Apr 26

Más Desacuerdos Sobre La Guerra Contra El Narcotráfico

Read this post in English

Las noticias más recientes describen la relación entre Los Estados Unidos y América Latina como una centralizada alrededor de La Guerra Contra El Narcotráfico. En un blog anterior que escribí, describí los cárteles en México que se han convertido en una de las peores fuentes de violencia en América Latina. También señale el impacto global de ellos, que se atribuye principalmente a la demanda de drogas de los EE.UU. Esta creciente epidemia también ha creado una llamada de acción para que los países se unan y encuentren una solución. Pero, por supuesto, esto es más fácil dicho que hecho. El diálogo más reciente que el presidente Obama tuvo con los líderes de países latinoamericanos demuestra que aun hay un desacuerdo sobre el camino apropiado. La semana pasada mencioné otra disputa que el Presidente Obama tuvo con América Latina, durante la VI Cumbre de las Américas, con respecto a la participación de Cuba en la Cumbre de 2015. Además de las obvias diferencias de opinión que el presidente Obama tiene con otros líderes referente a este tema, quiero señalar que esta es una decisión de política exterior que afectará directamente a todo los ciudadanos del hemisferio occidental. Creo que parte de la frustración de todos estos líderes tiene que ver con el hecho de que este es un problema mundial que no respeta fronteras y que continúa extendiéndose a varios países.

Entonces, ¿qué piensa de América Latina? Durante la Cumbre, los líderes latinoamericanos persuadieron al presidente Obama que pensara en alternativas a la guerra fracasada. Estas alternativas incluyen la legalización y despenalización de las drogas. Estas alternativas han surgido debido a la creciente violencia vista en todos estos países. La mayor parte de la guerra de Washington contra el narcotráfico ha tenido lugar en América Latina, dejando innumerables víctimas y familias muertas. Aunque los EE.UU. (especialmente, Hillary Clinton) ha estado presionando para continuar la guerra militarizada, se ha demostrado que esto no ha resuelto nada. Al contrario, parece como que esto se ha convertido en un juego para los cárteles. Los cárteles simplemente se mudan a un lugar o país diferente cada vez que ven una amenaza a su operación ilegal. Representante de EE.UU. Henry Cuéllar lo describe así “A medida que ponemos presión sobre México, ellos [los carteles]  se están yendo a otros lugares con instituciones civiles frágiles”. Por ejemplo, los miembros del cártel de Sinaloa, que opera en la costa pacífica de México, fueron detenidos en la República Dominicana este mes. Estos patrones han empujado a los líderes a buscar una alternativa, donde los carteles se pueden erradicar y no simplemente desplazar.

Independientemente de si la legalización y la despenalización es el camino correcto, lo cierto es que la actual guerra contra el narcotráfico no es efectiva. También es evidente que los líderes de América Latina seguirán adelante con sus decisiones políticas, independientemente de la oposición que tiene los EE.UU. sobre la legalización de drogas. Muchos países están dirigiéndose hacia la legalización de las drogas, buscando desesperadamente una solución. Desafortunadamente, esto no tiene un resultado claro, sobre todo si hay políticas opuestas entre los EE.UU. y América Latina. Esto realmente puede ser desastroso. Debido a que esto se ha convertido en un problema global que incluye la pobre infraestructura gubernamental, la pobreza, el abuso de drogas, la violencia y mucho más, es necesario pensar profundamente sobre este tema. Tal vez más allá de eso, es necesario que se adapten medidas antes de que este problema se extienda aún más. Los gobiernos deben escuchar a sus ciudadanos, los cuales se verán directamente afectados por estas decisiones políticas. Tenemos que expresar nuestras preocupaciones y buscar el mejor camino dado todos estos obstáculos. ¿Qué creen ustedes que es el camino que debemos tomar?

Share

Apr 25

Should Wearing Anti-homophobic Shirts be Banned in Schools?

Earlier this month a high school student from Ohio was banned from wearing a t-shirt that was meant to be supportive of National Day of Silence, an event created to draw attention to the silencing effect of anti-LGBT bullying and harassment in schools. Maverick Couch is one of the only openly gay students  at his school and felt discriminated against when he was forced to change his shirt that said “Jesus is not a homophobe,” complete with a rainbow colored Christian fish symbol. His principal claimed that the shirt brought state and religion together and decided that it was inappropriate.

Maverick, feeling as though his rights were being taken away, searched for every possible solution to this problem. He continuously attempted to reason with school officials in hopes that he would be allowed to stand up for himself and his rights. After working tirelessly to reach his goal, he finally decided that he needed to reach out for assistance. Maverick contacted Lambda Legal to find some help and support. Lambda Legal strives toward gaining equality for the LGBT community, and the organization decided to take action after hearing Maverick’s story. Lambda sent a letter to the school district to try their own hand at reasoning with the principal, unfortunately to no avail; Maverick was still threatened with suspension for wearing the shirt. At this, Lambda decided to sue the Waynesville school district.

During the process of filing the suit, the high school principle decided to let Maverick wear the LGBT affirming shirt, but only on National Day of Silence. While this is a slight improvement, it really doesn’t change much of anything.

This conflict has multiple aspects that stem from the central problem. The main issue is that Maverick is being banned from freedom of expression, freedom of religion, and equal treatment. The school principle forbade his student from wearing a Christian symbol painted in rainbow colors. However, I have no doubt that the same fish in a solid color would not have been given a second thought. The argument here is ridiculous. If a student is allowed to wear a shirt depicting their religion or a cross around their neck, a gay student should be able to wear something that symbolizes his or her own beliefs.

It would be easy to go on and on about what someone should and shouldn’t be able to do. However, that doesn’t really get us anywhere. What will progress us toward equality is seeing more students like Maverick stand up for what they believe is right. Students having to fight for equal rights in this day and age seems incredibly outdated. Unfortunately, it still remains necessary. I think that calling our government and equality organizations into action to enforce consequences on biased and unfair staff or administrators would be a good start. Having role models like Waynesville’s principal will only promote bullying and unequal treatment among students. To see true equality and a lack of discrimination, Continue reading

Share

Apr 24

More Disagreement on the War on Drugs

Most recent news will depict U.S.-Latin American relations as one dealing with the War on Drugs.  In an earlier post I wrote, I described the drug cartels in Mexico that have become one of the deadliest sources of violence in Latin America.  I also pointed out their global impact, which is largely attributed to the U.S. demand on drugs.  This increasing epidemic has also created a call of action for countries to come together and find a solution.  But, of course, this is easier said than done.  In the most recent dialogue President Obama had with leaders of Latin American countries, there still seems to be a gridlock on what the right path to take is.  Last week I mentioned another dispute the U.S. had with Latin America, during the VI Summit of the Americas, regarding Cuba’s participation in the 2015 Summit.  Besides the obvious differences in opinion President Obama has with other leaders regarding the war on drugs, I want to point out that this is a foreign policy decision that will directly affect citizens throughout the western hemisphere. I think part of the frustration all these leaders have is that this is a global issue that does not respect borders and that continues to spread throughout various countries.

 

So what does Latin America think?  During the Summit, Latin American Leaders persuaded President Obama to think of alternatives to the failed war on drugs.  Such alternatives include the legalization and decriminalization of drugs.  These alternatives have surfaced because of the increasing violence seen throughout these countries.  Most of Washington’s war on drugs has been fought in Latin America, leaving innumerable victims and families dead.  Although the U.S. (especially Hillary Clinton) has been pushing to continue the militarized war on drugs, it has proven to solve nothing.  Contrary to that, it seems as though this has become a game for cartels.  Cartels simply move to a different location or country whenever they see a threat to their illegal operation.  U.S. Representative Henry Cuellar describes this: “As we put the pressure on in Mexico, they are going to other places with weak civil institutions”.  For example, members of the Sinaloa Cartel, which operates on Mexico’s Pacific coast, were arrested in the Dominican Republic this month.  These patterns have led leaders to seek an alternative, where cartels could be eradicated and not simply displaced.

 

Regardless of whether legalization and decriminalization is the right way to go, it is certain that the current war on drugs is not effective.  It is also evident that Latin American leaders will go ahead with their policy-making, regardless of the adamant opposition the U.S. has on the legalization of drugs.  Many countries will start to move toward the legalization of drugs, desperately seeking a solution.  Unfortunately this doesn’t have a clear outcome, especially if there are opposing policy decisions between the U.S. and Latin America.  This can truly be disastrous.  Because this has become a global issue including poor government infrastructure, poverty, drug abuse, violence and so much more, there needs to be a lot of thought involved in this.  Perhaps beyond that, there needs to be action taken before this problem spreads even further.  Governments need to hear from their citizens, who will be directly affected by these policy decisions.  We need to voice our concerns and look for the best path given all these obstacles.  What do you think is the path we need to take?


Share

Apr 24

Tracking your One-for-Ones

This video continues my look at corporate social responsibility by analyzing more closely the one-for-one business model. In the form of a public service announcement , this video encourages consumers who buy one-for-one products to consider the social and economic ramifications of their actions.  The video discusses one-for-one products from their purchase to their donation and points to the economic disturbances and unfair production methods caused by profit-seeking one-for-one companies.  Please comment with your take on the one-for-one’s corporate social responsibility plan and if you think they are doing good or causing harm.

Share

Apr 23

International Development through Education, Women, and Social Media

If you’ve had the chance to read my most recent posts, you know that the International Development Conference was held at Harvard earlier this month. I’ve written about some of the key takeaways from the education and women in development panels, but I wanted to write something about the overall conference and what I took as a message from it.

In regards to education in development, I think it’s key to remember that quantity does not beat out quality. I wrote about this in another post, but I want to emphasize the fact that by trying to get as many children as we can enrolled in primary school by 2015 does not mean that our world will have developed. I realize that we have to start somewhere, but is there really any achievement in sending 100 more children to school when only 10 of them will pass the 8th grade? Would it not be better to enroll 20 more kids in primary school and see all of them graduate?

This problem seems straight forward to me and I do not think that we should feel accomplished with our increased enrollment rates. The statistics still show that children aren’t getting good grades. Governments and aid organizations are pushing to reach the universal primary education goal by 2015, but I really see this as a false sense of urgency. We’re seeing a lot of numbers and assuming that things are happening, but it’s not progressive enough to see true development. Rather than putting every effort into sending kids to school, we need to step back and realize that the 2015 goal needs to be revamped. Moreover, there is no reason to wait until 2015 to realize that enrollment isn’t enough. I think that we should start focusing more on teacher training and learning, and I think that we should do that right now.

Another key aspect that I took from the conference was that we all need to do something about our disappointment, anger, or doubt in current global issues. I am guilty of doing this along with so many other people out there; simply donating money will not end world hunger or poverty. I know- it feels nice to donate money to an organization; it feels like you are doing something to save the world. Even so, do you really know where your money is going? I could go into that problem, but it would take up another complete post. Instead, I’ll just leave it at this: sometimes it’s better to raise your voice than to empty your pockets. A repeated quote throughout the panel on women in development was Continue reading

Share

Apr 20

Nkundabana in Rwanda: Love for Children

In recent years, Rwanda has become a model for many of its neighbors in terms of health indicators. For example, maternal health indicators for the Millennium Development Goals are largely on track in that country. In addition, health systems’ strengthening has been improved with new financing systems and insurance schemes.  This has made accessing health care and health services much easier for many Rwandans.  However, there is one population that has largely been left out of the system is Rwanda’s young orphans.  This is due to health policies that leave them unable to access valuable services, like HIV testing.

 

In Rwanda, the probability of dying between the ages of 15-60 years is 304 per 1,000 and 258 per 1,000 for males and females respectively. Young people make up a sizable portion of the country’s population:  it is estimated that greater than 57 percent of Rwandans are below the age of 20 and nearly 46 percent are under the age of 15. A considerable portion of young people are in need of targeted program as well:  more than 28 percent of people under the age of 18 are considered to be vulnerable.

 

Amongst young Rwandans, there is another “subset” of vulnerable people. Continue reading

Share

Apr 20

Latinoamerica y Los EE.UU: Desacuerdo Sobre Cuba

Este abril, la VI Cumbre de las Américas tuvo lugar en Cartagena, Colombia. La Cumbre no sólo trato una serie de temas, como el discurso de Shakira sobre la educación y el desarrollo infantil, sino que también dejo muchas preguntas  sin resolver. Una de ellas es si Cuba debe ser invitada a la próxima Cumbre (2015 en Panamá).  Cuando el presidente Barack Obama asistió la Cumbre, él recibió una sorprendente respuesta de muchos países de América Latina. Después de que el presidente colombiano, Juan Manuel Santos, puso el tema sobre la mesa para discusión entre los países miembros, algunos expresaron la necesidad que Cuba fuera incluida en la próxima Cumbre.  Aunque Santos concluyo que la mayoría (32) de los países “ apoyan la participación de Cuba”, el presidente Obama y el primer ministro canadiense, Stephen Harper, hicieron claro que no estaba de acuerdo con esto. Cuando nos fijamos en las organizaciones internacionales que están exclusivamente creados por países miembros, tenemos que preguntarnos si realmente se logra algo con la unanimidad o si el consenso de la mayoría debe ser aplicado. Es decir, la misión de instituciones como la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA) es facilitar debate y movilizar acuerdos entre países. Pero, ¿esto realmente funciona cuando no puede haber acuerdos entre todos los países miembros?

 

Aunque el presidente Obama declaró que él no quiere mirar al pasado sino al futuro en relación con Cuba, también dejó claro que no dará la bienvenida a Cuba porque “aún no se ha movido a la democracia, aún no se ha observado los derechos humanos básicos”. Sin embargo, por el contrario, tenemos países latinoamericanos que han demostrado de forma explícita que esto no es un requisito para la inclusión de Cuba en la próxima Cumbre. En hecho, el presidente de Ecuador, Rafael Correa, se negó a asistir a la Cumbre del domingo en protesta contra la expulsión de Cuba de la OEA. Similarmente, el bloque ALBA de naciones  que incluye a Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua y algunas naciones del Caribe, dijeron que no asistirían futuras Cumbres sin la presencia de Cuba. Aunque Obama respondió que ha habido algunas iniciativas realizadas en relación con Cuba, parecía haber un consenso rígido sobre este tema entre los países latinoamericanos. O.K, parece que hay desacuerdos entre la participación de Cuba en la próxima Cumbre.  Pero, ¿Qué significa esto?

 

Creo que uno de los puntos importantes que destacar aquí es que esta Cumbre ha sido descrita como una rebelión de América Latina contra la diplomacia de EE.UU.. Eso es un poco radical para mi gusto. Sin embargo, creo que esta Cumbre ha demostrado unos puntos de vista contra la diplomacia estadounidense más fuerte de lo usual.  Algunos señalan un grado de aislamiento que los países latinoamericanos han experimentado de parte de los EE.UU., donde China ha tomado una fuerte influencia en el comercio con estos países. Lo que me parece interesante es que podemos ver una América Latina menos dependiente de los EE.UU., donde la expresión de sus opiniones no está sujeta a la aprobación de Estados Unidos. Aunque no hubo una declaración firmada en esta Cumbre, debido a la falta de unanimidad, se escucho una voz mayoritaria fuerte. Esto nos lleva a muchas preguntas importantes sobre la eficacia de dichas organizaciones y sus resultados finales. En cuanto a este contexto, ¿creen ustedes que los países de América Latina cederán a los deseos de los Estados Unidos contra Cuba, o que los EE.UU. permitirá a Cuba en la próxima Cumbre? Y si ninguno de estos casos ocurre, ¿qué pasará con las relaciones entre los Estados Unidos y Latinoamérica?

Share

Apr 19

Focus on Fuel

Have you ever seen the show “What Would You Do?”.  It catches regular unsuspecting people stuck in scripted, uncomfortable social situations.  For example, the show staged a scene in the middle of a restaurant where the actors placed a bug in their sandwich when the waiter left the table and then demanded a free meal when the waiter returned.  The concept of the show is what would you do if you saw a similar situation; would you “rat” out the actor’s actions to the waiter and turn them in?  Well I have a what would you do situation…What would you do if your suburban, colonial home owning neighbor suddenly rolled up with twelve new high-end luxury vehicles in the course of a year?  Would this seem strange enough to you to say something?  Well Rodney R. Hailey’s neighbors did just that.  After the extravagant purchase of a Rolls-Royce, Maserati, Bentley, and not one, but two Ferraris, Hailey’s neighbors grew suspicious of Hailey’s claim that the funds were coming from his company Clean Green Fuel’s production and sale of bio-fuels.  One neighbor took his suspicions to law enforcement that eventually uncovered Hailey’s multi-million dollar scheme.

The selling of bio-fuel credits has become a major way policy makers try to incentivize renewable energy without crippling business.  Similar to the carbon cap-and-trade system, companies that use non-renewable energy sources like gasoline or diesel are required to also use renewable energy sources like bio-fuels.  If a company who imports or processes gasoline or diesel does not wish to also use bio-fuels they can purchase bio-fuel credits (referred to by their renewable identification number, RIN) from another company that has exceeded their required bio-fuel use.  This way, companies still have choice, but the amount of harmful non-renewable fuels is ultimately being lowered. In 2010, the world produced 105 billion liters of bio-fuels, and it is possible by 2050 that half of all of the world’s transportation needs could be powered by bio-fuels.

Rodney R. Hailey counterfeited credits that would equate to 21 million gallons of bio-fuel from March 2009 to December 2010.  No gallons of bio-fuels ever really existed but Hailey was able to make over 9 million dollars by selling the fake credits to major oil companies in need of bio-fuel credits to reach the federal mandate.  Hailey pocketed the money made by “Clean Green Fuels” and spent it on lavish purchases like jewelry and cars.  Hailey claims he produced bio-fuels by converting vegetable oils from thousands of restaurants in the Baltimore area.  However, once the investigations were under way there were no signs of any production facilities or equipment, and I’m pretty sure one of “thousands” of restaurants would be willing to back up his story if there was any truth to it.  Nonetheless Hailey has pled not guilty to charges of violation of the Clean Air Act, wire fraud, and money laundering.

Hailey’s case leaves the Environmental Protection Agency and policy makers in a predicament.  If one person was able to make millions off of counterfeit RINs for over a year, how many other schemes like this are possible?  Fraudulent behavior among bio-fuel credit dealers poses a huge threat to the purpose of the trading program.  As Hailey bought luxury car after luxury car, these major oil companies he was selling his fake bio-fuel credits to were using just as much non-renewable energy.

As the country moves into a new era of green technology and renewable resources, more and more threats of cheating and fraud become likely.  Cases like Hailey have put more eyes and more pressure on existing bio-fuel companies.  The EPA is working with oil industry leaders and bio-fuel brokers to strategize on the best ways to ensure fairness and honesty across the system.  While non-renewable energy sources like oil become more and more scarce, innovation is necessary to power this country.  Innovation came in Dayton Florida when an engineer student at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University suggested that the campus’s lawn mowers be powered by converted fuel from the cafeteria’s leftover oil.

As the next generation of social change leaders emerges, we need to be as forward thinking as possible.  We need to stand up for what’s right (as Hailey’s neighbors did in the “What Would You Do” scenario), and we need to act as active agents of change as Michelle Rodio did at her Florida university.  It is important we act as frequently and with as much influence as possible.  It is the up-and-coming generation that will have to face the consequences of unavailable energy resources.  We can’t wait until it’s too late.

Share

Apr 19

Bahraini Activists Gain Steam

It’s pretty easy to forget that the Arab Spring is more than just Egypt, Libya, and Syria; those three countries dominate the news, particularly Syria, while the other countries involved in the movement are largely ignored.  So today I’ve decided to devote a post to Bahrain, which has been mostly out of the media since the early, extremely violent protests back in the beginning of the Arab Spring.

Protests in Bahrain failed to gain traction like those in Libya and Syria after the harsh government crackdown

in which 35 people were killed back in early 2011, but the country is still mired in unrest and is anticipating a major protest this weekend.  The Formula One Grand Prix race is set to take place over the weekend, and activists are taking advantage of the renewed international attention on the Bahrain by planning a “day of rage.” Last year the race was cancelled in the wake of the uprising, but this year Formula One has said the Grand Prix will be held as scheduled, leading many activists boycott the race and question what this decision means for human rights and for the safety of the protesters (see video below).  Graffiti messages have popped up around the capital, with colorful slogans like “You will race on the blood of martyrs,” and thousands of citizens are turning out for opposition rallies as race day nears.

The government has already begun rounding up protesters and tossing them in jail; about 80 people identified as “protest leaders” have been arrested so far as a “preventive measure.”  One particularly prominent leader, Abdulhadi al-Khawaji, went on a hunger strike after being sentenced to life in prison several months ago for plotting to overthrow the royal family, and has gone without food for over 70 days.  The government claims he is in stable condition, but his health is certainly deteriorating after over two months without food, especially since he said he will refuse intravenous infusions.  His death would likely spark another wave of violence, as protesters and international organizations like Amnesty International and the UN have rallied around him and demanded his release.  On Wednesday the 18th 60 activists gathered to protest and call for his release, but were shut down by the police.

The royal family has more to worry about than al-Khawaja and the Formula One race, though.  Every since the violent crackdown on the protests back in February of 2011 the government has been under scrutiny from human rights groups for failing to institute comprehensive reforms and for using torture and excessive force against protesters.  The government claims to be on the road to reform and government-issued reports portray attempts to uphold human rights and teach tolerance, acceptance, and dialogue in a positive light, but Amnesty International’s investigation into the matter found that recent reforms have been flawed and piecemeal. The king stated last month that “significant and broad progress” has been made, but there seems to be little substance to his claims.  It seems that the opposition movement is picking up steam again in Bahrain, and if the royal family continues to do nothing to improve the situation within the country I think it is likely that violence will erupt once more.

Now I’m going to leave you with a video of a Bahrani activist talking about the upcoming Formula One race.  Watch it and let me know what you think in the comments!  Do you think Formula One should have cancelled the race for ethical reasons?  Do you think the opposition movement is going to become more powerful and attempt to overthrow the royal family again?

 

Click here for the video!

Share

Apr 19

IDC Harvard: Micro evidence, macro learning

Last Saturday I attended Harvard’s International Development Conference (IDC) as a representative of the SISGI Group. The IDC is an annual conference organized by Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government.

 

Students from many different universities and many parts of the world (Latin America, Asia) were eager to hear from the experience of professionals and academics.  It was a very interactive conference, where constant interaction with the speakers and the attendants was necessary and facilitated by the networking lunches, case competitions and social events. Professionals from the public, private, non-profit or international sector came to share their experiences and express their opinions and concerns over the current challenges of international development. Every year, they focus on a series of thematic themes regarding international development and this year the four panel tracks that were governance, resources for development, human and social development, and system development. Major questions included things like how to address environmental problems? How to make the development community more efficient? How to make sure that the strategies target adequate human and social development?

A key takeaway of the conference was the importance of focusing on local and small problems when wanting to create sustainable change. In all the panels that I attended, the idea that seemed to prevail was that macro solutions to the problems of individuals had not been as effective. Many of the panelists were promoting directed and oriented solutions to poverty. Abhijit V. Banerjee, final speaker and author of Poor Economics, summarized this idea with the sentence “Micro evidence, Macro learning”. This sentence describes the phenomenon that although we do know “next to nothing” as to how to generate growth, we may know a little more about how to change children’s lives. The circumstances of growth depend on many different factors and the best way to make the most effective change is by making use of the “local knowledge” of the people.

Prof. Banerjee challenges the assumed causality between growth and poverty reduction. It is a problem of causality: does growth reduce poverty or does poverty reduction lead to growth? He stated that there is no clear evidence for a trade off between growth and poverty reduction. Event if it were, the attempts to reduce poverty by promoting growth is not significant. He further pointed out that efforts must be focused where they are the most effective, and that always happens at the “micro” level.

Listening to similar claims from different speakers made me realize that an important shift is taking place in the development discourse. There is no longer a belief of an easy solution to poverty. The idea of a one size fits all solution to poverty has been abandoned, or at least is quickly vanishing. In the past, what we’ve been able to measure has often defined what we do and how we impact, thus we have focused on growth. But we’ve come to realize that measuring aggregates is not good enough, and that many times the “devil is in the details”, in the local implications of the actions. That is why the solution will always depend on the environment, the people, the resources, and the circumstances. By focusing on facts, learning from innovations and testing, the impacts will likely be more sustainable. In the future, we have to focus on what we know works and stay away from what we know doesn’t work, and this can only be achievable by focusing impact at the micro level.

By the end of the conference, I think many students were encouraged but also feeling somehow perplexed. Indeed, the talks changed the framework through which many of us perceived development. The challenges that lie ahead are more complex than what we would like it to be, as there is no clear solution. But that makes it the more interesting because the opportunities to have a sustainable impact are greater. As for now, I think the first important challenge is how we can best start sharing all the “micro” experiences in the development arena in order to facilitate further understanding of the complexities that we are facing.

Share