, ,

Refugee Crisis: Roots and Remedies

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

MBA student, find Karen Ng gives her perspective on the Skoll World Forum seminar session ‘Refugee Crisis: Roots and Remedies’.

Past participants of the Skoll World Forum often praised the event as a safe space for leaders and practitioners of social change to be honest, viagra buy reflective and challenging of their own experiences and each other’s ideas. This session – ambitiously named “Refugee Crisis: Roots and Remedies” – was a perfect exhibit of that openness and vulnerability.

Root Causes

The session opened with a video produced by White Helmets, a group of volunteer rescue workers who risk their lives to in war-torn areas in Syria. It showed the volunteers’ effort to pull out a 2-month old “miracle baby” who survived barrel bombs and was trapped among rubbles of collapsed buildings.

It set the stage for Farouk Habib, Program Director of Mayday Rescue (an international non-profit organization that trains and supports White Helmets and many other emergency response groups), to share his thoughts on the root causes of the crisis.

“Refugees did not escape due to hunger, but due to security”, he said. The crisis was resulted from the dictatorship’s oppression that lasted for over 40 years. To deal with the root cause, “we need real political transition to a democratically elected government”.

Running out of solutions

Without an end to the conflict in sight, what are the short-term remedies? Joanne Liu, International President at Medicins Sans Frontiers (MSF), described the dire situation as observed on the frontlines. MSF provides medical support, and carries out search and rescue operations in conflict areas. Out of MSF’s 153 medical facilities, 63 were attacked by aerial bombs and 2 were completely destroyed. The recent closure of borders made their work even more difficult, as refugees are effectively in detention with no idea of when and where their trips will end. MSF readily adopts tele-medicine, however access to bedside support is still extremely crucial but lacking especially in siege areas.

“This is the biggest failure seen in international community”, she said. MSF has been on the fields for over 40 years and yet, “I am out of solutions, I have never been so desperate for a situation”. She called for the international community to step up, “States should live up to their responsibilities according to the Refugees Convention and give back humanity to people who are fleeing war zones”.

Unreasonable Optimism

With a room full of changemakers and innovators, they do not take “no” for an answer. Audience shared their thoughts on different ideas to harness technology and media to empower refugees and humanitarian workers. Corinne Gray, Innovation Engagement Officer at UNHCR, also shared their optimism. She emphasised the importance of bottom-up solutions, and provided examples of UNHCR’s recent projects to empower refugees through user-led innovation process (a step beyond user-centric design process). She also highlighted the power of engaging with private sector to utilise the businesses’ resources and capacity beyond philanthropic donations, such as distributive capacities of delivery companies and mobile networks of telecoms.

Changing the Narrative

The one thing that all panellists agreed on is the need to change the current narrative, especially on the refugees. As Liu explained, by changing the narrative from refugees to migration, we “take away the right to asylum and protection”. She calls for a stop in thinking about refugees as “good” or “bad” refugees, but accepting our collective responsibility to give back humanity to people fleeing war zones. “When motivated by fear, we will get the wrong answer. The trigger should be life – safeguarding lives – as all lives count”.

The civil society, especially the media, should recognise that these refugees are fleeing for their lives and not merely driven by better economic opportunities. As Habib stated, “all of them dream of going back home”. To enable the bottom-up solutions described earlier, Gray advocated the need to view refugees as “people with capacities, skill sets and had jobs” who, given the appropriate resources, access, training and mentorship, can be leaders of change themselves. Liu echoed the view, and said that “Remember they are looking for a future. No one is more innovative than people looking for a future”.

 

 

 

, , ,

Post-Paris Global Sustainability: how do we get there?

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

MBA student Neil Yeoh gives his perspective on the Skoll World Forum seminar session ‘Post-Paris: A New Era in Global Sustainability?’.

It has been just over five months since 195 nations signed the UN Paris Climate Change Treaty – a pivotal step towards global sustainability. However, doctor as every month passes and the champagne stops flowing, people scratch their heads as they consider “the real issue – how do we get there?” – framed by Mindy Lubber, President of Ceres.

A panel made up of the most distinguished climate leaders of today including former president of Ireland and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights – Mary Robinson – discussed this very issue. And amongst the dialogue, five overarching themes emerged:

  1. Changing the conversation – a bigger mindset shift is needed
  2. Pushing for policy change – the world will not self-correct
  3. Enabling access to finance and technology – developing countries cannot do it on their own
  4. Inspiring a larger movement – communities can achieve change
  5. Managing industry change – the transition from dirty to clean will be challenging

Far from the detailed implementation plan everyone was hoping for, the audience may have left dissatisfied still debating how we will get there. However, these feelings and thoughts reveal the true complexity of the challenge that lies ahead to make the treaty a reality. Climate change touches countless nodes of the world’s ecosystem and will need unprecedented global coordination and cooperation to alter course.

But I believe there is hope! If the world’s leaders were able to find common ground on the urgency of global sustainability, the rest of humanity – activists to sceptics – will surely find common ground in the fact that climate change is a real threat to our children and grandchildren. I, as I’m sure many others, can relate to and be compelled to act on that.

After Paris - neil

From left to right: Dipender Saluja – Managing Director, Capricorn Investment Group (Moderator); Mary Robinson – President, Mary Robinson Foundation – Climate Justice; Thom Woodroofe – Climate Policy and Communications Advisor, Independent Diplomat; Mindy Lubber – President, Ceres; and David Blood – Senior Partner, Generation Investment Management.

Follow Neil: @neil_yeoh

, , ,

Unavoidable Dilemmas

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

MBA student and Skoll Scholar, viagra order Pip Wheaton gives her perspective on the Skoll World Forum sessions themed around morality and empathy.

When you bring together nearly one thousand people whose work focuses on the biggest social, price environmental, sildenafil economic and political issues of our time, it is brave to ask the question, “What moral dilemma are you currently grappling with?” But that is exactly how Bill Drayton, CEO of Ashoka, opened the session on Moral Stances and Decision Making. The honesty of the responses from the audience was not only humbling but indicative of the fierce compassion with which people in the room treat their work. As Bill put it, we are all wrestling with something, and we all feel responsible for the things we wrestle with. And that’s the most important part.

Some big, meaty questions came out: How do we make trade-offs between breadth and depth? Is it ok to profit from poor people? When do we exit and how do we do that well? How rich is too rich?

Panelist Josh Nesbit, CEO of Medic Mobile, captured the challenge perfectly: “We want to maximise on all fronts – but it’s not possible. When we can’t, we have to make a choice, otherwise the choice will be handed to us.” So how do we make these decisions? Kirk Hansen, Executive Director of the Markkula Centre for Applied Ethics presented his guide to “Common Sense Ethics”, a high level overview of five of the most significant strands of moral theory from Aristotle to the present day. His argument is that moral language enables leaders to better think about moral decisions. Safeena Husain, Executive Director of Educate Girls, shared a moral dilemma that she and her team had worked through in Rajasthan while addressing critical gender gap issues, pointing out that all of us grapple with this, “but we don’t have the language [of ethics] built in.”

The last time I was a student, I studied moral philosophy and grappled with the morally and politically required responses to climate change. I thought that if I could just apply the frameworks of the great philosophers, the same ones that Kirk Hansen so clearly presented to the audience, I would be able to work out what we should do and, like magic, the world could think its way out of this global existential threat. I spent a year becoming increasing frustrated as I realised that the different theories give rise to different answers. And increasingly, I found evidence that even when we do know the “right” thing to do, we don’t always do it because of our imperfect, very human rationality. It’s only years later that I realise what I was struggling to articulate then: if we don’t have empathy then we won’t be able to create meaningful, enduring, compassionate change.

Bill Drayton went to the heart of the issue for me: rules-based ethics don’t work anymore. The world is changing so quickly that the rules are outdated or simply do not exist for the types of situations we find ourselves in today. He argued that we need to update our tools for moral decision-making: empathy-based ethics is the answer.

Empathy is a theme that has surfaced often over the past two days: as Roger Martin and IDEO’s Tim Brown discussed innovation in their panel, Design for Action; in a wonderfully honest conversation about education that emerged over dinner between three people from three different continents; from Selena Leem – an 18-year-old from the Marshall Islands who implored us to act on climate change so that her people don’t lose their home.

In the increasingly complex world that we live in, and particularly in the work that we do, we are faced with unavoidable dilemmas. Going back to foundations of morality, particularly a morality based on empathy, allows us to make the best decisions.

Follow Pip: @PipWheaton

, ,

Ag Faceoff: For-profit or Nonprofit, Which Wins the Social ROI Contest?

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

Mark Brown, rx Co-Founder of Kulemela Investments and Current Oxford Said MBA student weighs in on “Ag Faceoff: For Profit or Non-profit Which Wins the Social ROI Contest.”

Agriculture presents an incredible opportunity for small-scale rural families in developing countries across the world. Countless organizations have taken various approaches in an effort to help farming families create better livelihoods for themselves. In this debate, link we heard from two representatives from non-profits and two representatives from a for-profit investment fund. They debated which structure better positions an organization to achieve social return on investment.

The panel, moderated by Richard Fahey, COO of the Skoll Foundation, included Alan Cheung and Ion Yadigaroglu of the for-profit Capricorn Investment Group, and their non-profit counterparts Willy Foote of Root Capital and Andrew Youn of One Acre Fund.

The panel was tasked to debate whether $1million can generate better social impact for small scale farmers if invested in a for-profit company or donated through a non-profit channel.

All four of the panelists shared great examples of investments and impact that their respective organizations have made and achieved. All four debaters expressed their organizations’ innovative approaches, promising social impact and the ability to generate healthy streams of revenue. At the end of the introductory remarks all of the panelists seemed to have a lot in common.

Alan Cheng pointed out that Root Capital and One Acre fund have a lot in common with for-profit ventures. Willy Foote urged us to consider that non-profits can make riskier, important investments. Ion Yadigaroglu pointed out that many of the early discoveries that have been scaled by non-profits were initially discovered by for-profit ventures. Andrew Youn shared his bottom line that One Acre is for-impact and with a non-profit baseline, it can formulate its approach to generate social impact at the most efficient rate.

The panelists raised compelling arguments but their values did not seem to be inherently opposed. The dialogue pushed the conversation past the two sides’ common threads of impact and financial sustainability and examined where they are unique from one another: in their differing accountability to their sources financing. Fortunately Jeff Skoll, an investor in all four of the panelists organizations, stepped forward to share his perspective. “It’s about timing”, he shared from the gallery. Market forces can achieve great impact, but when working to serve the poorest of the poor, the timeline to make money can just take too long. With less vulnerable populations, we can let market forces push businesses forward to create social impact.

The insights from each side of the debate seemed to underscore the importance and benefits that both for-profits and non-profits can have in the pursuit of improving small-scale farmer livelihoods. In the end the themes of a commitment to social impact, innovative methods and financially-sustainable revenue prevailed as more important than what seemed to be a false tension between non-profit and for-profit structures.

Follow Mark: @MarkPatBrown

, , ,

Stronger Together? Government Collaboration with Social Enterprises in India

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

MBA student, viagra 100mg Skoll Scholar and Founder of Home Safe, ampoule Nikhil Saigal gives his perspective on the Skoll World Forum seminar session ‘Stronger Together? Government Collaboration with Social Enterprises in India’.

The question of the necessity and possibilities of fostering collaboration between the public and civic sector has been a pertinent one amongst practitioners. When champions from both sectors come together on a common platform, the insights are bound to be powerful.

Natalia Agapitova, Program Lead, Innovation Labs at World Bank kicked us off with her experiences working with multiple social enterprises across the developing world. Seeing a strong synergy in the objectives that both the civil sector and public stakeholders are working towards, she stressed the need to create an environment where support systems can help these social enterprises scale the work they do.

Rwitwika Bhattacharya, CEO for Swaniti Initiative, has been working in the space of delivering development solutions to government officials in India. These solutions have ranged across the fields of healthcare, education, gender equality and livelihoods. Sharing her experiences on working with a government in a rapidly developing environment, she explains that most often the challenges arise out of a difference in perceptions of the problem. While local government officials feel extremely connected first hand to issues in their areas, organizations that have seen successes in other settings are not always perceived to be able to tackle it and may be seen as outsiders. Suggesting that the best approach is to build a track record and show results in a similar environment visavis geography or nature of the challenge, strongly helps push the cause through.

On the flipside, hearing from Ms Vidyavathi Vaidyanathan, Joint Secretary at the Government of India, gave a balanced view of how the public stakeholders view collaboration opportunities with social enterprises. Over her 25 years working with the Indian political system across levels ranging from the Zila Panchayat all the way to her current role as joint secretary, one sentiment that came out strongly throughout was her insight that the perception from governments is changing. While there was a time that for profit organizations were perceived as negative partners, she says “Profit is not a dirty word”, matching Ritwika’s insight on how the transparent profit motive gives the government a clear understanding of what’s in it for the partner.

While times are changing and an environment of greater openness to working together are seemingly closer, we still have a long way to go before these conversations are more common. In the experiences shared, we could see how governments are open to overcoming traditional challenges like partnerships being driven on the basis of individual motivations and changes in this by bringing about longer term, multi year agreements on solutions being delivered. We are also seeing changes in the push for collaboration coming from both sides of the equation, governments reaching out to look for partners combined with the more traditional route of social enterprises advocating the government to open up to partnerships.

In my experience of working on Road Safety in India, there are certain social issues where collaboration with public stakeholders – governments and law enforcement agencies, becomes imperative to see a change. A for profit start up, we faced multiple challenges engaging with the public sector and understanding how these challenges are being addressed by other organizations working with the government. Armed with strong insights and experiences of practitioners in India on successes and challenges on fostering government collaboration, these experiences allow us to evolve our approach to taking the social missions we are passionate about to fruition.

Follow Nikhil: @nikhilsaigal

, , ,

Mindful Action, Intelligent Fearlessness: Creating Movements that Inform, Inspire, and Change the World

Oxford’s Fierce Compassion – Series of Student Insights to the Skoll World Forum 2016.

MBA student and Skoll Scholar, recipe Maria Springer gives her perspective on the Skoll World Forum seminar session ‘Mindful Action, Intelligent Fearlessness: Creating Movements that Inform, Inspire, and Change the World’.

Panel moderator Ron Schultz, Co-Founder of Waterman Aylsworth, opened the early morning session with a request for the audience: “Please root your feet on the floor, place your hands on your knees, sit up straight, gently lower your gaze, and feel your heart. Then let your heart radiate out.”

Within sixty seconds, the hearts of 75 delegates were radiating. If we believe that individuals are connected to the universe and by default other individuals, building movements that inform, inspire and change the world require mindfulness and fearlessness. Radiating hearts are just the beginning. Three key insights on mindful action and intelligent fearlessness emerged from the session.

(1) Fear is workable. What if we see fear as workable? After all, even the fearless fear. Insight Meditation Society co-founder, Sharon Salzberg, suggests that if we “loosen the grip on fixed thinking and expectations, new options emerge.” Fears that are acknowledged can be turned around. By creating space and an internal practice for managing fear, we can accept the world as it is, not how we think it ought to be, savings us time, frustration and energy. Founder and CEO of International Bridges to Justice, Karen Tse, summed up the point with a quote from Khalil Gibran, “your joy is your sorrow unmasked.”

(2) Compassion is a practice. Practicing compassion enables social entrepreneurs to align intention with heartfelt, powerful action. APOPO Founder, Bart Weetjens, suggests that social entrepreneurs are often successful because they demonstrate compassion for themselves and for those they serve. Social entrepreneurs who love themselves authentically connect with those they serve.

(3) Boldness and compassion are not mutually exclusive. Fierce compassion does not make one weak or foolish, and the notion of being compassionate towards oneself is not to be confused with laziness, a lack of rigor or an inability to pursue excellence. On the contrary, “being compassionate can increase the audacity and intensity of action,” advises Salzberg. By practicing fierce compassion, social entrepreneurs create the space to avoid superficial reactions, and can instead respond intelligently and strategically.

Mindful action, fierce compassion and intelligent fearlessness require practice and commitment. By valuing mindfulness, compassion and fearlessness, social entrepreneurs can inform, inspire and change the world.

 

Follow Maria: @mariaspringer