Podcasts about bennett professor

In The Measure of Progress: Counting What Really Matters, Dame Diane Coyle argues that traditional measures like GDP no longer capture economic realities.Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. She is also the director of the Productivity Institute, a fellow of the Office for National Statistics, and a member of the UK's Competition Commission. Drawing on her deep expertise, she proposes an alternative framework for measuring productivity that enables better policymaking.In her conversation with Nikolaus Lang, global leader of the BCG Henderson Institute, she discusses the shortcomings of GDP—such as a lack of accounting for immaterial goods or natural capital, alternative measures of progress, and how corporate leaders should rethink their approach to measurement.Key topics discussed: 01:32 | The shortcomings of GDP as a measure of productivity09:14 | The issues of inflated GDP statements11:12 | Alternative measures of productivity and progress13:47 | A time-based approach to measuring productivity16:39 | How productivity measurement works in practice18:57 | Implications for corporate leadersAdditional inspirations from Diane Coyle:Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be (Princeton University Press, 2021)GDP: A Brief but Affectionate History (Princeton University Press, 2015)The Soulful Science: What Economists Really Do and Why It Matters (Princeton University Press, 2009)Sex, Drugs and Economics: An Unconventional Intro to Economics (Texere, 2002)

How to measure the good life? According to Cambridge University's Professor of Public Policy, Diane Coyle, quantifying progress doesn't involve traditional economic metrics. In her new book, Measure of Progress, Coyle discusses how economic metrics like GDP, designed 80 years ago, are increasingly inadequate for measuring today's complex economy. She argues we need new approaches that account for digital transformation, supply chains, and long-term sustainability. Coyle suggests developing human-centric balance sheet measures that reflect true progress beyond simple growth numbers. Five Key Takeaways * Economic metrics like GDP were developed 80 years ago and are increasingly outdated for measuring today's complex digital economy with global supply chains.* We lack adequate tools to measure crucial modern economic factors such as data usage, cloud services, and cross-border supply chains.* Economic statistics have always been political in nature, from their historical origins to present debates about what counts as progress.* Coyle advocates for a "balance sheet" approach that considers long-term sustainability of resources rather than just short-term growth figures.* While productivity growth has slowed for many middle-income families over the past 20 years, Coyle rejects "degrowth" approaches, arguing instead for better metrics that capture true progress in living standards.Professor Dame Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Diane co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Her latest book is 'Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be', exploring the challenges for economics particularly in the context of digital transformation. Her current research focuses on productivity and on economic measurement: what does it mean for economic policy to make the world ‘better', and how would we know if it succeeds?Diane is also a Director of the Productivity Institute, a Fellow of the Office for National Statistics, and an expert adviser to the National Infrastructure Commission. She has served in public service roles including as Vice Chair of the BBC Trust, member of the Competition Commission, of the Migration Advisory Committee and of the Natural Capital Committee. Diane was Professor of Economics at the University of Manchester until March 2018 and was awarded a DBE for her contribution to economic policy in the 2023 King's Birthday Honours.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode, Richard Westcott talks to Diane Coyle, Jacques Crémer, and Paul Seabright about Europe's position in competing with the US in technology. They explore the factors shaping Europe's place in the global tech race—how data, policy, investment, competition and culture influence its potential to compete with the US.Our experts unpack the challenges and opportunities for Europe's tech ecosystem. They consider whether Europe should aim to catch up with the US or focus on carving out its own path, questioning what success in innovation really looks like. Along the way, they discuss the role of data, risk-taking, the challenges of scaling up new ideas, and the structural and policy changes needed to support innovation in Europe.This episode is hosted by Richard Westcott (Cambridge University Health Partners and the Cambridge Biomedical Campus), and features experts Diane Coyle (Bennett Institute for Public Policy, University of Cambridge), Jacques Crémer (IAST), Paul Seabright (IAST)Season 4 Episode 6 transcriptListen to this episode on your preferred podcast platformFor more information about the Crossing Channels podcast series and the work of the Bennett Institute and IAST visit our websites at https://www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/ and https://www.iast.fr/.Follow us on Linkedin, Bluesky and X. With thanks to:Audio production by Steve HankeyAssociate production by Burcu Sevde SelviVisuals by Tiffany Naylor and Aurore CarbonnelMore information about our host and guests:Podcast hostRichard Westcott is an award-winning journalist who spent 27 years at the BBC as a correspondent/producer/presenter covering global stories for the flagship Six and Ten o'clock TV news as well as the Today programme. Last year, Richard left the corporation and he is now the communications director for Cambridge University Health Partners and the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, both organisations that are working to support life sciences and healthcare across the city. @BBCwestcottPodcast guestsDiane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Diane co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Diane's new book (April 2025) ‘The Measure of Progress: Counting what really matters' explores how outdated economic metrics are distorting our understanding of today's digital economy. Diane is also a member of the UK Government's Industrial Strategy Council, New Towns Taskforce, and advises the Competition and Markets Authority. She has served previously in a number of public service roles including as Vice Chair of the BBC Trust, member of the Competition Commission, and of the Natural Capital Committee. Diane was awarded a DBE in 2023 for her contribution to economics and public policy. @DianeCoyle1859Jacques Crémer is Professor at the Toulouse School of Economics. He is a Fellow of the Econometric Society and of the European Economic Association. He has been the first director of the Digital Center since 2015.  In 2018-2019, as a Special Adviser to European Commissioner Margrethe Vestager, he co-authored the report “Competition Policy for the Digital Era”. Jacques has done fundamental work on planning theory, auctions, incentive t

In this episode of The Nowhere Office, we bring together three experts with very different perspectives on work to explore how we measure it, how we experience it, and how workplaces are changing. What is productivity, and why does it matter? Professor Dame Diane Coyle, economist and Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge, joins Stefan to discuss why productivity is such a tricky thing to measure what GDP can and can't tell us. These ideas will be explored more in Diane's forthcoming book, The Measure of Progress. (https://www.amazon.co.uk/Measure-Progress-Counting-Really-Matters/dp/0691179026). There is also a cameo from Sophie from Romania, of internet fame. Dr. Melissa Fisher is a cultural anthropologist at NYU and Parsons, who has studied Wall Street's culture and is now looking at the future of work. She shares insights into how work is shaped not just by numbers but by history, habits, and human behaviour. Phil Kirschner, workplace consultant and strategist, helps companies rethink their workplaces and manage the huge wave of change. The Nowhere Office is a Fully Connected Production in association with Sandstone Global Productions. Music by Julian Brezon. Learn more at Workathon.io Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Rory Cellan-Jones discusses with Diane Coyle, Ruth Mace, and Paul Seabright the impact of age on leadership, the consequences of having older leaders for society, and the case for implementing a compulsory retirement age.Our experts discuss the tradeoff between experience, expertise, skill and judgement as society's leaders age. They draw on evolutionary and current examples to evaluate the case for implementing a compulsory retirement age for leaders. Finally, they consider alternative mechanisms - such as reducing voting ages, term limits and cognitive testing - to improve democratic responsiveness. This episode is hosted by Rory Cellan-Jones (former technology correspondent for the BBC), and features guest experts Professor Dame Diane Coyle (Bennett Institute for Public Policy), Professor Ruth Mace (UCL/IAST) and Professor Paul Seabright (IAST). Season 3 Episode 10 transcriptListen to this episode on your preferred podcast platformFor more information about the podcast and the work of the institutes, visit our websites at https://www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/ and https://www.iast.fr/.Tweet us with your thoughts at @BennettInst and @IASToulouse.With thanks to:Audio production by Steve HankeyAssociate production by Stella ErkerVisuals by Tiffany Naylor and Kevin Sortino More information about our host and guests:Rory Cellan-Jones was a technology correspondent for the BBC. His 40 years in journalism have seen him take a particular interest in the impact of the internet and digital technology on society and business. He has also written multiple books, including “Always On” (2021) and his latest “Ruskin Park: Sylvia, Me and the BBC” which was published in 2023. @ruskin147Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Diane co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Diane is also a Director of the Productivity Institute, a Fellow of the Office for National Statistics, an expert adviser to the National Infrastructure Commission, and Senior Independent Member of the ESRC Council. Diane was awarded a DBE in the King's Birthday Honours List 2023 for her invaluable contributions to economic policy and practice, as well as her unwavering commitment to public service. @DianeCoyle1859Ruth Mace is Professor of Evolutionary Anthropology at University College London (UCL)  and a long-term visitor at the Institute of Advanced Study at Toulouse (IAST).  She trained as an evolutionary biologist at the University of Oxford, and then moved into evolutionary anthropology. Her research has covered a wide range of questions in human life history evolution and behavioural and cultural evolution.  She is a Fellow of the British Academy, and founding Editor-in-Chief of the journal Evolutionary Human Sciences. @tavitonstPaul Seabright is a professor of economics at the Toulouse School of Economics. He was Director from 2012 to 2021 of the Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse. Paul did his undergraduate and doctoral studies at the University of Oxford, where he was a Fellow of All Souls College. Paul's current research lies in three ar

What's happened to our economy and what does it mean for our health? Many developed economies have been growing more slowly since around 2008, but the UK economy has been struggling more than most. Wages haven't risen since 2008 leaving the average worker £14,000 worse off. Productivity growth – vital to rising living standards – has stalled. Regional inequalities are unusually large, and economic hardship is widespread with 2.8 million people reporting not working because of long-term sickness. So what's driving this economic stagnation, how is it connected to our health, and what can politicians do to address the challenges? To discuss, our Chief Executive Jennifer Dixon is joined by: Diane Coyle, Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge and Co-Director of the Bennett Institute. Torsten Bell, Chief Executive of the Resolution Foundation. Show notes The Health Foundation (2023). The unsustainable is not sustained: why productivity is fundamental to the future of the NHS.  The Resolution Foundation (2023). Ending stagnation: a new economic strategy for Britain.  The Health Foundation (2023). What we know about the UK's working-age health challenge. Coyle D and Muhtar A (2022). Contemporary Social Science. Levelling up policies and the failure to learn. Bennett Institute for Public Policy (2023). A Universal Basic Infrastructure for the UK.  The Resolution Foundation (2024) (funded by the Health Foundation). We've only just begun: action to improve young people's mental health, education and employment.

Rory Cellan-Jones talks to Jean-Paul Azam, Diane Coyle and Andy Westwood about the potential of universal basic income to tackle regional inequalities, boost economic growth in ‘left behind' and growing places, and rebuild democracy. This episode unpacks why current policies are failing to tackle regional inequalities and how a universal basic infrastructure might boost productivity across all places. Leading experts examine the value of infrastructure in different country contexts and how different levels of various departments and government could work together to deliver a universal basic infrastructure in all places. Listen to this episode on your preferred podcast platform Season 3 Episode 4 transcriptFor more information about the podcast and the work of the institutes, visit our websites at www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk and www.iast.fr Tweet us with your thoughts at @BennettInst and @IASToulouseWith thanks to:    Audio production by Steve HankeyAssociate production by Stella ErkerVisuals by Tiffany NaylorRelevant links:Townscapes: A Universal Basic Infrastructure for the UK by Coyle, D., Erker, S. and Westwood, A. Bennett Institute (2023).A Universal Basic Infrastructure in the UK by Coyle, D., Erker, S. and Westwood, A. Bennett Institute (2023). To Fight Populism, Invest in Left-Behind Communities by Coyle, D. Project Syndicate (2023).  More information about our host and guests:Rory Cellan-Jones was a technology correspondent for the BBC. His 40 years in journalism have seen him take a particular interest in the impact of the internet and digital technology on society and business. His latest book is “Ruskin Park: Sylvia, Me and the BBC”. @ruskin147Jean-Paul Azam is a professor of economics Emeritus at the Toulouse School of Economics, University of Toulouse and a member of IAST. After publishing mainly on the macroeconomics of Africa, he has focused since the mid-1990s on explaining violent conflict and its prevention, with application to foreign aid, civil war, and transnational terrorism.Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Diane co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Her latest book is ‘Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be‘ on how economics needs to change to keep pace with the twenty-first century and the digital economy. @DianeCoyle1859Andy Westwood is Professor of Government Practice at the University of Manchester and a Director of the ESRC funded Productivity Institute. He has worked as an expert adviser to the EU, OECD and IMF, as well as a specialist adviser to the Select Committees on Economic Affai

The cost of living crisis followed a decade in which people's wages and incomes barely grew. The idea that each generation does at least as well as the one before, has for the moment ended. We'll only start getting better off again if we can get the economy growing – as it used to in the decades preceding the financial crisis. So, what levers can governments pull to get growth back into the system? Why don't governments do the things that nearly every expert thinks might work? Should we be looking to governments at all? Paul Johnson of the Institute for Fiscal Studies explores the challenges facing the UK economy and asks: how can any government get the UK economy growing? Presenter: Paul Johnson Producer: Farhana Haider Editor: Claire Fordham Contributors: Diane Coyle, Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Jagjit Chadha, Director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research Stephen Evans, Chief Executive of the Learning and Work Institute Richard Davies, Director of the Economics Observatory Louise Hellem, Chief economist at the CBI. Nicholas Macpherson, former Permanent Secretary at the Treasury. Rowan Crozier, CEO C. Brandauer & Co Ltd Sam Bowan, Editor of Works in Progress

For Listener Week, you, our listeners, decide what we cover on the programme. Listener Liane has tasked the programme with a deep dive into the impact of generative Artificial Intelligence on the workforce. She's concerned that AI risks making humans “obsolete” and “has the capacity to replace millions of people's creative ideas, artwork, writing, music, their skills in language, invention and interpretation in seconds.” We speak to Dame Diane Coyle, the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at Cambridge University, and Christina Colclough, founder of the Why Not Lab specialising in the futures of work. Listener Deb emailed in to shine a light on the work of her daughter Daisy and her partner Anna, thatchers who have worked on rooves all over Devon. Our reporter Sarah Swadling caught up with them at work on a cottage near Okehampton. How do you feel about your nose? Once considered a symbol of beauty and power in ancient Rome, having a slightly larger facial feature nowadays can have a different meaning for some. Do you embrace it in its natural form or have you ever thought about changing it? We speak to Radhika Sanghani, who started the #sideprofileselfie campaign; and Karolina who decided to have a rhinoplasty. Listener Annette has often thought about living with her female friends in old age but she doesn't know how to go about it. To answer her questions, we speak to architect Anne Thorne, who has recently built Cannock Mill CoHousing with 25 other households. And Mim Skinner, author of Living Together, a book about intentional communities in the UK and beyond. Presenter: Anita Rani Producer: Lucy Wai Studio Manager: Gayl Gordan 00:00 OPENER 02:17 AI AND AUTOMATION 17.45 TRAIL 18:57 FEMALE THATCHERS 32:00 BIG NOSES 45:51 COMMUNAL LIVING

How can employers in all sectors of the UK economy get the best out of their workers, retain experienced staff, improve productivity and increase profits at the same time? The principles of "Job Design" seem to promise all of these benefits. It's a process of work innovation which focuses on people, their skills, their knowledge and how they interact with each other and technology, in every workplace, in every sector of the economy. Proponents claim it gives workers a voice in their workplace, allows them to balance their work and home lives, stops burnout and could get more of the economically inactive back in employment. But what evidence is there that it works - and how difficult would it be to implement changes in the workplace? Presenter: Pauline Mason Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Patricia Findlay, Professor of Work and Employment Relations, University of Strathclyde and Director of the Scottish Centre for Employment Research. Kate Bennett, Labour ward coordinator at Liverpool Women's Hospital. Damian Grimshaw, Professor of Employment Studies, King's College London, and former head of research at the International Labour Organisation. Dame Diane Coyle, Bennett Professor, University of Cambridge and a director of the Productivity Institute. Rachel London, Deputy Chief People Officer at Liverpool Women's Hospital. Jenna Brimble. Midwife in the continuity of care team at Liverpool Women's Hospital. Heejung Chung, Professor of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Kent. Emma Stewart, Flexible working consultant and co-founder, Timewise. Dr Charlotte Gascoine independent researcher and consultant on flexible and part-time working Paul Dennett, Mayor of the City of Salford Jim Liptrot, Managing director, Howorth Air Tech. Stacey Bridge, Financial accounting assistant, Howorth Air Tech.

How can employers in all sectors of the UK economy get the best out of their workers, retain experienced staff, improve productivity and increase profits at the same time? The principles of "Job Design" seem to promise all of these benefits. It's a process of work innovation which focuses on people, their skills, their knowledge and how they interact with each other and technology, in every workplace, in every sector of the economy. Proponents claim it gives workers a voice in their workplace, allows them to balance their work and home lives, stops burnout and could get more of the economically inactive back in employment. But what evidence is there that it works - and how difficult would it be to implement changes in the workplace? Presenter: Pauline Mason Producer: Ravi Naik Editor: Clare Fordham Contributors: Patricia Findlay, Professor of Work and Employment Relations, University of Strathclyde and Director of the Scottish Centre for Employment Research. Kate Bennett, Labour ward coordinator at Liverpool Women's Hospital. Damian Grimshaw, Professor of Employment Studies, King's College London, and former head of research at the International Labour Organisation. Dame Diane Coyle, Bennett Professor, University of Cambridge and a director of the Productivity Institute. Rachel London, Deputy Chief People Officer at Liverpool Women's Hospital. Jenna Brimble. Midwife in the continuity of care team at Liverpool Women's Hospital. Heejung Chung, Professor of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Kent. Emma Stewart, Flexible working consultant and co-founder, Timewise. Dr Charlotte Gascoine independent researcher and consultant on flexible and part-time working Paul Dennett, Mayor of the City of Salford Jim Liptrot, Managing director, Howorth Air Tech. Stacey Bridge, Financial accounting assistant, Howorth Air Tech.

Many blame our obsession with economic growth as being one of the biggest drivers of climate change. The United Nations is currently looking at options for what might replace Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as the world's primary go-to indicator of success, taking into account factors including sustainability and the natural environment. If this happens, it would be the biggest shift in how economies are measured since nations first started using GDP in 1953, 70 years ago. Presenter Graihagh Jackson is joined by: Ehsan Masood, author, science journalist and an editor at the journal, Nature; Diane Coyle, economist and Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge; Adil Najam, Dean Emeritus and Professor at the Pardee School of Global Studies, Boston University; Fouty-Boulanga Mouleka, on-the-ground reporter in Gabon Producer: Ben Cooper Researchers: Matt Toulson, Pierre-Antoine Denis, Bethan Ashmead-Latham and Laura Cain Series Producer: Alex Lewis Editor: China Collins Sound engineer: Tom Brignell Production Coordinators: Siobhan Reed and Sophie Hill

On this week's episode of the Governance Podcast, Mark Pennington, the Director at the Study of Governance and Society here at King College London, interviews Professor Diane Coyle. This episode is titled "The data that is and that data the isn't: the pitfalls of using big data", and discusses the various uses and implications of big data in society, and the many pitfalls that may arise.  The Conversation ‘Big Data' fuels AI models like ChatGPT and the machine learning systems that are generating much debate about their promise – and peril – for decision-making. The impact of the technology will depend on the character of the data used. While the issue of data bias is well-understood (although not solved), less attention has been paid to other aspects such as data quality (is the data an accurate measure of the underlying object?), missing data (do we have only part of the picture?), and the meaning of data (how are the underlying concepts represented by the data constructed and interpreted)? As AI models are advancing fast enough to be deployed increasingly widely in society, there is a pressing need to reflect on the perspective on our social world created for them through the data on which they are trained and updated. The Guest Professor Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Diane co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Her latest book is ‘Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be‘ on how economics needs to change to keep pace with the twenty-first century and the digital economy. Diane is also a Director of the Productivity Institute, a Fellow of the Office for National Statistics, an expert adviser to the National Infrastructure Commission, and Senior Independent Member of the ESRC Council. She has served in public service roles including as Vice Chair of the BBC Trust, member of the Competition Commission, of the Migration Advisory Committee and of the Natural Capital Committee. Diane was Professor of Economics at the University of Manchester until March 2018 and was awarded a CBE for her contribution to the public understanding of economics in the 2018 New Year Honours.

The charity Citizens Advice says it's seen a sharp rise in the number of working people accessing crisis support in the past few years. In 2022, of the 200,000 people helped with a food bank voucher or an emergency grant, almost 24,000 - about 1 in 8 of them - worked. That figure was up more than double the number in 2020. We'll speak to Citizens Advice and get a response from the government. We'll hear from Harriett Baldwin, the Chair of the Treasury Select Committee, on how she wants banks to stop dragging their feet when it comes to implementing changes designed to stop people from becoming victims of push payment fraud. UK Finance, which speaks for banks, says the industry is investing billions to try to keep customers' money safe and is working on plans to slow down certain high-risk payments to prevent fraud. From this week unmarried parents whose partner dies can claim bereavement support payment worth up to £9800. We reported a few weeks ago that the change was coming and this week the application process has opened. Anyone who thinks they should be eligible can now put in a claim online via gov.uk, over the phone or using a paper application form. More details here: www.gov.uk/bereavement-support-payment and from the charities Child Bereavement Network (https://childhoodbereavementnetwork.org.uk/) and Widowed and Young (https://www.widowedandyoung.org.uk/). And we'll discuss what GDP means for our personal finance with Diane Coyle, Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge and a former advisor to the UK Treasury. Presenter: Paul Lewis Reporter: Dan Whitworth Researchers: Eimear Devlin and Jo Krasner Editor: Jess Quayle (First broadcast 12pm Saturday 11th Feb, 2023)

The cost of living crisis is putting more pressure on more people - but what happens when that pressure becomes too much, and is bankruptcy always a bad thing? Professor Diane Coyle explains the processes and wider economic impact of bankruptcy, and Dr Victoria Bateman takes us back to the very beginning of the idea in the time of Henry VIII. Everything you need to know about the economy and what it means for you. This podcast will cut through the jargon to bring you clarity and ensure you finally understand all those complicated terms and phrases you hear on the news such as Inflation, GDP, National Debt, energy markets and more. We'll ensure you understand what's going on today, why your shopping is getting more expensive or why your pay doesn't cover your bills.Guest: Professor Diane Coyle, the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Producer: Louise Clarke-Rowbotham Researcher: Beth Ashmead-Latham Technical Producer: Nicky Edwards Editor: Clare Fordham Theme music: Don't Fret, Beats Fresh MusicA BBC Long Form Audio Production for BBC Radio 4

Dr. Jen Bennett is a driven visionary communicator who has a unique way of connecting with her audience. She enjoys teaching, leading, and building and is committed to helping others be successful. As a Strategic Communication Professor at Indiana Wesleyan University, Jen equips college students to discover their voice, develop their expertise, and lead with influence to impact culture for Christ. Jen provides students with real-world opportunities that help launch them into the careers and professions that they are called to. Jen has consulted various entrepreneurs, small business owners, ministries, organizations, and college students in social media, personal branding, marketing, and public relations. Jen was named as one of  65 Women in Digital You Should Be Following. In 2019 she was chosen as one of 55 social media influencers (out of 700 applicants) to attend #NASASocial for the Falcon Heavy Rocket Launch. She is also the author of the book, #BeWorthFollowing: How to Be Different and Influence People in a Crowded Social World. In April of 2021, Jen launched the She Impacts Culture podcast, a podcast for trailblazing, faith-based women who want to lead with influence and impact culture for Christ through their work. And in 2022, Jen co-founded Faith First Digital Marketers, a community of Christian digital marketers seeking to put Christ first in their businesses and lives.    In this episode, Dr. Bennett shares with Missie and Courtney about:  Her role as Strategic Communication Professor at Indiana Wesleyan University Her vision for how social media can be a tool used for kingdom purposes rather than self-promotion Her thoughts on whether Christian women should be social media “influencers” 4 marketing tips for new entrepreneurs or anyone just beginning to promote the cause God has called them to Tips for putting our phones down and being present with our real-life friends and family    

Former Treasury economist and Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge, Diane Coyle, says the government needs to be more consistent in its supply-side economic measures. She told Bloomberg's Stephen Carroll and Caroline Hepker that ministers can't keep putting off much-needed investments. Coyle added that criticism of institutions like the Office for Budget Responsibility by politicians was "really unhelpful" in the context of the cost of living crisis.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How can you be both interdisciplinary and be a contributing specialist in your discipline in this day andage? It's a core theme of this podcast, as well as our guests' research. Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Diane co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Her latest book is “Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be” on how economics needs to change to keep pace with the twenty-first century and the digital economy.Diane is also a Director of the Productivity Institute, a Fellow of the Office for National Statistics, an expert adviser to the National Infrastructure Commission, and Senior Independent Member of the ESRC Council. Diane joins Greg to discuss the shifting dynamics of economic measurement' over and underestimating GDP' mathiess; and why the public has such a skewed perception of what economists do.Episode Quotes:Why is the public's perception of economists skewed?20:51: It's partly what they see on the news when they turn on the TV in the evening, and often it's somebody who works in the financial markets talking about the kinds of things that financial markets are trying to predict second by second. That's very dominant. I've done some work in schools over the years to try to encourage young women to go into economics because it's a very male-dominated profession. Both they and the boys in the class take away the idea that what economics is about is going to work on Wall Street or in the City here and making a lot of money. They think it's about money. And I think that's the dominant perception that people have. Money is a metric—we use it quite a lot. But it's not really what economics is about.Data are social contracts08:54: Data are not things that are given. They're things that are made—they're social constructs.How do you identify what's happening in a market?41:07: If you want to identify what's happening in a market, going and talking to people who participate in the market is a great way to find out about it. And you have megabytes of data. It's just text, and you can analyze that in a very systematic way. Diane's aspiration for economist30:08: I would like, as us economists, to pay more attention to other insights from other disciplines from people who think differently to ourselves, that basic intellectual hygiene thing of talking to people who disagree with you so that you understand why you might be wrong. But I suppose my ultimate dream is we manage to make economics consistent with the human sciences. Show Links:Recommended Resources:Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much - Book by Eldar ShafirBob Schillers book on narrativePaul RomerVegra Lickus (?) paper in 1994 in the American Economic Review ??Guest Profile:Faculty Profile at University of CambridgeProfessional Profile at Enlighten EconomicsDianne Coyle on TwitterDianne Coyle on LinkedInHer Work:Enlighten EconomicsDianne Coyle on Google ScholarCogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should BeGDP: A Brief but Affectionate History - Revised and expanded EditionThe Economics of Enough: How to Run the Economy as If the Future Matters The Soulful Science: What Economists Really Do and Why It Matters - Revised EditionSex, Drugs and Economics: An Unconventional Introduction to EconomicsParadoxes of Prosperity: Why the New Capitalism Benefits All Governing the World Economy (Themes for the 21st Century)

Rory Cellan-Jones talks to leading economists Diane Coyle, Jacques Crémer and Jean Tirole, about why productivity growth has slowed in spite of immense technological progress and what policy can do about it.This episode unravels the impact of digitalisation on economic growth and its implications for policy. Leading economists discuss the productivity puzzle, why regulating Big Tech is so difficult, the threats of mass surveillance, and what policymakers can do to address these challenges. This episode is hosted by Rory Cellan-Jones (former technology correspondent for the BBC), and features guest experts Professor Diane Coyle (Bennett Institute for Public Policy), Professor Jacques Crémer (Toulouse School of Economics) and Professor Jean Tirole (Toulouse School of Economics – International Advanced Study in Toulouse). Listen to this episode on your preferred podcast platform: https://pod.fo/e/14406bSeason 2 Episode 1 transcript: https://www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/CC-S2-EP1-transcript.pdf For more information about the podcast and the work of the institutes, visit our websites at https://www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/ and https://www.iast.fr/.Tweet us with your thoughts at @BennettInst and @IASToulouseWith thanks to:Audio production by Steve Hankey.Podcast editing by Stella Erker. More information about our guests:Professor Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. She co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads the themes of progress and productivity, and researches the digital economy and economic measurement. Diane is also a Director of the Productivity Institute, and a Fellow of the Office for National Statistics. Professor Jacques Crémer received his undergraduate degree from the Ecole Polytechnique in 1971, a SM in Management and a PhD in economics, both from MIT, in 1973 and 1977. He has held appointments at the University of Pennsylvania and the Virginia Polytechnic Institute. His current research interests are the economics of organization, the economics of the Internet and of the software industries, as well as contract theory.Professor Jean Tirole is honorary chairman of the Foundation JJ Laffont-Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), and scientific director of TSE-Partnership. He is also affiliated with MIT, where he holds a visiting position, and the Institut de France. Professor Tirole's research covers industrial organization, regulation, finance, macroeconomics and banking, and psychology-based economics. Rory Cellan-Jones is a former technology correspondent for the BBC. His 40 years in journalism saw him take a particular interest in the impact of the internet and digital technology on society and business. He has written multiple books, including his latest “Always On” which was published in 2021.

The levelling up agenda finds itself up for debate in the Tory leadership race - as social issues take root in some parts of the north and a cost of living crisis rumbles on the horizon. This week, The Mill's Joshi Herrmann speaks to leading economist and Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge Diane Coyle to ask: what would real levelling up look like? Diane's story begins in the north, having grown up in Ramsbottom, and has taken her from economics editor at The Independent to working with the treasury. She has dedicated her working life to asking how the de-industrialised towns of the north can be more productive, how to bring back well-paid jobs and how to increase the quality of life in economically uncertain times. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

After second quarter GDP figures showed the UK economy contracting by less than had been expected, economist and Bennett Professor of Public Policy at Cambridge University Diane Coyle says the outlook is bleak. She told Bloomberg's Stephen Carroll and Alex Webb that the impact of rising energy bills will be 'severe' on households, and that discretionary spending will be the key metric to watch for signs of consumers being squeezed.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In the digital era, data is practically the air we breathe. So why does everybody treat it like a product to be hoarded and sold at profit? How would our world change if Big Tech operated on assumptions and incentives more aligned with the needs of a healthy society? Are more data — or are bigger models — really better? As human beings scamper around like prehistoric mammals under the proverbial feet of the new enormous digital monopolies that have emerged due to the Web's economies of scale, how might we tip the scales back to a world governed wisely by human judgment and networks of trust? Would Facebook and Twitter be more beneficial for society if they were public services like the BBC? And how do we settle on the social norms that help ensure the ethical deployment of A.I.? These and many other questions grow from the boundary-challenging developments of rapid innovation that define our century — a world in which the familiar dyads of state and market, public and private, individual and institutional are all called into question.Welcome to COMPLEXITY, the official podcast of the Santa Fe Institute. I'm your host, Michael Garfield, and every other week we'll bring you with us for far-ranging conversations with our worldwide network of rigorous researchers developing new frameworks to explain the deepest mysteries of the universe.This week on Complexity, we speak with two researchers helping to rethink political economy:SFI External Professor Eric Beinhocker is the Professor of Public Policy Practice at the University of Oxford, and founder and Executive Director of the Institute for New Economic Thinking at the University's Oxford Martin School. He is also the author of The Origin of Wealth: The Radical Remaking of Economics and What It Means for Business and Society.Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge, and co-director of the Bennett Institute, whose latest book — Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be— was published by Princeton University Press last fall.In the first episode of this subseries, we spoke with SFI President David Krakauer about how the study of political economy has changed over the last two hundred years due to the innovation of new mathematical and computational methods.  In this episode, we examine how the technological milieu that empowered these changes has also transformed the subject of study itself:  digital surveillance architecture, social media networks, big data, and (largely inadequate) attempts to formalize econometrics have all had a profound impact on modern life. In what ways do new institutions beget even newer institutions to address their unintended consequences? How should we think about the complex relationships between private and public agencies, and what status should we give the data they produce and consume? What is it going to take to restore the trust in one another necessary for society to remain coherent, and what are the most important measures to help economists and policymakers navigate the turbulence of our times into a more inclusive, prosperous, and sustainable world?Subscribe to Complexity Podcast for upcoming episodes with an acclaimed line-up of scholars including Ricardo Hausmann, Doyne Farmer, Steven Teles, Rajiv Sethi, Jenna Bednar, Tom Ginsburg, Niall Ferguson, Neal Stephenson, Paul Smaldino, C. Thi Nguyen, John Kay, John Geneakoplos, and many more to be announced…If you value our research and communication efforts, please rate and review us at Apple Podcasts, and consider making a donation — or finding other ways to engage with us — at santafe.edu/engage. You can find the complete show notes for every episode, with transcripts and links to cited works, at complexity.simplecast.com.Thank you for listening!Join our Facebook discussion group to meet like minds and talk about each episode.Podcast theme music by Mitch Mignano.Follow us on social media:Twitter • YouTube • Facebook • Instagram • LinkedInMentions and additional resources:Toward a New Ontological Framework for the Economic Goodby Eric D. BeinhockerComplexity Economics: Proceedings of the Santa Fe Institute's 2019 Fall Symposiumedited by W. Brian Arthur, Eric Beinhocker, Allison StangerSocializing Databy Diane CoyleThe Public Optionby Diane CoyleCommon as Air: Revolution, Art, and Ownershipby Lewis HydePitchfork Economicsby Nick HanauerThe Nature of Technology: What It Is and How It Evolvesby W. Brian ArthurGeoffrey West on Complexity 35Will A Large Complex System Be Stable?by Robert MayBlockchain: Trust Companies: Every Company Is at Risk of Being Disrupted by A Trusted Version of Itselfby Richie EtwaruHelena Miton on Complexity 46The coming battle for the COVID-19 narrativeby Sam Bowles, Wendy CarlinRecoupling Economic and Social Prosperityby Katharina Lima de Miranda, Dennis J. SnowerSignalling architectures can prevent cancer evolutionby Leonardo Oña & Michael LachmannWhy we should have a public option version of Google and Facebook (response to Diane Coyle)by James PethokoukisBryant Walker Smith on Complexity 79“Premature optimization is the root of all evil."— Donald Knuth

Data and the Data Economy are increasingly important issues affecting all of society. Hear from a panel of experts on responsible technology and public policy discussing mental models of how value accrues in the Data Economy, how to form protective legislation and infrastructure, and dealing with extreme concentrations of power and wealth plaguing the data economy. This was originally aired on RxC TV as part of the 2021 RadicalxChange unConference Online.SpeakersSushant Kumar (@sushants) As Director on the Responsible Technology team, based in India, Sushant is focused on Omidyar Network's work on a new data paradigm, with a vision for technology that underpins greater individual empowerment, social opportunity, and user safety.Previously, Sushant was part of the intellectual capital team, helping to define Omidyar Network's strategy, research, impact, and learning agendas, with a focus on India.Prior to joining Omidyar Network, Sushant was a principal at Accenture Strategy, where he led major initiatives across consumer goods and technology industries. In this role, he advised clients in Europe, Africa, and India growth strategy, operating model transformations, and international expansion. Before Accenture, Sushant worked as a strategist with the GSM Association, and Capgemini, driving thought leadership across policy, consumer technology, and digital media sectors.Sushant earned his MBA from the London Business School and received a Bachelor of Technology from the Indian Institute of Technology (BHU), Varanasi.Diane Coyle (@DianeCoyle1859)Professor Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Diane co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Her latest book is ‘Markets, State and People – Economics for Public Policy' examines how societies reach decisions about the use and allocation of economic resources. Her next book, 'Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be' is published on 12 October 2021.Diane is also a Director of the Productivity Institute, a Fellow of the Office for National Statistics, an expert adviser to the National Infrastructure Commission, and Senior Independent Member of the ESRC Council. She has served in public service roles including as Vice Chair of the BBC Trust, member of the Competition Commission, of the Migration Advisory Committee and of the Natural Capital Committee. Diane was Professor of Economics at the University of Manchester until March 2018 and was awarded a CBE for her contribution to the public understanding of economics in the 2018 New Year Honours.Matt Prewitt (@m_t_prewitt) Matt Prewitt is a lawyer, technologist, and writer. He is President of the RadicalxChange Foundation.

• Research identifies leadership and culture as catalysts • “Leadership must take the lead in aligning mindsets, structures, skills, and culture” (Total Recorded Time is 16:51) Organizations aren't quick to change and most businesses are around for profit. So does the issue of “sustainability” mean anything for the future of business? Yes, says a new study by the Bennett Institute for Public Policy at the University of Cambridge and JMJ, an Austin, Texas-based cultural transformation firm. “The Bennett Institute's research underscores the link JMJ has identified between an organization's culture and the success of its sustainability strategy,” says Jeff Williams, CEO at JMJ. “Those that treat ESG (environmental, social and governance considerations) as a box-ticking exercise will fail to take advantage of the strategic opportunity presented by enabling sustainability across all activities. “If an organization is going to embrace sustainability as a practice, leadership must take the lead in aligning mindsets, structures, skills, and culture,” Mr. Williams says. Jeff Williams is our guest on this Bizgnus Interview Podcast. Please click here to watch the interview: https://youtu.be/cBbHCF951o4 “There is no doubt leaders in business will need to embed sustainability in their corporate strategies,” says Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge Diane Coyle,. “Many will already have realized the importance of sustainability metrics. They need to go beyond that discussion to think about how their strategy, culture, and day-to-day activities will have to change -- and about the role of leadership in delivering that.” For more information: https://www.jmj.com/ ======================================= ABOUT US Bizgnus reports, writes, edits and publishes business news in online, broadcast and printed publications. We have published unbiased, unfiltered and in-depth interviews with business and other thought leaders since 2005. Opinions are those of our guests. Bizgnus never endorses the viewpoints, products or services of its guests, who are selected based on their knowledge and experience. No one pays to get on our podcasts. And we don't accept advertising (although Google/YouTube sells ads on our videos.) We'd appreciate your financial support through Patreon. If you'd like to help, please click here: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=56957587 Our address is 150 Herons Run, #104, Sarasota, Florida 34232. Call us anytime at 209.470.3400. Our email address is editor@bizgnus.com

Businesses are central in enabling global transitions to Net-Zero carbon energy and land-use systems. Business firms will need to innovate and scale new technologies, goods and services, business models and markets that make this new, more sustainable world become a reality. In the process, business incentives, accountabilities, and legitimacy will also be transformed. Institutions matter and they evolve. To meet the Net-Zero challenge, business organisations themselves are needing to change. In this lecture, Frans will review how the scope of business accountability has changed, what this means for notions of performance, how this influences practices of reporting and transparency, and how this feeds through to access to key resources, including capital and talent. Using some examples, Frans will conclude with some suggestions about how these linked business trends related to scope, performance, transparency and resources may unfold in future. This annual Grigor McClelland lecture will be given by Professor Frans Berkhout, Professor of Environment, Society and Climate at King's College London. Frans' presentation will be followed by a panel discussion. Joining Frans will be Professor Frank Geels, Professor Carly McLachlan, Director of Tyndall Manchester and Nkem Marian Igwe, Full-Time MBA Candidate. The discussion will be facilitated by Professor Andy McMeekin, Professor of Innovation at the Sustainable Consumption Institute. This lecture series was introduced in our 50th Anniversary year in 2015 in honour of the School's founding Director, Professor Grigor McClelland. During his twelve years as Director and Professor of Business Administration at Manchester Business School, Grigor shaped management and education for the next generation. He was a strong advocate of the principle that business cannot be divorced from society and that managers should be ethical and socially responsible. Our previous guest speakers for this lecture series, include Co-op Group's CEO Steve Murrells; Sir George Bain, former Chair of the Low Pay Commission which introduced the Minimum Wage in 1998; Craig Bennett, Chief Executive of Friends of the Earth; Torsten Bell, Director of the Resolution Foundation, Anna Dixon, Chief Executive of Ageing Better, Martin Wolf, Chief Economics Commentator at the Financial Times and Diane Coyle, Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. All have based the core themes of their lectures on this principle.

In Episode 3 of Series 7 of The Rights Track, Professor Diane Coyle, Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge and co-director of the Bennett Institute joins Todd to discuss the dizzying digital changes over the last 25 years, how it has disrupted the economy and impacted on our lives. Transcript Todd Landman  0:01  Welcome to The Rights Track podcast which gets the hard facts about the human rights challenges facing us today. In Series 7, we're discussing human rights in a digital world. I'm Todd Landman, in our third episode of the series, I'm delighted to be joined by Professor Diane Coyle. Diane is Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge and co- directs the Bennett Institute, where she leads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Her most recent book- Cogs and Monsters - explores the problems and opportunities for economics today, in light of the dizzying changes in digital technology, big data, machine learning, and artificial intelligence. And today we're asking her, why is it that digital is so very disruptive? So welcome, Diane, it's wonderful to have you here on this episode of The Rights Track. Diane Coyle  0:49  It's a pleasure, I'm flattered to be invited. Todd Landman  0:52  Well, it's great. And you know, I was reading Cogs and Monsters over the holidays and enjoy very much your dissection of you know, the state of the discipline of economics and where it's going, and some of its challenges, etc. But I was really taken by the section on digital technology and digital transformation. And you, you reference your 1997 book, The Weightless World. And of course, that was 25 years ago. So the time between the publication of The Weightless World and Cogs and Monsters. And you know, factoring in Moore's Law of technological change, a lot has happened over these 25 years. So I wonder if I could just start by asking you, what are the sort of broad brush, absolutely huge changes in this area? And what has been their impact on economics? Diane Coyle  1:34  Well, where to start, as you say, it's 25 years since I first got interested in digital technology, and was always sure, it was going to be transformative. But for a lot of economists, that was not obvious for quite a while. And I remember talking to one very senior figure in the UK profession who said, well, this digital stuff, it's going to reduce transactions costs a little bit, but we know how to handle transactions costs in our models so, so what's so special about this? And I suppose they've been inflection points where small changes or what might seem to be small changes bring about very large consequences. One of those was the switch from dial up internet, to broadband. And simply the loss of friction in the sort of *dial-up joining sound* when the modem did the handshake, for those who are old enough to remember, it made a big difference in the kind of services and opportunities that people thought they were able to put online and expanding the audience for them. And then the other was 2007, and the smartphone. Steve Jobs at that iconic Apple press conference, holding up the first smartphone first iPhone, which converged with the arrival of 3G, so that data transmission became cheaper and more possible at volume and speed. And also the kind of market design ideas in economics that enabled the creation of apps and in particular, matching apps and digital platforms. And if you look at what's happened since 2007, both in terms of individual behaviour and economic transactions, the fact that we spend a whole day a week, whole 24 hours a week, I think it's 28 now, online. And the new kinds of business models and the way that markets have restructured, it has been absolutely extraordinary. And I think in many areas, we're only just beginning to think through what the consequences are, and what the implications are for politics and policy and regulatory choices. Todd Landman  3:38  Thank you for that. And you know, that rapid expansion just in terms of volume, scale, speed has fundamentally transformed our lives. I remember Steve Jobs, the announcement and I thought what am I ever going to do with that? Why do I need a phone that takes a picture? And equally when the iPad came out, I thought, I'm not sure how I'm going to use that now of course I can't live without one. And it sort of does. It changes our workflow, it changes our productivity, people who are amenable to multitasking find that these devices do help us and of course, being able to share information at rapid speed. As we know, through the pandemic, we've been able to communicate and stay on, on track in some ways in engaging with the sorts of things that we do. And so I wanted to focus a little bit on those that haven't really experienced this incredible transformation. I was recently at an event where a representative from one of the local housing association said well, we have about you know, 10,000 houses in our portfolio, if we add up all the housing associations in our, our portfolio plus other providers that might be 100,000 houses in this region, most of whom do not have access to these digital transformations. So what could you say about the sort of the left out, the left behind or the famous word about the digital divide? How do we address some of those issues, both economically but also maybe in policy terms? Diane Coyle  4:52  In different ways it's a different level of the digital divide, and one is just the sheer network infrastructure. And the economics of these networks is such that population density really makes a difference to their financial viability. So to get universal service at high speed, there has to be public subsidy for it. In this country, we've got a government that has since Mrs. Thatcher's time being focused on you try all the market solutions possible first, and then grudgingly, you have some public intervention. And I think there should have been public intervention long ago and much more focused on minimum universal service. Ofcom does set standards and I think the standards that they have set are now outdated by the technology. So that needs revisiting, and then the investments got to happen. And we've had, you know, more or less monopoly of Openreach having the core of the network. And that problem hasn't really been fixed. So there's a set of problems about network infrastructure, and who's going to pay for it, and universal services and utility. And then there's access to devices and the payment plans. And for that, you know, obviously, smartphones are expensive, we've got plans where you can get the handset subsidised if you sign up to a reasonably expensive data plan. But lots of people can't do that. And this is a universal problem in all countries, because they're all pretty unequal. And so the people who are best off have best access. During the pandemic that's been diabolically bad, in particular for schoolchildren who've been learning online. And if you've got a limited plan, limited data, and you've only got a phone, not a tablet or a computer, you're not going to learn, you're not going to learn that learning deficit is going to scar those individuals for the rest of their working careers. So that has been a problem. And I'm not sure I've got an easy fix for this except that this is a necessity of modern life. And if people need subsidising to get necessities, if we subsidise their energy, for example, then we should be subsidising their connectivity as well. And then there's this sort of whole digital literacy bit, which is a whole other kettle of fish. And how do we teach people to be properly sophisticated consumers of whatever it is, whether it's social media misinformation, or whether it's price comparison websites, and how to interpret the information that you're getting from those.  Todd Landman  7:18  When I've listened to you, you know, it feels like you're making the case for digital connectivity as almost a public good like access to health care, education, social welfare, social, you know, the social safety net, if you will, is that your view that this really is, you know, akin to the provision of education and health and welfare?  Diane Coyle  7:43  I think it is because it's about conveying information really. And this is the fundamental characteristic of information and how that drives economic growth, particularly in what we call the knowledge economy. And all of this is useful because it gives people information to do things that make their lives easier or better in some way that matters to them. A trivial example might be, you've got an app on your phone that helps you navigate around the city so that you don't waste time because your bus isn't running. So that's one kind of valuable information and the time saving that goes with that. But you know, that's, that's the fundamental point of it. It's accessing public services online is almost essential now, leading your daily life, making it more convenient, making it more enjoyable, in business, using the information that you can get to deliver better services to your customers. So it's all, it's all about information. And that is the key characteristic of information - it is a public good, it's non-rival. Todd Landman  8:38  Ah it is a non-rival public good and it's very interesting that that crosses over with a lot of discourse of the Human Rights field around rights to information, rights to be informed, etc. But also date obligations to progressive really realise that the fulfilment of social, economic and cultural rights. So there's a really interesting communication or conversation, if you will, that could take place between economists and human rights people around the provision of non-rival public goods. But the other thing that I was struck by what you said was this idea about digital literacy about not knowing in a way, how good all this can be for you, but also what some of the pitfalls are, how is one a good consumer of digital information, but also what's the unwitting phenomenon of people sharing tremendous amounts of information about themselves in the absence of that digital literacy, literacy? And I know you've done some work on you know, how much is your data worth? So how do we calculate what people's data is worth in the marketplace? Diane Coyle  9:36  Aha, how much time have you got? Actually, my colleague here in the economics department, Wei Xiong has done some work looking at Chinese data on how concerned users of one of the huge apps are about privacy. And the finding there that is really interesting. You know, there's this privacy paradox. People say they care and then they act as if they don't, and they found that people care more the more sophisticated a user they are. So people who don't go online very much or don't think about it very much don't care about their privacy, but the more people use it, and learn about the pitfalls, I suppose the more they care about, about the privacy questions. But this is this is a really interesting area. And it's an ongoing area of research for me. And, you know it operates at different levels. So one is just what's it worth to the economy? People think data is an asset, because it helps businesses tailor their services better, develop better products, serve their customers better, make more money, which is a good thing in a capitalist economy. And there's a growing gap between the most productive companies and all the rest. So the top 5% In most OECD countries are pulling further away in terms of productivity and also profitability. More and more research is suggesting that's because they are using digital tools better, they using predictive analytics, they are building their own software to use the data, growing databases. So all of those more digital firms are becoming more productive and sort of winning the competitive race, the competitive rivalry that takes place in market economies. So we would like more firms to do that, to grow the economy and grow jobs and make better products and services. But then there's also the individual point that you alluded to. And being an economist, I think about this in terms of externalities. And as the negative externality that you pointed to that your behaviour online, or the data that people accumulate about you online, can reveal things about you that you don't want to be known. Or you can do the same about other people, you can reveal things about people who are like you, or people who are connected with you that they don't want, want known. And there are also positive externalities that come from joining up data, because a lot of the value, a lot of the information value depends on putting data in context. And even something that seems very personal. Like, do I have a temperature right now? Obviously, has positive information value for the people around me. And so to make use of this, to give people, you know, better quality lives better information, we need to think about how do we get data shared in good ways that creates value for people and doesn't invade their privacy? So this debate, I think is in in a pretty terrible state. And I'd be interested to know what you think about this, I think part of problem is that it's always thought about in terms of individual rights, and actually, it's a data captures relationships and context. Todd Landman  12:38  Yes, and you know, so a lot of the human rights discourse is around the right of the individual. But of course, there are group rights and collective rights that are equally as important. So one can look at minority rights, for example, and other collective rights. So there is that tension in human rights discourse in human rights law between the absolute fundamental rights of the individual vis-à-vis the state then vis-à-vis non-state actors, including businesses, but also non, non, not for profit organisations. And then collective rights - does a group of people have a right to maintain a certain set of practices, or certain linguistic tendencies or textbooks in mother tongue language? Which is a it's a whole another podcast about that I'm sure. So yeah, I think you put your finger on a very interesting tension between these things. And I, I guess, I want to pivot to this idea of capitalism without capital. So you, you mentioned the idea about productivity, growing the economy, jobs, and which is good for capitalism, as you say, but a lot of people have observed that actually, you know, companies like an Uber or any other kind of online car provider, or Airbnb, these are property companies without property. These are taxi companies without taxis. So they're actually wiping out any of the kind of overheads by having to run a big fleet of cars. And yet, the markup on that is, is very high. I mean, I went to one of these data centres in London, where they command all of the data needed to run a successful taxi company. And they get 26,000 bookings a day, I think, at the time, and they were optimising to the point that even if one of their drivers was on the way home, they made sure that there was a fair in the car on the way home because that meant that that car was earning money on the way home. So this phenomenon of the capitalism without capital, I mean, it's it's a bit of a misnomer, because it still requires infrastructure. It still requires devices and cars, but it shifts, you know, who owns what, who does what and where the margins sits. So, what can you say about this changing nature of capitalism in the face of this new phenomenon of digital technologies? Diane Coyle 14:39 It's a big question. I think the relationship between the material and the immaterial is really interesting. And the scale of the physical investment needed in data centres, or the energy use is often overlooked, although people are starting to talk about that more. And as you say, some platform companies operate by pushing the need to invest both in whether it's cars, physical capital, but also their own human capital, they're pushing that out to individuals. And what that means is that we're getting under investment, including in human capital, if you're a gig worker, your incentive to invest in your own training, when you're bearing all of the risk of fluctuations in the business is diminished. So that's quite interesting, too. And then we've got this construct of intellectual property or non-material property, hugely valuable, the stock market value put on companies that hold a lot of data or have a certain kind of brand or reputation is absolutely immense. And yet, it doesn't act like normal, old fashioned physical kinds of capital. It's got very different depreciation characteristics, you can, it can lose its value overnight, if there's a hit to reputation, or if a secret gets gets out and get shared. And I think the construct of property, intellectual property, intangible property is just as an individual right to own the property or corporate right to own the property is just highly problematic. And I would much rather we start to think in terms of rights to access - who has rights to access what? And, you know, particularly going back to data, what can, what can who know about somebody? Because part of the privacy issue is that whether it's big tech firms or governments, they're in a position to start joining up all kinds of data about people. And that's the problem. You don't mind your doctor, knowing very intimate details about you and having that data. You don't mind your bank manager, knowing what your bank balances, but you wouldn't want the government to join up all of those different bits of information about you and get that synoptic view, the Stasi, the East Germans had this term glesano which meant transparent people. And that I think, is is a real problem. So I came across this concept that you probably know more about the idea of privacy in public that comes from other parts of social science literature. It operates offline, it doesn't operate online. So can we start to think about those sorts of access rights or permissions rather than absolute property rights? Does that make sense? Todd Landman  17:21 Yeah, that makes sense. And you know, I was thinking about one of the extreme examples of the the intangibles, which is this non-fungible trading regime. So people are creating digital assets, if you will, that are then trading and you know, a digital asset by a famous artists can can sell on the market for for millions of pounds. And it it again, it gets back to some of the fundamental questions you ask in your book Cogs and Monsters about faith in the economy, you know, we think about coins and currency. Why do I accept the fact that you hand me a £10 note, and I say, that's a £10 note, which is worth something, when actually, it's just a piece of paper. So a lot of the economy is based on that transactional faith that has built up over centuries of people trading. And now of course, during the pandemic, cash and coins weren't used as much, we're going to electronic payment. Apple Pay has lifted its its cap on, you know, pounds per transaction. You know, there's a whole new world of financial transaction that feels even more ephemeral than economics has felt like in the past, and what can you say about sort of where are we going with all of this? What What's the new non-fungible that suddenly is going to have value in the market?  Diane Coyle 18:27 I don't really know. I mean, for NFT's, I can't help but believe that there's a bubble element to that. And that people, you know the art market is a pretty rigged market, if I can put it that way. So I think there are people in the market who are trying to create artificial value, if you like around NFT's. But I don't know the answer to your question and it sometimes seems that value has become so untethered, that surely it's unreal. And yet at the same time, there are people who haven't got enough cash to go and buy food, they're going to food banks, and how has that come about? Yet equally, there are intangible things that are really valuable. Trust is an intangible, and we wouldn't have an economy without it. Cultural or heritage assets, which I'm thinking about at the moment. You know, it's not that we assign value to the stones in Stonehenge in some normal economic sense, but, but there is an additional cultural value to that, and how should we start to think about that, and, you know, more and more of the economy is intangible. So we have to get our heads around this. Todd Landman  19:27 More and more, the economy's intangible. I'm gonna have to quote you on that. That's wonderful. I, I think then what the next thing I'm really interested in exploring with you is, is the role of the state and the way I want to enter this really is that you've already hinted at the idea that provision of no-rival public goods where there's clearly you know, a role for the state in that there is also a role for the state in the regulatory environment. And you know, of course, I was very sort of worried about your observation that the state can combine banking information with health information and know something about you in a connected way that re-identification but also that very private revelation about someone's individual circumstance. So what's that balance between the state helping, the state regulating and the state staying away? Because that's a big concern in human rights, we, we often say the state has a has a, you know, an obligation not to interfere in our rights, it has an obligation to protect us from violations of rights by third parties. And it has an obligation to fulfil its right commitments up to available economic capability and, you know, sort of state institutional capability. But boy, there's a tough balance here between how much we want the state to be involved and how much we really say, just stay away. What's your take on that? Diane Coyle 20:38 It's particularly difficult, isn't it when trust in government has declined, and when democracies seem to be becoming rather fragile? So you worry much more about these trade-offs with an authoritarian state, whose politicians you don't trust very much, I think these issues have become more acute than they might have been 25 years ago, I suppose. And at the same time, we need the state more than ever, because of the characteristics of the way the economy is changing. We've had this period since Thatcher and Reagan, when the pendulum in public discourse about economic policy has swung very firmly towards markets first state fills in the gaps corrects the market failure. And yet, we're in a period of technical innovation when we need standards. Just going back to data, we need somebody who will set the standards for interoperability and metadata so that we can enforce competition in digital markets, or technical standards for the next generation of mobile telephony. So we need the standard setting. And because of the non-rivalry, and because of the returns to scale, I think we're all much more interconnected economically than used to be the case. And those phenomena have always existed. They've always been, you know, big economies of scale, and autos and aerospace, but they are now so pervasive across the economy, that almost everything we do is going to affect other people, I think it's becoming a much more collective economy than it used to be. Or just think about the way that the productive companies are combining all of our data to use predictive analytics to do better things for us. So, I, my strong senses is that it's a more collective economy, because it's intangible because it's got this these elements of non-rivalry and scale. And so we're going to have to have a rethink of what kind of policy discourse do we have around that, and it's not markets first government then fixes a few problems. Todd Landman  22:40 Yeah and that idea of the collective economy really moves away from you know, the discipline of economics has often been characterised as residing in methodological individualism. And as long as you understand the individual rationality of people, you just aggregate that rationality and then you get market force, and you get supply and demand curves, you get equilibrium prices, and quantities, etc. But you're actually making a slightly different argument here that the interconnectivity of human behaviour is the interrelationships of one person's choices and the consequences or the as you say, the predictive analytics in a way talking about, well, we expect you to like these sets of products, and therefore you will go buy them, or we expect crime in this region, and therefore we put more resources there. That's a different enterprise. That's a much more holistic enterprise of looking at the, as you say, data in context, and it changes our way of thinking about modelling the economy, but also thinking about remodelling our relationship with the state. Diane Coyle 23:34 I think you're right, you know, we're in a world then of disequilibrium of non-linear, linear dynamics where things can tip one way or another very quickly, where decisions by state agencies will shape outcomes. And give a simple example in my kind of territory, if you've got digital markets that that tip so that there's generally one dominant company because of the underlying economic characteristics, then any decision that a competition authority takes about a merger, or dominant position is going to shape which company dominates the market. You know, if the merger goes ahead, it's one and if it doesn't, go ahead, it may be another one. So they become market shapers. And I think this is why there's more interest now in self-fulfilling outcomes and narratives which started to take off a little bit in economics more in some other disciplines. Because the narrative affects the outcome, it aligns people's ideas and incentives and points them all in the same in the same direction. So I often think about the Victorians and I think they, they had this kind of narrative of greatness, and legacy long-term prosperity, and so they built these huge town halls that you see in cities around the country. Joseph Bazalgette gave us 150 years' worth of capacity in the London sewers. So they had something going on in their heads. That was not the economics that we've had from 1979 up, up until just recently, they weren't doing cost benefit analysis or thinking about equilibrium supply and demand curves. Todd Landman  25:07 Yeah, it's a much bigger vision, isn't it? And you know, there's an observation now that data is the new oil. It's the oil of the future. And I wonder if, in closing, whether you could just say a few remarks about a) do you think it is the oil of the future? And what's that flow of oil going to look like? Is it just more and more data and more and more confusion? Or is there going to be some sort of consolidation, rationalisation and, and deeper understanding of the limits of the data enterprise and the digital enterprise? Or is it just too hard to say at this stage? Diane Coyle 25:36 Economists don't like that analogy at all because oil is a rival good and data is a non-rival good. So we in a very anoraky way say no, no, that's a very imperfect analogy. And I mean of course, the point is that it's going to be ubiquitous and essential. And people still talk about the digital economy. But before long, that will be like talking about the electricity economy. It'll just all be digital and data. But I think there's so much that we don't know. And so much of what will happen will be shaped by decisions taken in the near term, with, you know, the consequences for governance, really, we've talked a lot about the economics of it. But all of this has implications for governance and democracy and rights, which is where you come in. Todd Landman  26:18 Yes, absolutely and that's what we're exploring in this series of, of The Rights Track. So this has been a fascinating discussion, as ever, I really enjoy your insights and precision your use of language and correcting me about the, the rival nature of data that but that's an important correction and one that I absolutely accept. But you've also raised so many questions for us to think about in terms of governance, democracy, rights, individual rights versus collective rights. And this idea of the non-rival public good that will absolutely, our listeners will want to chew over that one for a long time. So for now, can I just thank you so much for joining us on this episode of The Rights Track. Chris Garrington 26:55 Thanks for listening to this episode of The Rights Track, which was presented by Todd Landman and produced by Chris Garrington of Research Podcasts with funding from 3DI. You can find detailed show notes on the website at www.rightstrack.org and don't forget to subscribe wherever you listen to your podcasts to access future and earlier episodes.

Professor Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Professor Coyle co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. She is also a Director of the Productivity Institute, a Fellow of the Office for National Statistics, an expert adviser to the National Infrastructure Commission, and Senior Independent Member of the ESRC Council. She has served in public service roles including as Vice Chair of the BBC Trust, member of the Competition Commission, of the Migration Advisory Committee and of the Natural Capital Committee. Professor Coyle was awarded a CBE for her contribution to the public understanding of economics in the 2018 New Year Honours. Her new book, "Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be," is available now.

Hope versus fear in artificial intelligenceIn this third episode of Crossing Channels, experts from the Bennett Institute for Public Policy, Cambridge, and the Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST), discuss the ethics of artificial intelligence (AI), including why we need to care about it, who is responsible for it, and whether there's a double standard for AI and humans.Host Rory Cellan-Jones talks to Dr Jean-Francois Bonnefon and Professor Daniel Chen from IAST, and Professor Diane Coyle from the Bennett Institute.Listen on Spotify and Apple Podcasts Episode 3 transcriptFor more information about the podcast and the work of the institutes, visit our websites at www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk and www.iast.fr/. Tweet us your thoughts at @BennettInst and @IASToulouse.Audio production by Steve Hankey.Podcast editing by Annabel ManleyMore about our guestsDr Jean-Francois Bonnefon is the Scientific Director at the Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST), and a Research Director for the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS). He is also the President of the European Commission expert group on the ethics of driverless mobility, Head of the Artificial Intelligenve and Society programme of the Toulouse School of Economics Digital Center, and Chair of Moral AI at the Artificial and Natural Intelligence Toulouse Institute. His research interests are decision-making and moral preferences, and the applications of this in the ethics of self-driving cars and other intelligent machines.Professor Daniel Chen is a Senior Fellow at the Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, a Professor at the Toulouse School of Economics, and a Director of Research at the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS). His research interests include AI and the Rule of Law, with an overarching focus on normative commitments and the justice system. He is also Lead Principal Investigator for the World Bank DE JURE (Data and Evidence for Justice Reform) programme, which aims to update how legitimacy and equality in the justice system is measured and interpreted.Professor Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. She co-directs the Bennett Institute for Public Policy where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Diane is also a Director of The Productivity Institute, a Fellow of the Office for National Statistics, an expert adviser to the National Infrastructure Commission, and Senior Independent Member of the ESRC Council. Her research interests cover economic statistics, the digital economy, competition policy and digital markets, and the economics of new technologies.Rory Cellan- Jones (host) is a former technology correspondent for the BBC. His  40 years in journalism saw him take a particular interest in the impact of the internet and digital technology on society and business. He has written multiple books, including his latest “Always On” which was published in 2021.  

In Episode 1 of Series 7 of The Rights Track, Todd is in conversation with Ben Lucas, Managing Director of the University of Nottingham's Data-Driven Discovery Initiative (3DI).  Together they discuss the threat to human rights posed by aspects of a digital world and the opportunities it can create for positive change.  Transcript Todd Landman  0:00  Welcome to The Rights Track podcast which gets the hard facts about the human rights challenges facing us today. In series seven, we're discussing human rights in a digital world. I'm Todd Landman, in our first episode of the series, I'm delighted to be joined by Ben Lucas. Ben is Managing Director of 3DI at the University of Nottingham. A hub for world class data science research, and a funder for this series of The Rights Track. To kick off the series, we're talking about some of the challenges and opportunities created in a data driven society, and particularly what all that means for our human rights. So welcome on this episode of The Rights Track. Ben Lucas  0:37 Thank you so much for having me.  Todd Landman  0:38  It's great to have you here, Ben. And I guess I want to start with just to kind of broad open question. We've been living with the internet for a number of years now. When I first came to United Kingdom, we barely had the internet and suddenly the web exploded, and it is a wonderful thing. It's transformed our lives in so many different ways. But it's also created major challenges for human rights, law and practice around the world. So my first question really is, what are the key concerns? Ben Lucas  1:04 I think that the internet is perhaps not bad in and of itself, and in that regard, it's very similar to any other new and emerging technology. We look at something like the automobile there's obviously dangers that having cars on roads introduced into society, but there's also a lot of good as far as a boost in quality of life and economic productivity and so forth. I think the central challenge and one that's perhaps getting exponentially more challenging is the fact that often more now than ever, digital technologies are moving a lot faster than what the regulatory environment can keep up with. And also very importantly, humankind's ability to fully understand the potential consequences of misuse or what happens when things go wrong. Todd Landman  1:50  So in some ways, it is interesting, you could look at Moore's Law for example, technology increases exponentially and this point you're making about the inability for the regulatory environment to keep up with that. I think that's a crucial insight you've given us because human rights in a way is a regulatory environment. We have international standards; we have domestic standards. Ben Lucas  2:08  Correct. Todd Landman  2:09  We have de jure protection of rights, de facto enjoyment of rights, but oftentimes, there's a great tension or gap between those two things. And when new issues emerge, we either need a new standard, or we need a new interpretation of those standards to be able to apply to that new thing. So, we're going to call the Internet a new thing for now and it actually, this dual use of technology is also interesting to me. When barbed wire was invented it's a great thing because you can suddenly close off bits of land and keep animals in one place. And it's wonderful for agriculture, but it's also a way to control property. And as we know, the enclosure laws in this country led to quite a lot of political conflict. But if we get back to the questions then about, you know, positive and negative aspects of the Internet, what else can you share with us? Ben Lucas  2:50 There are examples such as work that colleagues in the Rights Lab are doing, for example, on the use of the Internet and in particular social media, for exploitation. So, child exploitation, for example. There's also terrible examples of migrant exploitation. People who join groups thinking it's going to be a community to help them to get a job in another place. And that turns out to be quite dodgy, so that there's examples that are just blatantly you know, bad and terrible and terrible things that happen on the internet. But then there are other examples that are, I think, much more complicated, especially around the transmission of information and new emergent keywords we're seeing around misinformation and disinformation. The power that user generated content can have to help mobilise activists and protests for good for example, to get information out when journalists can't get in. Then the flip side of that is the potential exploitation by nefarious actors who are obviously spreading information that potentially damages democracies and otherwise stable and important institutions around the world. The other thing I would sort of cite here would be work by our colleague, Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick with his book, The Good Drone. That's a really interesting contrast here. So, a book about the use of UAVs and where on the one hand, if we think about a UAV that's armed. Todd Landman  4:12  That's an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle for our listeners. Ben Lucas  4:14 Yeah, Unmanned Aerial Vehicle. And if we think about one of those drones that's armed and also potentially autonomous moving forward to some that's potentially you know, very, very scary. On the other hand, this same basic sort of technology platform could provide cheap and accessible technology to help mobilise social movements to help journalists for example. And so I think any debate around the good and bad of technology, that there's some really interesting and very complicated contrast involved. Todd Landman  4:43   And you know, you see drones being used for beautiful visual displays over you know, presidential inaugurations, for example. Ben Lucas  4:48 Exactly. Todd Landman  4:49  You see this big, colourful display, but that same swarm technology of UAVs can actually be used for combat for warfare, etc. And we know from the work on human rights, modern slavery and human trafficking that, you know, taking pictures of the Earth using satellites with swarms of satellites is very good, but then that can also be used for for ill as well and I think that challenge of the dual use of technology will always be with us. I wonder now if we could just turn to another set of questions, which is, is the difference between life online and life offline. Do we think that human rights rules are different for online and offline life or roughly the same? Ben Lucas  5:25  A lot of people argue that online is a mirror of offline, although there are those potentially really negative amplification effects involved in the bad stuff that happens in the real world so to speak, when you move it online because you can take something that's very small and suddenly make it very big. I think there's a degree of it really just being a mirror and potentially an amplifier for the offline. Again, I think the central problem when we talk about human rights and the general protection of users of the Internet, is again really this fact that the technology is just moving so fast. That regulation both it's you know, how it's developed, initiated, interpreted going forward, the tech just moves so much faster. And then I think what we're seeing now is really kind of a shock that internet users get after the fact but it's maybe the sort of Newton's third law effect. You know, tech moved so fast was so aggressive and so free in the way it kind of there was sort of a wild west of how we, you know, captured and used data. And now we're just sort of experiencing the backlash that you would expect. One other sort of complicated dimension here is that we really need regulation to protect users of the internet but of course, that's then balanced against examples we see around the world of the way the internet's regulated being used to oppress and suppress populations. There's a really important balance that we need to achieve there. We need to protect everybody online. We need to preserve freedom of access to information, freedom of speech. We don't want people to get hurt online, but we also don't want to do that in an oppressive way. Maybe one thing that's really different as far as human rights online and offline, will emerge in the future around artificial intelligence. The big question I think that researchers in artificial intelligence are dealing with be they folks who are working on the algorithmics or be they the colleagues in law who are working on the ethics and the legal side of it. The really big question is around sort of transparency and tractability what's actually happening in this magic algorithmic box? Can we make sure that people can have appropriate checks and balances on what these you know this this new class of machines is doing? Todd Landman  7:32  Well, it's interesting because there is this observation about people who, who who use AI and design those algorithms that the AI solution and the algorithm that's been designed reflects many of the biases of the coder in the first place. Ben Lucas  7:44 Exactly. Todd Landman  7:425 And who are these coders? Well, they come from a particular social demographic and therefore you're replicating their positionality through AI, yet AI is presented as this neutral machine that simply calculates things and gives you the best deals on whatever platform you might be shopping. Ben Lucas  7:58  Precisely. And a lot of these you know, if we think about machine learning in general, where we're training an algorithm, essentially a type of machine to do something it involves a training set that involves a training data set. Where is that coming from? Who's putting it together? Exactly what biases are present in that? And now, and this is probably one of the most pronounced differences when we think about sort of human rights offline and online. I think a really big issue going forward is going to be that of AI discrimination, basically, and we're seeing that in everything from financial services - you know a machine is making a decision about does somebody get a loan, does somebody get a good credit score, applications and facial recognition technology. Who are they trying to find? What are they trying to do with that tech? And this AI discrimination issue is going to be one of the, one of the key things about that online/offline contrast. Todd Landman  8:50  Yeah, you know running right through all of our human rights law discourses, one about you know no discrimination, right that there should not be discrimination by type of person. Ben Lucas  8:59  Correct. Todd Landman  9:00  And yet, we know in practice, there's law discrimination already. And in a way AI can only amplify or maybe accelerate some of that discrimination. So it's a good cautionary tale about you know, the, the, shall we say, the naive embrace of AI as a as a solution to our problems. I wonder if I might just move forward a little bit about the cross-border nature of the internet, one of the promises of the internet is that nation state boundaries disappear, that people can share information across space and time we've just lived through a pandemic, but we're able to talk to each other in meetings all around the world without having to get in any kind of form of transport. But what sort of things should we thinking about in terms of the cross-border nature of the internet? Ben Lucas  9:38  I think that I would encourage all listeners today to go back to Alain de Botton's book, The News; a User's Manual, and also some of the talks he gave around that period, I think around 2014. We can have a totally new interpretation of some of those very relevant ideas, where we are now in the present and I'm talking about what some people are calling the threat of the post truth era. We've seen a completely unprecedented explosion in the information that we have access to the ability to suddenly take somebody's very small idea, good or bad, and project to a massive audience. But with that comes, you know, the vulnerabilities around misinformation and disinformation campaigns and the threat that that leads to, you know, potentially threatening democracies threatening, you know, various populations around the world. And another important branch of work that we're doing is studying campaigns and user generated content, and actually studying what's being said, at scale within these large audiences. We've done quite some work, Todd and I are with the Rights Lab for example, looking at analysing campaigns on Twitter. And this really comes down to trying to get into, exactly as you would study any other marketing campaign, looking at how do you cut through clutter? How do you achieve salience? But then also through to more practical functional matters of campaigns such as you know, driving guaranteed region awareness, policy influence donations, but we're just doing that at a much larger scale, which is facilitated, obviously, by the fact that we have access to social media data. Todd Landman  11:16  It's unmediated supply of information that connects the person who generates the content to the person who consumes it. Ben Lucas  11:23  Yeah. Todd Landman  11:24  Earlier you were talking about the media you're talking about academia and others, you know, there's always some sort of accountability peer review element to that before something goes into the public domain. Whereas here you're talking about a massive democratisation of technology, a massive democratisation of content generation, but actually a collapse in the mediated form of that so that anybody can say anything, and if it gains traction, and in many ways, if it's repeated enough, and enough enough people believe it's actually true. And of course, we've seen that during the pandemic, but we see it across many other elements of politics, society, economy, etc, and culture. And yet, you know, there we are in this emerging post truth era, not really sure what to do about that. We see the proliferation of media organisations, the collapse of some more traditional media organisations, like broadsheet newspapers and others have had to change the way they do things and catch up. But that peer review element, that kind of sense check on the content that's being developed is gone in a way. Ben Lucas  12:18  Yep and it's potentially very scary because there's no editor in chief for, you know, someone's social media posts. On top of that, they probably have or could potentially have a far greater reach than a traditional media outlet. And I think the other thing is, I mean, we were kind of for warned on many of these issues. The NATO Review published quite some interesting work on Disinformation and Propaganda in the context of hybrid warfare, I think around sort of starting in 2016, or ramping up in 2016, which is, you know, also very fascinating read. And then the flip side again of this connectivity that we have now, I guess the good side, you know, is when user generated content is used in a good way. And again, that's examples like, you know, examples we've seen around the world with the mobilisation of protests for good causes or fighting for democracy, grassroots activism, and in particular, that ability to get information out when journalists can't get in. Todd Landman  13:15  You know it's interesting we did a study years ago, colleagues and I, on the the mobilisation against the Ben Ali regime in Tunisia, and we were particularly interested in the role of social media and Facebook platform for doing that. And it turned out that a. there was a diaspora living outside the country interested in the developments within the country but within the country, those who were more socially active on these platforms more likely to turn up to an event precisely because they could work out how many other people were going to go so it solves that collective action problem of you know, my personal risk and cost associated protesting is suddenly reduced because I know 100 other people are going to go. And you know, we did a systematic study of the motivations and mobilisation of those folks, you know, try, trying to oust the Ben Ali regime, but it gets to the heart of what you're saying that this this you know, user generated content can have a tech for good or a social good element to it. Ben Lucas  14:08  Exactly. And I think another important note here, that's maybe some sort of upside is that, you know, there are a lot of academics in a lot of different fields working on understanding this massive proliferation of connectivity as well. In a kind of, I guess, strange silver lining to many of the new problems that this technology may or may not have caused is that it's also given rise to the emergence of new fields like so we're talking about Infodemiology, now we've got some amazing studies happening on the subjects of echo chambers and confirmation bias and these types of type of themes and I think it's really given rise to some really interesting science and research and I have some some confidence that we've got, even if we don't have those, again, editors in chief on social media, I have confidence because we certainly have some, you know, wonderful scientists coming at this scenario from a lot of different angles, which I think also helps to sort of moderate and bring some of the downsides to the public attention. Todd Landman  15:04  Yeah, and let me jump to research now, because I'm really interested in the type of research that people are doing in 3DI here at the university. Can you just tell us a little bit about some of the projects and how they're utilising this new infodemiology as you call it, or new grasp and harnessing of these technologies? Ben Lucas  15:23  Yeah, so 3DI as the data driven discovery initiative, we're basically interested in all things applied data science. We have, I think, quite a broad and really wonderful portfolio of activity that we represent here at the University of Nottingham, in our Faculty of Social Science. Faculty of Social Sciences. This is everything from economics, to law, to business, to geography, and everything in between. We take a very broad exploratory approach to the kinds of questions that we're interested in solving, I would say. But we do tend to focus a lot on what we call local competitive advantage. So we're very interested in the region that we operate - Nottinghamshire - sectors and industry clusters where they have questions that can be answered via data science. Todd Landman  16:08  What sort of questions? What sort of things are they interested in? Ben Lucas  16:11  This is everything from the development of new financial services to really driving world class, new practice in digital marketing, developing and sort of advancing professions like law, where there is a very big appetite to bring in new sort of tech and data driven solutions into that space but a need to achieve those new sort of fusions and synergies. So that, that side is obviously very, you know, commercially focused, but very importantly, a big part of our portfolio is SDG focus. So Sustainable Development Goal focused, and we've got, I think, some really fascinating examples in that space. My colleagues in our N-Lab, which is a new demographic laboratory, based in the business school, are working on food poverty, for example. And they're doing this in what I think is really exciting way. They've teamed up with a food sharing app. So, this is very much driven by the start-up world. It's very much a marketplace offering. The platform is set up to combat, hopefully both hunger, but also food waste. So, we're talking SDG 2, and we're talking SDG 12, sustainable production and consumption. And they've then been able to expand this work not just from understanding the platform - how it works, not just helping the platform, how it can work and function better. But they've been able to take that data from the private sector and apply it to questions in the public sector. So, they are doing a lot of wonderful work. Todd Landman  17:37  So, people have a bit of surplus food, and they go on to the app and they say I've got an extra six eggs, and someone else goes on the app and says I need six eggs and then there's some sort of exchange, almost like an eBay for food. Ben Lucas  17:47  Exactly. Todd Landman  17:48  But as you say, people who are hungry get access to food for much less than going to the shop and buying it and. Ben Lucas  17:55  Or free. Todd Landman  17:56  And people with the extra six eggs don't chuck them out at the end of the week. They've actually given them to somebody right? Ben Lucas 18:01  Exactly. Todd Landman 18:02  And then from that you generate really interesting data that can be geo-located and filled into Maps, because then you can work out where the areas of deprivation then where people have, say, a higher probability of seeking less expensive food. Ben Lucas  18:15  Precisely. Yeah. And I think that's also a good segue into you know, so one of the other flagship projects we have is 3DI, which is tracktheeconomy.ac.uk where we've been looking at, again, taking data from the private sector, but also government data and looking at how economic deprivation might have been exacerbated or not or how it changed. In particular focused on COVID and what sort of shocks that brought about, but with the intention of taking that forward. And the biggest sort of revelations that we've had working on that project have been really around the need for better geographical granularity. The fact that a lot of our national statistics or you know, marketing research assessments that are made by companies are based on you know, bigger geographical chunks. Actually, if we can get more granular and get into some of that heterogeneity that might exist at smaller geographical levels, you know, that's that's really, really important. That really, really changes a lot of policy formulation, sort of scenarios and questions that policy makers have.  Todd Landman  19:19 One of the big problems when when you aggregate stuff, you lose that specificity and precisely the areas that are in most need. So I wonder in this research that your your colleagues been doing and that you've been doing, you know, what's the end game? What are we working towards here? And how is that going to help us in terms of it from a human rights perspective? Ben Lucas  19:41  I think speaking from a personal perspective, when I was a student when I was first taught economics, I was taught in a way that really highlighted that this is you know, economics was was just something that everyone as a citizen should know even if you don't want to become an economist or an econometrician, you need to know it as a citizen. The same now very much applies when we talk about technologies that might not be familiar to all folks like AI data science. I think there's a lot to be said, as far as what I would say is a big sort of mission for 3DI is to really boost the accessibility of technical skills to really benefit people in terms of prosperity, but also just in terms of understanding as citizens what's actually going on. You know, if machines are going to be making decisions for us in the future, that we have a right to understand how those decisions are made. Also, if we think about other challenges, in the sort of AI and automation space around, you know, potentially people losing jobs because it's become automated. I think we have a right to know how and why that is. I think another big sort of an extension of that point is really in learning and getting technical skills out there to people for you know, potentially benefiting prosperity and the labour market. We really need to keep that very tightly paired with critical thinking skills. You know, we're very good as academics, thinking about things and breaking them down and analysing them especially you know, we as social scientists, you know, coding is probably going to be language of the future to borrow your quote Todd, but who's going to use that coding and what for? So I think we need to keep people in a good mindset and be using this this this technology and this power for good. And then the last point would be as something that's been done very well on this podcast in the past, is getting people to think both researchers and again, definitely citizens to think about the inextricably intertwined nature of the Sustainable Development Goals. You know, so for us at 3DI we're looking for those problems at scale, where we have measurements at scale, where we can do data science and crack big challenges, but I think whether you're doing you know, much more focused work or work with the SDGs at scale, it's all really interconnected. An obvious example, what is climate change going to do for you know, potentially displacing populations and the flow on, the horrible flow on effects that's going to have? So I really, I think that's yes, sort of our our mission, I would say, moving forward. Todd Landman  22:07  That's fantastic. So you've covered a lot of ground, Ben, it's been fascinating discussion, you know, from the dual use of technology and this age old question of the good and the bad of any kind of new technological advance. You've covered all things around the, you know, the mobilizational potential problems with post truth era. The expanse and proliferation of multiple sources of information in a sense in the absence of of that mediated or peer reviewed element. And this amazing gap between the speed of technology and the slowness of our regulatory frameworks, all of which have running right through them major challenges for the human rights community. So we're really excited about this series because we're going to be talking to a lot of people around precisely the issues you set out for us and many more. In the coming months we've got Martin Sheinin who is a great human rights expert, former UN Special Rapporteur, but now a global, British Academy global professor at the Bonavero Institute at the University of Oxford working on precisely these challenges for human rights law, and this new digital world. And that's going to be followed by a podcast with Diane Coyle, who's the Bennett Professor of Economics, University of Cambridge. It's interesting because she wrote a book in 1997 called The Weightless World, which is about this emerging digital transformation coming to the economy, and has now written a new book called Cogs and Monsters. It's a great take on the modern study of economics and the role of digital transformation. But for now, I just want to thank you, Ben, for joining us. It's exciting to hear about the work of 3DI. We appreciate the support of 3DI for this series of The Rights Track. We look forward to the guests and I think by the end of the series we would like to have you back on for some reflections about what we've learned over this series of the Rights Track. Ben Lucas  23:50  Happy to. Thank-you for having me. Christine Garrington  23:53  Thanks for listening to this episode of The Rights Track, which was presented by Todd Landman and produced by Chris Garrington of Research Podcasts with funding from 3DI. You can find detailed show notes on the website at www.RightsTrack.org. And don't forget to subscribe wherever you listen to your podcasts to access future and earlier episodes.      

In this third episode of Women in Economics, distinguished British economist Diane Coyle speaks with journalist Rhoda Metcalfe about how the lack of diversity within the economic profession is holding it back. Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge and author of several books, some of which challenge conventional economic wisdom such as GDP. In this podcast, Coyle says economists need to start working with other disciplines if they are to live up to the influence they have in public policy and help deliver solutions to the complex challenges the world is now facing. Transcript: https://bit.ly/3DydryE Look for the review of Diane Coyle's latest book Cogs and Monsters in the Fall edition of Finance and Development. IMF.org/fandd

Crossing Channels is the new podcast series produced by the Bennett Institute for Public Policy and Institute for Advanced Study to give interdisciplinary answers to today's big questions. Experts from both research centres will discuss different approaches to explore complex challenges and offer policy solutions.  This first teaser episode hosted by Rory Cellan-Jones  with co-director of the Bennett Institute and Bennett Professor, Diane Coyle, and Professor of Economics at the Toulouse School of Economics, former Director of the Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, and a Visiting Fellow of All Souls College, University of Oxford, Paul Seabright, discusses the thinking behind the Crossing Channels podcast series and the debates listeners can look forward to joining.Subscribe to the Crossing Channels podcast feed, download each episode at the start of the month,, download each episode at the start of the month, tweet us your thoughts at @BennettInst and @IASToulouse, and read more about our research at bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk and iast.fr.This episode is produced by Steve Hankey (audio) & Annabel Manley.

(10/7/21) Digital technology, big data, big tech, machine learning and AI are revolutionizing both the tools of economics and the phenomena it seeks to measure. In her book Cogs and Monsters: What Economics Is, and What It Should Be former advisor to the UK Treasury and the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge Diane Coyle explores the enormous problems facing economics today. Join us for a look at how economics can provide a positive road map in the 21st century in this installment of Leonard Lopate at Large on WBAI.

Economist Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy, Cambridge University. She co-directs the Bennett Institute, where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity. Her work has touched innovation, technology and intangibles; sustainability, inequality and measuring beyond GDP. We discuss the challenges of the current narrowness in economics both in terms of the diversity of people it attracts and the paucity of wider ranging interdisciplinary thinking. Diane's 1997 book (The Weightless World) was prescient over many technology, innovation and intangibles trends but sustainability was a missing hole. We discuss sustainability and what she felt she missed and what she had right. Diane critiques degrowth ideas while noting the challenges which catalyse that type of thinking. We chat about measurement challenges in an intangible world and how while GDP might have measured more usefully in the past but that in the present it misses many areas of value. In passing, Diane critiques happiness indices and elements of the human development index. We address the UK's productivity challenges (but don't expect we have solved it?!) and conclude it is not only a measurement challenge. We discuss inequality and “superstar earners” across all sectors and possible solutions. Diane over-rates / under-rates: Universal Basic Income, a Job guarantee policy, Industrial Policy, Arrow's impossibility theorem, running the economy hot; and the New Zealand Prime Minister. We discuss minimum wage and tax policy. Win-win investment ideas and end with what a productive day looks like and advice for would-be economists. Transcript and Video available here.

In our first episode of the season, Ronjour sits down with Dr. Matthew Kim (George F. Bennett Professor of Preaching and Practical Theology at Gordon-Conwell) to discuss his most recent book, Preaching to People in Pain. How can pastors preach on the topic of pain and suffering? What are some pitfalls when it comes to preaching sermons on pain? How can pastors encourage their people during seasons of pain and suffering? Join us this week as we tackle these questions (and many more)!

A landmark report has urged the world's governments to come up with a better form of national accounting from GDP, to reflect the value and depletion of nature. Plus, an update on carbon markets and the emerging field of biodiversity offsets. Guests: Diane Coyle, Bennett Professor of Public Policy, University of Cambridge Geoff Summerhayes, Senior Advisor, Pollination, former executive board member, Australian Prudential Regulation Authority

In this annual Grigor McClelland podcast, we will explore how current business practices are encouraging short-termism, ignoring nature and harming customers. The sense that capitalism needs to change, post-pandemic, reflects widespread concerns about the way business operates. In particular, many sectors of the economy are increasingly dominated by big companies, and this has been accompanied by the productivity slowdown, an absence of pay increases - except for executives - and a sense that innovation has stopped benefiting consumers. There are calls for businesses to rediscover their sense of corporate purpose and sign up to ESG reporting. But while businesses should of course behave ethically, a reset of the social contract requires governments to play an important part. Shaping the kind of market society we want after the pandemic involves political choices, not just technical measurement frameworks. The podcast will be given by Professor Diane Coyle, Bennett Professor of Public Policy, University of Cambridge. Diane was a Professor of Economics at the University of Manchester from 2014 – 18. She played a pivotal role in bringing the Productivity Institute to AMBS and now sits on its leadership team. This series was introduced in our 50th Anniversary year in 2015 in honour of the School's founding Director, Professor Grigor McClelland. During his twelve years as Director and Professor of Business Administration at Manchester Business School, Grigor shaped management and education for the next generation. He was a strong advocate of the principle that business cannot be divorced from society and that managers should be ethical and socially responsible. Our previous guest speakers for this series include Co-op Group's CEO Steve Murrells; Sir George Bain, former Chair of the Low Pay Commission which introduced the Minimum Wage in 1998; Craig Bennett, Chief Executive of Friends of the Earth; Torsten Bell, Director of the Resolution Foundation, Anna Dixon, Chief Executive of Ageing Better and Martin Wolf, Chief Economics Commentator at the Financial Times. All have based the core themes of their lectures on this principle. Facilitating the event, Bruce Tether, Professor of Innovation Management, Alliance MBS.

The labour market that emerges from the crisis will be very different from before the pandemic struck. The high street has been gutted by successive lockdowns and the acceleration of online retail sales. Other consumer behaviours and preferences may well be changed permanently as people have grown used to doing without their daily barista coffee or salon haircut, or – more importantly – as households feel the pinch of lower wages, shorter hours or redundancy and can no longer afford to do so. The government has done its best to incentivise job retention over the last twelve months, but a real risk remains of a spike in joblessness once furlough ends. The Office for Budget Responsibility anticipates unemployment could hit 6.5% this year and while a large economic bounce back is expected as the vaccines take hold, the economy is likely be scarred by the impact of coronavirus for years to come. This will intensify pre-existing regional inequalities, making the task of levelling up all the harder and all the more critical.The government has remained outwardly committed to levelling up as the cornerstone of its domestic policy agenda. But the recent Budget was still largely focussed on emergency support to tie the UK economy and workforce into the autumn. Soon we will need a detailed and actionable plan for jobs which seeks to respond to the challenges and opportunities ahead, boost the demand for good jobs and increase the supply of qualified people through the skills system. All while work itself is changing, not least through an expected permanent increase in remote working and the impact this will have on the nature and distribution of jobs – both those that can be done at home, and those for whom an office, factory and other fixed work settings remain compulsory or essential.The event will consider key questions including: How can we build on the government's current Plan for Jobs and Plan for Growth to deliver the good jobs of the future? How should we prioritise different industries as the engines of job creation? To what extent will green growth or other emerging sectors offer opportunities in this context? How do we avoid the rise of insecure work and underemployment similar to that experienced after 2008? How can we revamp the skills system to support those who have been out of work and need reskilling into new good jobs? What can local government do to drive forward good jobs in their area?PanellistsDiane Coyle, Bennett Professor of Public Policy, University of CambridgeAnna Thomas, co-founder and Director, Institute for the Future of WorkMartin Vander Weyer, Business Editor of the SpectatorCharlotte Alldritt, Director, Centre for Progressive Policy (Chair) See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

“Suffering is ubiquitous, success is not,” writes Matthew D. Kim in Preaching to People in Pain. Ironically, the content of many, if not most, sermons focuses on success more than suffering, however. Are pastors missing an opportunity to speak into the painful experiences of their church members with the hope of the gospel? And if they decide to make the most of the opportunity, how do they go about preaching to suffering people? Those are the questions I’m talking to Kim about in this episode of the Influence Podcast. I’m George P. Wood, executive editor of Influence magazine and your host. Matthew D. Kim is the George F. Bennett Professor of Preaching and Practical Theology, director of the Haddon W. Robinson Center for Preaching, and director of Mentored Ministry at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in Hamilton, Massachusetts. He is author, most recently, of Preaching to People in Pain: How Suffering Can Shape Your Sermons and Connect with Your Congregation, published by Baker Academic. ----- This episode of the Influence Podcast is brought to you by My Healthy Church, distributors of Bible Engagement Project. Most people have access to the Bible, but few regularly engage with it. Bible Engagement Project equips churches with digital Bible study resources to help people of all ages read and understand Scripture so they can become more like Jesus and live radically changed lives. Bible Engagement Project is available in both English and Spanish. Visit BibleEngagementProject.com to learn more.

‘Levelling up' has become an earworm. It featured highly in the Conservative manifesto in 2019, which was referring to improving infrastructure, skills, productivity and economic growth across the country. The idea is to make the UK economy less lop-sided, and less focused on London and the South East.  The aim of ‘levelling up' has gained even more potency because of the pandemic. For those working in health, policies to level up might also help tackle avoidable inequalities set out by Marmot and others, caused by factors injuring health like poor housing, low quality work, and low skills. In short, poverty and deprivation. But the government's levelling up strategy is still under construction. The recently announced Levelling Up Fund is mainly focused on basic infrastructure like transport, not health. So is levelling up a real and serious aspiration? What would a strategy look like that might also help reduce health inequalities? In the latest episode of our podcast, our Chief Executive Dr Jennifer Dixon discusses these issues with two expert guests: Professor Diane Coyle is an economist and the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Diane has many other distinguished roles, including advising the government on economic policy during the pandemic, and leading an independent review for Greater Manchester, which shaped its industrial strategy Sir Howard Bernstein was the Chief Executive of Manchester City Council from 1998 to 2017 and is honorary chair in politics at University of Manchester. He led the devolution of power and budgets to Greater Manchester – the ‘DevoManc' deal signed between the Government and Greater Manchester Combined Authority in November 2014. He is also a member of a new taskforce set up by the government to advise on the regeneration and development of town and city centres in the wake of COVID-19. 

Dr. Bennett is the founder and Director of the Center for Community Health & Prevention and Co-Director of the Clinical and Translational Science Institute. Dr. Bennett chaired the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices from 2015-2018. She has directed numerous studies and community interventions funded by the NIH, CDC, NYSDOH, and national and regional foundations related to the prevention of communicable and chronic disease. Dr. Bennett served for 17 years as the Deputy Director of the Monroe County Department of Public Health, and founded the Center for Community Health & Prevention in 2006. Dr. Bennett currently serves as co-chair of the Finger Lakes COVID-19 Vaccine Task Force.

The future is becoming harder to predict thanks to climate change and a global pandemic. But a large part of what the future will look like is in our own hands. The biggest challenge to creating a better future may be political rather than scientific or technological. In this episode, Diane Coyle, professor of public policy, Laura Diaz Anadon, professor of climate change policy, and architectural engineer, Ruchi Choudhary, join us to talk about how we can build a future that might not be anything like the past.We cover topics like innovation, GDP, and how the uncertainty created by climate change can help propel policy and economic decisions. Plus, we look at some of the benefits that come with building a greener future together. In this episode: 0:00 - Intro03:50 - What a sustainable future could look like07:15 - What economic, political and institutional changes do we need? 09:45 - Informing behavioural change11:15 - Recap point13:05 - How important is innovation in resolving climate change? 17:55 - The importance of measuring wellbeing. 19:50 - What metrics speak to policymakers? 23:17 - International coordination. Distributing the burdens of climate change27:05 - Recap point30:39 - What impact will COVID have? 35:35 - What will be the legacy of 2020? What changes are here to stay? 40:00 - Circling back to what a sustainable future might look likeThis episode was produced by Nick Saffell, James Dolan, and Naomi Clements-Brod. Please take our survey. How did you find us? Do you want more Mind Over Chatter in your life? Less? We want to know. So we put together this survey. If you could please take a few minutes to fill it out, it would be a big help.Thanks very much.Guest Bios: Professor Diane Coyle (@DianeCoyle1859) (@bennettInst)https://www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/about-us/team/diane-coyle/ Professor Diane Coyle is the inaugural Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. Diane co-directs the Bennett Institute where she heads research under the themes of progress and productivity, and has been a government adviser on economic policy, including throughout the covid-19 pandemic. Her latest book, ‘Markets, State and People – Economics for Public Policy' examines how societies reach decisions about the use and allocation of economic resources. Research Interests: Economic statistics and the digital economy: lead researcher on the Measuring the Modern Economy programme at the Economic Statistics Centre of Excellence. Competition policy and digital markets. Economics of new technologies. Natural capital; infrastructure.Professor Laura Diaz Anadon (@l_diaz_anadon) (@CEENRG)Professor of Climate Change Policy and Director, Cambridge Centre for Environment, Energy and Natural Resource Governance (C-EENRG)Prof. Diaz Anadon has three main areas of research: The...

In his article in the June 2020 issue of the Journal of Institutional Economics, Dr. P.J. Hill, who served as the George F. Bennett Professor of Economics at Wheaton College until his retirement in 2011, begins by saying, “in any discussion of the beginning of modern economic growth, the concept of the rule of law plays a crucial role," and that, "the lack of such an order is the fundamental cause of the failure of nations."But where did the foundations of the rule of law come from? Hill argues that the current theories about the origin of the rule of law, while useful, are also incomplete. According to Hill, the Jewish and Christian concept of all human beings being created in God’s image is an important, but often overlooked, contributor to the rule of law in Western civilization.Today, Acton’s Dan Churchwell is joined by Dr. P.J. Hill to discuss his research article, “The religious origins of the rule of law,” the way beliefs affect institutions in general, and how the beliefs of the Christian and Jewish faith traditions in particular were crucial to the establishment of the rule of law. Dr. P.J. Hill at Wheaton CollegeThe religious origins of the rule of law - P.J. HillP.J. Hill on the social power of markets - Joseph Sunde See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

On the day Marks & Spencer announce 7000 job cuts, we speak to Professor *Diane Coyle CBE - former adviser to the UK Treasury and Bennett Professor of Public Policy at University of Cambridge, about the worst recession in over 300 years, and what is yet to come. *Author of The Weightless World and Markets, State & People: Economics for Public Policy. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Markets-State-People-Diane-Coyle/dp/0691179263 Features the latest world news dated 18.08.20. A brand new podcast from the makers of SNS Online. Corona Chronicles offers up a document of an extraordinary time in living memory, through the people it affects. In the coming weeks, we will attempt to touch base with a wide range of people from all walks of life to talk about how the current situation is impacting them both professionally & personally, as well as offering some top tips/stats and, most importantly, to touch virtual base with a cheery hello – and without the need for hand sanitiser! www.gov.uk/coronavirus coronachroniclesshow@gmail.com Artwork: Andy Lambert Music: https://soundhills.com/ SNS Online will return later in the year.

Listen to Social Europe Editor in Chief Henning Meyer in discussion with Diane Coyle. They discuss the development of technology and what challenges it poses to economics as a discipline and public policy more widely. Diane Coyle is the Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge and was previously Professor of Economics at the University of Manchester. She has held a number of public service roles including Vice Chair of the BBC Trust (2006-2014), member of the Competition Commission (2001-2009), and member of the Migration Advisory Committee (2009-2014). You might also find our regular articles, blogs and other written publications of interest. Just visit our website www.socialeurope.eu to read our latest output. If you want to stay up-to-date with all things Social Europe just sign up to our regular newsletter. You can do so on our website.

David Grossman considers the impact that the revolution in artificial intelligence could have on our jobs, income and society. He is joined by Diane Coyle, Bennett Professor of Public Policy at Cambridge University and Andrew McAfee, Principal Research Scientist at the MIT Sloan School of Management.

Diane Coyle. Diane is founder of Enlightenment Economics , and Bennett Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge. She was recently appointed Commander of the Order of the British Empire (CBE) for "services to Economics and the Public Understanding of Economics". She is also the author of the 2014 book -- GDP A Brief but Affectionate History.