The North West MEC for Agriculture and Rural Development, Madoda Sambatha, is embarking on a series of engagements with young people in agriculture across the province.
According to the North West Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, the sessions aim to empower youth to take an active role in shaping the future of the sector, reflecting their commitment to supporting sustainable, youth-led growth in agriculture.
The first leg of the district engagements kicked off on Monday, 30 June 2025, in Coligny, within the Ngaka Modiri Molema District.
The department said that at the heart of this focused intervention is the Youth in Agriculture and Rural Development (YARD) structure, whose elected leadership has been tasked with advancing youth representation and development at all levels of the sector.
The rollout continues in the Dr Ruth Segomotsi Mompati District on Friday, 4 July, at Mooilagte Farm in the Naledi Local Municipality.
This will be followed by engagements in the Dr Kenneth Kaunda District on 11 July at Ga-Matsapola Farm, and in the Bojanala Platinum District on 14 July at the Moses Kotane Local Municipality.
The initiative brings together key stakeholders, including the National Youth Development Agency (NYDA), North West University Business School, the Small Enterprise Finance and Development Agency (SEFDA), AgriSETA, the Agricultural Research Council (ARC), commercial banks, and development finance institutions.
“The sessions serve as a gateway for young people to access critical information on funding, skills development, mentorship, and market access tools essential for building resilient and sustainable agri-enterprises.”
Held in partnership with local municipalities through the District Development Model (DDM), the engagements aim to ensure that the needs and aspirations of young farmers are integrated into local economic development plans.
“In addition to dialogue and presentations, each session includes live demonstrations and planting activities, exposing participants to practical techniques and climate-smart agricultural methods.”
Addressing youth during the Coligny engagement held on Monday, Sambatha emphasised the department’s commitment to creating an enabling environment for youth in agriculture.
“This is not a ceremonial exercise; it is a deliberate strategy to reposition young people as central drivers of agricultural growth and rural development. We are here to remove bottlenecks, unlock opportunities, and invest in future producers,“ Sambatha said.
The department encourages all young people involved in farming, agri-processing, and rural enterprises to take full advantage of these sessions and the wide range of support offered through government and its partners. – SAnews.gov.za
The African Development Bank (www.AfDB.org), through the Fund for African Private Sector Assistance (FAPA), has awarded a $1 million grant to South Africa’s National Business Initiative (NBI) to strengthen efforts to build a dynamic, demand-led skills ecosystem that enables South Africans, particularly young people, to access emerging job opportunities in the green economy.
South Africa continues to face significant challenges in youth employment, with StatisticsSA (http://apo-opa.co/3I92YRD) reporting that 46.1% of young people aged 15 to 34 were unemployed in the first quarter of 2025.
The funding will support the country’s Just Energy Transition Skilling for Employment Programme (JET SEP), led by the National Business Initiative in partnership with the management consultancy Boston Consulting Group. The initiative coordinates private sector efforts to prepare the workforce for the energy transition, in tandem with the government’s JET Skilling Implementation Plan, focused on inclusive workforce development and sustainable job creation.
Specifically, the grant will finance the programme’s first phase, including feasibility studies for the design of skills development zones and capacity building within the public technical and vocational education and training system. Skills development zones will anchor the delivery of inclusive skills and foster local economic growth during the country’s just-energy transition.
Launched in 2024 and endorsed by the JET Project Management Unit under the presidency of the Government of South Africa, JET SEP has garnered support from over 30 influential South African CEOs, public sector leaders, and civil society leaders in the past year.
Of the grant, Kennedy Mbekeani, African Development Bank Director General for Southern Africa, said: “By linking a strong private sector coalition – the engine for job creation – with government, academia, and NGOs, the FAPA grant will play a catalytic role to support informed policy decisions in skills development and labour market programmes. It will also strengthen skills development efforts for the growth of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises and the creation of jobs for youth in South Africa’s green economy.”
The grant builds on the African Development Bank’s significant investment in South Africa’s energy sector. Since 2007, the Bank has invested $3.4 billion to support energy infrastructure, including renewable energy. The current grant will support the government’s efforts to identify the skills needed for the sector, with a particular focus on renewable energy.
Shameela Soobramoney, CEO of the National Business Initiative, said: “This grant from the African Development Bank is a critical step toward turning vision into action, strengthening the national skills system, and ensuring that all South Africans are equipped to seize new opportunities in the green economy. We are proud to continue working alongside our partners and stakeholders to build an inclusive future-ready workforce and to stimulate local economies in a way that leaves no one behind.”
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of African Development Bank Group (AfDB).
Media contact: African Development Bank: Emeka Anuforo, Communication and External Relations Department, media@afdb.org
About the African Development Bank Group: The African Development Bank Group is Africa’s premier development finance institution. It comprises three distinct entities: the African Development Bank (AfDB), the African Development Fund (ADF) and the Nigeria Trust Fund (NTF). On the ground in 41 African countries with an external office in Japan, the Bank contributes to the economic development and the social progress of its 54 regional member states. For more information: www.AfDB.org
The ECOWAS Commission launched on Monday in Abidjan the third edition of its regional information and awareness campaign for small-scale cross-border women traders along the Abidjan–Lagos corridor. This initiative, which will run until 15 July 2025, aims to strengthen women’s economic participation in regional trade by improving their access to information, training, and a safer trading environment.
The Department of Human Development and Social Affairs and the Department of Economic Affairs and Agriculture of the ECOWAS Commission are co-organising the third edition of the Information and Awareness Campaign for small-scale cross-border women traders along the Abidjan–Lagos corridor, from 30 June to 15 July 2025.
The objective of this campaign is to build on the achievements and results of the 2023 and 2024 editions conducted along the Tema–Paga and Dakar–Banjul–Bissau corridors, in order to facilitate cross-border trade and improve operations for small-scale women traders by strengthening their knowledge and understanding of the regulations governing cross-border trade and related regional initiatives.
As part of the implementation of this campaign, an official launch ceremony—co-chaired by the Minister of Trade and Industry and the Minister of Women, Family and Children—was held on 30 June 2025 at the NOOM Hotel in Abidjan. The ceremony was graced by the effective participation of H.E. Mrs. Massandjé TOURE-LITSE, ECOWAS Commissioner for Economic Affairs and Agriculture.
The official launch of the information and awareness campaign was preceded by a public Town Hall meeting focused on raising awareness about ECOWAS cross-border trade policies and strategies, capacity building for women traders, the toolkit designed for small-scale cross-border women traders (border transparency and the fight against gender-based violence), and GIZ initiatives to boost intra-regional agri-food trade, improve coordination of regional policies, strengthen economic integration, and ensure food security.
The launch event also saw the participation of the ECOWAS Resident Representative in Côte d’Ivoire, the ECOWAS National Office in Côte d’Ivoire, the Abidjan Chamber of Commerce, representatives of associations of small-scale cross-border women traders, and technical and financial partners.
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).
Eissa has faced many challenges in his journey to graduation
Eissa Hassan’s journey to graduation has been more challenging than most.
After leaving his home in Yemen, the 28-year-old arrived in the UK, determined not to be defined by his past, but his future.
Eissa explains: “Arriving in the UK as a refugee with nothing but hope, with limited resources, I faced the daunting task of rebuilding my life from the ground up. I sought a place that didn’t just offer education – but transformation.
“I chose the University of Aberdeen because it embodies opportunity and growth. This institution opened its doors to me at a time I needed it most, nurturing my potential and empowering me to turn hardship into leadership. This University welcomed me with open arms and gave me not just an education, but a community and a future.
“Entering this new academic environment felt like stepping into a world vastly different from anything I had known. I confronted self-doubt about my ability to integrate and succeed. As a refugee adjusting to unfamiliar cultural and educational norms, I grappled with feelings of uncertainty and isolation.
“However, this initial apprehension gave way to resilience. Through daily engagement, academic challenges and support from the University community, I began to adapt and grow. This period marked a critical turning point, affirming my capacity to overcome adversity, embrace new opportunities and commit myself to lifelong learning and personal development.”
Where we begin does not define where we can go” Eissa Hassan
While studying for his degree in Business Management, Eissa was able to pursue not only his academic passions, but learn more about himself and what he wanted for his future.
He continues: “Studying Business Management has been both academically enriching and personally empowering. I had the privilege of representing youth voices on climate justice globally, coordinate sustainability programmes and lead community events – all while balancing my studies.
“One of the most meaningful highlights was working with climate and refugee networks across the UK and internationally, turning my lived experience into leadership. Of course, there were challenges – financial pressure, culture shock and grief after losing my mother, who passed away four months after I arrived in Aberdeen. But I found strength in my purpose and support from peers and staff who believed in me. Aberdeen gave me more than a degree; it gave me the platform to become the change I want to see in the world.”
His journey has not been easy, but with resilience and support from the University community, Eissa is proud to be celebrating his hard work at his graduation.
“Graduating fills me with profound gratitude and heartfelt reflection. This milestone represents not only the culmination of my academic journey but also the resilience required to overcome significant challenges. It reaffirms my belief that where we begin does not define where we can go and honours the sacrifices of my late mother. She was such an important part of my life and her dream was always to see me succeed. I was always trying to make her proud and happy and in the end, I feel like she succeeded.
“This achievement is a testament to the power of perseverance, reminding me of my potential and the meaningful impact that dedication and determination can create. My future aspirations are to advance my work in climate justice, with a particular focus on supporting vulnerable communities disproportionately impacted by climate change. I look forward to leading with purpose, guided by the lessons of my past and hope for the future.”
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
BEIJING, July 3 (Xinhua) — The 9th China-Russia Expo will be held from July 7 to 10, 2025, in the Russian city of Yekaterinburg, Chinese Ministry of Commerce spokesperson He Yongqian said at a regular ministry press conference on Thursday.
More than 300 Chinese companies are ready to participate in the Expo. The exhibits of these enterprises cover such fields as electromechanical products, agriculture, medicine, digital economy and new energy, He Yongqian said.
According to her, this year’s EXPO is held under the motto “Practical Cooperation between China and Russia: Sustainable Development.” Five main exhibition zones will be created, including the central exhibition zone, interregional cooperation zones, trade and economic exchanges, industrial projects, and cultural and tourism consumption zones.
In addition, the upcoming EXPO will also host a number of events to promote bilateral trade in order to create favorable platforms for interregional cooperation and interaction between the business communities of the two countries, she said.
“We invite partners at home and abroad to actively participate in the 9th China-Russia EXPO to deepen mutual understanding and share development opportunities through this platform,” she said. -0-
New York, N.Y., July 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — NANO Nuclear Energy Inc. (NASDAQ: NNE) (“NANO Nuclear” or “the Company”), a leading advanced nuclear energy and technology company focused on developing clean energy solutions, today announced that it is the Platinum Sponsor of the upcoming Defense Strategies Institute’s 7th Annual DoD Energy & Power Summit to be held on July 9-10, 2025, at the National Housing Center in Washington, DC.
NANO Nuclear Energy Chief Executive Officer James Walker will participate in a panel discussion titled, “Exploring Cutting Edge Nuclear Energy Solutions for Defense Applications” at 11:10am on July 9th. This panel will delve into the rapidly evolving landscape of nuclear energy technologies and their potential to revolutionize defense capabilities. It will also discuss the cutting-edge advancements in nuclear reactor designs, including small modular reactors (SMRs) and microreactors, and their suitability for powering remote military installations, advanced weapon systems, and future propulsion technologies.
The panel will additionally feature leaders of key United States nuclear research and oversight organizations, including the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Reactors, Department of Energy Dr. Rian Bahran, SES; Associate Laboratory Director, Nuclear Science & Technology Directorate, Idaho National Laboratory Jess Gehin, Ph. D., and the Director of Nuclear Engineering Program, Virginia Tech Research Center Alireza Haghighat Ph.D.
“The momentum behind our work to deliver mobile, resilient nuclear power solutions continues to grow, and I look forward to discussing their potential defense applications during the panel,” said James Walker, Chief Executive Officer of NANO Nuclear. “This summit offers a valuable forum to engage directly with energy leaders from the government and the Department of Defense, and I expect productive, and important conversations.”
Figure 1 – NANO Nuclear Announced as the Platinum Sponsor of the DoD Energy & Power Summit, held on July 9-10, 2025, at the National Housing Center in Washington, DC.
The Department of Defense is the single largest energy consumer in the United States and consumes approximately 76% of federal energy consumption. This year’s DoD Energy and Power Summit will provide a forum for members of the DoD, Military Services, Federal Government, Industry, and Academia, and other leading stakeholders to enhance energy efficiency, resiliency, affordability, and security across the Department of Defense and federal government. This “town-hall” style summit will allow attendees to hear first-hand from decision makers and engage in meaningful conversations and discussions on US energy and power initiatives.
“We’re proud to sponsor the DoD Energy & Power Summit and meet with leading policymakers and military officials in Washington,” said Jay Yu, Founder and Chairman of NANO Nuclear. “We’ve engaged numerous seasoned, former military and government experts onto our team to better position NANO Nuclear to support the DoD and DOE in their energy transition efforts. Our advanced reactor designs prioritize efficiency, safety, and reliability, qualities essential for powering critical installations and supporting the women and men who protect the nation.”
About NANO Nuclear Energy, Inc.
NANO Nuclear Energy Inc. (NASDAQ: NNE) is an advanced technology-driven nuclear energy company seeking to become a commercially focused, diversified, and vertically integrated company across five business lines: (i) cutting edge portable and other microreactor technologies, (ii) nuclear fuel fabrication, (iii) nuclear fuel transportation, (iv) nuclear applications for space and (v) nuclear industry consulting services. NANO Nuclear believes it is the first portable nuclear microreactor company to be listed publicly in the U.S.
Led by a world-class nuclear engineering team, NANO Nuclear’s reactor products in development include patented KRONOS MMR™Energy System, a stationary high-temperature gas-cooled reactor that is in construction permit pre-application engagement U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in collaboration with University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (U. of I.), “ZEUS”, a solid core battery reactor, and “ODIN”, a low-pressure coolant reactor, and the space focused, portable LOKI MMR™, each representing advanced developments in clean energy solutions that are portable, on-demand capable, advanced nuclear microreactors.
Advanced Fuel Transportation Inc. (AFT), a NANO Nuclear subsidiary, is led by former executives from the largest transportation company in the world aiming to build a North American transportation company that will provide commercial quantities of HALEU fuel to small modular reactors, microreactor companies, national laboratories, military, and DOE programs. Through NANO Nuclear, AFT is the exclusive licensee of a patented high-capacity HALEU fuel transportation basket developed by three major U.S. national nuclear laboratories and funded by the Department of Energy. Assuming development and commercialization, AFT is expected to form part of the only vertically integrated nuclear fuel business of its kind in North America.
HALEU Energy Fuel Inc. (HEF), a NANO Nuclear subsidiary, is focusing on the future development of a domestic source for a High-Assay, Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU) fuel fabrication pipeline for NANO Nuclear’s own microreactors as well as the broader advanced nuclear reactor industry.
NANO Nuclear Space Inc. (NNS), a NANO Nuclear subsidiary, is exploring the potential commercial applications of NANO Nuclear’s developing micronuclear reactor technology in space. NNS is focusing on applications such as the LOKI MMR™ system and other power systems for extraterrestrial projects and human sustaining environments, and potentially propulsion technology for long haul space missions. NNS’ initial focus will be on cis-lunar applications, referring to uses in the space region extending from Earth to the area surrounding the Moon’s surface.
This news release and statements of NANO Nuclear’s management in connection with this news release contain or may contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. In this context, forward-looking statements mean statements related to future events, which may impact our expected future business and financial performance, and often contain words such as “expects”, “anticipates”, “intends”, “plans”, “believes”, “potential”, “will”, “should”, “could”, “would” or “may” and other words of similar meaning. These and other forward-looking statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this news release and represent management’s current views and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, events or results and involve significant known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, which may be beyond our control. For NANO Nuclear, particular risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual future results to differ materially from those expressed in our forward-looking statements include but are not limited to the following: (i) risks related to our U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) or related state or non-U.S. nuclear fuel licensing submissions, (ii) risks related the development of new or advanced technology and the acquisition of complimentary technology or businesses, including difficulties with design and testing, cost overruns, regulatory delays, integration issues and the development of competitive technology, (iii) our ability to obtain contracts and funding to be able to continue operations, (iv) risks related to uncertainty regarding our ability to technologically develop and commercially deploy a competitive advanced nuclear reactor or other technology in the timelines we anticipate, if ever, (v) risks related to the impact of U.S. and non-U.S. government regulation, policies and licensing requirements, including by the DOE and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, including those associated with the recently enacted ADVANCE Act, and (vi) similar risks and uncertainties associated with the operating an early stage business a highly regulated and rapidly evolving industry. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which apply only as of the date of this news release. These factors may not constitute all factors that could cause actual results to differ from those discussed in any forward-looking statement, and NANO Nuclear therefore encourages investors to review other factors that may affect future results in its filings with the SEC, which are available for review at www.sec.gov and at https://ir.nanonuclearenergy.com/financial-information/sec-filings. Accordingly, forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as a predictor of actual results. We do not undertake to update our forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that may arise after the date of this news release, except as required by law.
The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that the goods and services deficit was $71.5 billion in May, up $11.3 billion from $60.3 billion in April, revised.
U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services Deficit
Deficit:
$71.5 Billion
+18.7%°
Exports:
$279.0 Billion
–4.0%°
Imports:
$350.5 Billion
–0.1%°
Next release: Tuesday, August 5, 2025
(°) Statistical significance is not applicable or not measurable. Data adjusted for seasonality but not price changes
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, July 3, 2025
Exports, Imports, and Balance (exhibit 1)
May exports were $279.0 billion, $11.6 billion less than April exports. May imports were $350.5 billion, $0.3 billion less than April imports.
The May increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit of $11.2 billion to $97.5 billion and a decrease in the services surplus of $0.1 billion to $26.0 billion.
Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $175.0 billion, or 50.4 percent, from the same period in 2024. Exports increased $73.6 billion or 5.5 percent. Imports increased $248.7 billion or 14.8 percent.
Three-Month Moving Averages (exhibit 2)
The average goods and services deficit decreased $16.8 billion to $90.0 billion for the three months ending in May.
Average exports increased $0.1 billion to $283.5 billion in May.
Average imports decreased $16.7 billion to $373.6 billion in May.
Year-over-year, the average goods and services deficit increased $18.8 billion from the three months ending in May 2024.
Average exports increased $17.9 billion from May 2024.
Average imports increased $36.6 billion from May 2024.
Exports (exhibits 3, 6, and 7)
Exports of goods decreased $11.4 billion to $180.2 billion in May.
Exports of goods on a Census basis decreased $10.8 billion.
Industrial supplies and materials decreased $10.0 billion.
Industrial supplies and materials decreased $0.9 billion.
Finished metal shapes decreased $1.7 billion.
Nuclear fuel materials increased $0.6 billion.
Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines increased $3.4 billion.
Passenger cars increased $3.1 billion.
Other goods increased $1.0 billion.
Capital goods increased $0.3 billion.
Computers increased $4.4 billion.
Computer accessories decreased $2.8 billion.
Net balance of payments adjustments increased $0.1 billion.
Imports of services decreased $0.1 billion to $72.8 billion in May.
Transport decreased $0.4 billion.
Travel decreased $0.2 billion.
Other business services increased $0.1 billion.
Maintenance and repair services increased $0.1 billion.
Real Goods in 2017 Dollars – Census Basis (exhibit 11)
The real goods deficit increased $8.1 billion, or 9.6 percent, to $92.5 billion in May, compared to a 12.3 percent increase in the nominal deficit.
Real exports of goods decreased $8.2 billion, or 5.3 percent, to $148.3 billion, compared to a 5.7 percent decrease in nominal exports.
Real imports of goods decreased $0.1 billion, or 0.1 percent, to $240.8 billion, compared to a 0.1 percent decrease in nominal imports.
Revisions
Revisions to April exports
Exports of goods were revised up $1.1 billion.
Exports of services were revised up $0.1 billion.
Revisions to April imports
Imports of goods were revised down less than $0.1 billion.
Imports of services were revised down $0.2 billion.
Goods by Selected Countries and Areas: Monthly – Census Basis (exhibit 19)
The May figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with Netherlands ($4.8), Hong Kong ($3.6), South and Central America ($3.3), Switzerland ($3.3), United Kingdom ($3.0), Australia ($1.5), Brazil ($0.5), Saudi Arabia ($0.5), Belgium ($0.4), Singapore ($0.3), and Israel ($0.1). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with European Union ($22.5), Mexico ($17.1), Vietnam ($14.9), China ($14.0), Ireland ($11.8), Taiwan ($11.5), Germany ($6.8), Japan ($5.8), South Korea ($5.4), India ($5.1), Canada ($2.8), Italy ($2.6), Malaysia ($2.4), and France ($0.5).
The deficit with Mexico increased $3.6 billion to $17.1 billion in May. Exports decreased $0.3 billion to $27.5 billion and imports increased $3.3 billion to $44.6 billion.
The deficit with Ireland increased $2.4 billion to $11.8 billion in May. Exports increased $0.2 billion to $1.6 billion and imports increased $2.5 billion to $13.4 billion.
The deficit with China decreased $5.7 billion to $14.0 billion in May. Exports decreased $1.7 billion to $6.9 billion and imports decreased $7.4 billion to $20.9 billion.
All statistics referenced are seasonally adjusted; statistics are on a balance of payments basis unless otherwise specified. Additional statistics, including not seasonally adjusted statistics and details for goods on a Census basis, are available in exhibits 1-20b of this release. For information on data sources, definitions, and revision procedures, see the explanatory notes in this release. The full release can be found at www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/index.html or www.bea.gov/data/intl-trade-investment/international-trade-goods-and-services. The full schedule is available in the Census Bureau’s Economic Briefing Room at www.census.gov/economic-indicators/ or on BEA’s website at www.bea.gov/news/schedule.
Next release: August 5, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. EDT U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, June 2025
Notice
Update to BEA’s Annual International Services Tables
BEA’s annual international services tables—BEA’s most detailed trade in services statistics by service type and geographic area—are scheduled for release at 10:00 a.m. on July 3, 2025, for statistics through 2024. With this release, BEA is introducing “Table 2.4. U.S. Trade in Services, Expanded Geographic Detail,” which presents total services exports, imports, and balance for 237 countries and areas, 147 more than the 90 presented in tables 2.2 and 2.3, beginning with statistics for 2018.
If you have questions or need additional information, please contact BEA, Balance of Payments Division, at InternationalAccounts@bea.gov.
The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that the goods and services deficit was $71.5 billion in May, up $11.3 billion from $60.3 billion in April, revised.
U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services Deficit
Deficit:
$71.5 Billion
+18.7%°
Exports:
$279.0 Billion
–4.0%°
Imports:
$350.5 Billion
–0.1%°
Next release: Tuesday, August 5, 2025
(°) Statistical significance is not applicable or not measurable. Data adjusted for seasonality but not price changes
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, July 3, 2025
Exports, Imports, and Balance (exhibit 1)
May exports were $279.0 billion, $11.6 billion less than April exports. May imports were $350.5 billion, $0.3 billion less than April imports.
The May increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit of $11.2 billion to $97.5 billion and a decrease in the services surplus of $0.1 billion to $26.0 billion.
Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $175.0 billion, or 50.4 percent, from the same period in 2024. Exports increased $73.6 billion or 5.5 percent. Imports increased $248.7 billion or 14.8 percent.
Three-Month Moving Averages (exhibit 2)
The average goods and services deficit decreased $16.8 billion to $90.0 billion for the three months ending in May.
Average exports increased $0.1 billion to $283.5 billion in May.
Average imports decreased $16.7 billion to $373.6 billion in May.
Year-over-year, the average goods and services deficit increased $18.8 billion from the three months ending in May 2024.
Average exports increased $17.9 billion from May 2024.
Average imports increased $36.6 billion from May 2024.
Exports (exhibits 3, 6, and 7)
Exports of goods decreased $11.4 billion to $180.2 billion in May.
Exports of goods on a Census basis decreased $10.8 billion.
Industrial supplies and materials decreased $10.0 billion.
Industrial supplies and materials decreased $0.9 billion.
Finished metal shapes decreased $1.7 billion.
Nuclear fuel materials increased $0.6 billion.
Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines increased $3.4 billion.
Passenger cars increased $3.1 billion.
Other goods increased $1.0 billion.
Capital goods increased $0.3 billion.
Computers increased $4.4 billion.
Computer accessories decreased $2.8 billion.
Net balance of payments adjustments increased $0.1 billion.
Imports of services decreased $0.1 billion to $72.8 billion in May.
Transport decreased $0.4 billion.
Travel decreased $0.2 billion.
Other business services increased $0.1 billion.
Maintenance and repair services increased $0.1 billion.
Real Goods in 2017 Dollars – Census Basis (exhibit 11)
The real goods deficit increased $8.1 billion, or 9.6 percent, to $92.5 billion in May, compared to a 12.3 percent increase in the nominal deficit.
Real exports of goods decreased $8.2 billion, or 5.3 percent, to $148.3 billion, compared to a 5.7 percent decrease in nominal exports.
Real imports of goods decreased $0.1 billion, or 0.1 percent, to $240.8 billion, compared to a 0.1 percent decrease in nominal imports.
Revisions
Revisions to April exports
Exports of goods were revised up $1.1 billion.
Exports of services were revised up $0.1 billion.
Revisions to April imports
Imports of goods were revised down less than $0.1 billion.
Imports of services were revised down $0.2 billion.
Goods by Selected Countries and Areas: Monthly – Census Basis (exhibit 19)
The May figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with Netherlands ($4.8), Hong Kong ($3.6), South and Central America ($3.3), Switzerland ($3.3), United Kingdom ($3.0), Australia ($1.5), Brazil ($0.5), Saudi Arabia ($0.5), Belgium ($0.4), Singapore ($0.3), and Israel ($0.1). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with European Union ($22.5), Mexico ($17.1), Vietnam ($14.9), China ($14.0), Ireland ($11.8), Taiwan ($11.5), Germany ($6.8), Japan ($5.8), South Korea ($5.4), India ($5.1), Canada ($2.8), Italy ($2.6), Malaysia ($2.4), and France ($0.5).
The deficit with Mexico increased $3.6 billion to $17.1 billion in May. Exports decreased $0.3 billion to $27.5 billion and imports increased $3.3 billion to $44.6 billion.
The deficit with Ireland increased $2.4 billion to $11.8 billion in May. Exports increased $0.2 billion to $1.6 billion and imports increased $2.5 billion to $13.4 billion.
The deficit with China decreased $5.7 billion to $14.0 billion in May. Exports decreased $1.7 billion to $6.9 billion and imports decreased $7.4 billion to $20.9 billion.
All statistics referenced are seasonally adjusted; statistics are on a balance of payments basis unless otherwise specified. Additional statistics, including not seasonally adjusted statistics and details for goods on a Census basis, are available in exhibits 1-20b of this release. For information on data sources, definitions, and revision procedures, see the explanatory notes in this release. The full release can be found at www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/index.html or www.bea.gov/data/intl-trade-investment/international-trade-goods-and-services. The full schedule is available in the Census Bureau’s Economic Briefing Room at www.census.gov/economic-indicators/ or on BEA’s website at www.bea.gov/news/schedule.
Next release: August 5, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. EDT U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, June 2025
Notice
Update to BEA’s Annual International Services Tables
BEA’s annual international services tables—BEA’s most detailed trade in services statistics by service type and geographic area—are scheduled for release at 10:00 a.m. on July 3, 2025, for statistics through 2024. With this release, BEA is introducing “Table 2.4. U.S. Trade in Services, Expanded Geographic Detail,” which presents total services exports, imports, and balance for 237 countries and areas, 147 more than the 90 presented in tables 2.2 and 2.3, beginning with statistics for 2018.
If you have questions or need additional information, please contact BEA, Balance of Payments Division, at InternationalAccounts@bea.gov.
The U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis announced today that the goods and services deficit was $71.5 billion in May, up $11.3 billion from $60.3 billion in April, revised.
U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services Deficit
Deficit:
$71.5 Billion
+18.7%°
Exports:
$279.0 Billion
–4.0%°
Imports:
$350.5 Billion
–0.1%°
Next release: Tuesday, August 5, 2025
(°) Statistical significance is not applicable or not measurable. Data adjusted for seasonality but not price changes
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis; U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, July 3, 2025
Exports, Imports, and Balance (exhibit 1)
May exports were $279.0 billion, $11.6 billion less than April exports. May imports were $350.5 billion, $0.3 billion less than April imports.
The May increase in the goods and services deficit reflected an increase in the goods deficit of $11.2 billion to $97.5 billion and a decrease in the services surplus of $0.1 billion to $26.0 billion.
Year-to-date, the goods and services deficit increased $175.0 billion, or 50.4 percent, from the same period in 2024. Exports increased $73.6 billion or 5.5 percent. Imports increased $248.7 billion or 14.8 percent.
Three-Month Moving Averages (exhibit 2)
The average goods and services deficit decreased $16.8 billion to $90.0 billion for the three months ending in May.
Average exports increased $0.1 billion to $283.5 billion in May.
Average imports decreased $16.7 billion to $373.6 billion in May.
Year-over-year, the average goods and services deficit increased $18.8 billion from the three months ending in May 2024.
Average exports increased $17.9 billion from May 2024.
Average imports increased $36.6 billion from May 2024.
Exports (exhibits 3, 6, and 7)
Exports of goods decreased $11.4 billion to $180.2 billion in May.
Exports of goods on a Census basis decreased $10.8 billion.
Industrial supplies and materials decreased $10.0 billion.
Industrial supplies and materials decreased $0.9 billion.
Finished metal shapes decreased $1.7 billion.
Nuclear fuel materials increased $0.6 billion.
Automotive vehicles, parts, and engines increased $3.4 billion.
Passenger cars increased $3.1 billion.
Other goods increased $1.0 billion.
Capital goods increased $0.3 billion.
Computers increased $4.4 billion.
Computer accessories decreased $2.8 billion.
Net balance of payments adjustments increased $0.1 billion.
Imports of services decreased $0.1 billion to $72.8 billion in May.
Transport decreased $0.4 billion.
Travel decreased $0.2 billion.
Other business services increased $0.1 billion.
Maintenance and repair services increased $0.1 billion.
Real Goods in 2017 Dollars – Census Basis (exhibit 11)
The real goods deficit increased $8.1 billion, or 9.6 percent, to $92.5 billion in May, compared to a 12.3 percent increase in the nominal deficit.
Real exports of goods decreased $8.2 billion, or 5.3 percent, to $148.3 billion, compared to a 5.7 percent decrease in nominal exports.
Real imports of goods decreased $0.1 billion, or 0.1 percent, to $240.8 billion, compared to a 0.1 percent decrease in nominal imports.
Revisions
Revisions to April exports
Exports of goods were revised up $1.1 billion.
Exports of services were revised up $0.1 billion.
Revisions to April imports
Imports of goods were revised down less than $0.1 billion.
Imports of services were revised down $0.2 billion.
Goods by Selected Countries and Areas: Monthly – Census Basis (exhibit 19)
The May figures show surpluses, in billions of dollars, with Netherlands ($4.8), Hong Kong ($3.6), South and Central America ($3.3), Switzerland ($3.3), United Kingdom ($3.0), Australia ($1.5), Brazil ($0.5), Saudi Arabia ($0.5), Belgium ($0.4), Singapore ($0.3), and Israel ($0.1). Deficits were recorded, in billions of dollars, with European Union ($22.5), Mexico ($17.1), Vietnam ($14.9), China ($14.0), Ireland ($11.8), Taiwan ($11.5), Germany ($6.8), Japan ($5.8), South Korea ($5.4), India ($5.1), Canada ($2.8), Italy ($2.6), Malaysia ($2.4), and France ($0.5).
The deficit with Mexico increased $3.6 billion to $17.1 billion in May. Exports decreased $0.3 billion to $27.5 billion and imports increased $3.3 billion to $44.6 billion.
The deficit with Ireland increased $2.4 billion to $11.8 billion in May. Exports increased $0.2 billion to $1.6 billion and imports increased $2.5 billion to $13.4 billion.
The deficit with China decreased $5.7 billion to $14.0 billion in May. Exports decreased $1.7 billion to $6.9 billion and imports decreased $7.4 billion to $20.9 billion.
All statistics referenced are seasonally adjusted; statistics are on a balance of payments basis unless otherwise specified. Additional statistics, including not seasonally adjusted statistics and details for goods on a Census basis, are available in exhibits 1-20b of this release. For information on data sources, definitions, and revision procedures, see the explanatory notes in this release. The full release can be found at www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/index.html or www.bea.gov/data/intl-trade-investment/international-trade-goods-and-services. The full schedule is available in the Census Bureau’s Economic Briefing Room at www.census.gov/economic-indicators/ or on BEA’s website at www.bea.gov/news/schedule.
Next release: August 5, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. EDT U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, June 2025
Notice
Update to BEA’s Annual International Services Tables
BEA’s annual international services tables—BEA’s most detailed trade in services statistics by service type and geographic area—are scheduled for release at 10:00 a.m. on July 3, 2025, for statistics through 2024. With this release, BEA is introducing “Table 2.4. U.S. Trade in Services, Expanded Geographic Detail,” which presents total services exports, imports, and balance for 237 countries and areas, 147 more than the 90 presented in tables 2.2 and 2.3, beginning with statistics for 2018.
If you have questions or need additional information, please contact BEA, Balance of Payments Division, at InternationalAccounts@bea.gov.
• Transaction enables Brookfield Business Partners to monetize a partial interest in three businesses at a value accretive to the trading price of its units and shares
• Provides new evergreen private equity strategy with an immediate, diversified portfolio
• The Transaction was subject to a rigorous, independent review process which included a fairness opinion provided by an independent third-party financial advisor
BROOKFIELD, NEWS, July 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Brookfield Business Partners (NYSE: BBU, BBUC; TSX: BBU.UN, BBUC), today announced that it has reached an agreement to sell a portion of its interest in three businesses (the “Transaction”) to a new evergreen private equity strategy (the “New Fund”) targeting high-net-worth investors, managed by Brookfield Asset Management.
Under the terms of the Transaction, Brookfield Business Partners will sell an approximate 12% interest in its engineered components manufacturing operation (“DexKo”), an approximate 7% interest in its dealer software and technology services operation (“CDK Global”) and an approximate 5% interest in its work access services operation (“BrandSafway”) to the New Fund.
Brookfield Business Partners will receive units of the New Fund (the “Units”) with an initial redemption value of approximately $690 million, representing an aggregate 8.6% discount to the net asset value (“NAV”) of the interests sold. In the 18-month period following the initial closing of the New Fund, expected later this year, the Units are expected to be redeemed for cash at an 8.6% discount to NAV at the time of redemption. Any remaining Units still outstanding after this 18-month period will be redeemable at NAV.
A joint independent committee comprising independent directors of Brookfield Business Partners retained an independent financial advisor and external legal counsel to assist with their review of the Transaction. The joint independent committee received a fairness opinion from their independent financial advisor, and following consultation with their advisors determined that the Transaction is fair and in the best interests of Brookfield Business Partners.
Anuj Ranjan, CEO of Brookfield Business Partners said, “The Transaction provides a strong outcome for Brookfield Business Partners’ unitholders and shareholders and provides the new evergreen private equity strategy with an immediate diversified seed portfolio prior to its launch. The realization of these partial interests, at a value that is accretive to the trading price of our units and shares, enables Brookfield Business Partners to continue to accelerate the return of capital under current and future buyback programs, reinvest in the growth of its business and reduce corporate leverage.”
The sale is expected to be completed on July 4, 2025.
Independent Review Process
The Transaction was reviewed by independent committees (the “Independent Committees”) formed by the boards of directors of the general partner of Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and of Brookfield Business Corporation (collectively, the “Boards”), which are comprised of independent directors. The Independent Committees retained Stikeman Elliott LLP as their external counsel and Origin Merchant Partners as their independent financial advisor to assist in their review of the Transaction.
The Independent Committees received an opinion from Origin Merchant Partners that, subject to various assumptions, qualifications and limitations to be set forth in its opinion letter, the consideration to be received by Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and Brookfield Business Corporation pursuant to the Transaction is fair, from a financial point of view, to Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and Brookfield Business Corporation.
After consultation with their independent financial and legal advisors, the Independent Committees unanimously determined that the Transaction is fair to and in the best interests of Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and Brookfield Business Corporation, and unanimously recommended to the Boards that Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and Brookfield Business Corporation approve the Transaction. The Boards have unanimously (excluding conflicted directors, who did not participate in deliberations) determined that the Transaction is in the best interests of Brookfield Business Partners L.P. and Brookfield Business Corporation and approved the Transaction.
As the value of the Transaction is less than 25% of the consolidated market capitalization of Brookfield Business Partners L.P., the Transaction is exempt from the formal valuation and minority shareholder approval requirements under applicable securities laws.
Brookfield Business Partners is a global business services and industrials company focused on owning and operating high-quality businesses that provide essential products and services and benefit from a strong competitive position. Investors have flexibility to invest in our company either through Brookfield Business Partners L.P. (NYSE: BBU; TSX: BBU.UN), a limited partnership or Brookfield Business Corporation (NYSE, TSX: BBUC), a corporation. For more information, please visit https://bbu.brookfield.com.
Brookfield Business Partners is the flagship listed vehicle of Brookfield Asset Management’s Private Equity Group. Brookfield Asset Management is a leading global alternative asset manager with over $1 trillion of assets under management.
For more information, please contact:
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-looking Statements and Information
Note: This news release contains “forward-looking information” within the meaning of Canadian provincial securities laws and “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of applicable Canadian and U.S. securities laws. Forward-looking statements include statements that are predictive in nature, depend upon or refer to future events or conditions, include statements with respect to the CDK Global, BrandSafway and DexKo businesses, their growth and leadership prospects and the Transaction described in this news release, including the expected redemption value of the Units, the timeline for redemption and the use of the proceeds therefrom, and include words such as “expects”, “anticipates”, “plans”, “believes”, “estimates”, “seeks”, “intends”, “targets”, “projects”, “forecasts”, “views”, “potential”, “likely” or negative versions thereof and other similar expressions, or future or conditional verbs such as “may”, “will”, “should”, “would” and “could”.
Although we believe that such forward-looking statements are based upon reasonable assumptions and expectations, investors and other readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements and information because they involve assumptions, known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors, many of which are beyond our control, which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of Brookfield Business Partners, CDK Global, BrandSafway and/or DexKo to differ materially from anticipated future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements and information. These beliefs, assumptions and expectations can change as a result of many possible events or factors, not all of which are known to us or are within our control. If a change occurs, our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations and our plans and strategies may vary materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements and forward-looking information herein.
Factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated or implied by forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, the following: the cyclical nature of our operating businesses and general economic conditions and risks relating to the economy, including unfavorable changes in interest rates, foreign exchange rates, inflation, commodity prices and volatility in the financial markets; the ability to complete and effectively integrate acquisitions into existing operations and the ability to attain expected benefits; business competition, including competition for acquisition opportunities; strategic actions including our ability to complete dispositions and achieve the anticipated benefits therefrom; global equity and capital markets and the availability of equity and debt financing and refinancing within these markets; changes to U.S. laws or policies, including changes in U.S. domestic and economic policies as well as foreign trade policies and tariffs; technological change; litigation; cybersecurity incidents; the possible impact of international conflicts, wars and related developments including terrorist acts and cyber terrorism; operational, or business risks that are specific to any of our business services operations, infrastructure services operations or industrials operations; changes in government policy and legislation; catastrophic events, such as earthquakes, hurricanes and pandemics/epidemics; changes in tax law and practice; and other risks and factors detailed from time to time in our documents filed with the securities regulators in Canada and the United States including those set forth in the “Risk Factors” section in our annual report for the year ended December 31, 2024 filed on Form 20-F.
We caution that the foregoing list of important factors that may affect future results is not exhaustive. When relying on our forward-looking statements and information, investors and others should carefully consider the foregoing factors and other uncertainties and potential events. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements or information, whether written or oral, that may be as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.
MIAMI, July 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — ThoughtLinks, a strategic advisory firm founded by global banking executive Sumeet Chabria and focused on banks and capital markets, released a bold projection: By 2030, nearly 40% of banking technology, operations, and knowledge work will be redefined by AI. As first reported this morning by Business Insider, these findings, based on proprietary modeling of nearly 5,000 banking processes, confirm that this change is already underway.
Driving this transformation is the convergence of generative and agentic AI, democratized data, cloud-native infrastructure, and intelligent automation—forces that are rapidly accelerating disruption. At its core lies a structural shift altering both the nature of work itself and who performs it. A new generation of AI agents—“digital workers”—is emerging, designed to collaborate with people and amplify human capabilities.
“AI capabilities are increasingly embedded within vendor systems, platforms, and tools, even if not yet fully activated,” says Chabria. “This is quietly accelerating structural change beneath the surface.”
A Strategic Blueprint for Value Creation in Banking and Capital Markets
To compete in this new reality, banks must align four strategic pillars into a practical blueprint for sustainable value. These pillars form the foundation of ThoughtLinks’ core proposition and power effective AI-enabled business goals:
AI-First Technology Strategy
Enterprise-Wide Transformation
Growth and Efficiency through AI
Future-Ready Workforce Strategies
Where the Shift Is Already Happening
AI-driven reinvention spans all areas of banking. Agentic AI, in particular, complements banking’s relationship-driven approach. AI agents promise to enhance interactions with customers and employees by providing context and continuity, expanding organizational capacity.
Consumer banking — Virtual AI assistants anticipate customer needs, answer queries, and suggest next-best actions.
Wealth management — AI synthesizes data, client preferences, and portfolio performance to surface personalized insights and augment advisor capacity.
Credit and lending — Conversational AI streamlines complex applications, flags risks early, and accelerates approvals.
Customer servicing — Intelligent agents resolve a growing share of routine requests, reducing costs and enhancing experiences.
Risk and compliance — Early deployments monitor transactions and communications in real time, detect anomalies, and escalate threats—potentially establishing a new enterprise-wide line of defense.
Global markets — AI supports analysts and traders by summarizing vast volumes of information, curating signals, and stress-testing investment theses.
In technology and operations—where nearly half a bank’s workforce and suppliers operate—AI is reinventing how systems are built, tested, and delivered. The traditional software development lifecycle faces unprecedented change as more productive and faster ways to build systems emerge. In parallel, sourcing and service models are evolving as human labor moves toward AI-enabled processes, prompting a rethink of supplier strategies, operating models, and contracts.
The scale and pace of change raise enterprise questions, such as:
Growth & Efficiency: How can we scale AI effectively while delivering measurable ROI?
Operations: Which processes should shift to AI, and how can doing so simplify the enterprise landscape? And how should we modernize global capability centers (GCCs) to keep pace?
Risk & Controls: As we automate, how do we build smarter safeguards and ensure AI runs within strong, adaptive guardrails?
Talent & Culture: Which tasks are impacted, and when? How do we rethink roles and help people view AI as a growth opportunity?
And for the leaders navigating it all—it takes staying clear on what matters, building new disciplines, trusting your gut, and rallying the right people around a vision that makes the path ahead feel steady, not overwhelming.
Roadmap to 2030
As AI reshapes banking, institutions must move beyond isolated use cases and proactively assess how this technology impacts everyday tasks. This means continually examining and aligning business activities with strategic objectives.
“The winners in this new era will not just implement AI—they will thoughtfully redesign their organizations around it,” Chabria concluded. “Their strategic advantage will come from elevating both people and performance, ensuring that human ingenuity remains central to innovation and progress.”
About ThoughtLinks
ThoughtLinks is a strategic advisory firm specializing in AI strategy, enterprise transformation, and innovation for banking and capital markets. Led by CEO Sumeet Chabria and composed entirely of former global C-suite executives, the firm partners with Fortune 500 institutions to drive AI-powered growth, efficiency, and workforce transformation.
True to its name, Thought ‘Links’ connects strategic business needs to best-in-class solutions, next-gen technology, and top talent across the financial services ecosystem—empowering human potential.
UConn is deepening its commitment to a sustainable future through a student-focused innovation challenge designed to reduce carbon emissions and promote clean energy solutions. In partnership with Eversource Energy, UConn has launched its third annual summer competition aimed at engaging students in the design of the future energy landscape.
The competition has attracted an impressive group of participants, with five finalist teams comprising 11 students – five undergraduates and six graduates. These talented individuals represent eight diverse departments and schools: the Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and School of Computing in the College of Engineering; the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics in the College of Agriculture, Health and Natural Resources (CAHNR); the School of Business; and the Department of Chemistry and the Department of Mathematics in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.
This multidisciplinary representation brings together diverse perspectives and technical expertise to address the complex challenges of decarbonization and the energy transition across UConn campuses and Connecticut municipalities.
Each team will receive summer funding and be paired with mentors from UConn faculty and Eversource Energy. The mentorship will support students in refining their proposals and addressing the practical dimensions of their clean energy solutions. This hands-on guidance is designed to help participants explore real-world applications of their research and ideas.
The culmination of the teams’ work will be presented at the 2025 Sustainable Clean Energy Summit on Monday, Oct. 27, 2025. The event will take place alongside the 2025 North American Power Symposium, offering students a valuable platform to present their innovations to an audience of industry professionals, researchers, utility leaders and state officials.
Following the Summit, the winning team will receive additional funding to continue their work throughout the academic year. This extended support aims to help transform early-stage ideas into actionable and impactful clean energy solutions.
The continued collaboration between UConn and Eversource Energy underscores a shared commitment to environmental responsibility, climate resilience, and technological advancement. Through this initiative, students are empowered to take an active role in building a cleaner and more sustainable energy future.
The projects and student teams selected for the 2025 Clean Energy & Sustainability Innovation Program are:
Project 1:Fuel Cell as a Catalyst for Local Economic and Environmental Development
Students: Songyang Zhou (Master’s Student, Data Science), Jane Torrence ’27 (BUS)
Project 2:UConn’s Wastewater to Bioenergy: Integrated Chlorella Cultivation and Pyrolysis
Students: Azeem Sarwar (Ph.D. Student, Chemical Engineering), Maham Liaqat (Ph.D. Candidate, Chemistry), Muhammad Hassan (Ph.D. Student, Chemical Engineering).
Project 3:Dual Characterization of Innovative Hydropower Systems for Sustainable Energy Storage and Generation
Students: Jonathan Hylton ’26 (ENG), Safiya Crockett ’26 (CAHNR).
Project 4:Harnessing Tidal Energy for Shoreside Electrification: A Tool for Sustainable Power in Coastal Connecticut Marine Terminals
San Francisco, USA, July 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The Global AI Chip Market is undergoing a seismic transformation as artificial intelligence continues to redefine how businesses operate, devices interact, and societies function. With a projected market value of USD 229,083.24 million by 2032 and a robust compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 20.49%, this sector stands at the intersection of deep tech and digital transformation.
At the heart of this momentum is a growing demand for purpose-built processing units capable of handling the high complexity of AI workloads. Traditional CPUs, once the backbone of computing, are being outpaced by AI chips such as GPUs, ASICs, FPGAs, and NPUs—designed to deliver faster computation, lower latency, and greater energy efficiency. These chips are now indispensable across sectors—from autonomous driving and industrial automation to smart consumer devices and medical diagnostics. The market’s evolution is not just driven by technological necessity but also by strategic shifts. Governments and enterprises alike are pouring resources into building resilient AI infrastructure, with the AI chip serving as the core enabler of scalable, real-time intelligence. As AI moves from concept to implementation across industries, the demand for high-performance computing is accelerating, and so is the AI chip ecosystem.
Technology at the Core: What Makes AI Chips Different?
AI chips are not just faster processors—they are purpose-engineered to manage billions of computations per second across neural networks. These tasks include matrix multiplications, data vectorization, and parallel execution, which are essential for AI functions like deep learning, natural language processing (NLP), and computer vision.
Unlike general-purpose CPUs, AI chips can execute these complex operations with higher efficiency, enabling near-instant responses in applications such as voice assistants, facial recognition, and real-time translation. For cloud computing platforms and edge devices, these chips provide the processing muscle required for AI algorithms to function seamlessly at scale.
Key Drivers Behind Market Growth
Industrial AI Integration Businesses across manufacturing, logistics, retail, and energy are rapidly incorporating AI for predictive analytics, process automation, and intelligent decision-making. AI chips empower these systems to function in real time, transforming operational agility and accuracy. Over 70% of businesses in manufacturing and logistics are adopting AI to enhance efficiency and decision-making.
Surge in Edge AI Devices The demand for localized, low-latency AI processing is pushing AI chip deployment to the edge—embedded in mobile phones, drones, surveillance cameras, and autonomous vehicles. This shift to edge computing is minimizing reliance on cloud infrastructure and enabling real-time decision-making.
Governmental Support and Funding Global investments in AI R&D and chip manufacturing are expanding at a record pace. For instance, the U.S. CHIPS Act and China’s “AI 2030” initiative are fueling domestic innovation. Europe, too, is actively funding AI research with an eye on digital sovereignty.
AI-Powered Consumer Products From smart speakers to fitness trackers and home automation, AI chips are embedded in everyday consumer electronics. Their capability to support machine learning in real-time makes them vital for user personalization and seamless functionality.
Data Center Expansion and Cloud AI Cloud service providers like AWS, Microsoft Azure, and Google Cloud are equipping their data centers with AI accelerators to meet surging demand for model training and inference workloads. AI chips are pivotal in reducing power consumption while improving performance in such environments.
MARKET KEY PLAYERS:
Advanced Micro Devices
Amazon
General Vision
Google
Gyrfalcon Technology
Huawei Technologies
IBM
Infineon Technologies
Intel
Kneron
Microsoft
MYTHIC
Nvidia
NXP Semiconductors
Qualcomm Incorporated
Samsung Electronics
Toshiba
Wave Computing
Apple INC.
Others
Market Challenges: Risks Alongside Opportunities
Despite its bullish outlook, the AI chip market faces several critical challenges:
Security and Privacy Concerns: As AI becomes deeply integrated into critical systems, safeguarding data integrity and user privacy is more important than ever. Misuse or vulnerability in AI processing hardware can have serious implications.
Supply Chain Disruptions: Global chip shortages and reliance on a few key semiconductor foundries have exposed vulnerabilities in the supply chain. Geopolitical tensions further compound this risk.
High R&D and Manufacturing Costs: Developing next-gen AI chips demands significant capital and technical expertise. Startups may face high entry barriers due to the dominance of large corporations with established IP and fabrication capabilities.
TABLE OF CONTENT
1. AI Chip Market Overview 1.1. Study Scope 1.2. Market Estimation Years 2. Executive Summary 2.1. Market Snippet 2.1.1. AI Chip Market Snippet by Product Type 2.1.2. AI Chip Market Snippet by Technology 2.1.3. AI Chip Market Snippet by Application 2.1.4. AI Chip Market Snippet by Function 2.1.5. AI Chip Market Snippet by End User 2.1.6. AI Chip Market Snippet by Country 2.1.7. AI Chip Market Snippet by Region 2.2. Competitive Insights 3. AI Chip Key Market Trends 3.1. AI Chip Market Drivers 3.1.1. Impact Analysis of Market Drivers 3.2. AI Chip Market Restraints 3.2.1. Impact Analysis of Market Restraints 3.3. AI Chip Market Opportunities 3.4. AI Chip Market Future Trends 4. AI Chip Industry Study 4.1. PEST Analysis 4.2. Porter’s Five Forces Analysis 4.3. Growth Prospect Mapping 4.4. Regulatory Framework Analysis ….
Regional Outlook: Asia-Pacific Leads the Way
The Asia-Pacific region dominates the global AI chip market and is projected to maintain its lead throughout the forecast period. Countries like China, South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan are investing heavily in AI education, R&D, and semiconductor infrastructure. The region also benefits from a strong electronics manufacturing ecosystem and rising demand for AI-enabled consumer and industrial products.
North America, home to major AI and semiconductor companies, remains a critical hub for innovation. The region sees significant investment in cloud data centers, autonomous driving, and AI-driven healthcare systems.
Europe is focusing on building ethically aligned and sustainable AI ecosystems. With a strong emphasis on regulations and cross-border collaboration, the region is shaping a trustworthy AI framework—favorable for long-term growth.
The AI chip market is fiercely competitive, marked by rapid innovation, M&A activity, and strategic partnerships. Key players include:
Nvidia: Leading the GPU segment, with powerful AI platforms like the A100 and H100 chips.
Intel: Diversifying through acquisitions and offering a mix of CPUs, FPGAs, and specialized AI processors.
AMD: Gaining momentum with powerful multi-core GPU architectures for AI workloads.
Google: Driving cloud AI performance through its custom Tensor Processing Units (TPUs).
Apple: Integrating neural engines directly into its mobile chips for on-device intelligence.
Startups: Firms like Kneron, MYTHIC, and Graphcore are disrupting the market with domain-specific AI accelerators.
Companies are steadily shifting to hybrid infrastructures that blend cloud and edge computing, emphasizing energy-efficient, scalable architectures seamlessly integrated with AI software ecosystems.
The industry presents a high-growth opportunity driven by surging demand for hybrid AI infrastructure. Investors should focus on companies innovating in energy-efficient AI chipsets optimized for edge-cloud synergy. Priority targets include firms with robust AI software stack partnerships and IP portfolios in low-power, high-performance chips—especially in sectors like automotive, industrial automation, and next-gen robotics.
Browse More Reports from AnalystView Market Insights:
LEICESTER’S Golden Mile will continue to be the focus for Diwali Day celebrations, but with major changes to the annual event due to crowd safety fears.
Serious concerns about public safety at the popular event have been raised by the Diwali safety advisory group due to the massive crowd numbers the event has attracted in recent years.
The group – which includes event and safety experts from the city council, representatives from Leicestershire Police, NHS Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland ICB, East Midlands Ambulance Service, Leicestershire Fire and Rescue and crowd security providers – has warned that the current location is no longer fit for purpose, and urgent action needs to be taken.
Several meetings have since been held by the safety advisory group to consider a range of options, including relocating the popular event to Abbey Park or the city centre, extending it onto Belgrave Circle or moving it onto Melton Road.
Following council engagement with Belgrave businesses and local community representatives, the decision has now been taken to enable Diwali Day celebrations on Belgrave Road, where it has been held for more than 40 years.
However, major changes to the popular event will be required to ensure it can be held safely.
Belgrave Road will be closed to all traffic for the evening of Diwali Day to allow families and friends to celebrate safely together and enjoy the atmosphere, shops and restaurants of the Golden Mile.
Festive illuminations featuring more than 6,000 lights will continue to be installed along Belgrave Road during Diwali. The popular Wheel of Light will also return.
There will be no stage entertainment or firework display at this year’s event. And Cossington Street Recreation Ground will no longer feature as part of the festivities.
These measures need to be taken to avoid potentially dangerous crowd massing that has been observed at the event in the last two years.
The city council has committed to continue to work with the safety advisory group and local community representatives to see whether any further enhancements can be made that will not compromise public safety.
The new approach was agreed at a meeting last night between the City Mayor Peter Soulsby, Cllr Vi Dempster, asst city mayor for culture, representatives from the Leicester Hindu Festival Council and Belgrave Business Association, and members of the local Jain and Sikh communities. Local ward councillors, council officers and safety advisory group members also attended.
Graham Callister, the city council’s head of festivals, events and cultural policy said: “Diwali has been a real highlight of the city’s festival calendar and attracts thousands of people who come from far and wide to join in the celebrations on the Golden Mile.
“However, we are now being advised by our emergency service partners and event security providers that we have reached the point where the growing crowds and sheer volume of people attending is causing significant concern about public safety.
“Scaling back on event infrastructure and activity means there will be the additional space needed – and more importantly less congestion – to safely welcome the crowds that want to celebrate on Belgrave Road.”
Cllr Vi Dempster said: “Unfortunately, Leicester’s annual Diwali festival has become a victim of its own success. We’re being strongly advised by our emergency service partners and crowd control experts that it cannot continue safely in its current format due to the unrestricted and growing crowd numbers that it attracts, and that’s a warning we must take extremely seriously.
“We are absolutely determined that Diwali continues to be part of the city’s festive calendar. We also understand the depth of feeling to see it continue on the Golden Mile where it began over 40 years ago. To do that, we must ensure that it can take place safely. That must be paramount.”
Over the last two years, record crowds have turned out for the city’s Diwali celebrations on Belgrave Road and Cossington Street recreation ground. Last year’s event saw estimated crowds of up to 50,000 people attending.
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
BEIJING, July 3 (Xinhua) — China firmly opposes any country making trade deals that harm Chinese interests, Commerce Ministry spokesperson He Yongqian said Thursday.
He Yongqian made the remarks in response to a media question regarding the trade deal between the United States and Vietnam, saying China has taken note of the relevant information and is assessing the developments.
She said the US’s imposition of so-called “reciprocal tariffs” on its trading partners was a typical act of unilateral bullying, which China has consistently opposed.
He Yongqian added that China supports other countries’ efforts to resolve trade disputes with the United States through consultations on an equal basis, but firmly opposes any country making deals that harm China’s interests.
“If such a situation arises, China will take decisive countermeasures to protect its legitimate rights and interests,” she said. -0-
The national awareness campaign on the Spaza Shop Support Fund is today in Volksrust, Mpumalanga.
Township-based entrepreneurs in the area will have an opportunity to engage directly with government and its partners on how to access vital support to grow and sustain their businesses.
Led by the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (the dtic) and the Department of Small Business Development (DSBD), the ongoing campaign forms part of a national drive to raise awareness about available support for spaza shops and township convenience stores. It aims to close information gaps and bring services closer to communities.
Following successful stops in KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, North West, the Free State, and the Northern Cape, this leg targets entrepreneurs and spaza shop owners in the Dr. Pixley Ka Isaka Ka Seme Local Municipality and surrounding areas, who are often underserved but play a vital role in the local economy.
At the centre of the campaign is the R500 million Spaza Shop Support Fund, launched by Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition, Parks Tau and Minister of Small Business Development, Stella Ndabeni, in April 2025.
The fund is administered by the Small Enterprise Development and Finance Agency (SEDFA) and the National Empowerment Fund (NEF) agencies of the DSBD and the dtic, respectively.
Attendees in Volksrust will receive detailed guidance on how to apply for financial and non-financial assistance, including:
Access to affordable stock through delivery partners.
Infrastructure upgrades such as shelving, refrigeration and security.
Point-of-sale devices.
Business training on compliance, digital literacy, credit health and food safety.
Market access support through partnerships with black industrialists and local manufacturers.
“The initiative aims to boost the competitiveness of township businesses and foster inclusive economic participation by bringing more informal retailers into the broader retail value chain,” the dtic said in a statement. – SAnews.gov.za
OMS CEO How Meng Hock to Join Leadership Panel on July 8 at 10:20 a.m.
SINGAPORE, July 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — OMS Energy Technologies Inc. (“OMS” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: OMSE), a growth-oriented manufacturer of surface wellhead systems (“SWS”) and oil country tubular goods (“OCTG”) for the oil and gas industry, today announced that its CEO Mr. How Meng Hock will join a leadership panel at the Third Annual ORY APAC-US Conference, taking place on July 8–9, 2025, in Singapore.
Mr. How will participate in the opening panel session, titled “The Long Game: Building Businesses with Staying Power,” where he will share insights on navigating economic cycles, fostering a resilient corporate culture and delivering sustainable long-term value.
Founded in 1972, OMS has grown into a trusted regional partner serving key energy markets across Asia Pacific, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), and West Africa. Mr. How has led the Company as CEO since 2014 and oversaw its successful Nasdaq listing in May 2025. Following the IPO, OMS continues to accelerate its growth, supported by strong operational capabilities and a commitment to engineering excellence. The Company remains focused on deepening its long-standing customer relationships and investing in advanced manufacturing and R&D to drive innovation, efficiency and sustainable growth, all while maintaining an exceptional corporate culture.
Ortoli Rosenstadt LLP and the Nasdaq Stock Market co-host the conference. It serves as a platform for global collaboration and dialogue on innovation and capital market strategy, bringing together financial professionals, investors and corporate leaders for two days of high-level discussions and strategic networking in one of Asia’s premier financial hubs.
AboutOMS Energy Technologies Inc.
OMS Energy Technologies Inc. (NASDAQ: OMSE) is a growth-oriented manufacturer of surface wellhead systems (SWS) and oil country tubular goods (OCTG) for the oil and gas industry. Serving both onshore and offshore exploration and production operators, OMS is a trusted single-source supplier across six vital jurisdictions in the Asia Pacific, Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) regions. The Company’s 11 strategically located manufacturing facilities in key markets ensure rapid response times, customized technical solutions and seamless adaptation to evolving production and logistics needs. Beyond its core SWS and OCTG offerings, OMS also provides premium threading services to maximize operational efficiency for its customers.
OMS CEO How Meng Hock to Join Leadership Panel on July 8 at 10:20 a.m.
SINGAPORE, July 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — OMS Energy Technologies Inc. (“OMS” or the “Company”) (Nasdaq: OMSE), a growth-oriented manufacturer of surface wellhead systems (“SWS”) and oil country tubular goods (“OCTG”) for the oil and gas industry, today announced that its CEO Mr. How Meng Hock will join a leadership panel at the Third Annual ORY APAC-US Conference, taking place on July 8–9, 2025, in Singapore.
Mr. How will participate in the opening panel session, titled “The Long Game: Building Businesses with Staying Power,” where he will share insights on navigating economic cycles, fostering a resilient corporate culture and delivering sustainable long-term value.
Founded in 1972, OMS has grown into a trusted regional partner serving key energy markets across Asia Pacific, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), and West Africa. Mr. How has led the Company as CEO since 2014 and oversaw its successful Nasdaq listing in May 2025. Following the IPO, OMS continues to accelerate its growth, supported by strong operational capabilities and a commitment to engineering excellence. The Company remains focused on deepening its long-standing customer relationships and investing in advanced manufacturing and R&D to drive innovation, efficiency and sustainable growth, all while maintaining an exceptional corporate culture.
Ortoli Rosenstadt LLP and the Nasdaq Stock Market co-host the conference. It serves as a platform for global collaboration and dialogue on innovation and capital market strategy, bringing together financial professionals, investors and corporate leaders for two days of high-level discussions and strategic networking in one of Asia’s premier financial hubs.
AboutOMS Energy Technologies Inc.
OMS Energy Technologies Inc. (NASDAQ: OMSE) is a growth-oriented manufacturer of surface wellhead systems (SWS) and oil country tubular goods (OCTG) for the oil and gas industry. Serving both onshore and offshore exploration and production operators, OMS is a trusted single-source supplier across six vital jurisdictions in the Asia Pacific, Middle Eastern and North African (MENA) regions. The Company’s 11 strategically located manufacturing facilities in key markets ensure rapid response times, customized technical solutions and seamless adaptation to evolving production and logistics needs. Beyond its core SWS and OCTG offerings, OMS also provides premium threading services to maximize operational efficiency for its customers.
South Africans want to shop more sustainably, according to research published in the journal Sustainable Development. But most can’t tell which products are environmentally friendly.
Some food manufacturers have introduced eco labels – a certification symbol placed on product packaging. This indicates the product meets specific environmental standards set by a third party organisation.
These labels are meant to signal to consumers that a product has been produced in a way that limits harm to the environment. But our recent study with 108 South African consumers showed low recognition of eco labels, widespread confusion, and a need for clearer guidance.
The results show that most South African shoppers are unfamiliar with these labels or unable to differentiate between real and fictional ones.
In the European Union eco labels like the EU Energy Label are easily understood and highly visible. They are also usually supported by government awareness campaigns. Other examples of labelling systems that work well include those of Germany and Japan.
These countries show that long term institutional support, mandatory labelling in key sectors, and consistent public messaging can greatly improve eco label recognition.
We concluded from our research that South Africa lacks that national visibility and public education, leaving even motivated consumers unsure of what labels to trust. Based on our findings we recommend steps businesses, government and nonprofits can take to ensure that eco labels are clear, visible and understood.
Eco labelling at its best
The EU Energy Label is used on appliances such as fridges, washing machines and light bulbs to indicate their energy efficiency on a scale from A (most efficient) to G (least efficient).
In countries like Germany and Japan, eco labels are government backed as well as being integrated into school curricula, public service announcements and shopping platforms.
Germany’s Blue Angel label, which states “protects the environment”, has been in use since the 1970s. It appears on over 12,000 products and services, including paper goods, cleaning products, paints and electronics, that meet strict environmental criteria. It is supported by ongoing public education campaigns.
In Japan the the Eco Mark appears on products with minimal environmental impact. It appears on items like stationery, detergents, packaging and appliances. Many retailers display explanations next to these products to help consumers understand the label.
South Africans struggle to identify eco labels
We conducted a structured online survey of 108 South African consumers. Participants were asked about their environmental awareness and their ability to recognise both real and fictional eco labels across ten images. According to the global directory of eco labels and environmental certification schemes, there are around 50 eco labels in South Africa.
The EU Energy Label was the most recognised (87%).
The Afrisco Certified Organic label, which is a legitimate South African label, was the least recognised, identified by just 22% of respondents.
Fictional labels were mistakenly identified as real by many participants, revealing widespread confusion.
Only 3 out of 10 labels were recognised by at least half the participants, suggesting a general lack of eco label awareness. These include the Energy Star Eco label; the EU Energy label and the Forest Stewardship council label.
Age and employment status were significantly related to environmental awareness. Older and employed individuals showed higher levels of awareness.
These findings suggest that consumers are not opposed to eco labels, they simply lack the knowledge and confidence to use them effectively.
Eco labels have the potential to build brand trust, drive green purchasing behaviour, and support national sustainability goals. But they only work if consumers recognise and trust them.
In South Africa, inconsistent use, small label size, and a lack of consumer education are holding eco labels back from achieving their purpose.
What businesses can do
Based on our findings, we recommend the following:
Use recognised and credible labels: Third-party certified labels are more trustworthy and reliable.
Improve label visibility: The most recognised label in our study was the EU Energy Label and was also the most prominent. Small, cluttered logos go unnoticed.
Educate your market: Explain what eco labels mean through packaging, marketing, and digital platforms.
Partner with government and NGOs: Awareness campaigns at national and community levels can help standardise eco label understanding.
Tailor communication efforts: Awareness efforts should consider age and employment demographics, as these affect levels of environmental engagement.
The way forward
South Africans are willing to support environmentally responsible products, but they need help identifying them.
Businesses, government and nonprofits all have a role to play in making eco labels clearer, more visible, and more trustworthy.
Eco labels must become more than symbols. They should be tools for transparency and trust, and a gateway to more sustainable shopping.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The global ecosystem of climate finance is complex, constantly changing and sometimes hard to understand. But understanding it is critical to demanding a green transition that’s just and fair. That’s why The Conversation has collaborated with climate finance experts to create this user-friendly guide, in partnership with Vogue Business. With definitions and short videos, we’ll add to this glossary as new terms emerge.
Blue bonds
Blue bonds are debt instruments designed to finance ocean-related conservation, like protecting coral reefs or sustainable fishing. They’re modelled after green bonds but focus specifically on the health of marine ecosystems – this is a key pillar of climate stability.
By investing in blue bonds, governments and private investors can fund marine projects that deliver both environmental benefits and long-term financial returns. Seychelles issued the first blue bond in 2018. Now, more are emerging as ocean conservation becomes a greater priority for global sustainability efforts.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Carbon border adjustment mechanism
Did you know that imported steel could soon face a carbon tax at the EU border? That’s because the carbon border adjustment mechanism is about to shake up the way we trade, produce and price carbon.
The carbon border adjustment mechanism is a proposed EU policy to put a carbon price on imports like iron, cement, fertiliser, aluminium and electricity. If a product is made in a country with weaker climate policies, the importer must pay the difference between that country’s carbon price and the EU’s. The goal is to avoid “carbon leakage” – when companies relocate to avoid emissions rules and to ensure fair competition on climate action.
But this mechanism is more than just a tariff tool. It’s a bold attempt to reshape global trade. Countries exporting to the EU may be pushed to adopt greener manufacturing or face higher tariffs.
The carbon border adjustment mechanism is controversial: some call it climate protectionism, others argue it could incentivise low-carbon innovation worldwide and be vital for achieving climate justice. Many developing nations worry it could penalise them unfairly unless there’s climate finance to support greener transitions.
Carbon border adjustment mechanism is still evolving, but it’s already forcing companies, investors and governments to rethink emissions accounting, supply chains and competitiveness. It’s a carbon price with global consequences.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Carbon budget
The Paris agreement aims to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by 2030. The carbon budget is the maximum amount of CO₂ emissions allowed, if we want a 67% chance of staying within this limit. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that the remaining carbon budgets amount to 400 billion tonnes of CO₂ from 2020 onwards.
Think of the carbon budget as a climate allowance. Once it has been spent, the risk of extreme weather or sea level rise increases sharply. If emissions continue unchecked, the budget will be exhausted within years, risking severe climate consequences. The IPCC sets the global carbon budget based on climate science, and governments use this framework to set national emission targets, climate policies and pathways to net zero emissions.
By Dongna Zhang, assistant professor in economics and finance, Northumbria University
Carbon credits
Carbon credits are like a permit that allow companies to release a certain amount of carbon into the air. One credit usually equals one tonne of CO₂. These credits are issued by the local government or another authorised body and can be bought and sold. Think of it like a budget allowance for pollution. It encourages cuts in carbon emissions each year to stay within those global climate targets.
The aim is to put a price on carbon to encourage cuts in emissions. If a company reduces its emissions and has leftover credits, it can sell them to another company that is going over its limit. But there are issues. Some argue that carbon credit schemes allow polluters to pay their way out of real change, and not all credits are from trustworthy projects. Although carbon credits can play a role in addressing the climate crisis, they are not a solution on their own.
By Sankar Sivarajah, professor of circular economy, Kingston University London
Carbon credits explained.
Carbon offsetting
Carbon offsetting is a way for people or organisations to make up for the carbon emissions they are responsible for. For example, if you contribute to emissions by flying, driving or making goods, you can help balance that out by supporting projects that reduce emissions elsewhere. This might include planting trees (which absorb carbon dioxide) or building wind farms to produce renewable energy.
The idea is that your support helps cancel out the damage you are doing. For example, if your flight creates one tonne of carbon dioxide, you pay to support a project that removes the same amount.
While this sounds like a win-win, carbon offsetting is not perfect. Some argue that it lets people feel better without really changing their behaviour, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as greenwashing.
Not all projects are effective or well managed. For instance, some tree planting initiatives might have taken place anyway, even without the offset funding, deeming your contribution inconsequential. Others might plant the non-native trees in areas where they are unlikely to reach their potential in terms of absorbing carbon emissions.
So, offsetting can help, but it is no magic fix. It works best alongside real efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and encourage low-carbon lifestyles or supply chains.
By Sankar Sivarajah, professor of circular economy, Kingston University London
Carbon offsetting explained.
Carbon tax
A carbon tax is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by placing a direct price on CO₂ and other greenhouse gases.
A carbon tax is grounded in the concept of the social cost of carbon. This is an estimate of the economic damage caused by emitting one tonne of CO₂, including climate-related health, infrastructure and ecosystem impacts.
A carbon tax is typically levied per tonne of CO₂ emitted. The tax can be applied either upstream (on fossil fuel producers) or downstream (on consumers or power generators). This makes carbon-intensive activities more expensive, it incentivises nations, businesses and people to reduce their emissions, while untaxed renewable energy becomes more competitively priced and appealing.
Carbon tax was first introduced by Finland in 1990. Since then, more than 39 jurisdictions have implemented similar schemes. According to the World Bank, carbon pricing mechanisms (that’s both carbon taxes and emissions trading systems) now cover about 24% of global emissions. The remaining 76% are not priced, mainly due to limited coverage in both sectors and geographical areas, plus persistent fossil fuel subsidies. Expanding coverage would require extending carbon pricing to sectors like agriculture and transport, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and strengthening international governance.
What is carbon tax?
Sweden has one of the world’s highest carbon tax rates and has cut emissions by 33% since 1990 while maintaining economic growth. The policy worked because Sweden started early, applied the tax across many industries and maintained clear, consistent communication that kept the public on board.
Canada introduced a national carbon tax in 2019. In Canada, most of the revenue from carbon taxes is returned directly to households through annual rebates, making the scheme revenue-neutral for most families. However, despite its economic logic, inflation and rising fuel prices led to public discontent – especially as many citizens were unaware they were receiving rebates.
Carbon taxes face challenges including political resistance, fairness concerns and low public awareness. Their success depends on clear communication and visible reinvestment of revenues into climate or social goals. A 2025 study that surveyed 40,000 people in 20 countries found that support for carbon taxes increases significantly when revenues are used for environmental infrastructure, rather than returned through tax rebates.
By Meilan Yan, associate professor and senior lecturer in financial economics, Loughborough University
Climate resilience
Floods, wildfires, heatwaves and rising seas are pushing our cities, towns and neighbourhoods to their limits. But there’s a powerful idea that’s helping cities fight back: climate resilience.
Resilience refers to the ability of a system, such as a city, a community or even an ecosystem – to anticipate, prepare for, respond to and recover from climate-related shocks and stresses.
Sometimes people say resilience is about bouncing back. But it’s not just about surviving the next storm. It’s about adapting, evolving and thriving in a changing world.
Resilience means building smarter and better. It means designing homes that stay cool during heatwaves. Roads that don’t wash away in floods. Power grids that don’t fail when the weather turns extreme.
It’s also about people. A truly resilient city protects its most vulnerable. It ensures that everyone – regardless of income, age or background – can weather the storm.
And resilience isn’t just reactive. It’s about using science, local knowledge and innovation to reduce a risk before disaster strikes. From restoring wetlands to cool cities and absorb floods, to creating early warning systems for heatwaves, climate resilience is about weaving strength into the very fabric of our cities.
By Paul O’Hare, senior lecturer in geography and development, Manchester Metropolitan University
The meaning of climate resilience.
Climate risk disclosure
Climate risk disclosure refers to how companies report the risks they face from climate change, such as flood damage, supply chain disruptions or regulatory costs. It includes both physical risks (like storms) and transition risks (like changing laws or consumer preferences).
Mandatory disclosures, such as those proposed by the UK and EU, aim to make climate-related risks transparent to investors. Done well, these reports can shape capital flows toward more sustainable business models. Done poorly, they become greenwashing tools.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Emissions trading scheme
An emissions trading scheme is the primary market-based approach for regulating greenhouse gas emissions in many countries, including Australia, Canada, China and Mexico.
Part of a government’s job is to decide how much of the economy’s carbon emissions it wants to avoid in order to fight climate change. It must put a cap on carbon emissions that economic production is not allowed to surpass. Preferably, the polluters (that’s the manufacturers, fossil fuel companies) should be the ones paying for the cost of climate mitigation.
Regulators could simply tell all the firms how much they are allowed to emit over the next ten years or so. But giving every firm the same allowance across the board is not cost efficient, because avoiding carbon emissions is much harder for some firms (such as steel producers) than others (such as tax consultants). Since governments cannot know each firm’s specific cost profile either, it can’t customise the allowances. Also, monitoring whether polluters actually abide by their assigned limits is extremely costly.
An emissions trading scheme cleverly solves this dilemma using the cap-and-trade mechanism. Instead of assigning each polluter a fixed quota and risking inefficiencies, the government issues a large number of tradable permits – each worth, say, a tonne of CO₂-equivalent (CO₂e) – that sum up to the cap. Firms that can cut greenhouse gas emissions relatively cheaply can then trade their surplus permits to those who find it harder – at a price that makes both better off.
By Mathias Weidinger, environmental economist, University of Oxford
Emissions trading schemes, explained by climate finance expert Mathias Weidinger.
Environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing
ESG investing stands for environmental, social and governance investing. In simple terms, these are a set of standards that investors use to screen a company’s potential investments.
ESG means choosing to invest in companies that are not only profitable but also responsible. Investors use ESG metrics to assess risks (such as climate liability, labour practices) and align portfolios with sustainability goals by looking at how a company affects our planet and treats its people and communities. While there isn’t one single global body governing ESG, various organisations, ratings agencies and governments all contribute to setting and evolving these metrics.
For example, investing in a company committed to renewable energy and fair labour practices might be considered “ESG aligned”. Supporters believe ESG helps identify risks and create long-term value. Critics argue it can be vague or used for greenwashing, where companies appear sustainable without real action. ESG works best when paired with transparency and clear data. A barrier is that standards vary, and it’s not always clear what counts as ESG.
Why do financial companies and institutions care? Issues like climate change and nature loss pose significant risks, affecting company values and the global economy.
However, gathering reliable ESG information can be difficult. Companies often self-report, and the data isn’t always standardised or up to date. Researchers – including my team at the University of Oxford – are using geospatial data, like satellite imagery and artificial intelligence, to develop global databases for high-impact industries, across all major sectors and geographies, and independently assess environmental and social risks and impacts.
For instance, we can analyse satellite images of a facility over time to monitor its emissions effect on nature and biodiversity, or assess deforestation linked to a company’s supply chain. This allows us to map supply chains, identify high-impact assets, and detect hidden risks and opportunities in key industries, providing an objective, real-time look at their environmental footprint.
The goal is for this to improve ESG ratings and provide clearer, more consistent insights for investors. This approach could help us overcome current data limitations to build a more sustainable financial future.
By Amani Maalouf, senior researcher in spatial finance, University of Oxford
Environmental, social and governance investing explained.
Financed emissions
Financed emissions are the greenhouse gas emissions linked to a bank’s or investor’s lending and investment portfolio, rather than their own operations. For example, a bank that funds a coal mine or invests in fossil fuels is indirectly responsible for the carbon those activities produce.
Measuring financed emissions helps reveal the real climate impact of financial institutions not just their office energy use. It’s a cornerstone of climate accountability in finance and is becoming essential under net zero pledges.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Green bonds
Green bonds are loans issued to fund environmentally beneficial projects, such as energy-efficient buildings or clean transportation. Investors choose them to support climate solutions while earning returns.
Green bonds are a major tool to finance the shift to a low-carbon economy by directing finance toward climate solutions. As climate costs rise, green bonds could help close the funding gap while ensuring transparency and accountability.
Green bonds are required to ensure funds are spent as promised. For instance, imagine a city wants to upgrade its public transportation by adding electric buses to reduce pollution. Instead of raising taxes or slashing other budgets, the city can issue green bonds to raise the necessary capital. Investors buy the bonds, the city gets the funding, and the environment benefits from cleaner air and fewer emissions.
The growing participation of government issuers has improved the transparency and reliability of these investments. The green bond market has grown rapidly in recent years. According to the Bank for International Settlements, the green bond market reached US$2.9 trillion (£2.1 trillion) in 2024 – nearly six times larger than in 2018. At the same time, annual issuance (the total value of green bonds issued in a year) hit US$700 billion, highlighting the increasing role of green finance in tackling climate change.
By Dongna Zhang, assistant professor in economics and finance, Northumbria University
Just transition
Just transition is the process of moving to a low-carbon society that is environmentally sustainable and socially inclusive. In a broad sense, a just transition means focusing on creating a more fair and equal society.
Just transition has existed as a concept since the 1970s. It was originally applied to the green energy transition, protecting workers in the fossil fuel industry as we move towards more sustainable alternatives.
These days, it has so many overlapping issues of justice hidden within it, so the concept is hard to define. Even at the level of UN climate negotiations, global leaders struggle to agree on what a just transition means.
The big battle is between developed countries, who want a very restrictive definition around jobs and skills, and developing countries, who are looking for a much more holistic approach that considers wider system change and includes considerations around human rights, Indigenous people and creating an overall fairer global society.
A just transition is essentially about imagining a future where we have moved beyond fossil fuels and society works better for everyone – but that can look very different in a European city compared to a rural setting in south-east Asia.
For example, in a British city it might mean fewer cars and better public transport. In a rural setting, it might mean new ways of growing crops that are more sustainable, and building homes that are heatwave resistant.
By Alix Dietzel, climate justice and climate policy expert, University of Bristol
The meaning of just transition.
Loss and damage
A global loss and damage fund was agreed by nations at the UN climate summit (Cop27) in 2022. This means that the rich countries of the world put money into a fund that the least developed countries can then call upon when they have a climate emergency.
At the moment, the loss and damage fund is made up of relatively small pots of money. Much more will be needed to provide relief to those who need it most now and in the future.
By Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science, UCL
Mark Maslin explains loss and damage.
Mitigation v adaptation
Mitigation means cutting greenhouse gas emissions to slow climate change. Adaptation means adjusting to its effects, like building sea walls or growing heat-resistant crops. Both are essential: mitigation tackles the cause, while adaptation tackles the symptoms.
Globally, most funding goes to mitigation, but vulnerable communities often need adaptation support most. Balancing the two is a major challenge in climate policy, especially for developing countries facing immediate climate threats.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Nationally determined contributions
Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) are at the heart of the Paris agreement, the global effort to collectively combat climate change. NDCs are individual climate action plans created by each country. These targets and strategies outline how a country will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change.
Each nation sets its own goals based on its own circumstances and capabilities – there’s no standard NDC. These plans should be updated every five years and countries are encouraged to gradually increase their climate ambitions over time.
The aim is for NDCs to drive real action by guiding policies, attracting investment and inspiring innovation in clean technologies. But current NDCs fall short of the Paris agreement goals and many countries struggle to turn their plans into a reality. NDCs also vary widely in scope and detail so it’s hard to compare efforts across the board. Stronger international collaboration and greater accountability will be crucial.
By Doug Specht, reader in cultural geography and communication, University of Westminster
Fashion depends on water, soil and biodiversity – all natural capital. And forward-thinking designers are now asking: how do we create rather than deplete, how do we restore rather than extract?
Natural capital is the value assigned to the stock of forests, soils, oceans and even minerals such as lithium. It sustains every part of our economy. It’s the bees that pollinate our crops. It’s the wetlands that filter our water and it’s the trees that store carbon and cool our cities.
If we fail to value nature properly, we risk losing it. But if we succeed, we unlock a future that is not only sustainable but also truly regenerative.
My team at the University of Oxford is developing tools to integrate nature into national balance sheets, advising governments on biodiversity, and we’re helping industries from fashion to finance embed nature into their decision making.
Natural capital, explained by a climate finance expert.
By Mette Morsing, professor of business sustainability and director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford
Net zero
Reaching net zero means reducing the amount of additional greenhouse gas emissions that accumulate in the atmosphere to zero. This concept was popularised by the Paris agreement, a landmark deal that was agreed at the UN climate summit (Cop21) in 2015 to limit the impact of greenhouse gas emissions.
There are some emissions, from farming and aviation for example, that will be very difficult, if not impossible, to reach absolute zero. Hence, the “net”. This allows people, businesses and countries to find ways to suck greenhouse gas emissions out of the atmosphere, effectively cancelling out emissions while trying to reduce them. This can include reforestation, rewilding, direct air capture and carbon capture and storage. The goal is to reach net zero: the point at which no extra greenhouse gases accumulate in Earth’s atmosphere.
By Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science, UCL
Mark Maslin explains net zero.
For more expert explainer videos, visit The Conversation’s quick climate dictionary playlist here on YouTube.
Mark Maslin is Pro-Vice Provost of the UCL Climate Crisis Grand Challenge and Founding Director of the UCL Centre for Sustainable Aviation. He was co-director of the London NERC Doctoral Training Partnership and is a member of the Climate Crisis Advisory Group. He is an advisor to Sheep Included Ltd, Lansons, NetZeroNow and has advised the UK Parliament. He has received grant funding from the NERC, EPSRC, ESRC, DFG, Royal Society, DIFD, BEIS, DECC, FCO, Innovate UK, Carbon Trust, UK Space Agency, European Space Agency, Research England, Wellcome Trust, Leverhulme Trust, CIFF, Sprint2020, and British Council. He has received funding from the BBC, Lancet, Laithwaites, Seventh Generation, Channel 4, JLT Re, WWF, Hermes, CAFOD, HP and Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors.
Amani Maalouf receives funding from IKEA Foundation and UK Research and Innovation (NE/V017756/1).
Narmin Nahidi is affiliated with several academic associations, including the Financial Management Association (FMA), British Accounting and Finance Association (BAFA), American Finance Association (AFA), and the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CMBE). These affiliations do not influence the content of this article.
Paul O’Hare receives funding from the UK’s Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). Award reference NE/V010174/1.
Alix Dietzel, Dongna Zhang, Doug Specht, Mathias Weidinger, Meilan Yan, and Sankar Sivarajah do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
India Inc has shown remarkable financial strength over the last five years, with corporate profits growing nearly three times faster than the country’s GDP between FY20 and FY25, a new report said on Thursday.
The profit-to-GDP ratio has risen significantly to 6.9 per cent — reflecting strong earnings performance despite economic challenges, according to the data compiled by Ionic Wealth (Angel One).
The report, titled ‘India Inc. FY25: Decoding Earnings Trends & Path Ahead’, highlights that FY25 was a resilient year for Indian companies.
Revenue of Nifty 500 firms grew by 6.8 per cent year-on-year (YoY), while EBITDA rose by 10.4 per cent and profit after tax (PAT) increased by 5.6 per cent.
Notably, mid-cap and small-cap companies outshined large-cap firms in terms of profit growth, recording 22 per cent and 17 per cent PAT growth respectively, compared to just 3 per cent for large caps.
Sector-wise, BFSI (banking, financial services and insurance) emerged as a major driver of profitability, with its share of total profits nearly doubling since the pandemic.
Auto, capital goods, and consumer durables also posted healthy earnings growth.
Consumer durables led with a massive 57 per cent PAT growth in FY25, followed by healthcare at 36 per cent and capital goods at 26 per cent, as per the report.
Companies also benefited from margin improvements in sectors such as cement, chemicals, metals, and auto, helped by easing inflation and better input cost management.
The report also points to a significant jump in capital expenditure plans. India Inc. aims to nearly double its capex to Rs 72.25 lakh crore during FY26–30, with a majority of the investment expected to be self-funded.
Around 80 per cent of this capex is focused on upgrading existing operations and generating new income, with sectors like power, green energy, telecom, auto, and cement leading the next wave of investments.
Looking ahead to FY26, the outlook varies by sector. Banks and NBFCs may see loan growth stabilise as interest rates are expected to ease in the second half of the year.
The IT sector is likely to witness a recovery, driven by cost-optimisation deals and demand from BFSI clients.
Pharma growth will be supported by expansion in chronic therapies and hospital networks, while the FMCG sector is expected to benefit from improving rural demand and a good monsoon, the report said.
India Inc has shown remarkable financial strength over the last five years, with corporate profits growing nearly three times faster than the country’s GDP between FY20 and FY25, a new report said on Thursday.
The profit-to-GDP ratio has risen significantly to 6.9 per cent — reflecting strong earnings performance despite economic challenges, according to the data compiled by Ionic Wealth (Angel One).
The report, titled ‘India Inc. FY25: Decoding Earnings Trends & Path Ahead’, highlights that FY25 was a resilient year for Indian companies.
Revenue of Nifty 500 firms grew by 6.8 per cent year-on-year (YoY), while EBITDA rose by 10.4 per cent and profit after tax (PAT) increased by 5.6 per cent.
Notably, mid-cap and small-cap companies outshined large-cap firms in terms of profit growth, recording 22 per cent and 17 per cent PAT growth respectively, compared to just 3 per cent for large caps.
Sector-wise, BFSI (banking, financial services and insurance) emerged as a major driver of profitability, with its share of total profits nearly doubling since the pandemic.
Auto, capital goods, and consumer durables also posted healthy earnings growth.
Consumer durables led with a massive 57 per cent PAT growth in FY25, followed by healthcare at 36 per cent and capital goods at 26 per cent, as per the report.
Companies also benefited from margin improvements in sectors such as cement, chemicals, metals, and auto, helped by easing inflation and better input cost management.
The report also points to a significant jump in capital expenditure plans. India Inc. aims to nearly double its capex to Rs 72.25 lakh crore during FY26–30, with a majority of the investment expected to be self-funded.
Around 80 per cent of this capex is focused on upgrading existing operations and generating new income, with sectors like power, green energy, telecom, auto, and cement leading the next wave of investments.
Looking ahead to FY26, the outlook varies by sector. Banks and NBFCs may see loan growth stabilise as interest rates are expected to ease in the second half of the year.
The IT sector is likely to witness a recovery, driven by cost-optimisation deals and demand from BFSI clients.
Pharma growth will be supported by expansion in chronic therapies and hospital networks, while the FMCG sector is expected to benefit from improving rural demand and a good monsoon, the report said.
Lord Mayor of Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough, Alderman Stephen Moutray, and Armagh Chamber Chair, Art O’Hagan, celebrating the town’s shortlisting in the Small Business Support category.
Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Council is proud to announce that Banbridge town has been shortlisted in the High Street Transformation category, and Armagh City has been recognised in the Small Business Support category in the third annual Let’s Celebrate Towns Awards, hosted by Visa in partnership with the British Retail Consortium (BRC).
The awards celebrate towns across the UK that are driving innovation and fostering thriving local economies. Banbridge’s nomination reflects its commitment to revitalising the high street through forward-thinking initiatives that support local businesses and enhance the town centre experience.
Meanwhile, Armagh City’s recognition in the Small Business Support category highlights strategic efforts to empower entrepreneurs and strengthen the borough’s economic resilience.
Lord Mayor of Armagh City, Banbridge and Craigavon Borough Alderman Stephen Moutray commented:
“We are absolutely delighted to see Armagh City and Banbridge town centre recognised in this year’s Let’s Celebrate Towns awards, once again. These nominations are a testament to the hard work, creativity and collaboration happening across our borough. We remain committed to supporting our towns and communities to thrive, and this recognition reinforces the impact of our collective efforts.”
A panel of expert judges will now select six category winners, each of whom will receive £20,000 to fund a local community initiative. Winners will be announced at a prestigious awards ceremony at the House of Lords in July.
Ice loss in Antarctica and its impact on the planet – sea level rise, changes to ocean currents and disturbance of wildlife and food webs – has been in the news a lot lately. All of these threats were likely on the minds of the delegates to the annual Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, which finishes up today in Milan, Italy.
This meeting is where decisions are made about the continent’s future. These decisions rely on evidence from scientific research. Moreover, only countries that produce significant Antarctic research – as well as being parties to the treaty – get to have a final say in these decisions.
Our new report – published as a preprint through the University of the Arctic – shows the rate of research on the Antarctic and Southern Ocean is falling at exactly the time when it should be increasing. Moreover, research leadership is changing, with China taking the lead for the first time.
This points to a dangerous disinvestment in Antarctic research just when it is needed, alongside a changing of the guard in national influence. Antarctica and the research done there are key to everyone’s future, so it’s vital to understand what this change might lead to.
Why is Antarctic research so important?
With the Antarctic region rapidly warming, its ice shelves destabilising and sea ice shrinking, understanding the South Polar environment is more crucial than ever.
Research to understand these impacts is vital. First, knowing the impact of our actions – particularly carbon emissions – gives us an increased drive to make changes and lobby governments to do so.
Second, even when changes are already locked in, to prepare ourselves we need to know what these changes will look like.
And third, we need to understand the threats to the Antarctic and Southern Ocean environment to govern it properly. This is where the treaty comes in.
Fifty-eight countries are parties to the treaty, but only 29 of them – called consultative parties – can make binding decisions about the region. They comprise the 12 original signatories from 1959, along with 17 more recent signatory nations that produce substantial scientific research relating to Antarctica.
This makes research a key part of a nation’s influence over what happens in Antarctica.
For most of its history, the Antarctic Treaty System has functioned remarkably well. It maintained peace in the region during the Cold War, facilitated scientific cooperation, and put arguments about territorial claims on indefinite hold. It indefinitely forbade mining, and managed fisheries.
Because decisions are made by consensus, any country can effectively block progress. Russia and China – both long-term actors in the system – have been at the centre of the impasse.
Tracking the amount of Antarctic research being done tells us whether nations as a whole are investing enough in understanding the region and its global impact.
It also tells us which nations are investing the most and are therefore likely to have substantial influence.
Our new report examined the number of papers published on Antarctic and Southern Ocean topics from 2016 to 2024, using the Scopus database. We also looked at other factors, such as the countries affiliated with each paper.
The results show five significant changes are happening in the world of Antarctic research.
The number of Antarctic and Southern Ocean publications peaked in 2021 and then fell slightly yearly through to 2024.
While the United States has for decades been the leader in Antarctic research, China overtook them in 2022.
If we look only at the high-quality publications (those published in the best 25% of journals) China still took over the US, in 2024.
Of the top six countries in overall publications (China, the US, the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany and Russia) all except China have declined in publication numbers since 2016.
Although collaboration in publications is higher for Antarctic research than in non-Antarctic fields, Russia, India and China have anomalously low rates of co-authorship compared with many other signatory countries.
Why is this research decline a problem?
A recent parliamentary inquiry in Australia emphasised the need for funding certainty. In the UK, a House of Commons committee report considered it “imperative for the UK to significantly expand its research efforts in Antarctica”, in particular in relation to sea level rise.
US commentators have pointed to the inadequacy of the country’s icebreaker infrastructure. The Trump administration’s recent cuts to Antarctic funding are only likely to exacerbate the situation. Meanwhile China has built a fifth station in Antarctica and announced plans for a sixth.
Given the nation’s population and global influence, China’s leadership in Antarctic research is not surprising. If China were to take a lead in Antarctic environmental protection that matched its scientific heft, its move to lead position in the research ranks could be positive. Stronger multi-country collaboration in research could also strengthen overall cooperation.
But the overall drop in global Antarctic research investment is a problem however you look at it. We ignore it at our peril.
Elizabeth Leane receives funding from the Australian Research Council, the Dutch Research Council, the Council on Australian and Latin American Relations DFAT and HX (Hurtigruten Expeditions). She has received in-kind support from Hurtigruten Expeditions in the recent past. The University of Tasmania is a member of the UArctic, which has provided support for this project.
Keith Larson is affiliated with the UArctic and European Polar Board. The UArctic paid for the development and publication of this report. The UArctic Thematic Network on Research Analytics and Bibliometrics conducted the analysis and developed the report. The Arctic Centre at Umeå University provided in-kind support for staff time on the report.
South Africans want to shop more sustainably, according to research published in the journal Sustainable Development. But most can’t tell which products are environmentally friendly.
Some food manufacturers have introduced eco labels – a certification symbol placed on product packaging. This indicates the product meets specific environmental standards set by a third party organisation.
These labels are meant to signal to consumers that a product has been produced in a way that limits harm to the environment. But our recent study with 108 South African consumers showed low recognition of eco labels, widespread confusion, and a need for clearer guidance.
The results show that most South African shoppers are unfamiliar with these labels or unable to differentiate between real and fictional ones.
In the European Union eco labels like the EU Energy Label are easily understood and highly visible. They are also usually supported by government awareness campaigns. Other examples of labelling systems that work well include those of Germany and Japan.
These countries show that long term institutional support, mandatory labelling in key sectors, and consistent public messaging can greatly improve eco label recognition.
We concluded from our research that South Africa lacks that national visibility and public education, leaving even motivated consumers unsure of what labels to trust. Based on our findings we recommend steps businesses, government and nonprofits can take to ensure that eco labels are clear, visible and understood.
Eco labelling at its best
The EU Energy Label is used on appliances such as fridges, washing machines and light bulbs to indicate their energy efficiency on a scale from A (most efficient) to G (least efficient).
In countries like Germany and Japan, eco labels are government backed as well as being integrated into school curricula, public service announcements and shopping platforms.
Germany’s Blue Angel label, which states “protects the environment”, has been in use since the 1970s. It appears on over 12,000 products and services, including paper goods, cleaning products, paints and electronics, that meet strict environmental criteria. It is supported by ongoing public education campaigns.
In Japan the the Eco Mark appears on products with minimal environmental impact. It appears on items like stationery, detergents, packaging and appliances. Many retailers display explanations next to these products to help consumers understand the label.
South Africans struggle to identify eco labels
We conducted a structured online survey of 108 South African consumers. Participants were asked about their environmental awareness and their ability to recognise both real and fictional eco labels across ten images. According to the global directory of eco labels and environmental certification schemes, there are around 50 eco labels in South Africa.
The EU Energy Label was the most recognised (87%).
The Afrisco Certified Organic label, which is a legitimate South African label, was the least recognised, identified by just 22% of respondents.
Fictional labels were mistakenly identified as real by many participants, revealing widespread confusion.
Only 3 out of 10 labels were recognised by at least half the participants, suggesting a general lack of eco label awareness. These include the Energy Star Eco label; the EU Energy label and the Forest Stewardship council label.
Age and employment status were significantly related to environmental awareness. Older and employed individuals showed higher levels of awareness.
These findings suggest that consumers are not opposed to eco labels, they simply lack the knowledge and confidence to use them effectively.
Eco labels have the potential to build brand trust, drive green purchasing behaviour, and support national sustainability goals. But they only work if consumers recognise and trust them.
In South Africa, inconsistent use, small label size, and a lack of consumer education are holding eco labels back from achieving their purpose.
What businesses can do
Based on our findings, we recommend the following:
Use recognised and credible labels: Third-party certified labels are more trustworthy and reliable.
Improve label visibility: The most recognised label in our study was the EU Energy Label and was also the most prominent. Small, cluttered logos go unnoticed.
Educate your market: Explain what eco labels mean through packaging, marketing, and digital platforms.
Partner with government and NGOs: Awareness campaigns at national and community levels can help standardise eco label understanding.
Tailor communication efforts: Awareness efforts should consider age and employment demographics, as these affect levels of environmental engagement.
The way forward
South Africans are willing to support environmentally responsible products, but they need help identifying them.
Businesses, government and nonprofits all have a role to play in making eco labels clearer, more visible, and more trustworthy.
Eco labels must become more than symbols. They should be tools for transparency and trust, and a gateway to more sustainable shopping.
The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The global ecosystem of climate finance is complex, constantly changing and sometimes hard to understand. But understanding it is critical to demanding a green transition that’s just and fair. That’s why The Conversation has collaborated with climate finance experts to create this user-friendly guide, in partnership with Vogue Business. With definitions and short videos, we’ll add to this glossary as new terms emerge.
Blue bonds
Blue bonds are debt instruments designed to finance ocean-related conservation, like protecting coral reefs or sustainable fishing. They’re modelled after green bonds but focus specifically on the health of marine ecosystems – this is a key pillar of climate stability.
By investing in blue bonds, governments and private investors can fund marine projects that deliver both environmental benefits and long-term financial returns. Seychelles issued the first blue bond in 2018. Now, more are emerging as ocean conservation becomes a greater priority for global sustainability efforts.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Carbon border adjustment mechanism
Did you know that imported steel could soon face a carbon tax at the EU border? That’s because the carbon border adjustment mechanism is about to shake up the way we trade, produce and price carbon.
The carbon border adjustment mechanism is a proposed EU policy to put a carbon price on imports like iron, cement, fertiliser, aluminium and electricity. If a product is made in a country with weaker climate policies, the importer must pay the difference between that country’s carbon price and the EU’s. The goal is to avoid “carbon leakage” – when companies relocate to avoid emissions rules and to ensure fair competition on climate action.
But this mechanism is more than just a tariff tool. It’s a bold attempt to reshape global trade. Countries exporting to the EU may be pushed to adopt greener manufacturing or face higher tariffs.
The carbon border adjustment mechanism is controversial: some call it climate protectionism, others argue it could incentivise low-carbon innovation worldwide and be vital for achieving climate justice. Many developing nations worry it could penalise them unfairly unless there’s climate finance to support greener transitions.
Carbon border adjustment mechanism is still evolving, but it’s already forcing companies, investors and governments to rethink emissions accounting, supply chains and competitiveness. It’s a carbon price with global consequences.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Carbon budget
The Paris agreement aims to limit global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by 2030. The carbon budget is the maximum amount of CO₂ emissions allowed, if we want a 67% chance of staying within this limit. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) estimates that the remaining carbon budgets amount to 400 billion tonnes of CO₂ from 2020 onwards.
Think of the carbon budget as a climate allowance. Once it has been spent, the risk of extreme weather or sea level rise increases sharply. If emissions continue unchecked, the budget will be exhausted within years, risking severe climate consequences. The IPCC sets the global carbon budget based on climate science, and governments use this framework to set national emission targets, climate policies and pathways to net zero emissions.
By Dongna Zhang, assistant professor in economics and finance, Northumbria University
Carbon credits
Carbon credits are like a permit that allow companies to release a certain amount of carbon into the air. One credit usually equals one tonne of CO₂. These credits are issued by the local government or another authorised body and can be bought and sold. Think of it like a budget allowance for pollution. It encourages cuts in carbon emissions each year to stay within those global climate targets.
The aim is to put a price on carbon to encourage cuts in emissions. If a company reduces its emissions and has leftover credits, it can sell them to another company that is going over its limit. But there are issues. Some argue that carbon credit schemes allow polluters to pay their way out of real change, and not all credits are from trustworthy projects. Although carbon credits can play a role in addressing the climate crisis, they are not a solution on their own.
By Sankar Sivarajah, professor of circular economy, Kingston University London
Carbon credits explained.
Carbon offsetting
Carbon offsetting is a way for people or organisations to make up for the carbon emissions they are responsible for. For example, if you contribute to emissions by flying, driving or making goods, you can help balance that out by supporting projects that reduce emissions elsewhere. This might include planting trees (which absorb carbon dioxide) or building wind farms to produce renewable energy.
The idea is that your support helps cancel out the damage you are doing. For example, if your flight creates one tonne of carbon dioxide, you pay to support a project that removes the same amount.
While this sounds like a win-win, carbon offsetting is not perfect. Some argue that it lets people feel better without really changing their behaviour, a phenomenon sometimes referred to as greenwashing.
Not all projects are effective or well managed. For instance, some tree planting initiatives might have taken place anyway, even without the offset funding, deeming your contribution inconsequential. Others might plant the non-native trees in areas where they are unlikely to reach their potential in terms of absorbing carbon emissions.
So, offsetting can help, but it is no magic fix. It works best alongside real efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and encourage low-carbon lifestyles or supply chains.
By Sankar Sivarajah, professor of circular economy, Kingston University London
Carbon offsetting explained.
Carbon tax
A carbon tax is designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by placing a direct price on CO₂ and other greenhouse gases.
A carbon tax is grounded in the concept of the social cost of carbon. This is an estimate of the economic damage caused by emitting one tonne of CO₂, including climate-related health, infrastructure and ecosystem impacts.
A carbon tax is typically levied per tonne of CO₂ emitted. The tax can be applied either upstream (on fossil fuel producers) or downstream (on consumers or power generators). This makes carbon-intensive activities more expensive, it incentivises nations, businesses and people to reduce their emissions, while untaxed renewable energy becomes more competitively priced and appealing.
Carbon tax was first introduced by Finland in 1990. Since then, more than 39 jurisdictions have implemented similar schemes. According to the World Bank, carbon pricing mechanisms (that’s both carbon taxes and emissions trading systems) now cover about 24% of global emissions. The remaining 76% are not priced, mainly due to limited coverage in both sectors and geographical areas, plus persistent fossil fuel subsidies. Expanding coverage would require extending carbon pricing to sectors like agriculture and transport, phasing out fossil fuel subsidies and strengthening international governance.
What is carbon tax?
Sweden has one of the world’s highest carbon tax rates and has cut emissions by 33% since 1990 while maintaining economic growth. The policy worked because Sweden started early, applied the tax across many industries and maintained clear, consistent communication that kept the public on board.
Canada introduced a national carbon tax in 2019. In Canada, most of the revenue from carbon taxes is returned directly to households through annual rebates, making the scheme revenue-neutral for most families. However, despite its economic logic, inflation and rising fuel prices led to public discontent – especially as many citizens were unaware they were receiving rebates.
Carbon taxes face challenges including political resistance, fairness concerns and low public awareness. Their success depends on clear communication and visible reinvestment of revenues into climate or social goals. A 2025 study that surveyed 40,000 people in 20 countries found that support for carbon taxes increases significantly when revenues are used for environmental infrastructure, rather than returned through tax rebates.
By Meilan Yan, associate professor and senior lecturer in financial economics, Loughborough University
Climate resilience
Floods, wildfires, heatwaves and rising seas are pushing our cities, towns and neighbourhoods to their limits. But there’s a powerful idea that’s helping cities fight back: climate resilience.
Resilience refers to the ability of a system, such as a city, a community or even an ecosystem – to anticipate, prepare for, respond to and recover from climate-related shocks and stresses.
Sometimes people say resilience is about bouncing back. But it’s not just about surviving the next storm. It’s about adapting, evolving and thriving in a changing world.
Resilience means building smarter and better. It means designing homes that stay cool during heatwaves. Roads that don’t wash away in floods. Power grids that don’t fail when the weather turns extreme.
It’s also about people. A truly resilient city protects its most vulnerable. It ensures that everyone – regardless of income, age or background – can weather the storm.
And resilience isn’t just reactive. It’s about using science, local knowledge and innovation to reduce a risk before disaster strikes. From restoring wetlands to cool cities and absorb floods, to creating early warning systems for heatwaves, climate resilience is about weaving strength into the very fabric of our cities.
By Paul O’Hare, senior lecturer in geography and development, Manchester Metropolitan University
The meaning of climate resilience.
Climate risk disclosure
Climate risk disclosure refers to how companies report the risks they face from climate change, such as flood damage, supply chain disruptions or regulatory costs. It includes both physical risks (like storms) and transition risks (like changing laws or consumer preferences).
Mandatory disclosures, such as those proposed by the UK and EU, aim to make climate-related risks transparent to investors. Done well, these reports can shape capital flows toward more sustainable business models. Done poorly, they become greenwashing tools.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Emissions trading scheme
An emissions trading scheme is the primary market-based approach for regulating greenhouse gas emissions in many countries, including Australia, Canada, China and Mexico.
Part of a government’s job is to decide how much of the economy’s carbon emissions it wants to avoid in order to fight climate change. It must put a cap on carbon emissions that economic production is not allowed to surpass. Preferably, the polluters (that’s the manufacturers, fossil fuel companies) should be the ones paying for the cost of climate mitigation.
Regulators could simply tell all the firms how much they are allowed to emit over the next ten years or so. But giving every firm the same allowance across the board is not cost efficient, because avoiding carbon emissions is much harder for some firms (such as steel producers) than others (such as tax consultants). Since governments cannot know each firm’s specific cost profile either, it can’t customise the allowances. Also, monitoring whether polluters actually abide by their assigned limits is extremely costly.
An emissions trading scheme cleverly solves this dilemma using the cap-and-trade mechanism. Instead of assigning each polluter a fixed quota and risking inefficiencies, the government issues a large number of tradable permits – each worth, say, a tonne of CO₂-equivalent (CO₂e) – that sum up to the cap. Firms that can cut greenhouse gas emissions relatively cheaply can then trade their surplus permits to those who find it harder – at a price that makes both better off.
By Mathias Weidinger, environmental economist, University of Oxford
Emissions trading schemes, explained by climate finance expert Mathias Weidinger.
Environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing
ESG investing stands for environmental, social and governance investing. In simple terms, these are a set of standards that investors use to screen a company’s potential investments.
ESG means choosing to invest in companies that are not only profitable but also responsible. Investors use ESG metrics to assess risks (such as climate liability, labour practices) and align portfolios with sustainability goals by looking at how a company affects our planet and treats its people and communities. While there isn’t one single global body governing ESG, various organisations, ratings agencies and governments all contribute to setting and evolving these metrics.
For example, investing in a company committed to renewable energy and fair labour practices might be considered “ESG aligned”. Supporters believe ESG helps identify risks and create long-term value. Critics argue it can be vague or used for greenwashing, where companies appear sustainable without real action. ESG works best when paired with transparency and clear data. A barrier is that standards vary, and it’s not always clear what counts as ESG.
Why do financial companies and institutions care? Issues like climate change and nature loss pose significant risks, affecting company values and the global economy.
However, gathering reliable ESG information can be difficult. Companies often self-report, and the data isn’t always standardised or up to date. Researchers – including my team at the University of Oxford – are using geospatial data, like satellite imagery and artificial intelligence, to develop global databases for high-impact industries, across all major sectors and geographies, and independently assess environmental and social risks and impacts.
For instance, we can analyse satellite images of a facility over time to monitor its emissions effect on nature and biodiversity, or assess deforestation linked to a company’s supply chain. This allows us to map supply chains, identify high-impact assets, and detect hidden risks and opportunities in key industries, providing an objective, real-time look at their environmental footprint.
The goal is for this to improve ESG ratings and provide clearer, more consistent insights for investors. This approach could help us overcome current data limitations to build a more sustainable financial future.
By Amani Maalouf, senior researcher in spatial finance, University of Oxford
Environmental, social and governance investing explained.
Financed emissions
Financed emissions are the greenhouse gas emissions linked to a bank’s or investor’s lending and investment portfolio, rather than their own operations. For example, a bank that funds a coal mine or invests in fossil fuels is indirectly responsible for the carbon those activities produce.
Measuring financed emissions helps reveal the real climate impact of financial institutions not just their office energy use. It’s a cornerstone of climate accountability in finance and is becoming essential under net zero pledges.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Green bonds
Green bonds are loans issued to fund environmentally beneficial projects, such as energy-efficient buildings or clean transportation. Investors choose them to support climate solutions while earning returns.
Green bonds are a major tool to finance the shift to a low-carbon economy by directing finance toward climate solutions. As climate costs rise, green bonds could help close the funding gap while ensuring transparency and accountability.
Green bonds are required to ensure funds are spent as promised. For instance, imagine a city wants to upgrade its public transportation by adding electric buses to reduce pollution. Instead of raising taxes or slashing other budgets, the city can issue green bonds to raise the necessary capital. Investors buy the bonds, the city gets the funding, and the environment benefits from cleaner air and fewer emissions.
The growing participation of government issuers has improved the transparency and reliability of these investments. The green bond market has grown rapidly in recent years. According to the Bank for International Settlements, the green bond market reached US$2.9 trillion (£2.1 trillion) in 2024 – nearly six times larger than in 2018. At the same time, annual issuance (the total value of green bonds issued in a year) hit US$700 billion, highlighting the increasing role of green finance in tackling climate change.
By Dongna Zhang, assistant professor in economics and finance, Northumbria University
Just transition
Just transition is the process of moving to a low-carbon society that is environmentally sustainable and socially inclusive. In a broad sense, a just transition means focusing on creating a more fair and equal society.
Just transition has existed as a concept since the 1970s. It was originally applied to the green energy transition, protecting workers in the fossil fuel industry as we move towards more sustainable alternatives.
These days, it has so many overlapping issues of justice hidden within it, so the concept is hard to define. Even at the level of UN climate negotiations, global leaders struggle to agree on what a just transition means.
The big battle is between developed countries, who want a very restrictive definition around jobs and skills, and developing countries, who are looking for a much more holistic approach that considers wider system change and includes considerations around human rights, Indigenous people and creating an overall fairer global society.
A just transition is essentially about imagining a future where we have moved beyond fossil fuels and society works better for everyone – but that can look very different in a European city compared to a rural setting in south-east Asia.
For example, in a British city it might mean fewer cars and better public transport. In a rural setting, it might mean new ways of growing crops that are more sustainable, and building homes that are heatwave resistant.
By Alix Dietzel, climate justice and climate policy expert, University of Bristol
The meaning of just transition.
Loss and damage
A global loss and damage fund was agreed by nations at the UN climate summit (Cop27) in 2022. This means that the rich countries of the world put money into a fund that the least developed countries can then call upon when they have a climate emergency.
At the moment, the loss and damage fund is made up of relatively small pots of money. Much more will be needed to provide relief to those who need it most now and in the future.
By Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science, UCL
Mark Maslin explains loss and damage.
Mitigation v adaptation
Mitigation means cutting greenhouse gas emissions to slow climate change. Adaptation means adjusting to its effects, like building sea walls or growing heat-resistant crops. Both are essential: mitigation tackles the cause, while adaptation tackles the symptoms.
Globally, most funding goes to mitigation, but vulnerable communities often need adaptation support most. Balancing the two is a major challenge in climate policy, especially for developing countries facing immediate climate threats.
By Narmin Nahidi, assistant professor in finance at the University of Exeter
Nationally determined contributions
Nationally determined contributions (NDCs) are at the heart of the Paris agreement, the global effort to collectively combat climate change. NDCs are individual climate action plans created by each country. These targets and strategies outline how a country will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to climate change.
Each nation sets its own goals based on its own circumstances and capabilities – there’s no standard NDC. These plans should be updated every five years and countries are encouraged to gradually increase their climate ambitions over time.
The aim is for NDCs to drive real action by guiding policies, attracting investment and inspiring innovation in clean technologies. But current NDCs fall short of the Paris agreement goals and many countries struggle to turn their plans into a reality. NDCs also vary widely in scope and detail so it’s hard to compare efforts across the board. Stronger international collaboration and greater accountability will be crucial.
By Doug Specht, reader in cultural geography and communication, University of Westminster
Fashion depends on water, soil and biodiversity – all natural capital. And forward-thinking designers are now asking: how do we create rather than deplete, how do we restore rather than extract?
Natural capital is the value assigned to the stock of forests, soils, oceans and even minerals such as lithium. It sustains every part of our economy. It’s the bees that pollinate our crops. It’s the wetlands that filter our water and it’s the trees that store carbon and cool our cities.
If we fail to value nature properly, we risk losing it. But if we succeed, we unlock a future that is not only sustainable but also truly regenerative.
My team at the University of Oxford is developing tools to integrate nature into national balance sheets, advising governments on biodiversity, and we’re helping industries from fashion to finance embed nature into their decision making.
Natural capital, explained by a climate finance expert.
By Mette Morsing, professor of business sustainability and director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford
Net zero
Reaching net zero means reducing the amount of additional greenhouse gas emissions that accumulate in the atmosphere to zero. This concept was popularised by the Paris agreement, a landmark deal that was agreed at the UN climate summit (Cop21) in 2015 to limit the impact of greenhouse gas emissions.
There are some emissions, from farming and aviation for example, that will be very difficult, if not impossible, to reach absolute zero. Hence, the “net”. This allows people, businesses and countries to find ways to suck greenhouse gas emissions out of the atmosphere, effectively cancelling out emissions while trying to reduce them. This can include reforestation, rewilding, direct air capture and carbon capture and storage. The goal is to reach net zero: the point at which no extra greenhouse gases accumulate in Earth’s atmosphere.
By Mark Maslin, professor of earth system science, UCL
Mark Maslin explains net zero.
For more expert explainer videos, visit The Conversation’s quick climate dictionary playlist here on YouTube.
Mark Maslin is Pro-Vice Provost of the UCL Climate Crisis Grand Challenge and Founding Director of the UCL Centre for Sustainable Aviation. He was co-director of the London NERC Doctoral Training Partnership and is a member of the Climate Crisis Advisory Group. He is an advisor to Sheep Included Ltd, Lansons, NetZeroNow and has advised the UK Parliament. He has received grant funding from the NERC, EPSRC, ESRC, DFG, Royal Society, DIFD, BEIS, DECC, FCO, Innovate UK, Carbon Trust, UK Space Agency, European Space Agency, Research England, Wellcome Trust, Leverhulme Trust, CIFF, Sprint2020, and British Council. He has received funding from the BBC, Lancet, Laithwaites, Seventh Generation, Channel 4, JLT Re, WWF, Hermes, CAFOD, HP and Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors.
Amani Maalouf receives funding from IKEA Foundation and UK Research and Innovation (NE/V017756/1).
Narmin Nahidi is affiliated with several academic associations, including the Financial Management Association (FMA), British Accounting and Finance Association (BAFA), American Finance Association (AFA), and the Chartered Association of Business Schools (CMBE). These affiliations do not influence the content of this article.
Paul O’Hare receives funding from the UK’s Natural Environment Research Council (NERC). Award reference NE/V010174/1.
Alix Dietzel, Dongna Zhang, Doug Specht, Mathias Weidinger, Meilan Yan, and Sankar Sivarajah do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – USA – By Robert Bird, Professor of Business Law & Eversource Energy Chair in Business Ethics, University of Connecticut
Something dangerous is happening to the U.S. economy, and it’s not inflation or trade wars. Chaotic deregulation and the selective enforcement of laws have upended markets and investor confidence. At one point, the threat of tariffs and resulting chaos evaporated US$4 trillion in value in the U.S. stock market. This approach isn’t helping the economy, and there are troubling signs it will hurt both the U.S. and the global economy in the short and long term.
The rule of law – the idea that legal rules apply to everyone equally, regardless of wealth or political connections − is essential for a thriving economy. Yet globally the respect for the rule of law is slipping, and the U.S. is slipping with it. According to annual rankings from the World Justice Project, the rule of law has declined in more than half of all countries for seven years in a row. The rule of law in the U.S., the most economically powerful nation in the world, is now weaker than the rule of law in Uruguay, Singapore, Latvia and over 20 other countries.
When regulation is unnecessarily burdensome for business, government should lighten the load. However, arbitrary and frenzied deregulation does not free corporations to earn higher profits. As a business school professor with an MBA who has taught business law for over 25 years, and the author of a recently published book about the importance of legal knowledge to business, I can affirm that the opposite is true. Chaotic deregulation doesn’t drive growth. It only fuels risk.
Chaos undermines investment, talent and trust
Legal uncertainty has become a serious drag on American competitiveness.
A study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that public policy risks — such as unexpected changes in taxes, regulation and enforcement — ranked among the top challenges businesses face, alongside more familiar business threats such as competition or economic volatility. Companies that can’t predict how the law might change are forced to plan for the worst. That means holding back on long-term investment, slowing innovation and raising prices to cover new risks.
When the government enforces rules arbitrarily, it also undermines property rights.
For example, if a country enters into a major trade agreement and then goes ahead and violates it, that threatens the property rights of the companies that relied on the agreement to conduct business. If the government can seize assets without due process, those assets lose their stability and value. And if that treatment depends on whether a company is in the government’s political favor, it’s not just bad economics − it’s a red flag for investors.
When government doesn’t enforce rules fairly, it also threatens people’s freedom to enter into contracts.
Consider presidential orders that threaten the clients of law firms that have challenged the administration with cancellation of their government contracts. The threat alone jeopardizes the value of those agreements.
If businesses can’t trust public contracts to be respected, they’ll be less likely to work with the government in the first place. This deprives the government, and ultimately the American people, of receiving the best value for their tax dollars in critical areas such as transportation, technology and national defense.
Regulatory chaos also allows corruption to spread.
For example, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits businesses from bribing foreign government officials, has leveled the playing field for firms and enabled the best American companies to succeed on their merits. Before the law was enacted in 1977, some American companies felt pressured to pay bribes to compete. “Pausing” enforcement of the law, as the current presidential administration has done, increases the cost of doing business and encourages a wild west economy where chaos thrives.
Chaotic enforcement of the law also corrodes labor markets.
American companies require a strong pool of talented professionals to fuel their financial success. When legal rights are enforced arbitrarily or unjustly, the very best talent that American companies need may leave the country.
The science brain drain is already happening. American scientists have submitted 32% more applications for jobs abroad compared with last year. Nonscientists are leaving too. Ireland’s Department of Foreign Affairs has witnessed a 50% increase in Americans taking steps to obtain an Irish passport. Employers in the U.K. saw a spike in job applications from the United States.
Business from other countries will gladly accept American talent as they compete against American companies. During the Third Reich, Nazi Germany lost its best and brightest to other countries, including America. Now the reverse is happening, as highly talented Americans leave to work for firms in other nations.
Threats of arbitrary legal actions also drive away democratic allies and their prosperous populations that purchase American-made goods and services. For example, arbitrarily threatening to punish or even annex a closely allied nation does not endear its citizens to that government or the businesses it represents. So it’s no surprise that Canadians are now boycotting American goods and services. This is devastating businesses in American border towns and hurts the economy nationwide.
Similarly, the Canadian government has responded to whipsawing U.S. tariff announcements with counter-tariffs, which will slice the profits of American exporters. Close American allies and trading partners such as Japan, the U.K. and the European Union are also signaling their own willingness to impose retaliatory tariffs, increasing the costs of operations to American business even more.
Modern capitalism depends on smart regulation to thrive. Smart regulation is not an obstacle to capitalism. Smart regulation is what makes American capitalism possible. Smart regulation is what makes American freedom possible.
Clear and consistently applied legal rules allow businesses to aggressively compete, carefully plan, and generate profits. An arbitrary rule of law deprives business of the true power of capitalism – the ability to promote economic growth, spur innovation and improve the overall living standards of a free society. Americans deserve no less, and it is up to government to make that happen for everyone.
Robert Bird does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Robert Bird, Professor of Business Law & Eversource Energy Chair in Business Ethics, University of Connecticut
Something dangerous is happening to the U.S. economy, and it’s not inflation or trade wars. Chaotic deregulation and the selective enforcement of laws have upended markets and investor confidence. At one point, the threat of tariffs and resulting chaos evaporated US$4 trillion in value in the U.S. stock market. This approach isn’t helping the economy, and there are troubling signs it will hurt both the U.S. and the global economy in the short and long term.
The rule of law – the idea that legal rules apply to everyone equally, regardless of wealth or political connections − is essential for a thriving economy. Yet globally the respect for the rule of law is slipping, and the U.S. is slipping with it. According to annual rankings from the World Justice Project, the rule of law has declined in more than half of all countries for seven years in a row. The rule of law in the U.S., the most economically powerful nation in the world, is now weaker than the rule of law in Uruguay, Singapore, Latvia and over 20 other countries.
When regulation is unnecessarily burdensome for business, government should lighten the load. However, arbitrary and frenzied deregulation does not free corporations to earn higher profits. As a business school professor with an MBA who has taught business law for over 25 years, and the author of a recently published book about the importance of legal knowledge to business, I can affirm that the opposite is true. Chaotic deregulation doesn’t drive growth. It only fuels risk.
Chaos undermines investment, talent and trust
Legal uncertainty has become a serious drag on American competitiveness.
A study by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce found that public policy risks — such as unexpected changes in taxes, regulation and enforcement — ranked among the top challenges businesses face, alongside more familiar business threats such as competition or economic volatility. Companies that can’t predict how the law might change are forced to plan for the worst. That means holding back on long-term investment, slowing innovation and raising prices to cover new risks.
When the government enforces rules arbitrarily, it also undermines property rights.
For example, if a country enters into a major trade agreement and then goes ahead and violates it, that threatens the property rights of the companies that relied on the agreement to conduct business. If the government can seize assets without due process, those assets lose their stability and value. And if that treatment depends on whether a company is in the government’s political favor, it’s not just bad economics − it’s a red flag for investors.
When government doesn’t enforce rules fairly, it also threatens people’s freedom to enter into contracts.
Consider presidential orders that threaten the clients of law firms that have challenged the administration with cancellation of their government contracts. The threat alone jeopardizes the value of those agreements.
If businesses can’t trust public contracts to be respected, they’ll be less likely to work with the government in the first place. This deprives the government, and ultimately the American people, of receiving the best value for their tax dollars in critical areas such as transportation, technology and national defense.
Regulatory chaos also allows corruption to spread.
For example, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which prohibits businesses from bribing foreign government officials, has leveled the playing field for firms and enabled the best American companies to succeed on their merits. Before the law was enacted in 1977, some American companies felt pressured to pay bribes to compete. “Pausing” enforcement of the law, as the current presidential administration has done, increases the cost of doing business and encourages a wild west economy where chaos thrives.
Chaotic enforcement of the law also corrodes labor markets.
American companies require a strong pool of talented professionals to fuel their financial success. When legal rights are enforced arbitrarily or unjustly, the very best talent that American companies need may leave the country.
The science brain drain is already happening. American scientists have submitted 32% more applications for jobs abroad compared with last year. Nonscientists are leaving too. Ireland’s Department of Foreign Affairs has witnessed a 50% increase in Americans taking steps to obtain an Irish passport. Employers in the U.K. saw a spike in job applications from the United States.
Business from other countries will gladly accept American talent as they compete against American companies. During the Third Reich, Nazi Germany lost its best and brightest to other countries, including America. Now the reverse is happening, as highly talented Americans leave to work for firms in other nations.
Threats of arbitrary legal actions also drive away democratic allies and their prosperous populations that purchase American-made goods and services. For example, arbitrarily threatening to punish or even annex a closely allied nation does not endear its citizens to that government or the businesses it represents. So it’s no surprise that Canadians are now boycotting American goods and services. This is devastating businesses in American border towns and hurts the economy nationwide.
Similarly, the Canadian government has responded to whipsawing U.S. tariff announcements with counter-tariffs, which will slice the profits of American exporters. Close American allies and trading partners such as Japan, the U.K. and the European Union are also signaling their own willingness to impose retaliatory tariffs, increasing the costs of operations to American business even more.
Modern capitalism depends on smart regulation to thrive. Smart regulation is not an obstacle to capitalism. Smart regulation is what makes American capitalism possible. Smart regulation is what makes American freedom possible.
Clear and consistently applied legal rules allow businesses to aggressively compete, carefully plan, and generate profits. An arbitrary rule of law deprives business of the true power of capitalism – the ability to promote economic growth, spur innovation and improve the overall living standards of a free society. Americans deserve no less, and it is up to government to make that happen for everyone.
Robert Bird does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: United Nations General Assembly and Security Council
The Conference holds its final multi-stakeholder round table this morning on “Reforming the international financial architecture and addressing systemic issues”.
Co-chaired by Carlos Cuerpo Caballero, Minister for Economy, Commerce and Business of Spain, and Seedy Keita, Minister for Finance and Economic Affairs of the Gambia, it will feature a keynote address by Hussain Mohamed Latheef, Vice-President, Republic of Maldives.
Rebeca Grynspan, Secretary-General of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), will moderate the discussion.
Panelists will include: Mthuli Ncube- Minister for Finance, Economic Development and Investment Promotion of Zimbabwe; Facinet Sylla, Minister for Budget of Guinea; Hervé Ndoba, Minster for Finance and Budget of the Central African Republic; and Carlo Monticelli, Governor of the Council of Europe Development Bank.
José Viñals, GISD Alliance Co-Chair and Senior Advisor to the Board of Standard Chartered, as well as a civil society representative, will be the discussants.
The IMF Executive Board has completed the first review under the Extended Credit Facility arrangement for the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The decision allows for an immediate disbursement of US$ 261.9 million towards international reserves, to continue building buffers.
The DRC’s economy has been resilient in a challenging environment amid the escalation of the armed conflict in the eastern part of the country, which placed significant strains on the budget. The authorities have made good progress on the structural reform’s agenda, but a few quantitative targets were missed.
The recent peace agreement signed between the governments of the DRC and Rwanda, mediated by the United States, is encouraging for the prospect of a peaceful resolution of the conflict and renewed focus on development goals.
The Executive Board of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) completed the first review under the Extended Credit Facility (ECF) Arrangement for the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) approved on January 15, 2025 (see PR 25/003). The completion of the first review allowed an immediate disbursement equivalent to 190.4 million SDR (about US$ 261.9 million) to support balance-of-payment needs, bringing the aggregate disbursement to date to 380.5 million SDR (about 523.4 US$ million).
The DRC has been facing significant challenges amid the intensification of the armed conflict in its eastern part since end-2024. The escalation of hostilities has claimed thousands of lives and caused severe social and humanitarian damages, including disruptions in access to essential services such as food, water, and electricity. Diplomatic efforts are ongoing to secure a cessation of hostilities and ensure sustainable peace in the region. The signing on June 27, 2025, of a peace agreement between the governments of the DRC and Rwanda, under the mediation of the United States, is encouraging for the prospect of a peaceful resolution on the ongoing conflict and renewed focus on addressing development goals.
Despite the challenging environment, economic activity remained resilient, with robust GDP growth of 6.5 percent in 2024, driven by continued dynamism in the extractive sector. External stability has strengthened, as the current account deficit narrowed and the accumulation of international reserves continued. Inflationary pressures continue to ease, and year-on-year inflation declined from 23.8 percent at end-2023 to 11.7 percent at end-2024 and [8.5] percent at end-June 2025.
Performance under the program was mixed, as the intensification of the conflict has placed significant strains on the budget. Despite strong revenue collection, the domestic fiscal deficit reached 0.8 percent of GDP in 2024, exceeding the program target of 0.3 percent, owing to spending overruns linked to the escalation of the conflict, including on exceptional security spending and public investments. The program target on the Central Bank of the Congo (BCC)’s foreign exchange assets held with domestic correspondents was missed as well, due to higher-than-expected tax payments in foreign currency on government accounts. Other quantitative performance criteria of the ECF were met. Most indicative targets were also met, except those related to the floor on social spending and the ceiling on spending executed through emergency procedures—owing to elevated exceptional security spending linked to the conflict intensification. Appropriate corrective measures are being implemented by the authorities.
In completing the first review, the Executive Board also approved the authorities’ request for waivers of nonobservance of the performance criteria on the floor on the domestic fiscal balance at end-December 2024 on the basis of corrective actions, and the continuous ceiling on the levels of foreign currency assets of the BCC held with domestic correspondents on the basis of the temporary nature of the deviation which has since been remedied. Further, the Executive Board completed the financing assurances review under the ECF arrangement. No reform measures under the Resilience and Sustainability Facility (RSF) arrangement, approved in January 2025, were due for review at this time.
At the conclusion of the Executive Board’s discussion, Mr. Okamura, Deputy Managing Director and Chair stated:
“The Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) has been confronted with heightened security challenges since late 2024. The escalation of the conflict in the eastern part of the country has caused serious human, social and economic damage and induced the government to increase spending. Despite these difficulties, the macroeconomic environment of the DRC remained broadly stable. Growth has remained robust, due to the resilience of mining production. Inflation continues to decrease, and the external position has strengthened. The economic outlook remains positive, but is fraught with downside risks related to the persistence of the conflict, declining external humanitarian assistance, global economic headwinds, and potential escalation of geopolitical conflicts. The authorities are committed to closely monitor these risks and to respond proactively to evolving challenges.
“Budget implementation remains challenging in a difficult security context. As a result, the domestic fiscal deficit is projected to be larger than initially projected for 2025, but is expected to return to the path envisaged at program approval starting in 2026, reflecting the authorities’ commitment to carry out measures to enhance domestic revenue mobilization and strengthen the budget implementation process. Additionally, to guard against unforeseen adverse shocks, the authorities have adopted a contingency plan.
“The Central Bank of the Congo (BCC) has maintained a tight monetary policy stance, thereby helping bring inflation down to single digits for the first time in three years. The accumulation of international reserves has continued, on the back of the narrowing of the current account deficit. Efforts must continue, to strengthen the monetary policy implementation framework, refine the foreign exchange intervention strategy, enhance the governance and safeguards of the BCC and ensure its adequate recapitalization.
“The authorities have committed to accompany these efforts to preserve macroeconomic stability with an acceleration of structural reforms in key areas, including strengthening the AML/CFT framework, improving the business climate, enhancing transparency and governance, combating corruption and upgrading national statistics. Efforts to lay the groundwork for a timely implementation of the reform measures underpinning the RSF arrangement approved in January should be stepped up.”
Table 1. Democratic Republic of the Congo: Selected Economic and Financial Indicators, 2023-26