in our legal system.
One of our provocateurs expressed a desire for a broader discussion on the purpose of prosecuting senior executives and the pressing need to consider our sense of how corporates behave and what is expected of leaders. They argued we should develop a framework of responsibility that works for an increasingly complex future, that helps leaders understand what is expected of them. In addition, they added that this is crucial to create norms that align with most senior executives who actually want to behave properly.
This observation, along with the comment about the skepticism of young professionals, struck a chord with me. As we look to the future, we should ensure our legal and regulatory systems are designed to promote fairness and bring accountability where it is merited. While our discussions at the virtual program raised important issues and provoked much reflection, there is much further to go.
As the debate continues, it is critical for governance and other professionals to remain attentive to ensuring their corporations do not fall foul of law and regulation and respond appropriately to their stakeholders.
Simon Dodds is of counsel in the Financial Institutions Advisory & Financial Regulatory practice in Shearman & Sterling's London office. Simon was formerly co-general counsel at Deutsche Bank AG. Simon's broad experience includes advising the board and senior management on legal and regulatory matters across corporate and investment banking, global markets, asset and wealth management. Simon has also advised on major litigation and regulatory enforcement matters, as well as all types of legal and regulatory matters relating to transactions, sales and trading, bank lending and outsourcing.
The Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance is an online discussion series introduced and led by Fellows of the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum. The articles and comments represent opinions of the authors and commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of their corporations or institutions, nor of Salzburg Global Seminar. Readers are welcome to address any questions about this series to Forum Director Charles E. Ehrlich: cehrlich@salzburgglobal.org. To receive a notification of when the next article is published, follow Salzburg Global Seminar on LinkedIn or sign up for email notifications here: www.salzburgglobal.org/go/corpgov/newsletter
In the latest installment of the Salzburg Questions for the Future of Finance, we hear from Matthew Saal, a digital finance specialist in the International Finance Corporation's Financial Institutions Group
This article is part of the Salzburg Questions for the Future of Finance series by the Salzburg Global Finance Forum
Embedded finance (EmFi) is two years old and yet also two millennia old. Embedding financial services into other products and services improves the user experience, generates data that can be used to manage risk (among other uses), reduces costs, and makes finance more inclusive.
The term “embedded finance” was coined – or at least popularized – by venture capital investor Matthew Harris in 2019 to describe how technology has-enabled financial functions like payments, lending, and insurance to be woven into the fabric of any company, just as Internet and mobile connectivity have become ubiquitous parts of product offerings and business operations. Buy-now-pay-later (BNPL) offerings from a wide range of merchants, enabled by fintech companies, is one prominent example of EmFi. BNPL, as a product, is going mainstream with banks and established payments networks devising BNPL offerings.
But is there anything new under the sun? Since the dawn of commerce, individuals engaging in barter or monetary exchanges have agreed to take goods now and pay later: when I come by tomorrow, when the hog is slaughtered or the rice harvested, when payday comes around, or according to an agreed accounts payable schedule (also known as an “open account” transactions) offered to known counterparts.
What’s new is the ability for any seller to incorporate credit, payments, insurance, and other financial services easily into an existing workflow or customer experience. EmFi uses data to move beyond known and trusted counterparts and automates underwriting and processing to reduce the costs and risks. Thus, to continue the delayed payment example, “open account” type terms are being offered to a broader range of customers, including small retail purchasers.
EmFi models have increased, including:
Across these and other applications, the attraction of EmFi stems from three inter-related features: incorporation into a core activity in which the customer is already engaged, leveraging data and automation, and expanding access.
Making finance part of another activity or workflow improves the user experience because no one actually wants most financial products for their own sake. For example, the individual wants a mortgage because of the home purchase; the business owner wants a working capital line to buy goods or pay salaries; insurance protects an asset. EmFi enables individuals to focus on the core functions of purchasing a home, ordering raw materials, or acquiring and using an asset without procuring funding or protection separately.
Leveraging data and automation enables EmFi providers to increase visibility to credit risk and recourse in the event of default. For example, a platform that is arranging cargo loads for a truck owner or enabling a small merchant to sell to a large customer base will know the borrower’s revenues and the quality of their business (returns and customer complaints) as well as the trends in the overall market. The platform can also deduct loan repayments from revenues at source, and borrowers who depend on the platform for access to their customers are likely to prioritize repayment to that creditor should they encounter financial distress.
Understanding the underlying transaction and use of funds and leveraging improved visibility and recourse enables EmFi to provide access to finance, and, crucially, to their own products, to a broader range of customers, including those without credit histories or even a prior trust relationship, depending on the application. BNPL, for example, enables any retailer to offer short-term credit like neighborhood merchants might give their “regulars,” driving increased sales volume and choice of higher-end products. Amazon is already a multi-billion-dollar lender to small businesses. In many emerging markets where working capital for small businesses is scarce, a credit line for sellers is a crucial driver of business volume and transaction fees for e-commerce platforms.
Together, these features potentially create intrinsic advantages for EmFi over third-party financial services, such as a bank loan. EmFi can be more convenient for the customer, offered at a lower cost by the provider, and be less risky. As such, these models may present a competitive threat to banks and other traditional lenders. Incumbents’ responses to the rise of fintech BNPL offerings indicate that EmFi is indeed perceived as a competitive threat.
Those three-interrelated features also give rise to new regulatory challenges concerning whether and how the provision of financial services by non-financial companies should be regulated and supervised, how to safeguard data ownership and use, and how to bolster consumer protection. The economies of scale and scope evident in technology-driven business models have already created concerns about market concentration and potential abuses of dominant market positions. Embedding can carry existing dominance in data or customer networks into the adjacent financial services space. (1)
Financial regulators will need to look carefully at the business models of EmFi. In some cases, tech platforms work with regulated payment service providers and banks that sit behind the scenes. In other cases, new entities take on intermediary roles outside the current regulatory perimeter or the remit of safeguards and consumer protections such as credit information systems.
The entry to financial services of new players via EmFi could present welcome competition to entrenched incumbents. There are examples of free or low-cost services enabled by the cross-subsidization an EmFi business model can incorporate. These may call into question longstanding financial stability and antitrust concepts such as the separation of banking and commerce and anti-tying provisions.
Most jurisdictions protect financial data, but we are still in the early stages of rolling out broader data protection frameworks. The increased linkage of non-financial information to financial services and access to finance should spur more urgent efforts in this area. In addition, coordination with other sector regulators and market conduct authorities will need to be enhanced to ensure data integrity, consumer protection, and fair competition.
Despite these challenges, regulators should look to welcome, rather than restrict, the flourishing of EmFi. As noted above, accounts payable finance has long been part of commerce, and by some estimates, the finance implicit in supply chains dwarfs global bank lending. Technology-enabled EmFi may disintermediate banks in some products but can also bring more transparency to the supply chain and other areas of finance, ultimately improving monetary and supervisory authorities’ ability to monitor and understand credit conditions.
The intrinsic cost and risk management advantages of EmFi should translate to lower risks and lower costs, if monopolistic abuses can be avoided. Furthermore, EmFi could improve stability and resilience at the systemic level as lenders with superior visibility and recourse – along with business motivations to provide capital – may be less likely to pull funding in a general downturn. They are also more likely to be confident to selectively re-start lending after a shock such as a global pandemic. (2)
EmFi is already a significant market force, and it will only grow as economic activities are increasingly digitized. Therefore, policymakers and market participants might consider:
Matthew Saal is a digital finance specialist in the International Finance Corporation’s (IFC) Financial Institutions Group. Matthew joined IFC in 2016 and covers digital financial services and financial infrastructure advisory work, partnerships, and investments in innovative financial services providers. During 2018-2019 Matthew was a World Bank Presidential Fellow seconded to the Finance Competitiveness and Innovation Global Practice, focused on fintech policy and fintech for inclusion. Prior to joining IFC, Matthew was associate director in the local currency and capital markets development initiative of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). Before joining EBRD in 2010, Matthew worked in emerging markets finance, private equity, venture capital, fintech strategy and business development, consulting, and international economics. Matthew holds an A.B. in chemistry from Princeton University and an M.Phil. in economics from Oxford University, where he studied as a Marshall Scholar.
The Salzburg Questions for the Future of Finance is an online discussion series introduced and led by Fellows of the Salzburg Global Finance Forum. The articles and comments represent opinions of the authors and commenters and do not necessarily represent the views of their corporations or institutions, nor of Salzburg Global Seminar. Readers are welcome to address any questions about this series to Forum Director, Tatsiana Lintouskaya: tlintouskaya@salzburgglobal.org
Academic, activist, choir soprano and expert on Filipino transgender history makes a passionate plea for Filipino queers to reemerge and be more visible and accepted in a religious society
Salyer – the organization’s longest-serving president and first Fellow to assume the position – will end 17-year tenure in June 2022
In the latest installment of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance, Kiran Somvanshi, chief manager at ET Intelligence Group, explores the advantages and disadvantages of "forced philanthropy"
This article is part of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance series by the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum
Governments across the world increasingly expect companies to be socially responsible citizens, and some of them are becoming more stringent about these expectations. China recently began a campaign of “common prosperity” wherein companies have been strongly encouraged to focus on working for the common prosperity, focusing on social value. The latest crackdown on the technology firms is prompting Chinese companies to toe the official diktat to avoid regulatory clampdowns.
Seven years ago, India became the first country in the world to make it mandatory for large companies to spend two percent of their annual net profit towards social welfare initiatives as part of their corporate social responsibility (CSR). The country’s corporate affairs ministry has laid down detailed guidelines on what’s eligible and not an expenditure towards CSR. Over time, non-compliance has come to attract penal provisions.
Though not a welcoming move, businesses have come around to comply with the provisions. Indian rating agency CRISIL estimated that Indian companies have spent around $13.6 billion since it was made mandatory. In addition, according to data compiled by Bloomberg News, seven Chinese billionaires have directed a record five billion US dollars to charity so far this year.
With the magnitude of corporate profits invested for social purposes being significant, it raises several questions about companies made to undertake social welfare or philanthropic initiatives:
To be sure, compelling companies to become socially responsible does have some obvious advantages:
However, the policy of “forced philanthropy” has some clear drawbacks:
There is an argument emerging that rich companies should pay their taxes duly instead of philanthropy or social welfare. Companies, while doing philanthropy, continue to have registered offices in tax haven destinations. Socially responsible conduct implies responsible action towards stakeholders such as employees, customers, and vendors. It means that companies adopt fair labor practices, produce products, provide safe and good services for the customers, and have practices that do not short-change their suppliers or vendors.
When the concept of philanthropy is adopted perforce, companies tend to treat it like a proxy tax to be paid in kind rather than in cash. As a result, it tends to get narrowed down to companies spending a token amount of money on a pet social cause and keenly publicizing the effort – effectively greenwashing their images. In other cases, philanthropic activities have more of a business or strategic objective than a noble one.
In an increasing disclosure-oriented corporate world, where companies are bound to disclose most aspects of their business dealings, philanthropy becomes the gray area for the management to use discretion in donating funds without disclosing every transaction. In a nutshell, philanthropy provides the much-needed opaqueness for founders and companies to donate to support vested interests discretely.
The companies that are seriously interested in doing good for their societies tend to do so without it being made a compulsory task. There is a clear business case for companies to act socially responsible. CSR should ideally constitute the “S” aspect of the ESG norms that companies comply with to attract a better class of responsible investors. However, when a business case logic is replaced with a regulatory diktat – it only ends up converting the non-spenders into spenders. It doesn’t necessarily motivate companies to take up social welfare as a business agenda for a better planet and better investment prospects.
Besides, for companies to make a meaningful impact through spending a small proportion of their profit on social welfare initiatives, the presence of an effective ecosystem of qualified agencies that implement, undertake an assessment, and measure the impact becomes pertinent. In the absence of an enabling environment, a genuine philanthropic initiative can be ill-targeted, ill-designed, and badly implemented. However, the presence of such an ecosystem is not always possible and takes time to get established.
The success stories from India and China as they get their companies to be socially responsible may prompt other countries to follow suit. Businesses globally will have to guard themselves against any regulatory overreach in this regard while simultaneously exhibiting socially responsible conduct.
Kiran Somvanshi works as a chief manager at ET Intelligence Group, the research wing of the Economic Times, India's largest business daily. With over twelve years' experience in business journalism, she has over 1200 published articles to her credit on Indian business and economy. She closely tracks and writes on the pharmaceuticals, healthcare and consumer goods sectors and has written extensively on Indian companies, their business, strategy and governance. Gender inclusion, corporate social responsibility and data protection are also areas of her interest and writing. Kiran is a 2017 Fulbright Humphrey fellow and a 2016 Chevening scholar. She holds a bachelor in Law and graduated in psychology with a gold medal and is a rank holder from Mumbai University. Kiran also holds a Ph.D. from the Tata Institute of Social Sciences, researching on corporate social responsibility in India. She is a qualified company secretary and cost accountant. She is a Fellow of Salzburg Global Seminar.
The Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance is an online discussion series introduced and led by Fellows of the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum. The articles and comments represent opinions of the authors and commenters, and do not necessarily represent the views of their corporations or institutions, nor of Salzburg Global Seminar. Readers are welcome to address any questions about this series to Forum Director, Charles E. Ehrlich: cehrlich@salzburgglobal.org. To receive a notification of when the next article is published, follow Salzburg Global Seminar on LinkedIn or sign up for email notifications here: www.salzburgglobal.org/go/corpgov/newsletter
In the latest installment of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance, John Cannon, partner at Shearman & Sterling LLP, reflects on discussions from the latest Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum program entitled Accountable to Whom? Restating the Purpose of a Corporation
This article is part of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance series by the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum
Recently, participants in the latest Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum program entitled Accountable to Whom? Restating the Purpose of a Corporation, addressed the contemporary debate over the proper purpose(s) of businesses conducted in the corporate form.
Professor Ed Rock of New York University School of Law, the Reporter (i.e., chief author) for the American Law Institute’s Project for a Restatement of the Law of Corporate Governance, led the program. Participants from multiple jurisdictions and perspectives, including corporate executives and directors, institutional investors, lawyers, academics, and experts on sustainability and other ESG matters, also contributed to a lively discussion.
The starting point for the conversation was the most recent version of Section 2.01 of the draft Restatement, “The Objective of a Corporation,” a text intended to articulate what the law now is in the United States rather than what it should be.
Then, through consideration of hypotheticals highlighting the potentially conflicting interests of shareholders and other stakeholders, the participants explored how corporate directors should or could make difficult decisions resolving those conflicts and how those decisions reflect a view of the purpose of the corporation. In this post, I consider some insights on the debate that I gleaned from the discussion.
One might think there would be little controversy about the content of current US law, which most people believe requires corporations to operate for the benefit of shareholders (1). After all, only shareholders elect directors, and only they, in most instances, may sue directors and officers for breaches of duty. Nonetheless, a vocal group in the US (with allies in the UK and elsewhere) argues that existing corporation law, properly understood, allows - or even requires - corporations to manage their affairs for the benefit of multiple stakeholders. These stakeholders include employees, lenders, customers, suppliers, and communities.
Prominent advocates for a stakeholder corporate governance model include the renowned corporate lawyer Martin Lipton. Lipton believes that Milton Friedman’s iconic 1970 essay, “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits,” ushered in an overly shareholder-centric and laissez-faire vision of capitalism. He and his allies further argue that (contrary to the current draft of Section 2.01 of the proposed Restatement) shareholder primacy is not legally mandated and has led to excessive short-termism and inadequate corporate concern for other constituencies and the broader interests of society.
Like many participants in our program, I am skeptical about this stakeholder model as an accurate explanation of the meaning of existing US corporation law. I also worry that the CEOs who signed The Business Roundtable’s “Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation” may only be paying lip service to stakeholder concerns. Still, I am sympathetic both to the desire to change our legal regime to be more protective of non-shareholder interests and to the instrumentalist view that consideration of non-shareholder interests often is to the long-term benefit of shareholders. This last point is key. In an increasingly interconnected world in which corporate reputation has become ever more important, valuable, and fragile, the shareholders of corporations that ignore important stakeholder interests and societal issues are likely to be the losers.
As participants in our program noted, Germany (with its “co-determination” model requiring board membership for employee representatives) and other jurisdictions already impose explicit legal accountability of corporate leaders to employees, local political units, and other non-shareholder groups. Yet other jurisdictions regulate corporate conduct and externalities more extensively than in the US, even if they do not necessarily modify the obligations of directors and officers to shareholders. One participant from Asia observed that we are mistaken if we believe that the rules we apply to the regulation of capitalism are immutable, like the laws of physics. From this perspective, corporations are artificial legal constructs required to have a social purpose and be regulated to ensure that they serve that purpose.
The distinction between laws that regulate the external conduct of business by corporations (e.g., environmental regulations, taxes, employee protections, and sustainability mandates) and those that purport to alter the internal governance of corporations (e.g., German co-determination and US Senator Elizabeth Warren’s proposed Accountable Capitalism Act) is a useful one. It also suggests different approaches that jurisdictions may adopt in seeking to make corporations more socially responsible.
Interestingly, rather than advocating for the Accountable Capitalism Act or some other statutory imposition of a governance model with true accountability to stakeholders, Lipton and his allies (including the World Economic Forum) are promoting a “New Paradigm.” This approach envisions neither extensive regulation of corporate externalities nor intrusive prescriptive rules about board composition and accountability. Instead, this ostensibly new model proposes voluntary cooperation among corporate managements, directors, large institutional investors, local governments, public pension plans, employees, and ESG advocates. They are encouraged to manage corporations in a socially responsible manner for the long-term benefit of corporations and all their stakeholders. To the extent that this movement advocates legislative or regulatory change at all, it is principally to make shareholder activism more difficult.
The New Paradigm, and stakeholder governance more generally, have come under criticism from prominent academics in law and finance who question the legal basis for stakeholder governance, the sincerity of corporate leaders pledging allegiance to the model, and the social utility of abandoning shareholder primacy (2). However, the critique of this model of stakeholder governance that resonates the most for me is that by allowing corporate decision-makers to consider and act in the interest of multiple divergent stakeholders without having enforceable legal obligations to those stakeholders, this may mean in practice that those leaders will be accountable to no one.
Finally, I believe that many corporations, whether through action or inaction and whether intentionally or not, have contributed to profound societal problems, including income inequality, racial and gender-based injustices, and climate change. It seems doubtful that a shift from shareholder primacy to the New Paradigm and stakeholder governance alone will be adequate to solve those problems.
(1) This is perhaps most apt as a description of the corporation law of Delaware (the state where a substantial majority of large US corporations are incorporated) applicable to for-profit corporations other than “public benefit corporations.” Note that Pennsylvania, among other states, has adopted a so-called “constituency” statute that allows directors to weigh the interests of other stakeholders, including employees and local communities, against those of shareholders.
(2) See, e.g., Lucian A. Bebchuk & Roberto Tallarita, The Illusory Promise of Stakeholder Governance, 105 Cornell L. Rev. 91 (2020).
John Cannon is a partner in the Compensation, Governance and Employment Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) practice of Shearman & Sterling LLP and co-chair of the firm's Corporate Governance Advisory Group. He has been at the firm since 1985. He is an inaugural fellow of the American College of Governance Counsel, a member of the American Law Institute and an adviser to the American Law Institute's Restatement of the Law, Corporate Governance project. He received a J.D. from the New York University School of Law and an A.B. from Harvard College. John is a Fellow of Salzburg Global Seminar.
The Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance is an online discussion series introduced and led by Fellows of the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum. The articles and comments represent opinions of the authors and commenters, and do not necessarily represent the views of their corporations or institutions, nor of Salzburg Global Seminar. Readers are welcome to address any questions about this series to Forum Director, Charles E. Ehrlich: cehrlich@salzburgglobal.org. To receive a notification of when the next article is published, follow Salzburg Global Seminar on LinkedIn or sign up for email notifications here: www.salzburgglobal.org/go/corpgov/newsletter
Philosopher and director of the Einstein Forum considers how culture influences how we view politics – and how politics influences how we value culture
Albert Einstein once said: “Curiosity has its own reason for existing.” Susan Neiman, an American moral philosopher, cultural commentator, essayist, and a contributor for this year’s American Studies Program, The President, The Press and the People, believes that every child is interested in philosophical questions. Unlike many adults, she never stopped pondering the whys and wherefores of the world.
Neiman, who first came to Salzburg Global Seminar in 2007, has been the director of the Einstein Forum for 21 years. The Forum was founded in 1993 after a dilapidated cottage in Brandenburg, Germany was discovered to have been a meeting ground for Einstein and some of the most interesting and thought-provoking people of his time to gather and discuss anything and everything in an informal, but intense, setting. Given that Einstein was an internationalist, an anti-racist, and a universalist Jew, it was decided that something unique could be done with the little house to honor his legacy.
“We’ve had all kinds of different programming [and] have a very broad mandate,” Neiman explains. “We often do things that have very little to do with politics at all. We do sometimes talk about natural science, literature, the arts. We talk about basically any philosophical question you can come up with – but the idea is to raise general philosophical questions and to have [people discuss them] from all different fields.”
Neiman posed several philosophical questions and raised many different topics with Salzburg Global Fellows primarily from the field of American studies as the primary contributor to the virtual town hall on July 20. She also encouraged controversial topics such as critical race theory, cancel culture, and US foreign policy, be explored further.
Having authored such books as Why Grow Up?: Subversive Thoughts for an Infantile Age, The Unity of Reason, and Evil in Modern Thought: an Alternative History of Philosophy, Neiman questions the relationship between culture and creativity with respect to politics, ethics, and social justice. She expresses doubt about whether having a vibrant, free, and open culture can guarantee a just and democratic society – although a just and democratic society cannot exist without such free and open culture – but also notes the surprising perks of an authoritarian political culture where censorship is rampant.
“There’s an interesting and problematic paradox: where there is straightforward censorship, you have a kind of underground culture that’s actually more vibrant and interesting than what you sometimes have in places where everything is permitted. We rather have a problem in the United States, but also in a lot of Western Europe, which is that people are so flooded with more books, more art, more music, more film, than they can possibly take in that it’s often quite hard to take it seriously.”
She takes this argument one step further by reflecting on the high capitalist society in which we find ourselves. As people strive to improve not just their creative expressions, but their “brand,” everything is commodified, she argues.
“I think until we actually deal with those problems, which would mean seriously dealing with the economic structures that we live in, we’re going to continue to be in a situation where creative independent culture will exist, but it doesn’t actually have much of an emancipatory role… Until we think seriously about the relationship between culture and capitalism, we’re going to be stuck in that place.”
On that note, Neiman does not entirely believe that American democracy exists in the way it is often perceived, highlighting political decisions are neither controlled by majority opinion, nor by a majority of representatives. Language, she explains, is a significant determinant of how issues or topics are framed, as it shows us what assumptions we take for granted.
“I’ll give you one example: In the United States, healthcare, education, vacation, parental leave, and a whole host of other things are referred to as ‘benefits.’ A benefit is a nice thing that’s granted to you by somebody else, contingently… Your perspective on the world changes completely when you look at healthcare as a ‘benefit,’ or you look at it as a ‘right.’
“Language is tremendously important in shaping our political consciousness.”
Listen to the interview with Susan Neiman in full: https://soundcloud.com/salzburgglobal/susan-neiman
Founder of the World Economic Forum Global Shapers Community Jacksonville Hub discusses the value of healthy debate and tolerance in the United States
One of the strategic goals of Salzburg Global Seminar is to bridge divides. Pascal Rathle, a Fellow of this year’s American Studies Program, titled The President, The Press and The People, has made it his life’s work to advocate for compromise as a value, a policy, and a rule in society and to relieve the divisions within humanity.
The 2016 presidential election in the United States was a turning point in Rathle’s life, which he admitted sparked a disgust in leadership. He felt there was a tumultuous tornado occurring, a widening binary divide amid a seemingly endless political doom loop. At that time, he was engulfed in his identity as an aspiring soccer player with FC Augsburg in the German Bundesliga and as a NCAA Division I athlete in the US.
“I realized that my entire life needed to pivot into the direction of [seeking] compromise within a leadership frame,” the former footballer and teacher, now graduate student and “global shaper”.
“Indirectly or directly, I began placing myself into difficult or contentious conversations and environments, whether through volunteerism for AmeriCorps, academic study or my professional experiences internationally and domestically. I worked to be a weaver, stitcher and a threader of people and opposing forces… I began to move my needle into global and local advocacy for human rights.”
Before founding the World Economic Forum Global Shapers Community Jacksonville Hub in 2020, Rathle observed a cityscape that suffered from a sectarian divide, with red lines, blockbusting, and classism. He took it upon himself to explore as many neighborhoods as possible and managed to break his assumptions about the people’s stories. Through trial and error, he built what he refers to as “a volunteer civic organization, a cross-partisan action think tank for human flourishing.”
“The goal locally for us is impact projects,” he says. “More importantly, during a time of democracy upheaval in many parts of the world, but even in the United States, to embody an apparatus where the democratic practice of debate, disagreement, proactive listening, tolerance, civility, and humility is animated. Programmatically, the Global Shapers of Jacksonville engage in bi-weekly seminars to bridge the gap between established decision-makers and what is the next generation.”
With a bachelor’s degree in communications, a master of science in social policy, and as a current master in law student at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, Pascal believes the first tangible outcome to combat the spread of misinformation is to establish media literacy as a norm, but also for traditional and nontraditional media companies to demonstrate responsibility and accountability by ceasing a monetize-from-outrage lens. He believes his generation must not imitate the older generations who behave as toddlers while consuming media, and must instead challenge the ethics of how media companies undermine America’s civic and democratic beliefs.
He questions the legislative branch’s expertise to respond to this heightened misinformation scheme, adding that they must yield relative familiarity with technology, AI, and data to create purpose-built policies and regulations.
On a separate note, Rathle considers US culture from an analogous perspective of a conductor in a symphony, which is bound to have technical errors, something that is both in tune and out of tune.
“It’s a page to be written, but it’s a page filled with variables of justice and injustice,” he notes. “It’s an opportunity for people to engage in meaning rather than nothingness. I think American culture combats the frame of nihilism and hopefully lends love and hope to those participating.”
As someone who aspires for political office and who aims to work with and listen to others, Rathle says he feels honored and blessed to be a part of Salzburg Global Seminar’s carefully curated space that allows for debate, disagreement, and exchange to flourish. That is the real value, he says, of the buildup to the organization’s 75th anniversary in the summer of 2022.
“From a collaborative front,” he concluded, “I think the American Studies Program creates an identity for us to enter and have a conversation to create a solution or a recommendation together… You’re going to have a lot of individuals that have heard the expressions of each other on Zoom and eagerly look forward to dialoguing together in a room, and I think that’s where the change that Salzburg [Global] has historically been known for will come to fruition. I am very grateful for the diverse intellect and the curious honesty that has been exhibited thus far.”
Layla McCay, Salzburg Global Fellow and Director of the Centre for Urban Design and Mental Health, explains why now is the time to support a Restorative Cities framework
COVID-19 has focused our attention on how our surroundings can affect our health. Whether trying to observe social distancing while walking along a narrow sidewalk or finding a nice park to exercise while the gym was closed, the pandemic has brought changes in how we interact with each other and our environment. Many of the changes were designed to protect our physical health – but a side effect has been the impact on our psychological well-being.
On the one hand, the pandemic has been detrimental to our mental health. The anxiety, disruption, uncertainties, and loss caused by COVID-19 have triggered or exacerbated many mental health problems. For example, observing various types of isolation and separation led to a narrowing of options for where, how, when, and with whom we work, learn, socialize, exercise and play. A loss of social engagement and support that would usually protect our mental health has increased loneliness. Meanwhile, a new appreciation for the benefits of gardens, parks, cycling infrastructure, and other aspects of the built environment has highlighted awareness of the inequalities in people’s neighborhoods – and the associated health impacts.
On the other hand, the pandemic has also revealed opportunities. For example, by eliminating the commute, home working liberated additional time to relax, socialize, enjoy leisure activities or exercise – which along with various lockdown restrictions, led people to appreciate the people and amenities in their local neighborhood. In addition, the need to socially distance and travel without the risk of catching COVID-19 drove the adaptation of many urban neighborhoods with widened sidewalks, temporary bike lanes, and pop-up parks, using space that pre-pandemic might have been considered the indisputable domain of cars.
The increase in outdoor socializing to reduce the transmission of the virus has led many people to appreciate the mental health benefits of easily accessible, well-designed, and well-maintained local parks, waterfront walkways, and other public spaces to enable safe socializing, exercise, and play.
As temporary adaptations teeter on the brink of longer-term changes, this is an apt moment in the pandemic for a new Restorative Cities framework to emerge. This framework, which I explore in my new book with Jenny Roe, identifies evidence-based approaches to designing and planning the urban environment to secure value and benefit public mental health and well-being.
The Restorative City framework pillars identify the opportunity to design the built environment to incorporate greenery and water within the city core. It leverages all five senses for mental health benefit, as well as neighborly and social interaction. It facilitates physical activity and all-age play; and ensures inclusion and belonging. The green, blue, sensory, neighborly, active, playful, and inclusive city can benefit a population’s mental health, including reducing stress, loneliness, anxiety, and depression and easing symptoms of mental disorders from ADHD to dementia.
These pillars form the basis of a restorative approach to urban planning and design. For example, we know that green space has the potential to benefit mental health. Still, the extent of its impact depends on factors like the amount, accessibility, type, views of nature, perceived quality, its biodiversity, its usage, and the amount of exposure or “dose” a person receives daily. And the benefits of water are modified by factors like how clean it is and equitable, safe access. When it comes to the latest research on sensory opportunities, this means going beyond a typical city approach from addressing noise or smell complaints to leverage the senses more positively. For example, a street of visually interesting, intricate storefronts will engage curiosity. They can reduce negative thoughts associated with depression far more than a featureless building wall monopolizing a city block.
Achieving a convivial neighborhood designed for social support means giving extra thought to those “bumping places” where neighbors might meet and chat, like a local market or dog park. Well-designed infrastructure can encourage and enable more physical activity for diverse residents in the form of walking, cycling, and other movements, and playful design for all ages can nurture creativity and social interaction. These factors must be underpinned by design inclusive for all ages, genders, races and ethnicities, sexual orientations, socioeconomic strata, and for the full diversity of physical, sensory, and cognitive abilities and needs.
As we hopefully emerge from the pandemic, cities now have the opportunity to learn lessons about what is possible in the design and use of public space for mental health – and to seize that opportunity to innovate for the benefit of everyone. The Restorative City provides a framework for how to pursue that goal.
Restorative Cities: Urban Design for Mental Health and Wellbeing by Jenny Roe and Layla McCay was published by Bloomsbury on August 12 2021.
Nearly 30 years after his time at Salzburg Global Seminar, Queen’s University Belfast’s Tony Gallagher still carries lessons from the program with him every day
For father of four daughters Tony Gallagher, his mission has always been clear: build a better world. “The animating force for me was to contribute as best I could to making Northern Ireland a more peaceful, just, and equal society,” the education professor at Queen’s University Belfast in Northern Ireland told Salzburg Global Seminar. “Mainly so that my children would not have to experience the type of world I experienced during my teenage and early adult years.”
Gallagher moved to Belfast, Northern Ireland, as a young boy in 1970 and grew up in a divided society experiencing political violence, unrest, and conflict. Remaining in Belfast, Gallagher completed his studies, from undergraduate to doctorate, at Queen’s University Belfast. He continued to grow in his career at the institution and while serving as a lecturer in educational research, was invited to Salzburg, Austria.
Introduced to Salzburg Global Seminar by Mari Fitzduff, in 1993 he participated in the program, Ethnicity, Cultures and the Making of Nations. Engaging with peers from all over the world, Gallagher found the experience enchanting. “This was my first opportunity to spend intensive days with extraordinary people from such a wide variety of countries,” said Gallagher.
Upon his return home, Gallagher became encouraged about the idea of collaboration as a way of transforming the ways schools in Northern Ireland worked, how they related to one another in local areas, and the communities they were based in.
“One of the consequences of attending [the program] was to make me think more expansively about what was happening in Northern Ireland and what possible futures we might have,” he said. “Nothing helps you see your own home differently than to see it from far away.”
Much of Gallagher’s research has centered on education in divided societies, particularly in Northern Ireland. “The key for me was to find ways of creating space for dynamic dialogue, the type of speaking and listening that had had such a powerful impact on me during those days in Salzburg,” he said.
From the early 2000s, Gallagher focussed on the development of collaborative school networks. In 2005, he became the head of Queen’s University Belfast’s School of Education and in 2007, created the Northern Ireland Model of Shared Education. This pilot involved students from local areas taking classes in each other’s schools in mixed groups. The program developed an effective model of collaboration between Protestant, Catholic, and integrated schools, as well as highlighted education’s potential role in underpinning peace. The success of this model attracted attention in other countries, with academics, teachers, and policymakers from Lebanon, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Cyprus among the nations who explored ways to adapt the model to work in their settings.
Gallagher continued to adopt new leadership roles along the way; between 2010 and 2015, he served as the university’s pro vice-chancellor and in 2016, he served as the Queen’s University’s School of Social Sciences acting head. In the same year, the Northern Ireland Assembly passed the Shared Education Act, ensuring it became a statutory duty for the education ministry to “encourage, facilitate and support” shared education. Before the COVID-19 lockdown, more than half of the schools in Northern Ireland were in collaborative partnerships. In 2020, Queen’s University Belfast received a Queen’s Anniversary Prize for Further and Higher Education from Prince Charles for their work on shared education.
Gallagher’s time in Salzburg left him with rich discussions, friendships, and ideas to take forward his work. Several elements stick out from the summer days he spent in Salzburg, including the walks, the meals, and the hearing Mozart’s works on the piano.
He has maintained regular contact with his fellow participants Attila Ledenyi, from Budapest, and Amiram Goldblum, a professor of chemistry at Hebrew University, Jerusalem, visiting both of them in their home countries.
“I have never been back to Salzburg, but I have kept in touch with some of the other participants, and the experience continues to act as a source of inspiration in my work,” he said. “It was transformative in opening my eyes to the possibilities of transformative change and the need to learn from as many other places as possible to encourage the development of innovative solutions in my own context.”
Are you a Salzburg Global Fellow? We are committed to using our programs and networks to support individuals and help accelerate change. How has Salzburg Global Seminar changed your personal or professional life? Share your story.
In the latest installment of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance, Raj Gupta and Victoria Ivashina discuss the relationship between private equity and public ownership models and what they can both learn from one another
This article is part of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance series by the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum
The prevailing view of the past 15 years has been the secular decline in public ownership. However, the recent special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) frenzy with nearly 300 listings in 2020, and record valuations of IPOs, have brought back the question of whether—as eclipses go—the eclipse of public corporations was just a temporary phenomenon.
Importantly, it doesn’t really matter; the question of the domination of public or private models is in many ways outdated. The private equity and public ownership models are more similar today than ever, and they will continue converging. What ultimately separates the two models is not so much the governance or the managerial style, but the cost of capital and the operational agility of the private equity model that can be helpful at some point in the life of any public corporation.
Historically, the private equity asset class has been described as focused on either multiples arbitrage (buying low and selling high) or financial engineering. Early buyout deals painted a picture of an industry that pursues underperforming assets at low valuation multiples, leverages them up, strips costs, and exits through a sale or an IPO, thus booking high absolute returns. This picture might have been a reasonable description of the industry in its early years. However, the focus has since shifted toward operational improvements in the past two decades.
Two central factors contributed to this shift in focus of the industry. First, private equity has become large and highly competitive. Second, in the wake of corporate scandals of the early 2000s, the governance of public firms has undergone substantial scrutiny. This scrutiny was further accelerated by the increasing concentration of ownership structures of public companies with index funds and large institutional investors. Taken together, they have majority ownership in most public companies, and they are not a silent voice.
In this environment, the “right price” to sell a public firm is almost always the highest possible price. And might that not be the case, it is likely that an activist fund—another governance mechanism that roughly over the same period became a force to reckon with—will remind the board about it. Carl Icahn’s opposition to the 2013 Dell buyout is perhaps the most publicized example. In sum, today, a typical investment thesis of public-to-private buyouts assumes multiples will stay flat, or, simply put, one cannot systematically buy low in the public space.
A few words are needed on the controversial role of leverage: access to leverage is a commodity. Granted that private equity brings substantial sophistication to their use and management of leverage, but—to a large degree—this is not a differentiated skill among private equity investors. Accordingly, since access to cheap debt is widespread, the primary beneficiary of high debt levels are typically the sellers, as competition pushes the easier credit condition into higher valuations. This argument is supported by academic evidence pointing to the negative correlation between credit market expansion and private equity returns. Debt is often a necessary evil that allows private equity to gain a controlling position. Although, some recent structures, such as Blackstone Crocs investment, show debt is not a defining feature of the private equity value-add.
Against this background, operational improvements have become the center of value-add propositions of the mid to large-cap buyouts. Importantly, this process has led to a convergence in operational focus and standards and, increasingly, governance practices. Large buyout firms have in-house operational teams, but they also have been very active in recruiting proven CEOs and business executives as advisors, chairs, CEOs, and executives. In addition, the private boards, which traditionally were restricted to a few private equity partners, have been expanding and increasingly look like a public company board. Indeed, the eventual transition of the company into the public domain demands governance structures that continue beyond the investment horizon of a private equity firm.
Take an example of Avantor, Inc. (NYSE: AVTR), a leading supplier of specialty materials, equipment, and services to the health care industry. The firm was acquired by New Mountain Capital back in 2010 for $280 million in a spin-off from its parent, Covidien. Today, it is a Fortune 500 company with an enterprise value of $27 billion. Avantor’s journey is the case in point of operational levers that now are commonly deployed in the private equity space. This included recruiting an experienced and proven CEO and other core leadership positions, enlisting an active board with a deep understanding of the industry, and ultimately carefully executing a series of strategic acquisitions culminating in the 2019 IPO.
So what can a private model offer that a public model cannot? Or better put, when is the high cost of private equity justifiable? As pointed out earlier, the distinctive feature of the private equity model is that it is deeply informed and can quickly commit to an experimental and agile business plan. As a result, there are three sets of general situations where the private equity model is the best fit:
Overall, however, in mature private equity, the value-add is rooted in the strategic partnership between patient and smart capital and operational experts, including managerial talent and industry veterans. The effects of this partnership are long-lasting and essential to a successful trajectory of companies re-entering public markets. For example, the surge in IPOs and SPACSs over the last several months has reversed the long-term decline in a number of public companies. This is a great example that both will coexist – and that their models may indeed have converged.
Both need to rethink their purpose radically. Serving stakeholders (customers, employees, environment, and society) consistently leads to long-term value creation for shareholders.
Both need to set short-term, medium-term, and long-term goals and have the discipline not to sacrifice medium and long-term for the short-term.
Both need to be prepared to make bold decisions, understand the risks, make choices, and execute well. However, public companies have a bigger challenge.
Raj Gupta has been the chairman of APTIV plc since March 2015 (formerly Delphi Automotive plc). From 1999 - 2009, Raj was chairman and chief executive officer of Rohm and Haas. Raj held a variety of posts at the company beginning in 1971. He was elected a vice president of the company and was named director for the Pacific region in 1993. Early in 1996, Raj became one of six members of the Chairman's Committee and was given oversight responsibility for the company's electronic materials business group. In December 1998, Raj was elected to the board of directors and named vice chairman in January 1999. He became chairman and chief executive officer on October 1, 1999. Raj assumed the additional title of president in early 2005 and held that title until May 2008. Raj is a past chairman of the American Chemistry Council and the Society of Chemical Industry, America Section. He is the chairman of Avantor, Inc. He has also served on the boards of Dupont, Arconic (Howmet Aerospace Inc.), HP, IRI, The Vanguard Group, and Tyco International, amongst other companies, in the past. Raj holds a B.S. degree in mechanical engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology (1967), an M.S. degree in operations research from Cornell University (1969), and an M.B.A. in finance from Drexel University (1972).
Victoria Ivashina is the Lovett-Learned professor of finance and head of the finance unit at Harvard Business School. Her research spans multiple areas of financial intermediation, including corporate credit markets, global banking operations, asset allocation by pension funds and insurance companies, and value creation by private equity. Victoria is a research associate at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) and a research fellow at the Center for Economic Policy Research (CEPR). She co-heads Harvard Business School’s Private Capital Initiative and Private Equity and Venture Capital (PEVC) executive education program. She is a co-author of Patient Capital: The Challenges and Promises of Long-Term Investing. Victoria serves as a department editor at Management Science and as a board member of the American Finance Association and Financial Intermediation Research Society. She holds a Ph.D. in finance from the NYU Stern School of Business.
The Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance is an online discussion series introduced and led by Fellows of the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum. The articles and comments represent opinions of the authors and commenters, and do not necessarily represent the views of their corporations or institutions, nor of Salzburg Global Seminar. Readers are welcome to address any questions about this series to Forum Director, Charles E. Ehrlich: cehrlich@salzburgglobal.org. To receive a notification of when the next article is published, follow Salzburg Global Seminar on LinkedIn or sign up for email notifications here: www.salzburgglobal.org/go/corpgov/newsletter
In the latest installment of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance, Mathilde Mesnard, deputy director for financial and enterprise affairs at the OECD, explores how the demand for ESG accountability will require changes in corporate governance mechanisms and frameworks
This article is part of the Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance series by the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum
There is a strong and growing demand for environmental, social governance (ESG) investing. No need to elaborate, as the evidence is clear; ESG investing has evolved from marginal, values-driven niche investing to something mainstream and value-driven in a number of financial markets. Many factors have triggered this change, including the environmental urgency and, more recently, the COVID pandemic that further opened our eyes and focused our attention on the need for sustainability and resilience.
With this ESG demand, the pressure from shareholders, stakeholders, stock exchanges, regulators, and policymakers on companies to report on their ESG performance is increasing. But this reporting remains a significant challenge due to the lack of consistent data, comparability of criteria and methodologies, and reliability of most available ESG metrics and ratings. These factors often lead to a lack of correlation between the ESG ratings supplied by different providers. It even questions the alignment with effective sustainability in the long term, particularly the environmental pillar of ESG ratings with a de facto low‑carbon transition (1).
But beyond these quality and integrity challenges in ESG measurement and disclosure, which could compromise market integrity and erode investor confidence, the demand for ESG accountability requests other adjustments in the corporate governance mechanisms and frameworks.
First and foremost, boards need to be up to the challenge and equip themselves to monitor the company’s performance in the three dimensions of E, S, and G. They need to understand the fundamental value of ESG information and grasp its materiality for the company’s performance and resilience. This understanding requires boards to get the right skills to challenge management meaningfully and ensure effective oversight of the company’s performance in these different dimensions.
They then need to develop an ESG strategy with clear, credible, and measurable goals and decide which metrics are relevant for the specific industries, sectors, and markets they operate. They must organize regular discussions on the most relevant dimensions of ESG at the whole board level and not only within a specialized ESG committee.
Last but not least, the board must integrate the ESG performance into the parameters of executives’ compensation, as a clear signal that they not only have the “permission to care” but are required to focus their attention on this ESG performance. These changes in the boards’ responsibilities, skills, and mechanisms are the same required to ensure that a company conducts itself responsibly and carries out due diligence along its entire value chain, as required by the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and related OECD Due Diligence Guidance.
These adjustments or changes might trigger, in time, a deeper shift in the corporate governance model toward a less exclusive focus on shareholders’ value but a better balancing of the interests of different stakeholders. The current debate on “financial materiality” versus "double materiality" could to some extent be resolved through "dynamic materiality", underscoring this shifting paradigm.
To fully integrate an ESG perspective in the governance of companies, board members must look after not only their shareholders’ value but how the company’s actions might impact its employees, the environment, and its community. Therefore, the upcoming review of the OECD Corporate Governance Principles will have to reflect these deep tectonic moves and adapt the corporate governance rules and practices to other pre-COVID trends related to, among other things, ownership concentration and digitalisation.
(1) OECD, ESG investing and climate transition: market practices, issues and policy considerations, Discussion draft for the G20 Sustainable Finance Working Group, July 2021.
Mathilde Mesnard is deputy director of the Directorate for Financial and Enterprise Affairs of the OECD. She provides intellectual leadership across the policy areas of anti-corruption, corporate governance, and responsible business conduct. In addition, Mathilde supports the coordination and management of the directorate’s program of work and its committees. Previously, she was coordinator of the New Approaches to Economic Challenges Initiative and senior advisor to the OECD Secretary-General. She launched an OECD-wide project on integrity and anti-corruption. From 2001-2009, she was an economist working on corporate governance and developed the OECD Guidelines on corporate governance of SOEs. Mathilde previously held positions as management consultant with Deloitte & Touche and Financial Analyst at Citibank. She holds a Ph.D. in economics from the École des Hautes Études en Sciences Sociales, an M.A. in finance from the École Supérieure de Commerce de Paris, and an M.B.A. from Drexel University, USA. Mathilde is a Fellow of Salzburg Global Seminar.
The Salzburg Questions for Corporate Governance is an online discussion series introduced and led by Fellows of the Salzburg Global Corporate Governance Forum. The articles and comments represent opinions of the authors and commenters, and do not necessarily represent the views of their corporations or institutions, nor of Salzburg Global Seminar. Readers are welcome to address any questions about this series to Forum Director, Charles E. Ehrlich: cehrlich@salzburgglobal.org. To receive a notification of when the next article is published, follow Salzburg Global Seminar on LinkedIn or sign up for email notifications here: www.salzburgglobal.org/go/corpgov/newsletter
American journalist reflects on how the USA's founding drives its current environment and continued racial injustice
As a teenager, Vann Newkirk moved to Rocky Mount, North Carolina in 1999. That same year, Hurricane Floyd hit with a sledgehammer-like force, putting much of the East Coast state – commonly referred to as Hurricane Alley – underwater. As he got older, he began to notice a disproportionate imbalance in how many vulnerable communities and areas with more Black and Indigenous residents were more heavily affected and dealt with much longer-lasting and devastating consequences from such natural disasters. This realization prompted Newkirk's interest in environmental justice, which, to this day, has inspired much of his journalistic work.
As a senior editor at The Atlantic, Newkirk is also the host of the narrative podcast series Floodlines, which highlights 2005's Hurricane Katrina with a powerful storytelling tone and is contextualized by accurate accounts of history. Similarly, his upcoming book Children of the Flood chronicles Black America's struggle against the perils of climate change and white supremacy. Essentially, he aims to emphasize that environmental injustice and racial inequality in America are indivisible – two sides of the same coin – especially when we consider history's role in creating our current social and political order in the world.
"When you look at the way the United States was founded," he told Salzburg Global Seminar following his appearance as a guest contributor at this year's American Studies Program, "the whole idea was control over a set of resources, control over a set of climates that were amenable to growing things. The reason why it's a multiracial country in the first place is the wide-scale theft of those resources in favorable conditions from indigenous folks… With that as a foundation for our cultural, racial order in the US, you can see it's also the foundation for our current environmental paradigms in the US."
During the first of three virtual town hall meetings for this year's multi-part program, The President, The Press and The People, Newkirk led a stimulating discussion around topics of historical context with relation to media. Particularly substantial here is the definition and perception of American democracy from both a domestic and international standpoint. With such informality and lack of institutional accountability, Newkirk explained that American democracy is often more aspirational than real.
"It's clear that a lot of the things we consider democratic norms, a lot of the things we consider institutions, are not actually legally enshrined," he said. "The US loves to talk about spreading and instilling and championing democracy abroad, but I think this last year has shown just how much of a tension that global posture is with what's happening back home."
Although there has been some progress in establishing and using historical context in the mainstream media, it is still an uphill battle. After all, sensationalism and surprise sell. Distinguishing between traditional news outlets, independent journalists, and social media is key since each media form presents its narratives differently.
"It doesn't make sense to me to think of [the media] as a separate, walled-off part of either the economy or our intellectual ways of being... Most of the media you consume is not fact-checked; most of it is not necessarily even fact-driven. When you have that realization, it forces you to be a lot more specific in your definition."
Through his participation in the first town hall meeting of the American Studies program had a quickfire nature, Newkirk says he connected with many participants and see a productive and collaborative future evolving. Such global connections are especially valuable when working on community and country-spanning. This is particularly true when we consider that his research and interest in the climate space cannot be addressed without thinking globally. He has already been challenged to expand his thinking.
"Seeing people who are involved in so many different sectors and areas of intellectual life, who all have tools to confront this problem, I just love being able to meet people, have these meetings of minds, and talk about different disciplines of work," he remarked. "In the climate space, every emission is a global emission. Every climate emergency is a global climate emergency… That's the kind of thing I'm trying to foster, the kind of solution-making I'm trying to bring about in my journalism, and I believe that involvement in this program can help us get there."
Vann Newkirk was a guest contributor at the first town hall meeting of the 2021 American Studies Program, The President, The Press and The People: American History. For more info on the series visit: https://www.salzburgglobal.org/news/latest-news/article/the-president-the-press-and-the-people
Salzburg Global Cultural Innovator reflects on how pandemic-induced lockdowns have forced shifts in many types of performance
“All the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players: they have their exits and their entrances; and one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages.”
This statement attributed to playwright William Shakespeare could not ring more true, as we look back on the year that brought the world quite literally to a standstill. COVID-19 and its effects showed us what really matters in today’s world – with Black lives being the most prominently vocalized. In an interview with Salzburg Global Seminar, Cape Town-based Salzburg Global Cultural Innovator and theater enthusiast Faye Kabali-Kagwa reflects on the roles we have played to bring us to this pivotal moment in history and how leaning on a network of young people who believe in creating a better world helped her find new ways to approach her passion for theater.
Under health and safety regulations, the world of performance-based arts had to shut its doors. However, the emergence of brands and organizations eager to protect their reputations found their way into the limelight, creating a new form of performance, eager to assure that they would be on the right side of history with refreshed mission statements proclaiming their support. It was in witnessing this that Kabali-Kagwa was able to revisit her own sensibilities and understand what true allyship looks and feels like.
“I used to find it very difficult to think of an ideal way of being... or an ideal life, or an ideal world,” says Kabali-Kagwa. “In a lot of ways, I’ve been thinking about how vision statements or mission statements for institutions (but also for yourself) are helpful in the sense that they bring to the fore things that you care about…
“The truth of the matter is that there are always more ways in which we can be pushing back – small ways in which we can be empowering people; small ways in which we can be showing people kindness; small ways in which we can be socially conscious that don‘t come with status, don’t come with money, do not come with fame. They are practices. They are ideologies that are entrenched in how we view the world.”
In response to the ongoing pandemic, the Cultural Innovators Forumshifted its Annual Co-Lab from a week-long program in Salzburg to a month-long online engagement in 2020, with many Fellows opting to use the virtual space as a means to continue their connections long after the formal programming had ended. Moving to the virtual also enabled connections to be forged between years of different cohorts.
South Africa’s lockdown forced Kabali-Kagwa too to bring her work into a digital space. However, with the help of a few fellow Cultural Innovators, she was able to retain a balanced approach to her work while being supportive of the Fellows that needed her too. Initiated by fellow curator from Baltimore, USA, Joy Davis, Kabali-Kagwa joined others from her Cultural Innovator Forum cohort on Zoom for weekly conversations – some that would last for hours on end.
These were open sessions where people could come to share their feelings and speak about whatever was on their minds when the pandemic was at its most fear-inducing. For Faye, those sessions were essential – a lot of her peers were feeling lost, stir-crazy, and demoralized. For so many movers and shakers who were forced by the pandemic to stand still, they were providing COVID-19 support for artists and influencing policy, securing resources, and arranging support grants in hopes of salvaging their sectors.
This put them in a position where they were often expected to have all the answers, which is a tough position to take when so much uncertainty lingered. There was not a lot of time to reflect when they were so busy doing damage control, and these weekly sessions enabled them to take a moment to do that while helping them navigate ideas like accountability for their own places in history, analyzing global power dynamics, and what solidarity really means for those who attended the Cultural Innovators Forum – all while being faced with a new mode of putting their learnings to good use.
“I don’t know if there’s been a global shift in the acknowledgment of the way Black people have been treated historically. I know that last year was really, really big and the killing of George Floyd in particular hit very close… We have some Cultural Innovator Fellows from Minnesota who were protesting, and we were getting to that point in the lockdown where we were speaking weekly via Zoom, and it just was really, really real. People in South Africa could sympathize because there was extreme brutality happening in terms of evictions, even though they were supposed to be illegal during lockdown in the city of Cape Town where I live,” explains Kabali-Kagwa.
“In this online space, we were able to be there for each other in a way that often is difficult to do in real life.”
Kabali-Kagwa was forced to go back to her drawing board to figure out a new way of creating connections. It prompted her to use WhatsApp as her medium of choice to produce The Shopping Dead, a fast-paced dramedy performed live on the app, virtually co-produced and screened by the South African National Arts Festival at the tail-end of 2020. A never-before-attempted, innovative approach to theater, Kabali-Kagwa found a way to inspire herself and her sector. Passionate about who her audience is, how they live and how theater can be something that slots into life, instead of becoming an imposition, is at the heart of her move to this widely adopted messenger service, further bringing the imaginary into the day to day.
As the world made moves toward the virtual space, much of the outcry for justice and peace did the same. From the checkered intentions of black squares on Instagram to marches to parliament, demands for investigation, and hashtag badges of honor, the line between reality and ruse began to perforate.
“The performance of allyship is tricky, since at this particular stage in our lives, we’re really, really, really cognizant of our professional standing and what that can mean,” says Kabali-Kagwa.
“I think theater allows us to rehearse different realities... different ways of being so that they become embedded in who we are… so that when the real thing comes, it’s easier to respond. I think rehearsing futures in our daily lives is important.
“I’m much more of a realist, though, and I don’t think brands and their allyship should be performed. The change needs to go back to the vision and the heart of the way they operate. Creating a new world rests in thinking about things on a molecular level, informing the way you act, the way you behave...
“If I was more optimistic, I do think at different points in our lives we need something that transports us out of our realities and gets us caught up in a moment. We need to see what could be. The problem with performance is that it gives you a glimpse into what could be. It doesn’t have any material benefits. At the end of the day, you take the costume off, the lights come down... It’s useful in preparing us, but the problem is that it ends! There is a choice to not engage anymore.”
Whether allyship is real or performative, it seems that it is the way in which we choose to act that will best determine what this age will be known for. Thanks to the space held by Kabali-Kagwa and her fellow Cultural Innovators, one thing is certain: we cannot reach a better future without helping each other on the journey in whatever ways we can.
“For me, the Cultural Innovators Forum became pivotal in trying to figure out what kind of organization I wanted to be aligned with,” explains Kabali-Kagwa, who returned as a facilitator for this year’s online Annual Co-Lab – all of which was co-created between existing Fellows of the Cultural Innovators Forum and Salzburg Global Associate Program Director Faye Hobson.
“The Cultural Innovators Forum was one space where I could speak about my WhatsApp project, to get feedback and to have other innovative creators’ input over a period of months was invaluable.
“One of the things I do well is connecting and holding space for people. I think Faye [Hobson] chose me because I have an enthusiasm in that respect that goes beyond the tangible. To do that was empowering for me.”
Faye Kabali-Kagwa is a Cultural Innovator Forum Fellow from the Cape Town Hub. She first joined the Cultural Innovator Forum in 2019.
Senior Program Advisor and former Senior Vice President & Chief Program Officer dies, age 77