tv Quadriga - The International Talk Show LINKTV July 3, 2016 2:30pm-4:01pm PDT
>> hello. a very warm welcome indeed to "quadriga" where this week we are talking about what else, brexit the vote by the british people to leave the european union. now,ast week's referendum has sent shock waves out across the world and the u.k. is in disarray. the country needs a new prime minister and could be facing the prospect of an early election. the e.u. is also reeling among the many big questions being asked, will other member countries now follow the british example? so our question here today on
quadriga is after the brexit, after the brexit shock, what next? i've got three seasoned observers and analysts here in the studio to discuss that question with me. we have the director of the european democracy lab who says the brexit is a wakeup call and we have to start thinking about a very different europe in parliamentary terms, democratic terms, and social terms. lso with us today is andreas klust of economist magazine believing the e.u. should first strike for a lenient and gracious deal that keeps britain close to the continent and second reform itself in a hurry. welcome too, keep calm and carry on. england made a mistake but now both sides should work hard to avoid this turning into a disaster. my first question has to be how can you possibly expect anybody to keep calm in this situation
of huge uncertainty? towell, i think the i issue is reduce uncertainty now and that means if you take the referendum s a victim which couldn't be returned to partnership or e.u. membership for england you have to deal with the referendum, with the outcocome, and have to try to come as fast as possible to negotiations to deal in terms of economic issues, t trade issues, security issues, and migration issues. >> that all sounds very sane and sensible but there are huge worries out there. you know, the u.k. could unravel. e.u. could collapse. u.k. could plunge into recession. we heard president obama coming out and saying the british vote raises longer-term concerns about global growth. what's the biggest worry? >> i think the biggest worry is about growth and stability of the financial markets and about security.
>> she is saying be calm, stay calm, relax. it's all going to be fine. >> i couldn't say all is fine. but try to make it. >> i understand. stay calm. >> no, i think stay calm, obviously we stay calm but stay calm to think and to think better and make a better europe. i think this is really the wakeup call and unfortunately what nobody seems to be doing. because yesterday it was basically said the question for the brits, as if you coululd punish a people which sounds absurd and then thehere is no space for really creative, new reflection. i think this is really the wakeup call of what is happening because what we can see first is that the u.k. is not alone. we had a similar situation in austria. we have a divided people. let me say that sentence. the british wanted to play a strong national part against the european union. what they earned now is basically the implosion of the british nation. that might be the wakeup p callo
reconsider the way we frame and think about europe and let's be reminded that the foundnding fathers of europe, what did they say europe is to overcome the nation state? what we see is that basically now with the scottish question and all that in place we need to reconsider the very question, who is the sovereign of europe? who is the sovereign in the european democracy? we should answer that question very calm without hurry but with strong reflection. >> andreas? >> well, i don't disagree with anything that's been said. first of all, i am going to try to keep calm. i have been panicking for about a week now. so that's enough panic. as far as uncertainty yes we'd like to reduce it but it is all uncertain and will be for a while. we have to keep calm amid that. that is just life too. i looked up where the phrase keep calm and carry on comes from. it comes from a war time poster as the bombs were already falling.
>> just instruction for the worst case. >> right. brits were telling their own people keep calm and carry on. now, clearly there is so much to say. i mean, the fact that boris johnson just said he's not even going to attempt to become prime minister now to me proves how irresponsible he was throughout and he is, symbolizes the entire irresponsible movement that they didn't even mean it and i think they regret what they did. that they all saw that they created a tone and a media disinformation campaign that they now regret. i'm hoping calmness prevails eventually and in the house of commons this week it was -- it already came up. some members of parliament said we are still a parliamentary democracy not a direct democracy. and for this reason the founding fathers of america decide, you know, james madison, alexander hamilton said direct democracy
is the road to hell. therefore you have a representative democracy. i think the way to legitimate exit from brexit would be to call an election, all the parties in britain wouldld haveo sort themselves out because they're in chaos. that's part of the uncertainty. but have a general election and make that the issue and then have thehe parliament that represents the people make the decision. at the moment the department doesn't want to exit it. >> that would just bring more uncertainty for the upcoming months. i think you have to admit there has been a referendum. there has been a decision. what europe has to do is come to a decision. can there be a way out, what would be the way out. what if the government would just call for an election a and afterwards not accept the referendum?
when you talk about acceptance i want to come back. you're from the economist magazine and they wrote something i thought was very interesting. they called the outcome of the british referendum a senseless and self-inflicted blow. i thought it was a very interesting use of language. it seems to suggest that the british people when we're talking about acceptance were almost duped. and the question is then, duped by whom? > well, i think i alluded to it. they weren't served well by the media and by weak and even bad and irresponsible leaders and i want to stay on brexit but i have written in the past in california about how direct democracy has almost destroyed that state. in ancient history it destroyed athens and then led to a war they regretted. direct democracy. james madison and alexander hamilton had a lot of quotes about mobs cannot be trusted. when the emotions prevail and
you force complex issues that no one understood and still understands to a binary question you can --. >> it can't be -- you have to decide what -- whom to believe it. >> i agree. i see this and trump among other things, i see brexit as ultimately a revolt against perceived elitism. this would further that narrative. that is a cosost and i understa that. i'm saying you are choosing between bad options now. i am still hoping, it is my least bad option would be to exit from brerexit. if we can't then i'll accept it with you. i'm ready right now to talk about what then. i'm ready to accept it. there is still a glimmer of hope. >> you've been very patient. >> i think that andreas is right because basically the -- let's just say this. basically in all democracies we
have a 2/3 majority for really strategic decisions and that is a constitutional decision which normally in all democracy a very is now rity -- half complaining and so forth so there is reason to put into place this option of perhaps .aving a new campaign so if the parties come up with a strong leader who would say exit from brexit in a way. let't's go deeper into what is stake here. this also points to the fact that if we want to have a wakeup call and learn lessons from what happened, in a way we do not want to ignore people i do not want to ignore people. i just want to function. in a way we need to respect some of the points said when the campaigning was i am not in control in the european union,
if in essence, right, the european union has a democracy in which you have no parliamentary rite of initiative, you do not control decisions by the people. it is not a government by the people but for the people which is the flaw of the european union and i would argue even the economists trashed the european constitution in a prorominent issue so the media were also basically criticizing the european union and now do the so-called pop list because the system, the european system is not taking that very serious that we need to reform the -- or europe in a parliamentarian way. >> before we come back to all that and we will, i just want to rewind a little bit and go back to the actual election in the u.k., itself. young british voters were the focus of much attention before the vote. e.u.voted to remain in the by a large margin.
turnout was low. let's begin in london to hear what they are saying. >> we are an internatitional ci and i am really proud of that. it might not be the cais in 100 years. >> i have a law degree with account anssi -- those are things i recognize and say i was to go in practice in frank furtwengler or paris those qualifications may no longer be recognized. >> i'm not happy. this isn't going to do our generation any good. we'll have to live with this the rest of our lives. >> getting investment now i presume will be quite difficult. >> i'd like to say it's the older generation and it's really unfair what you've done to the younger people. we feel really let down by the older generation. we've grown up as europeans and having the freedom and now it's taken away from us by people who won't have to live with the consequences as much as we have to.
>> andreas, you're nodding. young people there are saying -- >> very emotional and very moving. >> they feel let down. >> that was very moving. nobody could say it better, more eloquently than the lady at the end. >> what they are talking about is a sense of exclusion that is the heart of think the european moment. part of the reason why the e.u. lost this vote effectively. >> not only this. and you wanted to defend a nation you run for an i irish passport it adds to sort of the future concept of what a nation is. if something is exploded today then the british nation all against the young as we saw, a rule against urban city of london, against scotland and vice versa so it brings me back to that point of serenity. if we want to reorganize europe based on whahat these youngster have said we need a functioning european democracy to take people serious when they say we need a say in the system and then you care for r europe. this is one of the lessons
learned as she said it in your little movie which is we have grown up european and we need to organize how we live together in a system which is no longer shaped by national states meaning a european council and the european system. >> well, i think if they would have been, up to the time they had gone voting, the reality is the use, the british use -- they didn't sign up --. >> privileged british youth, winners, and the british kids, the youngsters who have been left behind. >> if you would ask all over europe, young people, how do they stand for the european values. how do they think about the european union you would have a
divided situation. the well educated young people who go to the universities who are part of the programs, they would all be in favor of europe and say t that is our reality a our identity. if you look at the less educated young people, if you look at other perspectives, they didn't even recognize that there are europeans. that is right. but this can only happen because basically what we do see is the same split between the losers and winners of globalization. if you happen to be a young person in the country side, you have a high chance to be a loser of -- then you believe the international story because the story tells you you would win in the national story. it is still fiction it would help you but it is sad that we do not educate these people better. >> if you call for a referendum you have to respect the whole
population. >> i respect this. i am just claiming that, i mean, first we have the data. data for instance the workers of north england, ya? what is happening is they will be losing in relative terms much more from not being in the single market than the city of london. the city of london can go offshore, whatever, but the english workers will not survive and despite that fact they voted u.k. because they were told that they would win. there is the slogans. they don't have the answers. that has much to do with losers of globalization which are simply not educated enough to understand the complexity. therefore you have these results. it is pitiful. i agree you would have a better use which is standing up for the future. >> the populace might not have the answers but they have the momentum. more and more people across europe are turning to empty e.u.
parties. what should be the response from brussels? >> this is possibly the time, so far we've been talking about the british isles but what should the e.u. do? we all agree and everyone says the e.u. must reform itself. hat does that mean, however? my worry is you have at least two camps who are diametrically opposed to what they think that means. in german politician among the social democrats as opposed to angela merkel's party they are aligning themselves with the federalists in france and brussels and saying, well, now then the remaining club must get even closer together, deepening it is called sometimes, integration --. >> mantra of the ever closer -- >> now the brits are gone. therefore let's -- they're wrong. >> they do not buy into that or accept that. they reject it. >> exactly. i think that would further or
exacerbate the trend you just asked me about which is it would drive even more euro skepticism in these countries including france. where antieuropean feeling is very high. >> then you answer with the very old sentence. it needs to be set. the problem of the current discussions we only offer more integration of the same or exit. and the real task is how to think europe differently. to answer the question of a serenity, different kind of parliament, and to go beyond the shaping of the discussion with nation states because this is at the origin of the brexit disaster, at the origin of the dutch disaster. let's move out a little bit. it is not only the brits which are the problem. it is because the e.u. is flawed. we have the same sort of referendum with the dutch a couple weeks ago when they had to vote over in e.u., ukraine secession agreement which is completely absurd because why should only dutch people vote over an agreement with the
ukraine? we need to move out of that national framing in the discussions we want on a european level and that comes to the very fact that nations are not sovereign. we need to understand this. people are sovereign. you organize a new european democracy around the serenity of people and not nation states. >> but that will not happen. if you want your way, you will need a referendum in france to do that to, just because we should reframe the treaties weefment should come to new agreements. for new agreements you need a referendum. you need one in ireland. you need one in france. probably one in the netherlands. >> one referendum in all european countries --. >> you can't have a referendum on that in germany because it is not in the constitution. if you respect -- >> good point. the european pect
reality you have to look at the situation we are in. even if you say europe only makes progress in crisis that may be true. we can't -- we are experiencing constitutional meltdown. that is actually happening in front of our eyes in the u.k. because, you please, the scotts want to enter and so forth. this is basically constitutional melt down. the real question is we are not stuck in a system, the systems are never stuck. we do not know this. we do not know. nobody knows. the only thing now is we are in a cata clism where the time will come that we need to rethink the system because the system may not survive. >> we need to take a break from
the conversation. we are in a very, very difficult and troubled passage in the history of the european union and the history of the united kingdom. some people think brexit decision is an opportunity. let's get an angle on that first. >> politics in europe have grown interesting. a positive aspect of the debate that led up to the brexit was although the topic was divisive it also demanded commitment. believevers and remainers fough passionately for what they thought was right and it helped revitalize democratic culture in europe and has reawakened enthusme for the e.u. among many citizens. are antie.u. parties stronger now or weaker? euro skeptics like marie la penn from france's national front are buoyant but it could undermine populist movements in the long run. britain has been plunged into
economic chaos and that could scare vote earsway from parties that want similar referendums. the e.u. is pulling together. britain has always had a unique position in the e.u. successive governments didn't want the euro but did demand special privileges. with britain out of the picture it will be easier to reach consensus in the union. could the brexit actually strengthen the e.u. in the long run? >> cot brexit strengthen the e.u.? i i don't think so. england is leaving. it is a european power is leaving. scotland is joining with its problems. so the economimic power, everythingng is a loss for euro. so europe will not be winning at all.
what may be happening is that think and we aree thinking euroe cocould includude -- why do we or think to need that close nion in terms of political integration in terms of france not only economimic but social integration? if you ask yourself why did we think so, that was alwayss the case becausese it couldn't be managed otherwise. it was always the p problem how could you manage economic social things without just going closer together? and nowadays we do have a lot of opportunities because the management capacityies enlarge a lot. >> what i worry about also in our debate is one side of people who want to save the e.u. is going off into yet another debate about the structures, the
institutions, and i think -- >> where should they be going? >> they should not be going there. i think because it's, it was always abstract. people never understood it. people actually had no interest, the people in north england where you come from that voted for brexit neff bothered to understand what the council as opposed to the commission and the institution with the court and the euro group, no. i think what he seems to think is do less and do it better. pick two or three things where the e.u. can cooperate and make it clear and a visible and immediate effect in people's lives and don't get bogged down in the weeds of this other crap frankly. those things must be things as they mentioned the right ones. security. we're afraid of terrorism. let's cooperate there. let's cooperate on closing or cocontrolling the borders aroun that is a big part of this anxiety.
possibly some new push to create growth so people out of jobs in the southern countries don't go off to the wrong side there. create fewer losers from globalization. so three simple things. don't worry about the carve chur of cucumbers and all the stuff they made fun of. >> the thing is that the european union failed because it was not about politics. now we have a trans national market and currency and we need to include a trans national democracy. it is a simple thing about basics and what the founding fathers of europe were claiming since the 1940's which if we need to have a trans national democracy. this has much to do with who is the sovereign, not the nation states but sovereign. not the european council which is basically playing national cop all over the place. if you say people don't care that don't understand i agree but they do not understand the council and the parliament because the system is not clear.
if you want good politics we need to fix the engine room. >> what is the structure you're proposing? ?> what are you proposing all this corporation talk hasn't worked for 25 years. we tried to do corporations on terror. we never did. where would you like the e.u. to be in a year's time? >> i would like us to be more pragmatic and down to earth and not just trying a new national state even larger than the ones we have. >> i am not saying this. >> okay. we have to leave it there. thank you very, very much for a wonderful discussion. i hope we've given you plenty of food for thought. thanks so much for joining us here on quadriga. do get in touch by social media or mail. we love to hear from you. until next week, bye-bye. ]ñ]ñ]ñx
man: this is a production of china central television america. woman: adapting to adversity. resilience is the ability to do just that, to roll with the punches despite the e challenges before you.. could resilience help build a better world? rather than reacting, would we be better off taking deliberate, planned, and proactive risks? this week on "full frame," we explore how embracing resilience could help companies, organizations, and people thrive in the face of unpredictable events. i'm may lee in los angeles. let's take it "full frame."
when nations and communities are faced with adversity from raging storms to civil wars, surviving them takes resilience. but can we learn to be resilient regardless of the challenge? a new public-private partnership believes the answer is yes. the rockefeller foundation's global resilience partnership is tryryinto help cocommunities across africica and asia buiuild ththeir resilience to challenges like e extreme poverty and climate change. now, one way they hope to start the process is with a competition called the global resilience challenge. sundaa bridgett-jones is the rockefeller foundation's associate director of international development. she joins us now via satellite from new york city to tell us more about the competition that is helping the world's most vulnerable communities become stronger and more resilient.
sundaa, welcome to the show. glad to have you here. sundaa: thank you, may. so pleased to be here. may: well, let's start off with the broad questions, sundaa. the rockefeller foundation, of course, is involved in so many different projects around the world, really trying to help cure the ails of the world, let's put it that way. but with the world being so chaotic these days and so many problems, is it sometimes overwhelming to decide what causes that you're gonna try and help at the rockefeller foundation? sundaa: well, you know, thanks for that, may. i think we at the rockefeller foundation see a world that's defined by disisruptions, disturbances to normal life, and you've mentioned many of them, and it's--in a way caused by 3 different threats, if you will. there is the threat of climate change that, of course, is an undeniable contributor to the severity of some of the issues that we have. there is, of course, urbanization, where we see a huge population growth, particularly in cities, and
causing a good deal of pressure for cities around the world, and there is globalization that has actually accelerated the pace of the volatility in many communities. and we see those 3 really as being some of the drivers of some of the challenges that we have. may: and sundaa, let's get right to--talking about the competition that i mentioned in the introduction, the global resilience challenge. tell us a little bit about why you started this challenge. sundaa: the global resilience challenge is indeed unique, but it's a model that we've been using for some time that helps to uncover and test some of the most really compelling solutions for resilience building around the world. the global resilience challenge was modeled after aa competition--a design competition that we supported in the n new york, new jersey area after superstorm sandy.
it's called rebuild by design. and the challenge is really one of the first activities of the global resilience partnership. we launched the partnership in august 2014 at the first u.s.-africa leaders summit in washington, dc, where the foundation and u.s. agency for international development and the swedish international development agency joinened forces to o reay find a platform for supporting the--these kinds of really promising innovative solutions for resilience building around the world. and it was s such a tremenendous response to this global competitition in the s sahel, wh is west africa and east africa, and south and southeast asia. we had over 500 applications for this competition. and it was really tremendous to try to get down to having 17 contestants and 8 winners. really going through a 3-stage process that focused on how they might be able to diagnose
solution--problems in their communities, how they can come together and into disciplinary teams with a number of actors to be able to look at those problems in a different way, in a way that focuses on resilience thinking and concepts to help to drive them towards some really promising solutions for communities. so, we're really quite pleased that we have a terrific set of 8 awardees. may: and what i find fascinating, sundaa, is the--again, the quality of the entrants. they're all pretty young, very smart, very well educated, but they all have the same mission in their lives--in their young lives to try to do some good in the world and that is--that must be really inspiring to see. sundaa: that is indeed the case, may. i think we have a number of teams that have come to really focus on what are the most pressing problems in the communities in which they live. the teams actually represent
meteorologists, and engineers, and scientists, and community leaders coming together to try to helelp to solve some of f these prproblems. and let me just give you maybe one or two examples of some of the work that the teams have proposed in terms of really fascinating solutions. one is the grameen foundation, and they have compiled a number of folks on their team to ally focus on how to improve the resililience of coconut farmers in the philippines. and that's obviously a top agriculture industry f for the philippines, except some of those coconut farmers are really some of the most vulnerable in their community. and so, what the team has proposed is try to connect those farmers to markets. so, offengng finanal services, mobilele technology to provide them information thatt helps to understand the conditions under which the coconuts are growing--the coconut trees are growing. and alall of this is really to increase productivity, reduce their vulnerability, and ensure
that they have better livelihoods in their communities. and so, that's really quite exciting. i think similarly, when we go to west africa in mali and niger, we have another team in mercy corps has partnered with groups of organizations and businesses and government to really try to improve agro-pastoralists' access to financial markets there. so, again, it's very much a focus on increasing their access to financial services with a real attention to women who have been, in some cases, marginalized, not having access because of cultural norms or other circumstances in their communities to some of these services. so, we're really looking at teams that are focusing on really exciting innovations in their community--in these communities that are helping the communities adapt to some of the stresses and shocks that they might face. may: and unlike e a lot of
competitions we hear about all over the world, not just, you know, when it comes to social good, but sometimes the issue and the problem is that they win, but then there's no sustainability in the idea. there's no long-term lasting effect. i would imagine that that would be crucial in this kind of competition to choose those projects that really, you know, are gonna have a long-term effect. sundaa: indeed. you hit the nail right on its head, and the long-term sustainability and impact is a huge criterion for selecting many of these solutions, and what was really fascinating about this challenge process, again modeled off of rebuild by design in the new york, new jersey area, was the time that they had two or 3 months to actually start to pilot some of their activities, their solution-oriented activities in various communities to see whether the community would actually have an uptake of what they're proposing. and that was just kind of, you know, an early indication that
this could actctually much more--be much more impactful than one would originally believe. and that's certainly been the take that we've had moving forward with these teams. and let me also just say that this is not a challenge whereby teams come up with designs and solutions on their own. i mean, we're walking very--walking side by side with many of the teams trying to reinforce the understanding of what resilience thinking and practice means in these communities. and also to help to connect them to the kinds of networks and resources that they will need to be successful in implementing the solutions. may: does this give you hope when you see all this activity and the growing trend of this interest in trying to give back, trying to change the world for the better, and that you see this youth movement becoming more and more interested in this. is this a phase? is this just a, you know, just a trend that's gonna go away? or do you think this is
an ongoing growing trend that we're gonna keep seeing? sundaa: so, may, i not only see hope, but i see hope that leads to action and people really wanting to take charge, come up with identifying what important local needs are really--that they're facing in their communities and trying to find the kikinds of approaches and tools and solutions that help to address some of those needs and challenges. so, this is really about acting on the notions of resilience concepts and thinking. and with resilience being really about building people's adaptive capacities to not only survive, but to thrive in the face of some of these disruptions that we've been discussing. and so, i see that this is--this is something that's not gonna be short-lived. this will be with us for some time and we'll all be better for it. may: i sure hope so and i would have to agree with you, we would definitely be better for
it. sundaa, in terms of the everyday person, you know, every person isn't brilliant like some of these--i'm sure these competitors in the challenge. the everyday person has to put food on the table, and go to work, and, you know, kind of live their everyday life, but when it comes to giving back, when it comes to the idea of resilience and trying to help the community, what do people of the rockefeller foundation actually recommend just to the average schmo on the street? sundaa: you know, we've been talking about the circumstance in which we're all living here in the 21st century, where crisis is the new normal. and what we've found in our work around d the world here in the u.s., but also in many parts of asia and africa, is that the solutions really lie within indivividuals and their communities. so, we believe that these great ideas, these activities that we all can--and do and be--and
help us to thrive in the face of some of the shocks and stresses can be found with the very everyday person that you've been describing, may. we know people are resilient all around the world and have been coming up with innovations on a daily basis, innovations that are born by the activities of communities coming together, of networks coming together, of drawing on one another for support, and for recovery efforts in many of these cases. and so, this is not a situation whereby one looks outside of their community necessarily for e kinds ofof innovations that we're discussing. this is a case where we're looking within, that we're really finding solutions within communities. may: all right. well, sundaa bridgett-jones, thank you so much for yoyour time. i really appreciate thee information and the insight. sundaa: thank you, may. may: well, coming up, we hear
from two of the winning teams who are building resilience in communities that face some of today's most difficult challenges. stay right there. developing resilience in places like west africa, where war threatens access to food, or in southeast asia, where typhoons plague farmemers, can seem like an impossible task. but 8 teams from around the world are tackling some of the world's most difficult challenges. the groups recently won grants from the first global resilience challenge. it m means they y will be awardd up to a million dollars to implement and scale up their solutions to these problems. joining us now are leaders from two of those winning teams. whitney gantt is grameen foundation's global director for mobile agriculture. her team plans to help coconut
farmers in the philippines. and from rabat, morocco, via satellite is allison huggins. she is the country director at mercy corps in mali. her team plans to use its winnings to financially help communities in the fragile dry lands of africa. welcome to "full frame" to both of you. thank you for being here. whitney: thank you for having us. may: w wl, whitneyey, let me start with you. why did your team choose to compete in this resilience competition? because there was 500 teams in this competition, right? whitney: right. well, resilience is really at the heart of what grameen seeks to achieve. we look to increase the income and resiliency of poor households in remote rural areas across the globe. and what we've seen in our work, particularly in agriculture, is that often a single intervention isn't sufficient to help families come out of poverty and, even more importantly, to keep them out of poverty when they do. and so, a more holistic
approach is needed that provides a suite of services and also helps families build the skills and accesses--access the resources that really helped them weather the types of shocks that they're facing, whether it's from climate change or from market variability. may: and it always is about sustainability, right? you have to be able to sustain this growth and this economic viability. we're gonna get to, you know, the specifics of that. but first, tell us what exactly is your project? it has to do with coconut farmers in the philippines, right? whitney: it does. so, there are over two million coconut farmers in the philippines. they--despite being part of a $2 billion-a-year industry globally, are some of the poorest farmers in the philippines and the most vulnerable to the type of shocks that we'll talk about today--typhoons, climate change, market price shocks, et cetera. and so, what our program is looking to do is to partner with public and private sector players to build resiliency of those coconut farmers through a 4-component program.
and so, the first component looks at how can we increase the amount of coconuts that these farmers are producing to get them more sales and more revenue? may: uh-hmm. whitney: the second is looking at how do we help them prevent losses? and that's through an early warning system which helps prevent pest and disease outbreaks and helps farmers to control that on their farm when they identify a threat. and it's also looking at getting them more market access. so, higher prices through certifications like organic, fair trade, and rainforest. and finally, through looking at appropriate financial services. so, whether it's investing in their farming businesses and growing those through access to credit or whether it's saving for the hard times that may hit, we're partnering with financial service providers to provide a complete solution. may: ok. so, you're covering pretty much all bases, which is--which is great.
well, let's turn to allison in morocco. allison, first, tell me why you guys decided to compete in this contest. and then, also, your project is a little bit different. it deals with problems in west africa. allison: right. so, similar to what whitney said, we've been working in the dry lands of west africa for many years. and we've realized that in order for us--for us to have a sustainable impact in the communities that we're working in, we really need to take more of a holistic approach to the work that we're doing. and so, we were thrilled to get--be a part of the global resilience challenge and to be able to work with other organizations that are using similar holistic approaches and really looking at the systems that people live in and how can we have more of a broader system, a holistic impact to help people to be able to improve their livelihoods and really make choices that they need to make to be able to better manage their livelihoods.
so, our project is working in northern mali in the sahel region of mali. and in--across the border in niger. and in communities where we've been working on agriculture programs and emergency response for many years, and the project will be working to provide access to financial services for those populations. in northern mali, there's almost no financial services available due to the conflict. and then, niger financial services are really limited as well. and so, we'll be using the mobile phone in working with the private sector to deliver savings products to farmers and pastoralists as well as credit products and insurance products over the mobile phone. may: so, allison, give me one definition, thouough. yoyou use the term pastoralistst and it's agro-pastoralist. tell me exactly what that means. i'i'm assumingng it obviououslys to do with agriculture, but is it something more specific than that? allison: right. so, there's really two livelihood groups in the areas that we're working in.
one group who are more sedentary agro-pastoralists. so, they use a combination of agricultural production and raising animals for their main livelihoods. and then, there's also a substantial nomadic pastoralist population. and they really travel from place to place, searching for the most healthy grass, pasture lands, and bring their cows along with them. so, they're really, you know, not tied to any one place. they move around in search of the most rich pasture lands that they can find. may: i see. ok. so, it's almost like a nomadic lifestyle to a certain extent. whitney, let's go back to you. with these coconut farmers in the philippines, you obviously talked about some of the issues that they face with climate change and, you know, weather, and things like that. so, are those the specific problems that you guys are trying to target and help them out t with? and that's kind of a difficult thing to deal with, isn't it? because you're talking about nature, also man-made problems as well, right? whitney: it is. and ththat's why we are trying o
take again that multi-faceted approach that brings in partners from different parts of the philippines. so, we bring in the philippine coconut authority. they have the mandate to help provide advice--technical advice to farmers and to help prepare them for the changes of climate change. we're also working with a national university, university of the philippines los banos, who's created a number of climate models to predict what the impact will be on smallholder farmers. and so, part of what we're doing is working with those entities who know best how to predict and how to respond. and then, also, looking at how can we diversify livelihoods for those farmers? so, helping them get into additional crops, whether they are for home consumption, so, fruits and vegetables, or whether they're other cash crops like cacao that won't be as susceptible to some of the changes that are coming.
may: and how do you find them responding to your program and to what you're suggesting they do to be able to sustain their livelihood? are they responsive? do they get it? are they willing to make some changes? whitney: i think that they are. we've--through the grant award, we've gone out and done a lot of research and really focused on being in the field with farmers, being in their households, understanding the dynamic that they have with the existing market, and what we're seeing is that there is a sense of awareness around vulnerability, but not a clear sense of how they go and build assets and help to secure their families. what we also found was that the female members of the household were more likely to take that longer-term view. and so, in terms of how we'll reach out and work with farmers, we know that we need to have a gendered approach that takes into account the different dynamics on the ground. may: that's an interesting
point to bring up because i always wonder, and you always hear that within communities, the females are really the ones that are sort of holding the family together, and oftentimes, holding the community together through the work that they do. so, how important is that to reach the female population and to be able to educate and raise awareness amongst women? whitney: i think it's very important and it will be--it will be a key pillar of the work that we do, just really understanding what are the roles and what are the household dynamics in terms of gender. and so, men were also very critical in that system, but had maybe a shorter-term view of how do i meet the immediate needs? and so, in talking with them together as well as individually, what came out was that we really can leverage this longer-term view that the female household members may have. may: that's interesting. allison, i'm gonna ask you the same q questioinin your linene f work and the people that you work with. are--do you find that to be the case as well, reaching out to
the women because they tend to maybe have a longer-term point of view? allison: we definitely do. and, you know, women in northern mali and in niger have really limited control over financial resources and have limited participation in household decision-making. and so, part of our program is starting with financial education to especially allow women to better understand how they can control resources, how they can better access financial resources. there's a tradition in west africa of small savings groups, and women are often the ones who are--who are members of these savings groups. and so, we'll be working through these saving groups to increase their access to credit, so that women can have financial resources at their disposition and can really plan around how they use those financial resources to either invest in small businesses or invest in goats or chickens or other small livestock that they can have control over. because helping women to better
be able to have tools to manage their households is really what we've seen as being key to helping communities to--and househeholds to weatheher the shocks that they face. may: and that's so interesting, allison, because we hear those stories over and over again when we hear about things like micro loans. when they're given out to women, they tend to really use it in the best way possible, very efficiently, to be able to growow a business anand really provovide for the cocommunities. but here's my question, though: in places like mali and niger, is there any resistance, though, from the traditional male, sort of, ideals for women--against women to really develop and become financially savvy, and grow businesses, things like that? allison: it is a difficult context. and i think that the key to us being successful in our programs is really to use a community-based approach. we work really with both men and women and work with male community leaders to try and
evolve some of these norms. but really, you know, and together with the communities. because wewe, you know, we don't wanna take an approach where we go into communities with these radical new ideas that are against community norms. but we found that by working together, we can help to slowly evolve these norms and help women to have a greater role in decision-making and household management. may: what are you foreseeing in the next few years with this project? allison: so, the goal of our project is to work togetether with the private sector to help them move into more risky areas of mali. there's a pretty well-developed financial services market in the south of mali. but in the north, due to the conflict that began in 2012 as well as just a long history of marginalization and isolation, these types of services are really much less developed in northern mali. so, we really see this project as, you know, a starting point for us to be able to work with the private sector to help them to take the risks to
invest in the north of the country. and we hope that by working together and proving to them that there are market opportunities in the north, and that people are interested in financial services and products, it will demonstrate to the financial sector that there are other opportunities to work there. so, we're hoping that together with the private sector, we'll be able to kind of create market incentives and spur a market to continue to grow in the future. may: what's great about both your projects, and what you're both saying, is that you're not just trying to help the little guy just paddldle along with ththeir business, you're also trying to bring in corporations, big business, to help them realize that if they get involved, and there's some sort of financial interest there, right? it's all about business as well, that it make sense to them. and so, this is a way with both your projects you're able to sort of tie those two worlds together, isn't it? whitney: exactly. and i think franklin baker is a great example of that where today they are sourcing only
10% of their coconuts directly from the smallholder. but they have a goal within the next 5 years to be sourcing 50% of coconuts directly from smallholder farmers. they also have about 10,000 hectares that are organic, and they want to increase that up to 50,000. may: wow. whitney: so, there's a big opportunity here to not only generate value for the smallholder farmer, but to make something than can be profitable and, as a result, sustainable long-term. may: well, allison huggins, thank you so much for joining us all the way from morocco. really great project, and good luck to you. and i should have congratulated you at the top of the show on winning ththis competition. it's good work. allison: thank you so much. we're excited about it. may: all right. and whitney gantt, thank you so much for coming into the studio today and telling us about your fantastic project. again, to you, congratulations to you and your team, and good luck in t the futurure with i it. whitney: thank you. we'll have to keep you posted. may: please do, please do. well, building resilience in
communities facing adversity, whether it's the impact of climate change or man-made crises, it's crucial for people all around the world, including right here in california. the state's ongoing drought is causing many communities to find proactive solutions to their water problems instead of waiting around for rain. "full frame" contributor sandra hughes takes a look at how innovators are finding solutions to fight the drought. [thunder] sandra: when the rain falls in los angeles now, conservationists head directly into the storm. man: well, we're sampling for stormwater runoff. we're sampling the quality and the quantity of stormwater runoff. at this point, we're taking water samples. we're filling individual bottles which will be analyzed in a lab for different water quality parameters. sandra: they're testing water quality as part of a plan to harness mother nature to save and store more water.
so, the next time a long drought hits, the western u.s., especially los a angeles,, will be ready. man: people think that we live in a desert, but we don't. it's a semi-arid environment. we actually rereceive quite a bt ofof rain, between 10 and 15 inches a year. it doesn't sound like a lot, but for every inch of water that rains here, we throw away 3.8 billion gallons of water. so, on the driest year in recorded history two years ago during the drought, it rained 3.6 inches in los angeles. that means we threw away over 12 billion gallons or 3,420 gallons per person. sandra: is there a wayay to save that watater and reduce ththe city's dendndencen imimported wawater? and for the ground to stay wet in even the driest of times? conservationists in los angeles think so. man: well, the city of los angeles has implemented a green streets and green infrastructure program. this is one of our first green streets in the city of l.a. construction actually was completed in 2010, so, the
inception for the project and design started a couple of years before that. and as part of our green streets program or--you know, what we're looking for is--in sanitation is our focus is on water quality and water capture. sandra: the idea is to break up the concrete jungle of l.a. one block at a time. it started in a working-class neighborhood of los angeles called elmer street. the street was bulldozed a and rebuilt, installing an underground infiltration gallery to absorb and filter rain watater. new sidewalks were put in, and curbs with cutouts, and rock gardens below rain barrels with smart irrigation technology. the efforts are meant to slow down rain runoff, so it could be filtered and drained back into a natural underground aquifer. chris: and we essentially use this as a living laboratory, a demonstration of things that work, and of course things that don't work, because we want--when you put in these green streets, you learn each time one of these projects goes
in the ground. sandra: and the ground is where the conservationists are hoping to keep the water. without these efforts, water runs into sewers or flood runoffs, and heads straight into the ocean. even the plants on elmer street were chosen for their power to clean water, and absorb it. woman: plants are living things that help to--in this instance we're talking a about stormrmwa. if you think about the roots of plantstsnd trees, , they go into the soil, they help to integrate the water into the soil much easisier. of couourse, they're also stopping erorosion, and in the swails, where we have the very steep-sided slopes, if you have plants in there, it's helping to slow the water down as it's rushing through the swail during a storm, and it also helps the water to infiltrate into the soil. also, they're filtering out pollutants, too. sandra: more than $2 million were spent to create elmer avenue, the gold standard
of water conservation inin los angeles. obviously, the idea isn't to replicate that price tag on other city blocks, but to take ideas employed here and use them in other drought-stricken areas. the green streets initiative has built a dozen streets like elmer in los angeles to work together with the new l.a. storm catcher plan. the idea borrowed from australia, where residents suffered through more than a decade of drought. lipkis: it is very simply an old-fashioned cistern, and the highgh-tech piece is that it is remotely controlled, and remote monitored. sandra: this box mounted on the side of a home contains electronics that monitor weather, and then opens and closes theisisterns neneed. when released in t thesearden pools, the water stored in the cistern can irrigate an entire yard. a fence could be replaced with
narrow cisterns. the sizes and ideas are endless. but the bottom line is reducing l.a.'s dependence on imported water. lipkis: rain water captured and either recharged where possible or directly used together can replace half the watater we're importing g today. sandra: and the unpredictable weather patterns that have plagued the southwestern united states in recent months could be the perfect storm in which to prove that green streets, alleys, and yards are the solution to california's continual water woes. for "full frame," this is sandra hughes in los angeles. may: coming up next, it's all about going miniature to help save lives. we'll journey into the world of tiny artificial livers.
conducting medical research can be challenging. just ask world-renowned bioengineering professor sangeeta bhatia. during her grad school years at mit, sangeeta tried and failed to create an artificial liver. but she didn't give up. she tirelessly kept at it, and her resilience finally paid off. sangeeta pioneered a way to create micro livers that are sustainable outside the human body. her groundbreaking research has revolutionized the world of artificial organs used for transplants. i sat down with bhatia at the 2015 annual meeting of the clinton global initiative to talk to her about her motivation, innovation, and how her research is making the world a healthier place. sangeeta, people like you inspire me a great deal because i feel like i cannot understand the work that you do, and it requires a very large brain, so,
do me the favor. tell me first hohow you gogot into the work tt you do, because it's not an everyday sort of field. sangeeta: it's true. may: right? sangeeta: yeah. i, um--so, i started out as an engineering student. i was interested in biology, and i was good at science and math, and my dad said, "you should consider biomedical engineering." so, off i went to study that, and i got very interested in materials that could be used for nerve regeneration, so, this idea that, like, plastics, and polymers, remember, like, "the graduate," the movie, like, the plastics are the future. may: that's right. sangeeta: it was that time. so, it was sort of, like, late 1980s, and they were making new kinds of plastics that we thought could help with nerve regeneration, and that was my undergraduate project, and i got very interested in this idea that you could use engineering tools and material science for medical applications. may: amazing. so--but--did it t all make sense to you right off the bat? i mean, you knew, "oh, you know what, this--i'm prettyty good at
this, and i think k this is the field that i need to be in"? sangeeta: so, i really liked the idea that instruments could change human health. like, that from the beginning had captured my imagination, but it turns out that that's a really broad field. it's like, you could make a new mri machine, like, that's one kind of research that's more physics. you could make, like, an artificial hip, that's a different kind of research, that's actually materials, and then what we work on, which i mentioned, is actually like living systems, like organ regeneration and nerve regeneration. and so, it took me a while to kind of figure out where in the scheme of instruments meet medicine i wanted to be. may: ok. but now that you've obviously focused on that particular area, was it something that was so new and different that really no one--no one else was really working on it and so, you had to sort of carve a path for yourself? sangeeta: i think so. i mean, in some ways. so, the sort of tiny, little susubfield that i'm in is one
where we use computer chip technology for medical applications. and that was actually really pretty new. so, i started graduate school in the early nineties, and we--i went over to the computer manufacturing facility on mit campuswhich i dndn't knknow exisd except for thamymy boyfriend athehe timwas s in ectricalngineering. he wouldatater bome e my husband. and heaiaid, "knowow y' trng to o all these things th cells and patrnrns an the's actually ahohole comput f fab ocampmpushat thth electric enginee u use y: ok. sangeeta: so, i found w way over there a f figur outut h to usehohose itrumumen to makertrtificl lilive and t tt became kind of my--i guess my life's work so far. may: well, again, in layman's terms. sangeeta: yeahah. may: for those of us who don't get it. how do you create an artificial liver ususing a compututer chipd living tissue? how does that work? sangeeta: yeah. so, to make an artificial liver, you need liver cells, and the liver does like 500 different functions. so, it's
a lot of different things. you can't really replace it with a s simple filter. may: right. sangeeta: like a kidney where you can replace with a filter and a heart we can replace with a pump, so, mechanical things. so, for the liver, you really need a living cell. may: ok. sangeeta: and the problem in the field had been that liver cells, when you take them out of their body and you try and put them in the machine to use them, they quickly die. may: uh-hmm. sangeeta: and so, my job as a graduate student was to figure out how to basically copy the environment that they saw in the body in the petri dish, and that way they would still behave like liver r cells and then we could use them to process someone's blood. may: ok. sangeeta: and so, the way we copied, the way they are in the body is using computer chip technology. so, we would pattern them on surfaces. we would write lines of cells and surround them with the neighbors that they saw in the body. there's 5 cell types in the liver. so--and then we would recreate these little structures. and because they had all the right signals from their neighbors, they would behave properly.
may: and how--i don't know what to ask of this, but how long does that take to figure that out? sangeeta: yeah, well, it took a long time. so, ph.ds, about 5 years. may: yeah. sangeeta: and that's one of the key, every ph.d project has a sort of a key turning point, kind of a pivot. may: uh-hmm. sangeeta: and mine came after a year of failed experiments, and the experiment went like this. you start with a piece of glass which is clear, you shine light on it which is not visible. you dip it in a bunch of chemicals which are clear, and at the end, your--the goal is to make liver cells line up in stripes. and i tried this over and over and over again, all different versions of it for about a year, until at the end of that year of research and little improvements and thinking about it different ways, it finally worked. so, that one year was like the real breakthrough. it still took us about 10 years to sort of like make a product out of it that we could share with the world. but that was
the kind of aha moment. may: and that prproduct now is out there. sangeeta: yeah. so, the products now are lilittle, tiny human l livers. we make them and we sell them for drug testing, actually, so that if you have a new drug and you wanna know whether it will be safe in the body, you can pour it on our little liver and test it without having to expose patients to it. may: and it functions like a real human liver. sangeeta: right, for about 6 weekeks, which is long e enougho test it. may: so, the future of this, then, would be to actually create full-sized human livers for transplant? sangeeta: that's right. yes. so, once we figured out how to make little livers and we decided we wanted to scale up and make a replacement for transplants. and that we do with another engineering technology, which is 3d printing. so, we can print layers, by layer, by layer of livers instead of just like a tiny, little layer, and builds up a bigger organ that way.
and the liver is cool because it can regenerate on its own. so, you don't actually have to build the whole liver, which is 100 billion liver cells. may: wow. sangeeta: you can build, we think, a little piece of it and then kind of encourage it to grow on its own. may: tell me about nanotechnology. sangeeta: sure. may: is that related to this kind of work or is that something different and separate? sangeeta: so, it's an evolution of the same sets of technology. so, the e computer manufacturing methods that i mentioned to you, they're really good for manipulating things as small, a single cell. so, the single cell is about 10 microns, which is 1/10 of a human hair. may: wow. sangeeta: so, pretty narrow. and as i got into the field kind of in the nineties, in the early 2000s, because we were trying to make computers faster and faster and faster, the field was making the technology better and better and better at making tinier things all the way down to the nanoscale. and it turns out in biology, that's super useful. so, if you make something that
is as small as 100 nanometers, now you can make a detector thahat you can inject n the bloodstream and it can go and it can find cancer on its own. may: wow. sangeeta: and it can send out a signal. and it's only because it's so small that it can kind of find its way through the human body. may: so, you're able to expxpre parts of thehe body and cells that you would never go o near before. sangeeta: exactly. may: right, right. so, that has got to be a revolutionizing technology for-- obviously for ailments, and curing ailments, and cancer research. sangeeta: yeah. so, we call this field nanomedicine, and it's sort of everything that's 100 nanometers and smaller, so, a thousand times smaller than a human hair. may: right. sangeeta: on down. and the trick is in fact that you can get inside of all of the human organs. so, it turns out that this is the exact link scale that molecules communicate in your body. may: wow. sangeeta: and it's good both for detection. so, for early detection of diseases that would be more
curable, so, cancer, for example, as well as treatment. so, what we do is we try and target drugs, let's say chemotherapy, just to the tumor to spare the normal tissues. so, it's useful both for kind of getting a window into the disease as well as treating it better. may: so, i it must be amazazingo you because you're seeing how muchch technology is helping in the field of m medicine. i mean, it truly is changing the way that medicine is being done and executed. sangeeta: yeah. so, it's an amazing time to be a researcher, because we think of the--sort of convergence of these two fields. so, on the one hand, we've had all these engineering advances, right? 50 years of what we call moore's law,w, which is the exponential growth and competition power that comomes from growing things tinier, and tinier, and tinier. so, that's one thing. and on the other hand, we have the human genome and genomics, right, and now they're coming together at this moment in time which is just incredibly exciting.
may: are we just goingng to jump by leaps and bounds in the medical field because of this grgrowth in technology? sangeeta: i think so. i mean, so, some people ll this kinofof thehirdrd relution oscience. ani think 'llook back i 20 yrs at th kind of-year period a r reallidentifyt as an inecectionointnt. there are meme tecologogie thatavave co outut jt in t t past cplple yes whwherwe canan what we calldidit thhumaman genome. there's nenew enme t thacan go in and actualally change yoyr genome and repair it. i mean--and, you know, the therapeutic possibilities are just amazing. i mean, it's like all the genetic diseases are potentially curable and, you know, i think it will take us about 10 or 20 years to get those safely into patients. but looking back, i think in a coupuple of decades we'll say this is like when it all hahappened. may: h here's an ethical questin for you.u. sosome people mighght say--a-any have saiaid that science sometimes pushes the bououndaris a little bit too mucuch, changig
dna structures, genomes, you know, all of these things that we couldn't do a couple decadess ago, and now we're really starting to push those limits. is there ever an ethical conflict that you see or have gone through yourself in research? sangeeta: i'm gonna say most of the work that i do is well within what myself and others considerer important and impactful. we do do animal research. i have two young daughters and my little one wants to be a vet, and she says to me all the time, "why do you have to do experiments on mice?" you know. and i explain that we do it ethically and how do we do it and it's better to know that a medicine is safe before it gets into a person. so, i would say that's kind of the closest piece that i have. may: right, right. sangeeta: but there are things that we work on that are highly contentious. i think it--i feel pretty
confident about the ability of the scientific community to kind of self-regulate. we did that with recombinant dna. we had a conference called the asilomar conference where the thought leadaders came together and set out what the constraints should be and what the practices should be. may: so, i it's didiscussed? sangngeeta: yeah. and that's happening g again now with crispr, which is this new genome editing technology that i mentioned to you. so, you know, the typical pattern is that we'll have a self-imposed moratorium for a year or two. may: uh-hmm. sangeeta: while we figure out what we should be doing and then we'll sort of carefully engage. i think that--i think that's sort of part and parcel of the way that we do science. may: yeah, yeaeah. let me switch gears for a second. sangeeta: sure. may: you beingng a woman in science, you know, there's always discussion that therere aren't enough girls going into science and math and technology. and so, how can we inspire these girls to do that? what do you think? i mean, because you're so, sucuh a success in your field, you've
been through it. you know what the barriers are. and you know that still the educational system seems like it doesn't try to push those fields for girls. what--what's the problem still, do you thinknk? sangeeta: that's a great question. i think there are two main challenges. the first one is interernal. may: uh-hmm. sangeeta: so, if you look at women in engineering--i'm a--i'm an engineer, you see that at age 11, very early on, girls arart sang t thathey''re less interested s scien and math and tsese sorof f feer discipnes for gigineerg. and know w that pt t of tt is l lack rolole dels.. may:eaeah. sangtata: anpartrt oit iss that they're opting out. they're--''not that ty'y' nonocapable. it's that therehoososin somemeing else. d theye're reacting in many cases to what ople call a chilly cmamate oa gegeekguy cuure. and the have bn some reay omisinadvances rently, sothere is 5-year concerted efeffort made at harvey mudd.
may: uh-hmm. sangeeta: harvey mudd college, where they did 3 things in the curriculum. they gave them role models. they made the engineering curriculum more project-based instead of like theoretical abstract concepts. and they made the freshmen class divided by experience level, so, you wouldn't be intimated by the geeky guys. may: that's smart. yeah, that's a good idea. sangeeta: yeah, and over the course of 5 years, they increased the number of computer science women from 12% to 40%. so, there really are approaches out there that can work and are scalable, i think. may: what do you think that is? you--do you think women just want to have more sort of hands-on? because like project-based. sangeeta: yeah. may: instead of classroom theorizing. maybe they want to experience more, do more. sangeeta: i think so. i mean, there are--so, it's hard to understand why, but they do see in many fields that women tend to respond better to projects that have more tangible impact on society.
so, women and men respond but women respond more. may: right. sangeeta: so, project-based learning is, you know, sort of a trend in engineering in general, but it's--it has a side e effect of pulling in wom. the second reason which we didn't talk about is bias, right, there is overt discrimination, but nowadays, at least in the u.s., it's mostly unconscious bias. and at mit, that's been sort of really handled head-on. we train the faculty. we have a diversity officer. we make sure everyone gets the same pay. i mean, that's doubled the faculty numbers over the course of 10 years. so, you know, all these things i think have interventions now. may: yeah. sangeeta: associated with them. may: i mean, that's--i-is been--itit's reresearched t than the past the problem was that female students weren't even called upon in class, in college, by the professor. they sort of were overlooked. sangeeta: yeah. may: but it's good to hear... sangeeta: raise your hand. i mean, even sheryl sandberg, you know, just sit at the table. so, a lot of that is, you know, internal and making sure that
women participate, gain confidence, they're encouraged. may: and so, you're seeing that change going on, so, that must give you some hope that there's gonna be a lot more girls interested in these fields and wanting to go into these fields. sangeeta: it does. i--i have a little bit of pause because in biology, we've had over 50% women for 20 years at the undergrad level. and if you look at the biotech startups in cambridge, 3% are started by women. so, there's something else that happens. it's not just enough to get them into college. there's, "who's in the boardroom?" "who's the--who's the founder?" "who are the venture capitalists?" you know, i think it's important that women--more women are coming in, but we need to do more to keep them in and to grow them up as leaders. may: that's encouragement enough, i think, when girls see those role models rather than just imagine it. sangeeta: i think so. actually, there's good data on that, too, now. may: oh, there is? ok, good. sangeeta: i know. it's called the role model effect. may: oh, nice. sangeeta: there is an amazing study done in india. i was in politics. but what they showed was that
there's a bunch of villages where they had a quota system and they had to have women elected to government in those villages. and they found in those villages over the course of 10 years that young girls, their aspirations for themselves improved by 30% and that parents' aspirations for their daughters just by having a a woman in government improved by 20%. may: wow. sangeeta: so, the fact that the community could see a capable woman in powower changed peopl's aspirations for themselves and for their children. so, you know, i think that really translates across fields. may: last question thehen. wha's next foror you in terms of your research? sangeeta: yeah. we have lots to do, so, we're working on this early cancer detector, and we're really excited about making a urine test for early cancer detection for things like breast cancer and colon cancer and ovarian cancer and lung cancer. may: wow. sangeeta: and we're hoping to be able to deploy it globally,
so, it could be really cheap and available at the point of care. and in order to do that, we just started a company that can take it, you know, through manufacturing and regulatory. so, thatat's kind of my latestt baby. may: that's a big baby. sangeeta: it is, yeah. may: and that would be amazing if that were to come to fruition, just a simple urine test to be able to detect, yeah. well, good luck to you and thank you so much for your time. amazing work that you're doioin. so, keep on doing it. and keep on being that role model. sangeeta: i'll try. may: and we'll be right back with this week's "full frame close-up." nothing makes us stronger than love. research has shown that healthy, loving relationships can help build resilience for people facing stressful or traumatic situations. love, as i it turns out, can hep
buffer our hearts. but is a week enough time to discover love and then marry within a month of meeting? well, we found one couple who is out to prove that rushing into marriage may not be such a bad thing. man: for the hopeleless romanti, there's never enough romance in life. [different man laughs] man: and love is, well, simply ageless. and that couldn't be truer for frank and margaret may. within a week of meeting each other, the widow and widower were engaged. within a month, they were married. today, they are newlyweds. [margaret laughs] frank: the best thing that ever happened to me. [margaret laughs] me, too. [laughs] man: you see, frank and margaret fell in love while they were in their nineties. margaret: so, we didn't have
much longer. i mean, we were--i was 90 and he was more than that. frank: i'm 92. man: so, while getting married after only knowing each other for a month may seem a bit rushed... margaret: what? yeah, you don't rush into anything at 90. frank: no, not 90. [applause] man: margaret and frank decided to make their love official. woman: a few weeks ago, mom and i were at church. and so, mom went up to father bill afterwards, we were leaving, and she said, "you know, i think you'll probably be the one that's going to bury me. and i actually have a place in greens park [inaudible]." and so, i think father bill was a little taken aback, like, "well, let's not rush things here." so, when i called father bill last week and i said, "do you remember mom making that comment about when we go out of church?" he goes, "yeah, i do." and i said, "well, would you mind marrying her before you bury her?" [laughter]
father bill: dearly beloved, we've come to gather in the presence of god to witness and bless the joining together of this man and this woman in holy matrimony. you may kiss your bride. woman: wait, wait now, everybody back up. [laughter] man: and with the reverend's blessing, frank and margaret were now husband and wife. and they both say they'd do it all over again. frank: it's wonderful. it's just absolutely wonderful, really. [crowd cheering] woman: o 70. woman 2: o 70, 7-0, o 70. man: if lolove is justst a game, frank and margaret arere happy o be players, believing their love connection makes them both winners. margaret: oh, because i thought
he was very attractive and he was a good conversationalist. and we had a good time together. frank: and we can look at each other and burst out in laughter and we laugh for 10 minutes straight. man: i've only known margaret for all of a week and a half and she's just like, [inaudible] for my life. i love your laugh, i love your smile, and your whole demeanor is just wonderful. so, i couldn't be happier for my father and i wish you the very, vevery best. cheers. woman: hear, hear. man: frank and margaret prove you're just never too old. woman: the most gentle and kindest man i've ever met. woman 2: aw, nice. man: and that falling in love, like good wine... frank: it gets better and better. woman: hear, hear. all: hear, hear. man: is truly ageless. may: that really is the sweetest story. and that's it for this week.
join the conversation with us on social media. we are cctv america on twitter, facebook, and youtube. and now, you can watch "full frame" on our new mobile app available worldwide on any smartphone for free. get the latest news headlines and connect with us on facebook, twitter, youtube, and weibo. search cctv america on your app store to download today. and all of our interviews can still also be found online at cctv-amemerica.com.. and let us know what you'd like us to take "full frame" next time. simply email us-- firstname.lastname@example.org. i'm may lee in los angeles. thanks so much for watching and we'll see you again next time. ]ñ
- hello. i'm john cleese. it seems that beneath all the apparent differences that separate the world's religions, there's a deep undercurrent that points towards what is called oneness or unity consciousness, the single indivisible essence of all creation. to get some further understanding of this, we're going to explore the concept from both the mystical and the scientific perspectives with an east indian physicist and a british mystic. so settle back, take a slow, deep breath as we join our trusted guide and host, phil cousineau, on this fascinating episode of global spirit, the first "i"internal travel" series. [percussive music]