Sustainability in Action

Transcript

Des Dearlove:

Hello. I’m Des Dearlove, co-founder of Thinkers50. Welcome to our weekly LinkedIn Live session, celebrating the brightest new voices and ideas in the world of management thinking. In January, we announced the Thinkers50 Radar List for 2024, 30 exciting rising stars in management thinking, and we’ll be hearing from one of them today. This year’s Radar List is brought to you in partnership with Deloitte. And a key topic for this year is making workplaces wholly inclusive and healthy for everyone. As you might expect, AI and all things digital also loom large, but so too does sustainability. Something we’ll be hearing about from today’s guest speaker. We do try to make these sessions as interactive as possible, so please do let us know where you are joining us from and put your questions in the comments or chat box. Our guest today is Weslynne Ashton. Weslynne is Professor of Environmental Management and Sustainability at Illinois Institute of Technology, with joint appointments at the Stuart School of Business and the Institute of Design.

Weslynne is a sustainable systems scientist – that’s a lot of S’s for me – whose work is oriented around transitioning our socio-ecological systems towards sustainability and equity. Her research is grounded in industrial ecology and the circular economy. Between 2012 and 2015, she led the US State department-funded Pathways to Cleaner Production in the America’s project, an eight-country interdisciplinary partnership focused on education for cleaner production in small and medium enterprises in Latin America. In 2018, she was awarded a Jefferson Science Fellowship and spent a year at the United States Agency for International Development, working with its Bureau for Europe and Eurasia, looking at energy security, supply, diversity and efficiency in the region’s transitioning economy. She’s also worked in South and Southeast Asia, so she has a truly global perspective. In 2019, she returned to Illinois Tech to continue her research on sustainability of urban food systems and industrial networks around Chicago. Weslynne, welcome.

Weslynne Ashton:

Thanks, Des. Good to be here. Good morning from Chicago.

Des Dearlove:

It’s great to have you here, and congratulations on making the Thinkers50 Radar List.

Weslynne Ashton:

Thank you so much.

Des Dearlove:

Listen, before we get on to talking about your work, of which there’s a lot to talk about, but I’m always interested to know about people’s personal journeys. Tell us a little bit about your journey. How did you end up working in this area?

Weslynne Ashton:

Sure. So my journey starts in the Caribbean. I was born and grew up in Trinidad and Tobago which, some people might know but many people don’t, is really one of the most industrialised islands in the world. So our main export is oil and gas and the juxtaposition, the natural environment and this heavy industrialization, I think is what really shaped my interest in environmental issues. So I went to MIT, I did an undergraduate degree in environmental engineering. And towards the end of that program, I was introduced to the idea of cleaner production and industrial ecology. So as an environmental engineer, I was learning about how to remediate, clean the problems that had been generated because of our industrial systems, because of our wastewater. And so I knew that for my graduate work, I really wanted to do something that was thinking about how we redesign our industrial systems, so that they can operate more in harmony with nature.

And I found a graduate program at Yale University in Industrial Ecology, and the professor that I worked with, Marion Trotto, was working on an idea called industrial symbiosis. And industrial symbiosis thinks about, how do we get companies from different industries to collaborate around managing energy, waste, water byproducts. And so the core idea there is, the byproducts, the waste from one industry can become the input to another. Which I think nowadays it seems like, “Yeah, that’s the thing to do.” But 20, 25 years ago when I started my graduate work, it wasn’t. And I think, thinking about sustainability in business was very fringe. Now it feels much more mainstream. We have the finance sector really pushing on integration of environment, social governance, ESG metrics in their decision making. So it’s much more mainstream. And because my dissertation work was interdisciplinary, I landed in a business school. The Stuart School of Business at Illinois Tech.

And so over the last decade that I’ve been at Illinois Tech, my work has been grounded in business. And a couple years ago I started doing some more collaboration with colleagues in our Institute of Design. And they’re like, “You’re really a designer.” And so in the words of Herbert Simon, a designer is anyone who tries to change the future and thinks about the path that we’re on, devices, solutions, thinks about innovation, but really is working to change the way we do things. And so in a way, we are all designers. We’re designers of our lives, we’re designers of companies.

Des Dearlove:

Hopefully we all have some kind of design element to what we’re doing. We have some kind of agency in what we’re doing. I do hope that’s the case. Listen, really interesting. You’re talking about… I know you’re very systems focused and I love the phrase industrial symbiosis. That’s how I’d like to think the world can move forward, understanding the knock-on effects and how things are interconnected. But just to really ground this, you and I were talking just before we came on about an example in Barbados. Can you just tell us a little bit about that example, seaweed and white rum were involved as I recall.

Weslynne Ashton:

Yeah. So we joke, “What’s the Caribbean known for?” White sand beaches and rum. Party on the beach. And seaweed is a completely natural phenomena. So in the western Atlantic we have brown seaweed that’s known as sargassum. And Jean Rhys wrote a book, Wide Sargasso Sea. So it’s a natural phenomena that has existed for a long time. So these mats of brown seaweed float in the western Atlantic, providing a habitat for fish. And so, juvenile fish species grow in it. But with climate change and global warming, we are increasingly seeing larger and larger masses of this sargassum seaweed washing up on the shores of Caribbean beaches, the southeastern United States, so Florida, the Gulf. And it presents a huge problem, because once that mass washes up on the beach, it starts to decompose and rot. And so there’s a smell, it attracts flies and nobody’s coming to your beaches if you have this rotting mass on the beach instead of the white sand. It’s estimated that it costs upwards of $200 million a year just in cleanup costs.

So that’s not accounting for the lost revenues from tourism, the hotel stays, the restaurants. So it has really been a huge impact in the Caribbean. So I have one of my colleagues, Dr. Legena Henry, who is a lecturer at University of the West Indies in Barbados in renewable energy. And in her lab, she and her students were experimenting on ways to what she could do with this material. And they came up with a process to combine this sargassum seaweed with rum distillery waste. And there’s also some animal manure that they combine with it, run it through an anaerobic digestion process and produce bio-based compressed natural gas that can now replace gasoline that’s used in automobiles on the island. So this is a great example of industrial symbiosis. We have a waste from one industry, we have a natural waste that’s generated on the island that’s causing a real problem. And so we combine it in an interesting way to produce a new product. And so there is a significant capital investment that needs to happen to build this facility.

But once that’s up and running, it now provides a much cheaper source of energy for automobiles on the island, while reducing the carbon footprint, because we’re not importing all of that gasoline anymore. So this is again, I think a very nice contemporary example of industrial symbiosis, circular economy in action.

Des Dearlove:

We’re going to talk a little bit more about the circular economy in a second, and also about your specific research around Chicago in terms of food waste management. But I mentioned at the top of the piece that you’ve actually worked in different… you have different perspectives, you have quite a global perspective, let’s put it that way, because you’ve seen what’s going on in different parts of the world. And the island economy thing is interesting just because they are, as we said, somewhere like Barbados is such a microcosm, you can really see the effects of some of these issues. But when you’re looking at the … and you also mentioned that 20 years ago sustainability wasn’t quite so high on the agenda – hopefully it is now moving very much to the centre and also breaking out of its silo – we’ll be beginning to realise, hopefully we’ll be finally beginning to realise that it should be integrated into everything. It shouldn’t be a separate department. It is a way of thinking.

But from a global perspective, how do you see it? Are we making … presumably you’ve seen the good, the bad and the ugly, quite honestly. And how does it look? How does the global picture look? Big question, sorry!

Weslynne Ashton:

Yeah, it is a big question and I think it is a mixed bag, because I think that there are certainly a gather of companies who are on the leading edge. Who have integrated sustainability, the sustainable development goals into their purpose. And so, they are thinking about aligning the purpose of the company, the types of products that they’re developing, the contributions that their employees are making and the benefits that their employees receive, the value of products to their customers and the communities in which they’re based. And so aligning purpose with profits, I think they are a larger group who are doing what they need to do, what they think their peers are doing, and so are following along because of signals that they’re getting in the market from customers who want greener products or because their peers are doing it or because regulations are requiring them to do it.

And then, I don’t have percentages in these categories. I think it varies from place to place. So the European context is very different from the US context, but there’s probably still a large number of companies who aren’t sure how this is relevant to them. And if they are trying to be more efficient, and so they might be reducing waste through being leaner and through increasing their operational efficiency. But I think some of the big drivers that we see are around cost and efficiency and also around market. It’s through customer demand, it’s through brand awareness and building brand loyalty. But there’s quite a distribution of companies in this realm. I’d say that one of the challenges that I see, and I do hear some other sustainability scholars talking about this, is that, for a very long time we’ve thought about sustainability actions as being win-win. If we make the business case for sustainability, we do the investment, there’s a clear positive return on the investment.

And I think we’ve gotten to a point for many companies where we’ve captured that low-hanging fruit, where there is a clear win-win. And now we’re faced with some tougher investments and the need for commitments that might not have that short-term win. And so, I think it really takes leadership commitment-to-purpose to say what is the value that we are creating here? And are we measuring it purely in terms of money and profitability or can we also measure the more holistic social benefits, environmental benefits, societal benefits, so that we are contributing to that larger systemic impact. And so I feel like that’s a shift that we’re now on the cusp of. And for most companies, they’re not there, because we still have to ground decisions in what’s the best business case. And I think there are fewer companies who are willing to make that commitment. So I’ll reference the work of Andrew Winston and Paul Polman, thinking about what it takes to be a net positive.

Des Dearlove:

I was about to bring them into the conversation. You know they’re very close to hearts at Thinkers50 and we ranked them at number three in our Ranking. But yeah, please go ahead and tell us.

Weslynne Ashton:

So I think the types of commitments that are now required mean that you might not have a short-term return on investment that’s as competitive with other things that you might invest in. But if we think more holistically about the long-term benefits and the value that’s being created, so the framework that I’ve been using and others use as well is that of thinking about multiple types of capital, so usually we really measure things in terms of financial capital. Everything is monetized. But through the work of groups like the Capitals Coalition, we’re developing frameworks for measuring natural capital, social capital, human capital. I also like to think about cultural, digital, political capital. And so I think we’re at a point of thinking about how can we measure how we use, how we destroy or how we can regenerate these different types of capital. Because, guess what? All businesses rely on all types of capital and they are not strictly replaceable.

So there’s a concept called strong sustainability, where we think about the stocks of these different types of capital independently. Whereas a weak sustainability conception thinks that, “Well, if we’re getting the money from using up a natural resource, then we can put it into our bank account. But if we’ve completely used up that natural resource and we’ve destroyed the place and people can no longer live there, now we’ve lost that natural capital, we’ve lost the cultural capital of that place. And so they’re not directly replaceable. And so what I see is a need and work of the Capitals Coalition is really trying to develop frameworks for us to measure and account for the value of these different types of capital, independently of just monetizing them.

Des Dearlove:

No, I think you’re absolutely right. I think one of the difficulties, certainly in the past when you were talking to the business community, is that only the financial resources were costed. It was taken for granted that the environment and the planet was free. But of course it’s not if you are using up that resource or you are changing that resource and clearly, but it’s a one-dimensional system in a way because that’s the only, and of course the only thing that gets measured and gets paid for, there you go, is the only thing that leaders back in the day would’ve looked at. And certainly the argument about shareholder value being the only thing that mattered. But hopefully we’ve moved on from that. But you mentioned, we mentioned, Paul Polman as being a potential exemplar of a leader with a bit more vision. Are there other people you also talked about? You said there’s companies that are at the leading edge. Are there examples that you think about either specific leaders or organisations that you think are doing … nothing’s perfect, but doing this well or leading the way?

Weslynne Ashton:

Yeah, I think Patagonia is an example that’s always held up as being a leader in this space. Yesterday I had a chance to attend part of the Harvard Business Review Leaders Who Make a Difference event and was learning about the work of Elf Cosmetics and the investments that they’re making around purpose. And because they’re serving a global market and diversity and inclusion is a really big part of not only who they sell to, but also reflective of the company itself. And part of that purpose is also thinking about how they use resources. Their packaging footprint is pretty significant. And so that’s a place where they’ve made a lot of investments in trying to reduce the packaging to reduce their carbon footprint while reducing costs. If you’re reducing packaging, you’re reducing costs as well. So I think there are many, I think the fashion industry, particularly fast fashion, gets a bad rap.

And I was reading the other day about H&M really thinking deeply about what it means to produce clothes for the global marketplace, but in a way that’s not using more resources. So being more thoughtful about how they are sourcing and procuring the types of raw materials that they’re using. So I think they’ve been using recycled PET bottles as a source material. And so now they’re thinking about, “Well, how do we actually reuse textiles in new clothing?” And I think the statistic is something like 80% of clothes that we have, go either into a landfill or are incinerated every year. And most of that landfill happens in the global south, and only 1% of clothing is currently recycled into new clothing. So that’s a space that they’re trying to innovate around. And this is not easy because those fibres are already shortened because they’ve been processed.

And so there are limits to what we might recycle and how we might recycle their significant capital expenses, to invest in the equipment, their energy expenses, to convert those materials. So it’s not that. Recycling isn’t always cheap, but these investments are commitments that companies can make to how we do better. I also think about smaller companies. So I think when we’re talking on a global scale, we often look to multinationals. But there are so many small, whether they’re social enterprises that are trying to hit both a social and financial target or purely for profit, but doing something in a way to benefit a community, all over the world. And so there are thousands of examples of small companies that are trying to do things differently to benefit their communities, to create jobs, to leave the world a better place, use resources more and more sensibly.

Des Dearlove:

You mentioned health cosmetics, and again, we were fortunate to have. ..

Weslynne Ashton:

Scott Nelson?

Des Dearlove:

No, Scott Nelson actually is another of the executives who was at the Thinkers50 Gala in November and was fascinating. He was on our sustainability panel and it’s really interesting what they’re doing. But when you were talking … it reminded me of another company we had some interaction with a few years ago, a company called Ecoalf. I don’t know if you’ve heard of this Spanish company. What they’re doing is, they make clothing, very classy, upmarket clothing from the plastic that we find in the ocean. And the other part of this was they were paying the fishermen, which makes no sense until you see it in a circular way. They’re paying the fishermen who were going about their business in fishing in the Mediterranean, instead of just throwing the plastic back that comes up in the nets, the plastic bags and all the waste, they were saying, “We will pay you for the plastic if you take it out of the ocean, and then we will use it to create clothing, which we will then turn into a social enterprise business.”

And they were very successful and I’m trying to think of his name, but the CEO and founder was a very smartly dressed Spanish gentleman. And I remember saying to him, “But you are not wearing the clothes.” And he said, “Yes, I am. This is how good the clothes can look just because of…” So there are some great examples, and we’re trying more and more at Thinkers50, we talk about bringing thinkers plus doers together equals impact. So we’ve got a simple formula. Thinker plus doer equals impact. So I will come back to you at some point and try and pick your brains for some of these other companies, because we got to shine the spotlight not just on the ideas, but also on the companies that are putting the ideas into action. Now, we started talking about the circular economy. Most people listening will have some idea what it is. At Thinkers50 we’ve highlighted the work of the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and others. But perhaps you can give us your definition and perspective. What is the circular economy and where are we in that journey towards it?

Weslynne Ashton:

So let me start with what it is and then I’ll tackle where we are.

Des Dearlove:

I’m asking you big challenges here.

Weslynne Ashton:

But yeah, so I think of the circular economy as a way of organising our economic activities to extract as little raw virgin materials from nature as possible, and utilize what we have in a smart way. So maintaining the value of those resources throughout their life cycle is the term that we use. So this is contrasted with the idea of our linear economy, which we currently operate under, in that we extract a vast amount of natural resources. So we take resources from nature to make a variety of products across global value chains, and distribute them to customers around the world. And then at the end of life, after customers are finished using those products, they dispose of them and those wasted products end up in the garbage. They might be incinerated, they’re going to the landfill. So they have a single chain, a single use. And so it’s a very linear flow. So the circular economy says, “Well, can we think about, one, redesigning our products so that we’re using less virgin resources?”

We might be using more bio-based or more recycled content. So we’re needing less virgin resources. How can we optimise our manufacturing processes so that we are reducing the waste that’s being generated? Reducing costs, reducing waste, distributing them smartly, creating multiple markets. So rather than only thinking about we’re going to sell this product once, can we capture that product after the first set of customers have used them, and then bring them into a secondary market so they can be reused, resold by someone else. The products might not always be of sufficient quality to do that. So we might need to repair, we might need to disassemble, re-manufacture those products into new products, so that there’s an opportunity to collect, re-manufacture, and put those products back into circulation. And then the end of life really becomes a disassembly, decomposition so that we can get the materials back, put them into new uses, and get the energy back from those materials. So we think about extending the life of the materials, reusing, creating opportunities for sharing these product life cycles.

Des Dearlove:

That’s fantastic.

Weslynne Ashton:

Now, where we are?

Des Dearlove:

Where we are. Hopefully we all know now that that’s a good idea.

Weslynne Ashton:

Yeah, we’re very far away. So I think the latest circularity gap report indicates that we currently recycle, reuse materials, about 7% of the materials. So our circularity level is about 7%. Meaning that, of all of the materials that we extract from the earth, pass through various cycles and come back into reuse, that’s only a 7% of what’s extracted. So that’s a very small number. And part of that challenge is that we have many parts of the global South where populations are growing. We need the infrastructure, roads, buildings, housing to meet the material well-being needs of that growing population. But, there’s also a lot of waste and a lot of over consumption that happens. And so I want to come back to your Spanish example, because we have been conditioned and like a dominant mental model that we have is that, we need to buy more stuff.

You buy stuff to be happy. “I need this new jacket, I need this new car.” My kids make fun of me. They’re like, “Mom, our car is so old.” And I’m like, “Okay.” We need a new car. But the current one is working just fine. But we have been conditioned over the last 50, 60 years, post-World War II, and primarily in the West that we need new stuff, we need to consume, that consumption is good, but it doesn’t account for these social and environmental costs of consumption. And so I would think that, I would argue that we actually need to reduce our consumption in the West, and that might involve purchasing fewer but higher quality goods that are more durable, that can be repaired, so that we are not just buying stuff that’s going to end up in the landfill. There are places in the world where there’s under consumption. And so where we clearly need people to have more clothing, housing, food to meet their needs, but it’s not the same across the board.

So we have these different needs in different parts of the world, and I think our consumption patterns need to change. I’m just recalling a conversation with some of my current students and several of whom come from Asia and Africa, saying that in their markets they feel that they get lower quality goods, which only worked for a year, and so it has to be disposed of and they have to buy a new one next year. And so, I think we equate price with quality. So it’s a lower price, and so it’s a lower quality, and so we end up with more waste. And so I think we also need to rethink about how we might provide better quality goods that are more durable, so that we are not generating much of that waste wherever we are in the world.

Des Dearlove:

No, it’s interesting. Philip Kotler who we gave a Lifetime Achievement Award – oh, I’m ticking all the boxes with the Thinkers50 Thinkers, lovely to begin to integrate some of these ideas – but Phil’s big thing these days, he was talking the last time we spoke to him about marketing, which we assume is all about – and he’s the great master of marketing, he virtually created a lot of the marketing theory – but he was saying that, non-consumption – I forget what he calls it – un-marketing is the big thing. How do we use the techniques that we’ve used in the past to encourage people to consume more? How do we use marketing to persuade people to consume, for example, use less water? Don’t use the resources? It is like a whole new area really for marketing. But some of the tools that we’ve got in the business toolbox could be used to support circular economy thinking, rather than, as you say, the traditional, linear economy that you were describing earlier.

We’ve got lots of questions coming in. I’m very conscious that I want to talk about your specific work on the sustainability of urban food systems. Perhaps we can work some of that stuff into the answers to the questions as well. But I do want to get a couple of these questions in. So Danny Wareham says, “Weslynne, do you feel that there is genuine movement from commercial organisations towards a truly circular model? Or are we still using the linear make-use-dispose model, but focusing on increasing the time between make and dispose, so as to appear more sustainable?”

Weslynne Ashton:

I think there’s still a lot of green washing and circular washing. We’re making things circular.

Des Dearlove:

Spin cycle.

Weslynne Ashton:

But I do think that increasing the durability, the repairability of products, so lengthening that time between make and dispose is beneficial. Because if we are keeping more products in use, whether it’s from the primary consumer or in a secondary market, then that’s one less item that we have to produce. So I think there is a benefit there. But I do think that there is a good bit of green washing and circular washing that still goes on, because there’s often not a penalty. This is not regulated. These actions are really voluntary and companies are doing it because they think it helps them to be more competitive vis-a-vis their peers, vis-a-vis customers, helping them to reduce costs. And so, if we don’t have someone that’s saying, “Is this actually true?” – and I guess that’s part of the role of the public and scholars. I have a colleague, Nancy Landrum, who was at Loyola University, Chicago and is now in Munich Business School, who recently published a study looking at sustainability reports. And the fact is that, most sustainability reports are really a lot of talk. And she aligned it that most are aligned with what we think of as that weaker sustainability, not the strong sustainability.

Des Dearlove:

It’s interesting. I remember a couple of years ago, I think it was Unilever, I’m sure it was Unilever, who obviously in some ways have been leading the way in some ways, telling their customers that 70% of this product is going to be recycled, is made from recycled plastic and thinking they were doing well. But actually the consumer pushback was, “We don’t want 70%, we want 100%.” So they actually realised that they were no longer leading. And in fact, certain consumers were actually pushing them to go faster, which I think is a healthy thing. Let me put…

Weslynne Ashton:

Part of that accountability, right?

Des Dearlove:

Absolutely.

Weslynne Ashton:

So if the government’s not going to hold you accountable, your customers might.

Des Dearlove:

Yeah. And as consumers, we all have a voice, we all have a role to play in this. I think obviously it’s easy to forget that sometimes and we fall back on just convenience. Let me ask you another question. I haven’t got a name on this one. “What role does innovation play in addressing social environmental challenges?” And here’s the kicker. “How can AI technologies be leveraged to enhance the strategies for sustainability and equity in urban food systems?”

Weslynne Ashton:

Okay, yeah. I swear this is not a planted question.

Des Dearlove:

I was going to ask the question about AI anyway, so it’s good.

Weslynne Ashton:

All right, good. And this hits some of the things that I know we wanted to talk about. All right. So I sit in the Institute of Design, which is really one of the founders of thinking about human-centred and user-centred design. And in our work, we’re actually thinking about systemic design. And so it’s not just about designing products, although we certainly have toolkits. So IDEO and the Ellen MacArthur Foundation have their circular design toolkit, that’s very beautiful, that has guideposts and we like checklists. And it’s a great toolkit for how a company might think about implementing circularity in their product design, their business model, and even collaboration. For us, we are thinking about a more systems view. So yes, we might want to develop new products, but we are within this larger system and we don’t get to transformation just by changing products. We also have to change hearts and minds.

So to the point you were making about the un-marketing, changing human behaviour is not usually done with numbers and statistics, it’s done with stories and narratives and changing what people see as possible, so there’s a strong role for imagination and creativity and creating futures. So in one of my current classes designed for climate leadership, we are currently envisioning the future of retail environments and what does that mean for food production, food security, and climate action. And so we see that, futuring helps to create these new narratives about the future that can ignite imaginations and present new pathways for action. Now let me bring that back to AI and I’ll use the same example, because that’s certainly something that came up in our futureing activities. And here there’s certainly a big role for predictive analytics, big data, some more of the… So rather than Generative AI, and I think there is probably a role for Generative AI in here, but I’m thinking more of the machine learning and predictive analytics to help us better understand our food supply chains.

So a big problem in food supply chains is a lack of traceability and transparency. What’s coming from where, how much is… When is something going to be expired? When is something no longer good? And so I do see a huge opportunity here for predictive analytics for us to better manage our food supply chains. How much should we order? How much is likely to go bad? Now what should we price food that might be expiring in a few days, so that more people are likely to purchase it? And so yeah, I think there’s an important role for AI in here for us to better understand production, supply chain, consumption patterns, so that we can reduce the waste that’s being generated in this food system.

Des Dearlove:

We are, I’m afraid, running out of time. But if there’s one thing you’d like people to take away from, I’m going to ask you two things in one because we’ve only got a minute. If there’s one thing you’d like people to take away from this conversation, what would it be? And where can people find out more about your very important work?

Weslynne Ashton:

So I feel like there are lots of things. When I think about the circular economy, I think we are thinking about innovation. And I would like people to recognize and remember that innovation happens everywhere. We are all designers, and there are really fantastic innovations that are happening in communities that have been minoritized and marginalised all around the world. So in the US context, that’s African-American, Latina communities. In India, that’s migrant communities, slum communities. And so, I think there’s a huge opportunity for investing in the innovations that are happening in marginalised communities. There are lots of solutions that are being born there and that need investment so that they can scale and really amplify the impact of what they’re happening. So I think we have to think about the equity part of this equation. It’s not just materials, it’s also about people.

Des Dearlove:

No, that’s fantastic. And where can people find out more about your work?

Weslynne Ashton:

So I guess we can connect on LinkedIn. Weslynne Ashton. My lab’s work is… I cannot remember my address. id.iit.edu. And if you search for me there, it’s the Food Systems Action Lab at the Illinois Institute of Technology.

Des Dearlove:

Fantastic. Huge thank you to Weslynne. Please do join us on 24th of April at the same time when our guest will be Ville Satopää from INSEAD. And we’ll be talking about… Well, predictions actually, crowdsourced predictions and forecasting and the use of real-time information. So a link to what you’ve just been talking about. Weslynne, a huge thank you. Really enjoyed your company.

Weslynne Ashton:

Thank you. Appreciate it. Good to see you all today.