Wednesday, June 27, 2018
Computational model analysis reveals serotonin speeds learning
Study
provides insight into the role of serotonin in neural plasticity
June
26, 2018
Sainsbury
Wellcome Centre
A
new computational-model reveals that serotonin, one of the most widespread
chemicals in the brain, can speed up learning.
A
new computational-model designed by researchers at UCL based on data from the
Champalimaud Centre for the Unknown reveals that serotonin, one of the most
widespread chemicals in the brain, can speed up learning.
Serotonin
is thought to mediate communications between neural cells and play an essential
role in functional, and dysfunctional, cognition. For a long time, serotonin
has been recognized as a major target of antidepressants
(selective-serotonin-reuptake-inhibitor (SSRIs) that are used to treat various
psychiatric conditions, such as depression, obsessive-compulsive-disorder and
forms of anxiety. However, serotonin in humans, and other animals, is
associated with a bewildering variety of aspects of cognition and
decision-making, including punishment, reward and patience.
The
new results, published in Nature Communications today, provide
additional illumination. In the article, Kiyohito Iigaya and Peter Dayan at
Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit and the Max Planck UCL Centre for
Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research at UCL, analysed data collected by
their collaborators, Madalena Fonseca and Masayoshi Murakami, led by Zachary
Mainen at the Champalimaud Centre for Unknown in Portugal.
In
the experiments, mice were trained to choose one of the two targets to receive
water rewards. Mice continually had to learn which of the targets was more
rewarding, as the reward rates changed without warning. Crucially, sometimes
serotonin release in the brain was temporarily boosted in mice with genetically
modified serotonin neurons by a technique called optogenetics, allowing the
effects of serotonin on learning to be assessed.
Iigaya
built a computational account of mice behaviour based on reinforcement learning
principles, which are widely used in machine-learning and AI. Iigaya found that
the learning rate, i.e. how fast the modelled mice learn, was modulated by
serotonin stimulation. He compared trials with and without stimulation of
serotonin neurons, and observed that the learning rate was significantly faster
when stimulation was delivered, meaning that boosting serotonin sped up
learning in mice.
The
authors also found that when mice made decisions in very quick succession, they
followed a simple strategy called 'win-stay lose-switch', in which they
repeated a choice if it had just been rewarded, and switched to the other
choice if it had not been rewarded. Serotonin stimulation did not affect these
fast choices. However, on subset of trials, when animals acted slowly and took
a long time in-between trials, their decisions did not follow the simple
win-stay lose-switch rule. Instead, the mice made decisions based on a longer
history of rewards, which was well-characterized by a reinforcement learning
account. Serotonin stimulation only affected this slow learning system.
Importantly,
the authors found that this slow system tracked reward outcomes every trial,
even when the choices were made by the fast, win-stay lose-switch, system.
Thus, the effects of the serotonin stimulation to boost the slow system became
apparent only occasionally, when the animals spent a long time before making
decisions. The authors believe that the way that multiple decision-systems mask
each other might explain why scientists have had difficulty in constructing a
comprehensive theory as to how serotonin affects learning and decision-making.
The
authors conclude: "Our results suggest that serotonin boosts [brain]
plasticity by influencing the rate of learning. This resonates, for instance,
with the fact that treatment with an SSRI can be more effective when combined
with so-called cognitive behavioral therapy, which encourages the breaking of
habits in patients."
Substantial
clinical research shows that SSRI treatment is often most effective if combined
with cognitive-behavioural-therapy (CBT). The goal of CBT is to change
maladaptive thinking and behaviour actively, through sessions that are designed
for patients to (re)learn their way to think and behave. However, scientists
have had limited understanding of how and why SSRI and CBT work together for
treatments. The new findings point to a possible functional link between the
two, with serotonin boosting the learning inherent to CBT, providing clues as
to one of the roles that this neuromodulator plays in the treatment of
psychiatric disorders.
Story
Source:
Materials
provided by Sainsbury
Wellcome Centre. Note: Content may be edited for style and length.
Journal
Reference:
Kiyohito
Iigaya, Madalena S. Fonseca, Masayoshi Murakami, Zachary F. Mainen, Peter
Dayan. An effect of serotonergic stimulation on learning rates for rewards
apparent after long intertrial intervals. Nature Communications, 2018; 9
(1) DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-04840-2
Is Ocasio-Cortez Win a Black Swan Event?
By Rob Kall
Black swan is the name of
Nassim Nicholas Taleb's best-selling book (millions sold) and it could be used
to describe Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's upset defeat of incumbent Democrat Joe
Crowley.
Taleb characterizes a black
swan event as having three characteristics:
The event is a surprise (to
the observer).
The event has a major effect.
After the first recorded
instance of the event, it is rationalized by hindsight, as if it could have
been expected; that is, the relevant data were available but unaccounted for in
risk mitigation programs. The same is true for the personal perception by
individuals.
For at least 1400 years black
swans were believed not to exist. The term "black swan" was used to
describe something non-existent. Then, a whole lot of them were discovered in
Australia.
Nassim Nicholas Taleb's hugely
successful book argues that black swan events often play major roles in
history, citing 9/11 and the invention of the internet as examples.
I believe it is reasonable to
characterize Ocasio-Cortez's win as a black swan event. That means that it
could play a major role in history. It could open the sluice gates to
Berniecrat victories and defeats of old-school Clinton DLC corporatist
Democrats.
Over the coming days, the
Pelosi-led powers that be will surely do as Taleb describes, and rationalize
this beautiful black swan event, just as early critics of the computer said it
could only be of interest to a handful of businesses.
Ocasio-Cortez, through her
victory has opened a door that could see throngs of victorious progressive
candidates swell through. Let's hope it happens soon enough, before the current
Democratic leaders destroy the opportunity for victory that Donald Trump and
his GOP sycophants have served up on a plate.
Free Assange
JUNE 27, 2018
Last week, rallies in support
of Julian Assange were held around the world. We participated in two
#AssangeUnity events seeking to #FreeAssange in Washington, DC.
This is the beginning of a new
phase of the campaign to stop the persecution of Julian Assange and allow him
to leave the Ecuadorian Embassy in London without the threat of being arrested
in the UK or facing prosecution by the United States.
The Assange Case is a Linchpin
For Freedom of the Press and Freedom of Information in the 21st Century
The threat of prosecution
against Julian Assange for his work as editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks will be a
key to defining what Freedom of the Press means in the 21st Century. Should
people be allowed to know the truth if their government is corrupt, violating the
law or committing war crimes? Democracy cannot exist when people are misled by
a concentrated corporate media that puts forth a narrative on behalf of the
government and big business.
This is not the first time
that prosecution of a journalist will define Freedom of the Press. Indeed, the
roots of Freedom of the Press in the United States go back to the prosecution of John Peter Zenger, a
publisher who was accused of libel in 1734 for publishing articles
critical of the British royal governor, William Cosby. Zenger was held in
prison for eight months awaiting trial. In the trial, his defense took its case
directly to the jury.
For five hundred years, Britan had made it illegal
to publish “any slanderous News” that may cause “discord” between the
king and his people. Zenger’s defense argued that he had published the
truth about Cosby and therefore did not commit a crime. His lawyer “argued that
telling the truth did not cause governments to fall. Rather, he argued, ‘abuse
of power’ caused governments to fall.” The jury heard the argument,
recessed and in ten minutes returned with a not guilty verdict.
The same issue is presented by
Julian Assange — publishing the truth is not a crime. Wikileaks, with
Assange as its editor and publisher, redefined reporting in the 21st Century
by giving people the ability to be
whistleblowers to reveal the abuses of government and big business. People
anonymously send documents to Wikileaks via the Internet and then after
reviewing and authenticating them, Wikileaks publishes them. The
documents sometimes reveal serious crimes, which has resulted in Assange being
threatened with a secret indictment for espionage that could keep him
incarcerated for the rest of his life.
This puts the Assange case
at the
forefront of 21st Century journalism as he is democratizing the media
by giving people the power to know the truth not reported, or falsely reported,
by the corporate media. Breaking elite control over the media narrative is a
serious threat to their power because information is power. And, with the
internet and the ability of every person to act as a media outlet through
social and independent media, control of the narrative is moving toward the
people.
WikiLeaks is filling a void
with trust
in the corporate media at record lows. A recent Gallup Poll found only
32% trust the media. There has been a significant drop
in newspaper circulation and revenue, an ongoing decline since 1980.
Also, fewer
people rely on television for news.
In this environment, the
internet-based news is becoming more dominant and WikiLeaks is a particular
threat to media monopolization by the elites. Research is showing that independent
and social media are having an impact on people’s opinions.
The threats to Julian Assange
are occurring when dissent
is under attack, particularly media
dissent; the FBI
has a task force to monitor social media. The attack on net neutrality, Google using algorithms to prevent
searches for alternative
media and Facebook controlling the
what people see are all part of the attack on the democratized media.
The Astounding Impact of
WikiLeaks’ Reporting
The list of WikiLeaks’
revelations has become astounding. The release of emails from Hillary Clinton, her presidential campaign, and
the Democratic National
Committee had a major impact on the election.
People saw the truth of Clinton’s
connections to Wall Street, her two-faced politics of
having a public view and a private view as well as the DNC’s
efforts to undermine the campaign of Sen. Bernie Sanders. People saw the
truth and the truth hurt Hillary Clinton and the Democrats.
Among the most famous
documents published were those provided by Chelsea Manning on Iraq, Afghanistan, the Guantanamo Prison and the US State
Department. The Collateral
Murder video among the Manning Iraq war documents shows US soldiers in
an Apache helicopter gunning down a group of innocent men, including two
Reuters employees, a photojournalist, and his driver, killing 16 and wounding
two children. Millions have viewed the video showing that when a van pulled up
to evacuate the wounded, the soldiers again opened fire.
A soldier says, “Oh yeah, look at those dead bastards.”
Another massive leak came from
Edward Snowden, the NSA whistleblower who exposed massive NSA spying in
the United States and around the world. This was followed by Vault 7, a series of leaks on the Central
Intelligence Agency’s activities, and Vault 8, which included
source code on CIA malware activities.
WikiLeaks has also published
documents on other countries, e.g. WikiLeaks published a series of documents on Russian spying. WikiLeaks
has been credited by many with helping to spark the Tunisian Revolution which
led to the Arab Spring, e.g., showing the widespread corruption of the
23-year rule of the Ben Ali. Foreign Policy reported that “the candor of the
cables released by WikiLeaks did more for Arab democracy than decades of
backstage U.S. diplomacy.” WikiLeaks’ publications provided democracy activists
in Egypt with information needed to spark protests and provided background that explained the Egyptian
uprising. Traditional media publications like the New York Times relied on WikiLeaks to
analyze the causes of the uprising.
WikiLeaks informed the Bahrain
public about their government’s cozy relationship with the US,
describing a $5
billion joint-venture with Occidental Petroleum and $300 million in
U.S. military sales and how the U.S.
Navy is the foundation of Bahrain’s national security.
John
Pilger describes WikiLeaks’ documents, writing, “No investigative
journalism in my lifetime can equal the importance of what WikiLeaks has done
in calling rapacious power to account.”
Assange Character
Assassination And Embassy Imprisonment
Julian Assange made powerful
enemies in governments around the world, corporate media, and big business
because he burst false narratives with the truth. As a result, governments
fought back, including the United States, Great Britain, and Sweden,
which has led to Assange being trapped in the embassy of Ecuador in London for
six years.
The root of the incarceration
were allegations in Sweden. Sweden’s charges against Assange were initially dropped by the
chief prosecutor, two
weeks later they found a prosecutor to pursue a rape investigation.
One of the women had CIA
connections and bragged about her relationship with Assange in tweets she tried to erase.
She even published a
7-step program for legal revenge against lovers. The actions
of the women do not seem to show rape or any kind of abuse. One woman
held a party with him after the encounter and another went out to eat with
him. In November 2016, Assange
was interviewed by Swedish prosecutors for four hours at the
Ecuadorian embassy. In December 2016, Assange published tweets
showing his innocence and the sex was consensual. Without making a
statement on Assange’s guilt, the Swedish
investigators dropped the charges in May 2017. The statute of
limitations for Swedish charges will be up in 2020.
As John
Pilger pointed out, “Katrin Axelsson and Lisa Longstaff of Women
Against Rape summed it up when they wrote, ‘The allegations against [Assange]
are a smokescreen behind which a number of governments are trying to clamp down
on WikiLeaks for having audaciously revealed to the public their secret
planning of wars and occupations with their attendant rape, murder, and
destruction… The authorities care so little about violence against women that
they manipulate rape allegations at will.’”
Assange is still trapped in
the embassy as he would
be arrested for violating his bail six years ago. But, the real threat to
Assange is the possibility of a secret indictment against him in the United
States for espionage. US and British officials have refused to tell Assange’s
lawyers whether there was a sealed indictment or a sealed extradition order
against him. Former CIA Director, now Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo
has described WikiLeaks as a non-state hostile intelligence service and described
his actions as not protected by the First Amendment. In April
2017, CNN
reported, “US authorities have prepared charges to seek the arrest of
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.” The Obama Justice Department determined it
would be difficult to bring charges against Assange because WikiLeaks wasn’t
alone in publishing documents stolen by Manning but the Trump DOJ believes he
could be charged as an accomplice with Edward Snowden.
When the
president campaigned, Trump
said he loved WikiLeaks and regularly touted their disclosures.
But, in April 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions
said that Assange’s arrest is a “priority.”
Time To Stop The Persecution
Of Julian Assange
The smearing of Assange sought
to discredit him and undermine the important journalism of WikiLeaks. Caitlin
Johnstone writes that they smear him because “they can kill all
sympathy for him and his outlet, it’s as good for their agendas as actually
killing him.”
Even with this character
assassination many people still support Assange. This was seen during the #Unity4J
online vigil, which saw the participation of activists, journalists,
whistleblowers andn filmmakers calling for the end of Assange’s solitary
confinement and his release. This was followed a week later by 20
protests around the world calling for Assange’s release.
Julian Assange has opened
journalism’s democracy door; the power to report is being redistributed,
government employees and corporate whistleblowers have been empowered and
greater transparency is becoming a reality. The people of the United States
should demand that Assange not face prosecution and embrace a 21st Century
democratized media that provides greater transparency and accurate information
about what government and business interests are doing. Prosecuting a news
organization for publishing the truth, should be rejected and Assange should be
freed.
You can support Julian Assange
by spreading the word in your communities about what is happening to him and
why. You can also show support for him on social media. We will continue to let
you know when there are actions planned. And you can support the WikiLeaks
Legal Defense Fund, run by the Courage Foundation*, at IAmWikiLeaks.org.
Tips For Staying Civil While Debating Child Prisons
Recent incidents of Trump
officials being confronted in public for their role in the administration’s
separation and imprisonment of immigrant families have driven renewed concern
about the lack of civility in U.S. politics. The Onion presents tips for
staying civil in a debate about child prisons.
Avoid unkind generalizations
like equating the jailing of ethnic minorities with some malevolent form of
fascism.
Consider that we all have
different perspectives stemming from things like age, ethnicity, or level of
racism.
Recall that violently
rejecting a tyrannical government goes against everything our forefathers
believed in.
Find common ground by
recognizing that some kids are huge assholes.
Make sure any protests are
peaceful, silent, and completely out of sight of anyone who could actually
affect government policy.
Give your political opponents
the benefit of the doubt by letting this play out for 20 years and seeing if it
gets any better on its own.
Realize that every pressing
social issue is solved through civil discourse if you ignore virtually all of
human history.
Remind yourself that you’re
just two people having a cocktail at the same D.C. party and that politics is a
game to you.
Avoid painting with a broad
brush. Not everyone in favor of zero-tolerance immigration wants to see
children in cages—it’s more likely that they just don’t care.
Tuesday, June 26, 2018
'Electrogeochemistry' captures carbon, produces fuel, offsets ocean acidification
June 25, 2018
University of California -
Santa Cruz
Limiting global warming to 2
degrees Celsius will require not only reducing emissions of carbon dioxide, but
also active removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. This has prompted
heightened interest in 'negative emissions technologies.' A new study evaluates
the potential for recently described methods that capture carbon dioxide from
the atmosphere through an 'electrogeochemical' process that also generates
hydrogen gas for use as fuel and creates by-products that can help counteract
ocean acidification.
Limiting global warming to 2
degrees Celsius will require not only reducing emissions of carbon dioxide, but
also active removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. This conclusion from
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has prompted heightened interest
in "negative emissions technologies."
A new study published June 25
in Nature Climate Change evaluates the potential for recently
described methods that capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere through an
"electrogeochemical" process that also generates hydrogen gas for use
as fuel and creates by-products that can help counteract ocean acidification.
First author Greg Rau, a
researcher in the Institute of Marine Sciences at UC Santa Cruz and visiting
scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, said this technology
significantly expands the options for negative emissions energy production.
The process uses electricity
from a renewable energy source for electrolysis of saline water to generate
hydrogen and oxygen, coupled with reactions involving globally abundant
minerals to produce a solution that strongly absorbs and retains carbon dioxide
from the atmosphere. Rau and other researchers have developed several related
methods, all of which involve electrochemistry, saline water, and carbonate or
silicate minerals.
"It not only reduces
atmospheric carbon dioxide, it also adds alkalinity to the ocean, so it's a
two-pronged benefit," Rau said. "The process simply converts carbon
dioxide into a dissolved mineral bicarbonate, which is already abundant in the
ocean and helps counter acidification."
The negative emissions
approach that has received the most attention so far is known as "biomass
energy plus carbon capture and storage" (BECCS). This involves growing
trees or other bioenergy crops (which absorb carbon dioxide as they grow), burning
the biomass as fuel for power plants, capturing the emissions, and burying the
concentrated carbon dioxide underground.
"BECCS is expensive and
energetically costly. We think this electrochemical process of hydrogen
generation provides a more efficient and higher capacity way of generating
energy with negative emissions," Rau said.
He and his coauthors estimated
that electrogeochemical methods could, on average, increase energy generation
and carbon removal by more than 50 times relative to BECCS, at equivalent or
lower cost. He acknowledged that BECCS is farther along in terms of
implementation, with some biomass energy plants already in operation. Also,
BECCS produces electricity rather than less widely used hydrogen.
"The issues are how to
supply enough biomass and the cost and risk associated with putting
concentrated carbon dioxide in the ground and hoping it stays there," Rau
said.
The electrogeochemical methods
have been demonstrated in the laboratory, but more research is needed to scale
them up. The technology would probably be limited to sites on the coast or
offshore with access to saltwater, abundant renewable energy, and minerals.
Coauthor Heather Willauer at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory leads the most
advanced project of this type, an electrolytic-cation exchange module designed
to produce hydrogen and remove carbon dioxide through electrolysis of seawater.
Instead of then combining the carbon dioxide and hydrogen to make hydrocarbon
fuels (the Navy's primary interest), the process could be modified to transform
and store the carbon dioxide as ocean bicarbonate, thus achieving negative
emissions.
"It's early days in
negative emissions technology, and we need to keep an open mind about what
options might emerge," Rau said. "We also need policies that will
foster the emergence of these technologies."
Story Source:
Materials provided
by University of California
- Santa Cruz. Original written by Tim Stephens. Note: Content may be
edited for style and length.
Journal Reference:
Greg H. Rau, Heather D.
Willauer, Zhiyong Jason Ren. The global potential for converting renewable
electricity to negative-CO2-emissions hydrogen. Nature Climate Change,
2018; DOI: 10.1038/s41558-018-0203-0
Sunday, June 24, 2018
The eurozone isn’t ready for the next big shock
MADRID — The return to
economic growth in the eurozone has produced a dangerous sense of complacency
on the Old Continent, especially in the richer countries of the north. But
Italy’s flirtation with an exit from the euro under a populist government is a
stark reminder that, if left unaddressed, the deep structural weaknesses that
plague the single currency could trigger an existential crisis across the EU.
It would be a mistake, therefore, to believe we can drive along in
business-as-usual mode, or just take a few small steps toward more European
integration.
This week’s Meseberg
Declaration signed by Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron, although a step in the
right direction, is part of a collective denial about what needs to be done.
You don’t need to be a populist to recognize that Europe’s monetary union is dysfunctional
and in dire need of more substantial reforms that those proposed by Germany and
France.
To keep the single currency
alive, it needs two major structural improvements.
First, it needs to reduce the
fragmentation in Europe’s banking system that has caused the Continent to
experience more severe crises than other parts of the world — most notably in
comparison to the U.S.
Second, it has to develop a
streamlined and legitimate decision-making process to respond quickly and
boldly to the next major recession.
The next crisis is likely to
hit some countries harder than others. The problem is that the only tools at
the eurozone’s disposal to tackle these recessions are internal devaluations
— which invariably lead to income cuts and job losses.
The European Commission,
academics and national governments broadly agree on this diagnosis. The problem
is that there is no consensus on the way forward.
Some argue that eurozone
countries should take on more responsibility when it comes to prevention and
reform. That means putting public finances in order, boosting the solvency of
banks — by reducing the incidence of non-performing loans — and reforming their
labor and product markets.
Action at EU level, according
to this view, should only become an option when each country has taken the
necessary measures to get their house in order. In other words, risks should be
minimized before they are shared among the group.
But the experience of Spain
and others shows that this approach, although it may work in normal times,
tends to produce unnecessary economic damage during a crisis. The strategy of
placing most of the burden on crisis-stricken countries under the adjustment
logic of the so-called troika can — in the long run — prove to
be politically unsustainable and undermine European citizens’ confidence in the
euro. We saw it in Greece. We are now seeing it in Italy.
Yes, Germany carried out
successful reforms in the early 2000s. But their success owes much to the fact
that other European countries were sustaining demand for German goods and
services. What might be good for one country can be damaging if several
countries act at the same time.
We need to be more ambitious
than simply proposing a eurozone budget. Designing a relatively well-sourced
fiscal capacity, managed by a central fiscal authority at the European level
will be crucial to offset country-specific shocks.
This can take several forms: a
Europe-wide fund to be mobilized depending on a country’s circumstances, an
investment fund; or an unemployment reinsurance system that tops up national
schemes. What matters is that it can be quickly activated in the event of a
major shock and that there are safeguards to avoid irresponsible behavior.
This eurozone budget — which
should be closer to €100 billion than the €10 billion presently foreseen
— would smooth macroeconomic shocks and fund pan-European projects to
increase growth potential, ensure sufficient public investment, reduce
inequality, protect the borders and facilitate debt sustainability.
It would be an ambitious
measure, and it can only happen if there is trust among member countries and a
willingness to pool more fiscal sovereignty. For it to work, every member
country would need the backing of its citizens.
Merkel and Macron neglect this
point in their declaration. But the truth is that reform will be politically
impossible without first explaining to voters why their government needs to contribute
to a eurozone-wide fund, when it should be activated and how it should be
deployed. The eurozone is, after all, a public good. Politicians have a
responsibility to make a convincing case for why it needs a eurozone budget to
sustain it.
They must also address the
concern — common in northern member countries — that creating a central
fiscal capacity will encourage some to misbehave and overspend.
This can be avoided with the
right incentives. The new framework should be set up in a way that ensures that
only countries that stick to fiscal prudence and commit to structural reforms
will receive support.
The question of what happens
when a member country misbehaves must also be answered. Introducing formal
sovereign debt restructuring in the eurozone to ensure market discipline ex
ante — as Merkel has suggested — is problematic.
As long as the central fiscal
capacity is not large enough — and it won’t be for some time
— sovereign debt restructuring will be both traumatic and destabilizing
for Europe as a whole. Instead, a member country should be able to obtain
financial support from the central fiscal authority, while relinquishing its
fiscal sovereignty temporarily, and signing a memorandum of understanding of
macroeconomic reforms.
This fiscal authority would
have to represent the interests of the eurozone as a whole and not the sum of
the individual members, as is now the case with the European Stability
Mechanism as well as the future European Monetary Fund proposed by Merkel and
Macron.
To ensure this, the permanent
head of the central fiscal authority should be put forward by the Eurogroup and
ratified by a newly established euro committee in the European Parliament.
The bottom line is simple. For
the eurozone to be successful, we need to inject more democratic legitimacy
into how it is governed.
Miguel Otero-Iglesias is
senior analyst at Elcano Royal Institute and professor at the IE School of
International Relations. Raymond Torres is director for macroeconomic and
international analysis at FUNCAS. They are co-authors of the paper “Quit kicking the can down the road: A
Spanish view of EMU reforms.”
The POLITICO
Global Policy Lab is a collaborative journalism project seeking
solutions to pressing policy problems. Join the
community.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)