The Policy Nerd, by UNESCO

Juliet Schor, professor at Boston College, bestselling author and global advocate for worktime redesign, returns to the podcast following the 2023 episode. She now brings new insights from expanded large-scale trials in reducing the workweek from five to four days, with no pay cuts. Since we last spoke, these trials have grown significantly in both scale and scope, covering more than 245 organisations across 11 countries. The findings show remarkable consistency: around 90% of participating companies remain on the four-day week after one year, with employees reporting improvements across 20 well-being indicators and employers seeing no loss in productivity. While the four-day workweek may feel novel, it is not the first time working hours have been reduced. The shift from six to five days in the 1920s offers a clear historical precedent and important lessons for today. The four-day movement is now attracting a broad coalition, from governments and unions to environmental organisations, women’s groups and disability advocates, each seeing tangible benefits in shorter workweeks. Yet the at-scale adoption of the four-day week is bound to have ripple effects across other sectors, including education, the care economy, social protection and the environment – effects that remain to be fully understood. Are we ready for those? Find out more in her conversation with UNESCO’s Iulia Sevciuc.The facts, ideas and opinions expressed in these podcasts are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO or any of its partners and stakeholders and do not commit nor imply any responsibility thereof. The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout these episodes do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Mark Esposito, Professor at Hult International Business School and Adjunct Professor of Public Policy at Georgetown University, joins us today to discuss crisis and resilience. He dissects the concrete markers of a resilient system and discusses what helps it withstand (and possibly thrive in) turmoil. The number of shocks will only increase, hence it is high time to in-build agility and implicit fragility into our systems. When it comes to governance and decision-making, there is a lot of destigmatization that needs to be done on the concept of failure. In crisis, the speed of response and pivoting may be more critical than accuracy. Yet we’re bound by institutional legacies that have not been stress-tested for the mega challenges of today and operate under the assumption that decision-making must be successful 100 percent. How to regroup? Follow his discussion with UNESCO's Iulia Sevciuc for solutions.Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Much guilt for the erosion of public trust in science is laid at the feet of social media. Does data support such fears? Homero Gil de Zuñiga Navajas and Brigitte Huber conducted a 20-country study that looked into this relationship and they say… “it’s complicated”. Social media news use is positively related to trust in science, yet worries about echo chambers and polarization are real. They also say that there is little fake news on social media, but it’s the concentration and effects that are concerning. The majority of fake news hits a small group of people, who are dragged into rabbit holes by algorithms and their own curation of content. But look on the bright side. There is room for everything on social media. Scientists and policy makers need to discern paths to positive outcomes. From using micro-targeting, to banking on users' need for cognition, to tailoring campaigns to personality traits – social media has “tricks”. Are we ready to employ them? Find out in their discussion with UNESCO’s Iulia Sevciuc .Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Mark Howden, a Vice Chair of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, talks about trust in climate science. How vital is this trust for our collective policies and climate trajectory? Why have we ended up polarizing and politicising climate science to such levels? Can we de-escalate? Mark has answers. Listen closely to his discussion with UNESCO’s Iulia Sevciuc on these and so much more.Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Juliet Schor, Sociology Professor at Boston College and a bestselling author, says the traditional approaches to work need redesigning. The case she makes is for a reduction of the workweek from five to four days with no pay cut. Juliet has been trialling it around the world – including Australia, Brazil, Canada, South Africa, the UK and the US – and brings concrete data on its benefits for both the employees and the companies. Employees report less stress, lower burnout rates, improved physical and mental health, and greater job satisfaction. As for the companies, productivity and profitability go up, turnover and absenteeism go down, and talent and applicant attraction improve. While positive, these results come from trials that have been, so far, concentrated in certain industries and set-ups. To scale up and reap the full benefits of a 4-day week, companies and governments need to embrace broader measures – e.g., internal reorganisation of processes, work redesign, incentives and possible subsidies to stimulate uptake across industries and countries. How do we make it happen? Find answers in her discussion with UNESCO 's Iulia Sevciuc.Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Diane Coyle, Professor of Public Policy at the University of Cambridge and Director of the Productivity Institute, talks to us about data value. She explains how good (or bad) we are at capturing such value and why we need to start distributing it amongst all actors involved in its co-creation. Diane tackles the key issue of whether/what share of that monetary and non-monetary value should flow back to both governments and individuals. Listen closely to her discussion with UNESCO’s Iulia Sevciuc on all this.Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Mariana Mazzucato, professor at University College London and a bestselling author, explains how the current systems are geared towards the pursuit of dysfunctional – i.e., financialised, consumption-led, climate-damaging – growth. They are also designed to fail, operating in a fixing and reactive rather than proactive mode. The present crises are clear lessons for all. The direction has to change and the systems require re-shaping to fit that purpose. Mazzucato does not stop at diagnosing problems. She explains that there are concrete levers to be employed in this shift. First, public procurement is a powerful instrument at the disposal of governments – big and small – that needs to become outcome-oriented to deliver against common needs, such as the green transition or zeroing the digital divide. Second, investments have to be structured around real collective intelligence and reward sharing, rather than extractive relationships between the parties that have been witnessed throughout the COVID-19 crisis and beyond. Third, a common good and portfolio mindset is required on the public investment side so that access and rewards are shared as equitably as the risks have been taken. Listen to Mazzucato as she addresses the UNESCO MOST Forum and details these solutions.Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Peter Gluckman, the President of the International Science Council and the former Chief Science Advisor to the Prime Minister of New Zealand, came on to discuss how polarisation has infiltrated science and is tearing up the public trust in it. He says that the acceptance (or rejection) of scientific conclusions has become an ideological badge of identity. Social media only adds to it, overloading the public with (mis)information we are not yet equipped to navigate. There are many solutions, but underneath it all is the fundamental task of restoring civil discourse. We need to be able to talk – in agreement or disagreement – again. Can we do that? Find out in his discussion with Gabriela Ramos, UNESCO’s Assistant Director-General for Social and Human Sciences. Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Vilas Dhar, president of the Patrick McGovern Foundation and a leading voice on global AI policy, discusses how rapid and profound technological advancements, particularly in artificial intelligence, are reshaping society at an unprecedented pace. He highlights the need to move from reactive to anticipatory policy approaches, focusing on equity, dignity, and inclusivity. Dhar stresses the risks posed by AI, including its potential misuse and the dangers of concentrated power in homogeneous decision-making circles. He calls for embedding ethics into technology design and fostering participatory governance, while also emphasizing the importance of broad digital literacy so that all stakeholders can actively shape the future of technology. He also argues for public investment in technology development to create inclusive outcomes. At the heart of the discussion is a call for a moral economy that prioritizes human agency, rights, and shared prosperity, ensuring that technological progress aligns with human values. This requires a rejection of simplistic narratives and a deeper understanding of the complex implications of AI.How can these goals be achieved? Find out in his conversation with Gabriela Ramos, UNESCO’s Assistant Director-General for Social and Human Sciences.Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

Gil Eyal, Professor of Sociology at Columbia University, talks to us about trust in science, trust in expertise, and the slow demise of such. He explains that not all science is equal and neither is public trust in it. Regulatory science is what underpins policy and collective decision-making, yet this is exactly what the public mistrusts the most. Why? It has a lot to do with the distributional effects of regulatory science (as often, there are winners and losers), the politicization of science, and the scientization of politics. Listen closely to his discussion with UNESCO’s Iulia Sevciuc about all this.Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

This is a 3-part podcast on India’s quest for basic income. It discusses the basic income pilots that have been run so far and, importantly, asks what they tell about the potential of such schemes in India and perhaps in other developing countries.The expert is Sarath Davala, Chair of the Basic Income Earth Network (BIEN), and co-founder for India Network for Basic Income. He served as the research director for the Madhya Pradesh basic income pilot.The host is UNESCO’s Iulia Sevciuc.PART 1: TrialsThis part is concerned with concrete basic income pilots coming from India. It goes deeper into the Madhya Pradesh trial, covering the design features, results, and interaction with the existing social protection system.PART 2: Scale upThis part goes beyond individual pilots to bigger questions on the future of basic income. It discusses the paths to basic income’s scale up in India, potential in other developing countries, and use in development and crisis contexts.PART 3: Knowledge and policyThis final part talks to knowledge and policy actors about data gaps and, importantly, messages that need amplification in policy debates on basic incomeHosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

This is a 3-part podcast on new data and, particularly, if and how the private and the public sectors should be working together to advance its use for public good.The expert is World Bank’s Holly Krambeck. She founded the Development Data Partnership – a coalition between international organizations and the private sector to further responsible use of third-party data in international development.The hosts are UNESCO’s John Crowley and Iulia Sevciuc.PART 1: Worries and prioritiesThis part diagnoses key barriers to using new data in policy and governance. It also debates who are the winners and the losers in a system where the demand, from the public sector and beyond, for new data is so high yet the supply is limited to a handful of private companies.PART 2: Solutions – big and smallThis is a deep look into the big picture changes (regulations and systems) and operational solutions (nascent and in-testing) that hold the promise of boosting use of new data in our collective decision making. Concrete models are provided.PART 3: PointersThe last part flags key knowledge gaps the researchers need to close and lessons learned policy makers need to hear so as to move the needle towards more effective use of data for and in public good.Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.

This is a 3-part podcast on Data for Good. It debates new data landscapes, power dynamics in data, inequities, and concrete solutions to redress some of them.The expert today is Gry Hasselbalch. Her expertise is in data equity, and power in data. She served as a member of the European Commission’s High-Level Expert Group on AI, and a member of the Danish government’s first Data Ethics Expert Group.The hosts are UNESCO’s John Crowley and Iulia Sevciuc.Part 1: Power in and of dataThe new data systems we witness forming follow, unsurprisingly, the existing power dynamics. They drive current inequities even further. They also give rise to new groups of haves and have nots. This part discusses it all – power, commons, (re)distribution, privacy divide and so much more. (Pay attention to the bit on data reporting as a hands-on response to some of the concerns.)Part 2: Data and governanceThe COVID-19 crisis did not create (but it did expose) limitations in capacities and regulations of the new data systems. This part talks about how the governments need to master the balancing act of being permissive enough for data to thrive while providing a guarantee against misuse. It also debates the capacities the governments need to not only regulate, but effectively bank on new data in the very act of governance.Part 3: Data and policyThis part focuses on data as both an area of knowledge and of policy action. We need more data on data (i.e., what are the knowledge gaps), and we discuss what areas require increased policy attention (i.e., what needs to be done fast as to prevent the skewing of the new data systems).Hosted on Ausha. See ausha.co/privacy-policy for more information.