We were discussing the theory of general linear rank statistics in the previous class. We have discussed the distribution, then we also talked about the how to find out the asymptotic distribution of the general linear rank statistics. Now, using that theory, we will derive the asymptotic distribution of Mann-Whitney u-statistic and the Wilcoxon rank sum statistics for two sample problems. We will show that they are actually asymptotic normal. So, this is proved in the following theorem. So, we consider that m and n tend to infinity, m and n tend to infinity such that m by n goes to lambda. That means, the where capital N is equal to m plus n. That means, basically what we are saying is that it is not that abnormally one of the sample sizes becomes very large. It will be that both of them will have a fixed ratio. So, here of course, your lambda will be between 0 and 1. Then the standardized Wilcoxon statistic and similarly the standardized Mann-Whitney statistic that is the W minus expectation W by square root variance W and U minus expectation U divided by square root variance of U. This two have limiting normal 0 1 distributions under the null hypothesis that is theta is equal to 0. To prove this, let us consider here the definitions of this. Let me rewrite this thing. Suppose, I consider Tij that is equal to 1 if yj is greater than xi and it is equal to 0 if yj is less than or equal to xi. So, if I consider U star that is equal to double summation Tij, then actually it is equal to mn minus U because U was defined as the sum of sigma Dij's where Dij was 1 when yj is less than xi that was it was reverse of this. We are assuming that the ties are not occurring. Then we will have expectation of Tij is equal to 1 under the null hypothesis that is when theta is equal to 0. Let us consider say W star which is based on Tij's. If we define this thing, then we will have expectation of W also equal to 0 under H naught that is when theta is equal to 0. Now let us consider the conditional expectation of Tij minus half given that xk is equal to x under the null hypothesis. Then it is nothing but the probability of yj greater than xi given that xk is equal to x minus half. So, we can then write expectation of Tij minus half given xk is equal to x. This is equal to 0 if k is not equal to i and it is equal to probability of y greater than x minus half if k is equal to i. Similarly, if I consider expectation of Tij minus half given yk is equal to y then this is equal to 0 if k is not equal to j and it is equal to probability of y greater than x minus half if k is equal to j. Now we are assuming that under the null hypothesis that is theta is equal to 0, x and y will have the same distribution, x and y have the same distribution under H naught that is f. So, if we consider expectation of double summation Tij minus half given xk is equal to x then that will become simply equal to now you see here that I will get this value when k is equal to i for all other values it will be equal to 0. So, how many times that will occur when k is equal to i that is now xk how many xis are there there are n. So, this will become n times 1 minus fx minus half. So, this I can write like this. Similarly, if I consider expectation of double summation Tij minus half given yk is equal to y then this is equal to m times fy minus half you can see here this is x less than y. So, that is fy and here it is y greater than x. So, it is the cdf of y that is f. So, it is 1 minus probability y less than or equal to x. So, that is 1 minus fx here. Now the projection of W star we are writing it as vp is equal to n times sigma half. So, this is i is equal to 1 to m minus f of xi plus m times sigma j is equal to 1 to n f of yj minus half. So, let us consider here n square root n divided by mn vp that is equal to square root n divided by m into sigma vi i is equal to 1 to m plus square root n divided by n sigma vi star i is equal to 1 to n. What are this vi and vi star? We are considering vi and vi star they are uniformly distributed on the interval minus half to half. So, they will have basically 0 mean and variance will become 1 by 12. So, we can now these are in the form of the summation. So, we can apply the central limit theorem on the two terms on the right hand side. So, basically what I have done I have adjusted this terms here. See this particular term because of the probability integral transform this becomes uniform distribution f of on the interval 0 to 1 f of yj becomes uniform distribution on the interval 0 to 1. So, half minus f xi becomes uniform distribution on the interval minus half to half. Similarly, f of yj minus half becomes uniform distribution on the interval minus half to half. So, both of these are summations now and we apply the central limit theorem. So, applying central limit theorem on the two terms of the right hand side what will happen? We will get square root n by m sigma vi i is equal to 1 to m this will converge to 1 by root lambda z 1 where z 1 is following normal 0 1 by 12.  So, basically what we get then here? So, root n divided by m n v p this will converge to that means I am considering the sum here after adjustment here. So, this is converging to 1 by root lambda z 1 and this is converging to 1 by square root 1 minus lambda z 2. So, this is coming to 1 by root lambda z 1 plus this means convergence and distribution 1 by root 1 minus lambda z 2 where z 1 and z 2 are independent normal 0 1 by 12. So, if we apply the linearity property of the normal distribution we get that root n by m n v p converges in distribution to z which follows normal 0 1 by 12 lambda into 1 minus lambda. We can also talk about the asymptotic variance. So, variance of square root n by m n v p this will converge to 1 by 12 lambda into 1 minus lambda and variance of square root n by m n w star that will also converge to that is equal to n into n plus 1 by 12 m n that is also converging to same value because this was just a linear combination of this thing. So, if we now use the projection theorem which I gave in the last class let me just repeat it here that v minus w expectation we expectation v minus w square is minimized by choosing p i star x as expectation of v given x i and this is the projection and expectation of v minus v p square is equal to variance of v minus variance of v p. So, we use this result here now. So, by projection theorem and the relation to which I just now showed you we get that expectation of root n by m n w star minus root n by m n v p this goes to 0. So, if we use the theorem which I gave for the limit part that is if w n as asymptotic distribution and expectation of u n minus w n square goes to 0 then u n also has a asymptotic normal distribution. So, if we use this hence square root n by m n w star has the same limiting distribution as root n by m n v p.  So, thus we have obtained the asymptotic distribution of the Wilcoxon rank some statistic and the Manwit-New statistics and both are shown to be asymptotically normal. Now, in the general linear rank statistics we are writing the statistics of the form sigma of C i A of r i. Now, in this one we may consider some sort of permutation of the ranks or you can say permutation of the indices then what happens to the distribution our next result is regarding the distribution of the permuted form of this. So, if C 1 prime C 2 prime C n prime is a fixed permutation of C 1 C 2 C n and A prime 1 and so on A prime n this is a fixed permutation of A 1 A 2 A n then S is equal to sigma C i A of r i i is equal to 1 to n is having the same distribution as S prime that is equal to where the vector of ranks has uniform distribution over the set of all permutations of the numbers 1 to n. So, this is an interesting result and it allows us to use the ranks in a that means basically the way the data has been obtained it will not matter when we consider the distribution of the linear rank statistics which is based on that. Let me give the proof of this year since C 1 prime C 2 prime etcetera there this is a permutation. So, we can write C i prime as some C of alpha i for some alpha is equal to alpha 1 alpha to alpha n belonging to r. So, basically this means that it is the ith value of C under permutation alpha. Similarly, we can consider A prime i as equal to A of beta i this is for some permutation beta of the numbers 1 to n. Let us define say a function from r to r as phi r is equal to beta composition with r alpha inverse here this be alpha and beta are this. So, this is actually the composition of the permutations. So, you can look at it like this that r is a vector in r that means it is a permutation of the numbers 1 to n on that we apply beta from the left hand and alpha inverse from the right hand. So, here alpha and beta are fixed as we have mentioned here that these are fixed permutation. So, for fixed permutations this result is being proved here. So, we have already fixed alpha and beta here. So, now let us consider take any r belonging to r which is arbitrarily fixed. So, S prime that is based on i is equal to 1 to n that is equal to sigma C alpha i A beta r i i is equal to 1 to n. Why this is so? Because A prime i is equal to A of beta i. So, if I am writing r i here then this will become beta r i here. So, this I can now write as sigma of C i A of beta r and since I have changed here alpha i to i that means I have taken the inverse transformation for i then this will become alpha i inverse i is equal to 1 to n. So, this has then become equal to sigma C i A of phi i i is equal to 1 to n. Hence S prime is equal to sigma C i A of phi i i is equal to 1 to n is equal to S with r replaced by phi r. Hence S will have the same distribution as S prime. So, this we denote by this S and S prime have the same distribution. Let us repeat the argument here. I am expressing S prime which is sigma C i prime A prime r i as here C i prime has become C i again and here A prime r i becomes A of phi i here. So, you can say that it is a phi is a 1 to 1 function because what is happening there is r, r is transformed using beta and alpha inverse. So, for a given r phi r is uniquely defined. If that is so, then basically the original combination will be preserved here for the distribution that means whatever probability we are saying for that particular thing it will remain the same. As a corollary if we consider like we are going 1 to n and then we take from the reverse side. So, if we consider the permutations which are counted from the left hand side if we count from the right hand side then the distributions must be the same. So, as a corollary we have the following result that this the sigma C i A of r i this will have the same distribution as S prime that is equal to sigma i is equal to 1 to n C i A of n minus r i plus 1. As a consequence we can prove another important theorem. Let r have uniform distribution over r that means we are considering each permutation is equally likely. If either A of i plus A of n minus i plus 1 this is equal to a constant say k or C i plus C of n minus i plus 1 is a constant. Then S is equal to sigma C i A of r i has a symmetric distribution about n A bar C bar. We will take both the cases that is firstly when A i plus A n minus i plus 1 is a constant and secondly the case when C i plus C n minus i plus 1 is a constant.  So, A of i plus A n minus i plus 1 that is equal to twice A bar. Let me call this relation number 1. So, S is equal to sigma C i A of r i this is having the same distribution as S prime that is equal to sigma A i C i A of n minus r i plus 1. So, as a consequence let us consider the probability of S is equal to n A bar C bar plus S that is probability of S prime is equal to n A bar C bar plus S that is probability of sigma C i A of n minus r i plus 1 this is equal to n A bar C bar plus S that is A bar C bar plus S.  This is equal to n A bar C bar plus A n minus i plus 1 is equal to n A bar C bar plus S. So, that is equal to probability of sigma C i A of r i and this becomes n bar C n C bar. So, twice n A bar C bar this you bring to the left hand side. So, and you take this term to the right hand side. So, you get n A bar C bar minus S which is same as saying probability of S is equal to n A bar C bar minus S. So, this will prove that the distribution of S is symmetric about n A bar C bar. So, we have proved this theorem for the case when A i plus A n minus i plus 1 is a constant. Now, let us take the second case. Second case is C i plus C n minus i plus 1 is equal to k which implies that C i plus C n minus i plus 1 is equal to 2 C bar. This proof will be same because we can sum over all the values. So, I will get 2 k and then since both the sums will be the same therefore, this is equal to 2 C bar therefore, that is equal to. So, k is equal to 2 C bar. So, now, let us consider S is equal to sigma C i A of r i i is equal to 1 to n. Now, this we write as C of d i A of i i is equal to 1 to n where d i is the n t rank of. So, basically what we are doing is that if observation, if the ith observation has rank r i. So, i will have the reverse that is d i. That means, I have changed r i by i. So, what is the corresponding reverse value here? So, that is called C d i. So, this will then have the same distribution as sigma C of i of n minus d i plus 1 A of i i is equal to 1 to n. So, if I consider the probability of S is equal to n A bar C bar plus S then it is equal to probability of sigma C n minus d i plus 1 A of i that is equal to n A bar C bar plus S that is equal to probability of 2 C bar minus C d i A of i i is equal to 1 to n that is equal to n A bar C bar plus S that is equal to probability of sigma C d i A i again this term you take to the other side. So, this becomes n A bar C bar minus S that is same as same sigma C i A of r i is equal to n A bar C bar minus S. So, once again you are proving that the distribution of S is symmetric about n A bar C bar. We can actually apply this result to various statistics. So, and therefore, they can be used for the testing problems in the two sample testing problems. Let me give some examples. One is the called Wander Walden statistic. Here the score is are taken as based on the CDF of the standard normal distribution that is phi inverse i by n plus 1. So, if we consider the statistic as sigma C i phi inverse i r i divided by n plus 1 i is equal to 1 to n. So, this will be equal to sigma C i because for m plus 1 up to n this will be 0. So, this is i is equal to 1 to m C i phi inverse r i divided by n plus 1. So, expectation of X under the null hypothesis is equal to m A bar actually you can determine A bar here. See here if we consider the property of the standard normal CDF here that is to determine A bar we use the fact that A of i plus A of n minus i plus 1 that is constant. See if I write say phi inverse i by n plus 1 is equal to say some X then this will mean that i by n plus 1 is equal to phi of X this will mean that 1 minus i by n plus 1 that is equal to 1 minus phi of X that is equal to phi of minus X. So, you will get minus X is equal to phi inverse of n minus i plus 1 by n plus 1. So, what do you get then? Phi inverse i by n plus 1 plus phi inverse n minus i plus 1 by n plus 1 that is equal to 0 that means this constant is actually becoming equal to 0. This means that your A bar is 0 and therefore, you will have expectation of X under the null hypothesis that is also 0 that is m A bar. We can also write the expression for the variance of X that is m n by n into n plus 1 sigma i is equal to 1 to n phi inverse i by n plus 1. So, this kind of statistics are quite useful for the two sample testing problems. Let me also introduce the scale problem here the two sample scale problem. So, we have a random sample let X 1, X 2, X m be a random sample from the CDF FX and Y 1, Y 2, Y n be another random sample from the CDF FX and Y 1, Y 2, Y n be another independent random sample this is from G Y X. So, our null hypothesis is whether the two distributions are identical and alternative is that this is theta X for all X where theta is not equal to 1. So, this is basically the scale model because I have introduced a scale parameter here. So, when you have theta is equal to 1 then the two will be same. So, that is the null hypothesis. We may also consider it in terms of the variability. So, if we consider say X square d G Y that is equal to X square d FX theta X that is equal to 1 by theta square Y square d FX Y. So, that is equal to V X by theta square. So, theta greater than 1 will imply that V X by theta X is greater than V Y and theta less than 1 will imply that V X is less than V Y. So, in some sense then we can say that this testing problem is equivalent to testing which distribution has more variability that is the distribution of X or the distribution of Y. So, basically we can consider this null hypothesis as and the alternatives will be alternatives will be say theta is less than 1 that means whether the variability of X's is less than the variability of the distribution of Y or theta greater than 1 that means whether the variability of X's is more than the variability of Y's or simply say that the variability of X is different from the variability of Y. So, all the three alternatives can be considered here. So, some of the two sample statistics that are introduced for the scale problem they are as follows. Let me give few of them certain two sample statistics for a scale problems. So, here I am taking C i is equal to 1 for i is equal to 1 to n and it is equal to 0 for i is equal to m plus 1 to n. So, when we are mixing the two samples the first one I am assigning the value 1 and in the second one I am assigning the value 0. So, one is mode test statistic. In mode test statistic we take the scores as i minus n plus 1 by 2 square you can easily understand what does it represent here. It will represent that how much difference each value basically when we put a r i. So, n plus 1 by 2 is the mean rank here. So, how much each rank is different from this one. So, this is a measure of variability of the ranks and therefore, if I consider the statistic based on that for example, if I write the mode statistic as sigma r i minus n plus 1 by 2 square i is equal to 1 to m. So, basically this is a rank of x i's in the sample. So, if the ranks are closer to the mean value of all the that means the sample is well mixed up that means x's and y's are well mixed up and therefore, it will mean that theta is closer to 1. Whereas, the more variability will imply that m is large. So, we can consider here expectation of that is equal to m n square minus 1 by 12 n a bar will be equal to n a bar. So, n into n square minus 1 by 12 and variance of m is equal to m n by n into n. I am not giving the derivations here, but this can be done in a easy way. m is small is equivalent to less variability of x's that is theta is less than 1 and m n is equal to 1. So, m large will imply that more variability that is theta is greater than 1. So, this can be used for testing this test of hypothesis here. We can also consider another statistic which is named by several authors actually friend Ansari, Bradley, David Barton. So, if you look at this mood statistic here it is taking the square deviations here. So, if from the square deviation we take the absolute deviations then we get this statistic. So, these are all very natural choices for the score functions here. So, Ansari, Bradley is given by sigma r i minus n plus 1 by 2 i is equal to 1 to m. Actually, there are several variations of this that means whether you take directly like this or so. So, this one is actually Ansari, Bradley choice. Let us take the case when n is odd that means, say n is equal to 2 m minus 1 kind of thing. If that is so then n a bar is equal to 2 m bar that is equal to sigma modulus i minus n plus 1 by 2 that is becoming sigma i minus m that is 2 m minus 1 plus 1 by 2. So, i is equal to that is equal to sigma m minus i plus sigma i minus m.  So, if we look at this, this is becoming m into m minus 1 by 2 and this will also give the similar thing minus m into m minus 1 by 2 plus sigma j is equal to 1 to m minus 1. So, this actually gets cancelled out. So, you simply get m into m minus 1 which is n plus 1 by 2 n minus 1 by 2 that is n square minus 1 by 4 here. So, if n a bar is this one then we are able to get the value of expectation a that is equal to m n square minus 1 divided by 4 n of course this I have done for n art. If n is even say n is equal to 2 m in that case you consider n a bar that is equal to sigma i minus 2 m plus 1 by 2 that is n plus 1 by 2 i is equal to 1 to 2 m. So, again we split into 2 parts i is equal to 1 to m then this is equal to 2 m plus 1 by 2 minus i plus sigma i minus m sorry 2 m plus 1 by 2 for i is equal to m plus 1 to 2 m. Once again we can easily simplify these terms this becomes m into m plus 1 by 2 minus sigma i i is equal to 1 to m plus sigma j j is equal to 1 to m. So, this is minus m by 2 that is m square that is n square by 4. So, a bar is then equal to n by 4. So, expectation of a in this case becomes equal to m n by 4. So, variance of a can be calculated. Once again if actually the interpretation of this is same as the moods statistic because if a is large it will mean that there is more variability in the x data that is theta is greater than 1.  Now, some variation of this form has been given here. See you are considering the absolute deviation here. So, and we are taking direct sum here we can consider we may also consider a reverse form a i is equal to n plus 1 by 2 minus as you can see the logic behind it that this is just a little variation from this. This form is actually called friend and sorry form. So, this function let me write i is equal to 1 to m n plus 1 by 2 minus r i minus n plus 1 by 2. So, that is equal to m into n plus 1 by 2 minus basically and sorry Bradley. So, it is just the reverse one. So, small f indicates theta greater than 1 and large f indicates theta is less than 1 expectation of f will be m into n plus 1 by 2 minus expectation of a and the expectation a term I have already calculated here when n is odd then it is m into n square minus 1 by 4 n and when n is even it is equal to m n by 4. There is yet another variation of this which is called David Bartle variation you can consider a i as this is done sorry Bradley wise, but you shift it little bit that means basically it is the adjustment of the even and odd value. So, basically so b is equal to sigma a of r i i is equal to 1 to m that is equal to m times n plus 2 by 2 minus the friend and sorry choice that is this choice here because if I take this minus this minus in the bracket then this will become the friend and sorry choice. Therefore, once again we can obtain this is also the n plus 2 by 2 minus m into n plus 1 by 2 plus and sorry Bradley choice. So, here large value of b indicates that theta is greater than 1 and of course, small b will indicate theta is less than 1 then there is a Siegel to key choice in Siegel to key choice we take a i to be equal to 2 y if i is even it is equal to twice i minus 1 if i is odd for 1 less than or equal to i less than or equal to n by 2 and it is equal to 2 times n minus i plus 1 if i is equal to n minus i is even and it is equal to twice n minus i plus 1 minus 1 if i is odd n by 2 less than i less than or equal to n and s is equal to sigma a of r i this is a small n here small values of s indicate that theta is greater than 1. We have one final comment here that this mood friend and sorry and sorry Bradley and David Barton these statistics they are more sensitive to one sided hypothesis that is theta greater than 1 or theta less than 1. But the Siegel to key this is more sensitive for theta not equal to let me briefly mention one more here that is called the Claude's normal score in this one we define phi inverse i by n plus 1 whole square. You can compare it with the one which I gave earlier that was phi inverse of i by n plus 1 wonder warden sister in this one we had phi inverse i by n plus 1 and here you can see this is equal to phi inverse i by n plus 1 whole square here. So, the Claude's statistic is given by phi inverse r i by n plus 1 whole square i is equal to 1 to n. I am not getting too much into detail of the working out of this of course it is slightly more complicated than the wonder warden's statistics because if I take this one I am getting the sum is equal to x square plus 1 minus x whole square. So, that is not a constant here. So, this will require some working out to get the outcome of this. In the next class I will discuss about the Socrates two sample test I will discuss the null distribution of this and we will also introduce the concept of the consistency of the statistical test. You might have seen that when we consider the parametric test. So, in the parametric test we discuss about the power of the test and the say we consider the type 1 error and the type 2 error, but in the when we consider the two sample test since we are not having the form of the distribution. So, we are not using the you can say most powerful or the that is a usual name and Pearson theory is not being applied here. And therefore, the test functions are based on these linear rank statistics and the exact distributions are quite complicated. So, we consider the asymptotic properties of these things. So, in the next lecture I will be discussing about the asymptotic properties of the test here. Firstly, I will discuss about the Socrates test and then we will discuss about other asymptotic properties.


Okay, so again, CASPA is open, ready for you guys to apply, and I've been getting lots of questions since the start of CASPA opening up just last week about consultation sessions. Am I still doing them? If so, how do they, how do you book a session with me or you know, where to find these sessions? Because for some reason they can't book any, there's nothing available on the calendar. So that is what this video is going to be about because there are sessions available not just with me, but with all of the consultants on GTCU. So let's get into this video right now.  It's Bina. Welcome back to my channel. So again, thank you guys so much for joining me today. If you are new to my channel, you don't know what to do, but you should look around if you like what you see, then you should subscribe, okay? Thank you guys for those of you who are already subscribed to the channel. I really appreciate all of you guys because it helps my YouTube algorithm out a lot. I wanted to just address this question that I've been getting, I've been getting lots of emails and DMs on Instagram and even some comments about like, hey, are you still doing consultation sessions? And if so, you know, how do I book one? I've gone to the website, I've gone to GTCU and I don't see any available sessions with you or they're going to like the down in the pa.com website where I used to do my sessions from and that whole system is no longer working in terms of booking consultation sessions.  I want to show you exactly where to go and we're going to, I'm going to put it up on the screen. We're going to do like a little screen share with my phone so that you can see exactly what you need to do to book a session, okay? So from at this moment in time, sessions are offered through Get That C University, okay? So you have to go to GetThatCUniversity.com to actually book a session with me or with any of the consultants that are currently on the site, all right? So I wanted to just kind of make that clear, okay? So here I have the page up, you can see it says there at the top, it says GetThatCUniversity.com so that is the website that you're going to go to. You don't have to log in, okay, on the side. This is now the phone, the cell phone view, but if you're looking on your desktop, everything will all be at the top and then towards the side. You do not have to log in, you do not have to be a member of GetThatCUniversity to actually book a consultation session with any of us, okay? So I just wanted to make that clear. There's stuff here. If you're interested in being a member of GetThatCUniversity, you can absolutely join and we have various different master classes and virtual events. The next virtual event will be happening this upcoming week where I will be talking about CASPA. We're going to just kind of be going through CASPA piece by piece. I'll open up my old CASPA application. If I still remember the password, I'll have to look all that stuff up, but we're going to be going through CASPA and asking your questions because CASPA is open and I know a lot of you have questions about it, okay? So on the side here where I went to these three little bars, there's a tab that says consulting, okay? So when you click on the tab, the consulting site or the consulting page, I guess you would say, pulls up, okay? So it says personal consulting service and that is where you will find all of the various different consultations that we do. So we do personal consultations and that's me, Adana, there for you to do a session. Natalie is here doing sessions as well. We have Andre, Raven, Van. Mario is our resident personal mental health consultant. So if you do want just someone to kind of talk to, he is licensed and certified. So he can absolutely give you tools to deal with the various different mental health issues that you may be going through. So that is a really good resource at you guys' disposal if you need it and he does do things virtually, you know, although he's based in the DMV area, it's COVID times and stuff, so everybody has kind of had to switch to this virtual platform. So please definitely look into that as well. We also do personal statement reviews and again, for the most part, everybody does personal statement reviews, however, we have someone new who's Jamaica. She's actually a DERM PA. She also does personal statement reviews. That's where she kind of makes the bread and butter, does a really good job of doing that. Again, you see Raven, Van and Andre and then mock interviews. So if you are interested in like, you've gotten an interview, I know the season has just begun, but once you do get your interview, we're speaking that into existence, once you get your interview, you can come and you can work out with us in a sense in terms of practicing how to answer questions in the mock interview form. OK, so these are all of our consultants. OK, I want to just go through and let's book a consultation, OK, because I think that is where everybody kind of gets confused on what is available and what is not available. So we can go, we can go with Natalie, we can just kind of go down the line. So for me, if you wanted to book a session with me, you hit book now. It will take you to the calendar. And where you see all of these little dots, those are the days that I'm available for sessions. OK, so if I click on the 11th, these are the times that I'm available. You choose your time. You hit next, as it says, it says that you're going to get a Zoom link once you actually complete it with the time and the date and all of that stuff. And then you hit next. That's where you're going to put in the information and you're in a pay. OK, so that is how this works. OK. It's pretty, pretty simple.  I'm going to just kind of back out so that we can go to somebody else. So you can see exactly that it's not just my times that are available. There are other people who have, you know, set times that they're available. OK, so we can go to Natalie next, hit book now. And all of these consultation sessions are an hour long. They're in a Zoom chat. You're going to be able to ask the questions that you want.   This may need some work. You can even bring the schools that you're interested in. I've had students do this where I asked them, hey, tell me the schools that you're interested in. And I look at these schools at the moment of the session. We're going through it together and we're looking at their stats in comparison to some of the schools just to see where they land. And I think that that's really important because you want to make sure that you're doing this really good comparison. OK. All right. So let me go hit back. Natalie is here. You can say book now. It shows you the times that she's available. She's only available in the night, but there's no no time there. Right. So these are her days, but she hasn't put a time because right now maybe it's really tough because she's in PA school. OK. So I want to make sure that you do you understand that.  It says bookings will open 14 days before the session starts. OK. So that's why you cannot choose these dates. But when you go to like the 18th or the 17th because the 18th is with more than 14 days out, it shows you that she's available at 6 p.m. or 6 30 p.m. for a session with you. So again, you have like lots of us to choose from if you need. And I want to make sure that you guys exactly know how to go about doing this. Let's just kind of check out Andre. Andre is an orthopedic PA based in New York. So if you're interested in ortho and like his job and that kind of stuff, you know, he would be somebody that you should book a session with. He's only available on Sundays and really like one he has one session time on Sundays because he works pretty hard. And so again, you can go through. You can hit his one p.m. time and you go through and you do the booking. It's the same thing you hit next and you put in your information, your name. The Zoom link will be sent to you and then you just kind of prepare yourself for your session. OK. So I want you guys to be able to kind of go through that and and really know exactly how to book sessions with us because I know that all of you are like there's a good amount of you that are asking about sessions and how to go about doing that. But this is how you do it. We are only doing sessions through get that C university dot com or I'm only doing sessions through get that C university dot com. So if you want to book a session with me, you have to go through get that C university dot com. No, you do not need to be a member of GTCU to book a session. You just need to go through and go through the consultations. OK. Here, Raymond has times on Sundays and then as you can see, Tuesdays and Wednesdays, so you can book a session with her. And I believe she's pretty flexible as well. All of her sessions are in the morning time. So again, look at the website. If you're interested in being a member, you absolutely are more than welcome to do that. There are actually some new things that we're going to be doing. And I will be talking about that once once I do my CASPA virtual event through get that C university next week. I will give you guys all the information about that and the days to come in terms of exactly when the session is going to be and what time it's going to be that live event. But we will be talking about the transition of GTCU to specifically like online virtual shadow. And we do have virtual shadowing videos that are up and available for you to see. And schools are accepting those those virtual shadowing videos towards their shadowing hours. But we have created a brand new like program that you'll be able to go through. You'll be able to meet one on one with one of the consultants that you have here every week. And you'll be able to ask them questions. And at the end of it all, you will be able to get several hours of virtual shadowing and that I do have some schools that are on board with me that said that they will accept those as their hours. And I know it's hard to get shadowing now during COVID times. Things are opening up a little bit more. But the pandemic has really put a damper on allowing people to do in person shadowing. And if it wasn't already hard enough with like HIPAA, it was even made harder with the pandemic. But, you know, the virtual shadowing platform is something that you can really take advantage of. And that is really what DTCU is kind of moving towards, along with still giving you the supplemental information on how to do well on an interview and how to create a CV and, you know, how to ask for a letter of recommendation and those various different things that you really should have those tools under your belt. OK, so this is where you're going to go to get your consultation session and mock interviews and personal statement reviews you book through get that to university.com. For anything else, you can come to down the P.A. You can also just join get that to university.com and you will see the various different things we have to offer there. Also, please, you guys, just continue to leave comments and questions because that that information helps build not only the content for down the P.A. but for DTCU because it tells me what you guys want to hear. OK. So that's how you will book your session. Go to get that to university.com.  And that's it. It's pretty easy. OK, so that is how you would do it. I hope I answered you guys' questions. I hope I've made this a lot clearer on exactly how to go about getting a session with me and with all of the consultants. Go book your session now today. I'm going to open it and we're ready and willing and available to help. All right. Thank you guys so much for watching. Please like this video. Leave comments in the comment section below for me if you haven't already done. So go ahead and subscribe. Follow me on Instagram and on the P.A. and on Instagram at get that to university.com. Thank you guys so much for watching. I will talk to you guys next time.


Hackensack Meridian Health is so honored to be making history as one of the first vaccination sites in the entire nation. Never before has our nation attempted such a mass vaccination of our citizens. We have delivered a safe and effective vaccine in record time. Taking the vaccine to me means that I'm setting the standard, especially for our African American community. I'm trying to get them to understand that without the vaccine this pandemic might continue. I am very proud and I'm ready to lead my team members to be able to take this vaccination. I think this is the beginning of the end. I think there's a light at the end of the tunnel and that light keeps getting brighter. It's okay. It's safe. I feel like these doctors are so much with us. And this is like, there's like a light at the end of the tunnel. Now it's hard to sleep at night sometimes when you know you have to come into work and just see the things that we have seen in critical care. It's like, it's like we're making progress. Sorry. The virus has certainly taken its toll on the entire world. To have some hope of going back to normalcy, you know, for our families, for our elderly parents, for our children and everyone in between, it'll be a big deal. I think in this situation it's important to have faith in the community and the work that all of our healthcare professionals and scientists are doing.


Hello and welcome to this Low Institute virtual event. My name is Roland Rader and I am the lead economist here at the Low Institute and host for today's session. Before we begin, as we are based in Sydney, let me start by acknowledging the traditional owners of the land in which we meet virtually today and pay my respect to their elders past and present. The topic for our conversation today is does Southeast Asia need a new development model? Today's discussion follows an online debate published by the Low Institute focused on the same question in which we asked six of Southeast Asia's best and most interesting economic thinkers to contribute their thoughts on the future of the region. That publication is available on our website. For today, I'm glad to say I'm joined by several of those contributing writers to continue the conversation. First is Dr. Tricia Yeo, who is CEO of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs and Independent Public Policy Think Tank in Malaysia where she has previously held the positions of Chief Operating Officer and Fellow. Second, we have Vasuki Shastri, who is an Associate Fellow at Chatham House in London and has previously worked for Standard Chartered Bank, the International Monetary Fund and as a journalist in India, Singapore and Indonesia. He is also a best-selling author. His latest book published in 2021 is entitled Has Asia Lost It? Dynamic Past, Turbulent Future. And finally, we have Teza Mafira, who is the Director of the Indonesia Office of Climate Policy Initiative, where she leads a team of analysts studying climate finance, effectiveness and innovations for policymakers. She is also the Executive Director of the Indonesia Plastic Bag Diet Movement, a community-based organization which advocates for policies and awareness to reduce single-use plastics and which has seen her named as one of five global ocean heroes in 2018 by the United Nations. So Teza, Vasuki, Tricia, welcome to the Lowe Institute. Thanks for being here. Thanks for having us. It's a pleasure. So the topic for our conversation today is obviously this question around does Southeast Asia need a new development model? Now, many people might say that, well, Southeast Asia doesn't have a new development model. Obviously, one can take that position, but what we're looking for is to try and understand where does Southeast Asia come from and where is it headed and what are the challenges that it faces? So just to kick us off on this conversation, I might ask all of you, just if you can tell us how do you understand the strengths and weaknesses of what has been Southeast Asia's development model and approach to development to date? What has been good in the past and now what do you see as under challenge? Maybe if we can start with you, Vasuki. It's great to be here, Roland. I guess if you look at globalization, the types of globalization, Southeast Asia has been probably the single largest beneficiary. And of course, a lot of people will say looms very large in the way it has benefited from trade and investment, but China is also a continent-sized economy and trade has never been more than 20, 25% of GDP compared with many countries in Southeast Asia, Singapore, Vietnam, Malaysia come to mind. Where trade has been the dominant driver of economic growth, inward investment has been also a central feature in how these economies are organized. So the critical question is you've had four, five decades of very strong economic growth because of these favorable times. What happens when these times reverse? And there's some evidence, geopolitical as well as economic that globalization, the kind of globalization wave that we've seen over the past few decades may well reverse. And this leaves an open question. Can Southeast Asia rebalance its economic growth away from trade and investment into finding domestic drivers of growth? And there are some countries I think who are already well there, Indonesia I think is a great example where it consumption has been a driver of growth for the last two decades, but many other countries need to catch up. So it's very difficult to come up with the one size all prescription. So if you look at the more open economies, I would say Vietnam, Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand, they probably fall into the category of you need to find domestic drivers of growth. Arguably Singapore is gonna be much more difficult like they're given the size of its economy. I would say Indonesia and Philippines are much better positioned from a domestic driver perspective, but probably need to do more in driving investment and trade. So you've got this mixed bag of challenges and from the commentary that one reads from policy makers, they have seized that this needs to change. I guess the complexity is an execution. Thank you, Vasuki. Atresha, would you like to give your own views on this question? Vasuki has zeroed in on the globalization, de-globalization debate. Who would you say? Sure. So firstly, thank you to Lowy Institute for inviting me and my colleagues here both to contribute to the written piece as well as this forum today. So I think at the outset, before we even start talking about Southeast Asia as a region, a very important region, especially given the global trends of today, what is really important to point out is that Southeast Asia really cannot be seen with a homogenous lens or through a homogenous lens simply because as Vasuki alluded to earlier, each of our economies is exclusively drawn from a very different kind of history with different backgrounds, colonial backgrounds, constitutional backgrounds. And I think the economies themselves have taken various trajectories as well based on their own specific demographic makeups. So with that out of the way, I think we can still categorize some of our Southeast Asian economies into several different... So for example, one cannot compare Singapore's progress, for example, with that of Malaysia. And of course you have Vietnam and Thailand who have taken on different routes. And Laos and Myanmar still sort of lining behind. So that's just to start off with. So I think the question that you asked was Southeast Asia's development model, what approach has it taken and what are its strengths and weaknesses? So one thing that I pointed out in my written piece, Prolovi, was that many of the countries adopted this sort of industrialized model that approach taking, for example, a leaf out of the East Asian economies. In Malaysia, for example, which is the country that I am from and know best, the Prime Minister, Mahati Muhammad, then even had a look East policy looking at the examples of Japan and Korea. So very export driven. We wrote the wave of rapid industrialization, getting into manufacturing and also looking at some of our early commodities such as rubber and palm oil. So the strengths was that, especially throughout the 1980s and the 1990s, I think many of the Southeast Asian economies were very aggressive. We were driving forward in this industrialized, industrialist approach, export driven. And there are strengths to this model simply because we had and we continue to do have a very strong workforce, for example, labor is relatively cheap in the region, although that is changing. And this applied well for a while until of course, several of these financial crisis drugs. So I think I'll talk straight away about some of the weaknesses that we have seen in this development model that we've taken. So one of the weaknesses that I have also highlighted in the piece is that this rapid industrialization did not actually match with the sort of governance approach that perhaps some of the more developed countries were able to do in their earlier days of rapid industrialization. And these governance structures are actually starting to emerge, the weaknesses and perhaps the lack of a stable institutionalized approach that emerged very much so from the pandemic period over the last few years. And although we are emerging out of that pandemic, I think many of our economies in Southeast Asia are still grappling with these structural weaknesses. And we can talk a little bit more about what these weaknesses are and what we can do to improve them. But I think just contrasting between the aggressive industrialized approach versus the kind of lack of governance that perhaps the government of Southeast Asia were not able to emphasize or fully capitalize and optimize on in order to take the next growth truly forward. So I think I'll stop there for now, thank you. Yeah, it's kind of just a position between sort of hard economic development which has been very strong versus a lack of soft institutional development to go with it. I think is where you're zeroing in on. Now, you've talked a lot about industrialization. That's been a big part of the secret to Southeast Asia's success. It's also come with a lot of costs in terms of the impact on the environment. And I think this is something that Tisa now to bring you in, you've really focused on in your work but also in the piece you wrote for us. So can you tell us your views on this question of Southeast Asia's model to the extent there is one but more importantly, how it needs to change? Yeah, thanks, Roland. Well, I'll start with the strengths of ASEAN countries and I think my colleagues have alluded to this as well that we have enjoyed a growth, relatively stable growth of around 5% per year. This was before COVID-19. That changed a little bit but we're bouncing back. But I do think that there is something that hasn't been achieved with all that growth and that is equality because across Indonesia, Laos, the Philippines, Vietnam, there is a rise or at least persistent inequality. And that has shown itself in more exaggerated form during the pandemic where death tolls for the poor are higher than for wealthier citizens. And for example, children with no internet access have suffered from lack of remote schooling. And this has happened across Southeast Asia. So I think that the development model for ASEAN in the past has been more focused on trying to industrialize, looking at Western countries as a model, as a champion. But today we're already seeing the significant decline of Western industrialization models actually. We're already seeing in the US, in the UK, across Europe, wealth gaps, social gaps and a decline of overall wellbeing, which is pretty stark. So I don't think that that is because of an accident. I don't think that's because of a political or a governance failure because governance in the Western societies are pretty good. I think it is a failure of the economic system because of that very focus on industrialized, large-scale production and growth of consumption. So I think whether we like it or not, we have now come into an era where climate change is here and affecting us and affecting our economy. And we've also come to the realization that economic growth is limited whether we like it or not by the health of the ecosystems that provide us with balanced weather, with clean water, with clean air and other essentials for human existence. So I think the climate crisis really now prompts ASEAN to contemplate the limits to growth, the limits to industrialization. And if we agree that, you know, if growth is supposed to support our common welfare and if it's not doing that, we should ask why. And as I argue in my article for Loei, what we should be focusing instead of industrialization models is to develop a resilient economy. And I argue that a resilient economy is an economy that doesn't rely on linear industrialization, but more it is a very big transformation towards a circular economy model. I might just ask you to expand a little bit though, because I think it's very interesting that I think certainly you and others from the region have certainly put climate change up there as an issue that Southeast Asian nations need to deal with now, not in the future, it's an issue to deal with today. Governments, you know, the real world progress maybe is not that fast, but at least there are some committing to net zero, putting target dates down, trying to roll out renewable energy, emissions trading schemes and these sorts of things. But it's interesting because the, typically this is posed as attention, attention between dealing with climate change and decarbonizing economies and reducing emissions per capita, attention between that agenda and the development and the economic growth and development agenda. These are still countries which are not at rich country per capita income levels and so they should be allowed to pollute and transition in a slower sort of pace. Now, how do you respond to that? I mean, you're I think suggesting a different paradigm. Yeah, exactly because the focus is still on industrialization, that's why we have that tension. That's why dealing with the climate crisis has been framed as what can we do that doesn't sacrifice the economy? Whereas the framing should be whatever we do that sacrifices the environment will sacrifice the economy. So there's no way to work around this. And it's apparent in some models where, for example, in Indonesia, which I know best, the latest climate policy is to produce nickel, to produce car batteries. And because of that, Indonesia has issued 278 nickel mining licenses in the past two years alone. So that is heading towards a new problem, a new environmental problem. Whereas what could have happened from the outset is if they designed it as a circular economy model, then they would have realized that we don't actually have to produce as much extract as much nickel if we design it to be recyclable infinitely. And that's by design that has to be from the outset, it can't be an afterthought after 10 years of mining. So the resilient economies of the future will be those that don't rely on linear industrial models. Whatever the sector, whatever the commodity, it cannot be linear because those models, they deplete resources, they generate pollution and emissions, they do not factor external costs into their prices. Whereas a circular economy will mean that instead of using new materials, most of the things we produce should be recycled or should use recycled material, can be regenerated, can be repaired, can be reused. And it is all powered by renewable energy. Very little is extracted from the ground, very little will be disposed during production processes or at the end of a product's life cycle. And all of that will be apparent in the cost of a product as well. So all external costs will be factored into the price. I think then we'll see a very core transformation of the economy and not just surface level changes. Thank you. Thank you for that, Tiza. That's very well put. I think Tiza, I'm sorry, Tiza, Trisha, did you have a comment on this question? Yeah, I just wanted to say that I think that many of these things actually are coming together. So there's an increased pressure, I think, on businesses worldwide to eventually comply with ESG standards, right? So the environmental, social governance aspect of businesses. In fact, I'm also involved right now in a project where we're looking at a national action plan on business and human rights in Malaysia. So again, in Southeast Asia, very little has been done in creating or coming up with regulations and standards as to what businesses need to do better to comply with human rights with the human rights agenda. I think linking human rights to the language of human rights to the language of what traditional activists have done in the areas of environment, in the areas of labor and the social agenda, as well as in governance. I think this is still a weakness and we're trying to just narrow that gap as we speak today. But I also just wanted to emphasize that we don't necessarily have to think of governance and environment in separate circles. I think they can be mutually reinforcing in the sense that without governance, companies and countries themselves will not be able to create the right environment within which they can introduce better environmental standards across the board. So whether it's financial institutions, a large MNCs, I think the pressures, of course, are highest on the small SMEs, the small businesses, whether or not they're able to emerge with the right human resources, the right kinds of employees to understand these international standards that are being placed on them, especially from the import market. So I think these are new trends that we need to take into account. Definitely, climate crisis is there, but I also wanted to emphasize that we also need to look at our own Southeast Asian economies ourselves, the kinds of development projects that we are undertaking. Some countries looking at dams, for instance, which are certainly damaging on the environment as well as on the communities that are affected and whether or not there is capacity amongst our Southeast Asian governments themselves to be able to understand what it takes to undertake these large public infrastructure projects. So again, I think that tension still exists between we want to have development for our people, we want to build bridges, we want to build for our nations, but how do we do that without damaging the environment? And of course, now complying with these new, these newly defined international standards on ESG. So I just wanted to bring that into the picture. Thank you. Thank you, Tricia. I might ask Basuki if you have anything to add on this. I mean, you agree that there really isn't attention, to say perhaps between the need to reduce emissions and the need for ongoing economic development? I guess if you compare Southeast Asia with China and India, we've taken very, very bold steps in doubling down on renewables. And the puzzle for me really is, Southeast Asia has all the potential to really invest in renewables, to talk about industrial policy, to rally and mobilize efforts to move away from coal. And coal still accounts for on average, 70, 75% of the energy mixed in all of these countries. Not to say that coal still remains dominant in China and India, but in terms of solar, for example, both these countries have managed to bribe the cost down and there's very good steps being taken in integrating solar into the fuel mix. Now, can Southeast Asia do the same? I would argue, Indonesia should be in the lead in doubling down on renewables, really integrating this into the national development plan. This is not a defensive strategy. I would argue that renewables actually can be a driver of economic growth for many of these larger economies. And linked with this, I think, to what Tisa said on building climate resilience. Again, here, I think Southeast Asia, Southeast Asia is really prone to rising ground temperatures. The primary risk for Southeast Asia really is on devastating floods. So how do you build up that climate resilience while simultaneously changing your energy system? I would say that when we're talking about rebalancing, this should be in the mix. Thank you for that, Vasuki. I mean, obviously there's a lot of, there are a lot of challenges and you couldn't say anything other than Southeast Asia is at the beginning, all countries in Southeast Asia at the beginning of starting to think about these transitions and trying to start to try and do something about it. I mean, the question I suppose I'd like to put to all of you is the difficult question is where do you start and how do you generate momentum, particularly taking into account politics, taking into account the political economy of countries that are very much dependent on an industrialization-based model? Do you see any particular sort of green shoots or opportunities where there's opportunities to drive change and progress in the right direction? Tricia, I got to you maybe first. Yeah, this is a really interesting question. How do we incentivize ourselves to make the changes that are not necessarily politically palatable or even demand-driven? So our communities and society ourselves are not very well-educated as to the needs to move into this new growth era. So we know that politicians are ultimately incentivized by that. So I think that's a really crucial question that anyone who's in this field needs to ask ourselves. And once we have that answer, place that pressure on the necessary governments as well as regional institutions of the day, so including your ASEAN, your World Bank, other sorts of development institutions that do exist in our country. I think one answer that I have gotten recently from our own research in this area is that it ultimately does start from pressure from abroad. So this is something that I know can be a little bit of a sensitive subject because we like to believe that reforms come from within, that domestic reforms start first, and so on. However, in my experience in the country that I know best again in Malaysia, I'll give you two examples. So number one, Malaysia has recently signed and ratified the CPTPP, which is the new iteration of the former TPPA. And so some of the major chapters in the CPTPP documents actually include standards that need to be met by the Malaysian government on environment number one, which we've been talking a lot about, number two, labor. So it requires us to sign or amend our laws in order to comply with the international ILO standards. For example, number three in the area of government procurement. So Malaysia also has a lot of controversial and sensitive procurement policies that are meant to protect a certain segment of our community, as well as number four, state-owned enterprises. So state-owned enterprises or government-linked companies, they loom large in not just Malaysia, but I think many of our Southeast Asian economies have a large presence of government within the economy. So again, taking a page out of international agreements and seeing how we can use them to reform from within. So I think that's one possible driver. It may not apply to all economies. It really depends on how it is each of the economies want to respond to it, but that's one method. The other thing is to look at, ultimately, international investors. So what kinds of standards are international investors, especially international institutional investors are looking at? If they're coming from countries that they themselves need to comply with, very high standards, they will set the same standards for the investee companies that they're looking at in Southeast Asia. And this is where it is about a business. So it's a little bit of a cynical reason because you can't do business unless you comply with these environments. But this is really how people operate without the laws, without the regulations in place. Nothing is going to compel them to do better. So I think we should take advantage of all of these instruments and tools at hand and do what we can with them, while at the same time, educating our public, educating our young to really transform ourselves and once we get onto this new growth trajectory and what that means, then hopefully it's a sort of holistic environment within which we operate. Thank you. Thank you, Trisha. I might ask Vasuki and Teza, if you have anything else that you'd wanna add or how do you get momentum on these issues? But also, Trisha has brought up the issue of how does climate change affect Southeast Asia's international relations and external relations with other partners. And so we've got things like the carbon border adjustment mechanism in the EU, for example, a lot of talk around carbon finance and financing just transitions and so on. So I put sort of two questions for either of you to sort of talk about in terms of opportunities to drive change, but also this international element. Yeah, I can start and I can talk about the carbon issues as well, but I wanted to start by saying that in answer to your question of where do we start, I think we should start with forgetting efficiency and scale as a mantra for economic development and instead focus on what is providing wellbeing to the environment and to society. And I know this might sound radical, but in the context of planetary boundaries, efficiency and scale has in fact been wasteful and harmful, right? So if we are to focus on what actually delivers what we need as a society, as a planetary society, then we should think beyond efficiency and scale. We should think of what actually delivers wellbeing and the way to do that without being arbitrary, right? Without cherry picking, oh, this industry gets to survive, that industry doesn't get to survive. The way to do that without being arbitrary is two things. Number one is to get the pricing right, to drive in the externality factors and costs into every single price. So we're talking here about maybe carbon pricing and that alludes to your question about carbon border adjustment mechanisms and other types of actually the entire world now is thinking about carbon pricing. The IMF has come up with carbon pricing for suggested carbon prices set at $75 for industrialized countries, $50 per ton for emerging economies and $25 for vulnerable countries with the idea that every single country should have its own carbon pricing system and that will affect international relations, that will affect trade. But if the global community comes together and if ASEAN decides as well as a region how it is best positioned to set its carbon price then ASEAN would be in a good position to negotiate with other countries because that's coming. That discussion is coming sooner or later and we need to be prepared for that. The second thing is, I'm alluding to ESG that Tricia mentioned and all of the innovations around the financial sector. ESG being one of those innovations but right now I think that ESG is being treated as an add-on by investors and bankers as a portfolio that exists outside of its overall portfolio. If you're interested in green stuff this is where you would invest, we have a portfolio for that but it doesn't really address the core or fundamental architecture of the financial sector. And I think in order to address that we need to factor in climate risks and because climate risks are now quantifiable. If we're getting floods five times a year and Europe is getting forest fires twice a year then that is a very physical quantifiable climate risk. And if there are certain industries that are contributing to those climate risks then they shouldn't get a great credit rating. And if we integrate climate risk into financial sector assessments all of these industries would not get triple A ratings and we would not be able to get financing for those companies at such a low rate. And that is what I think we start there correct carbon pricing, integrate climate risks. I think we can transform the system from inside. Thank you, Teza. Vasuki, can I give you a chance to say something on this question, the getting momentum going and the international sort of elements? Yeah, I spend a lot of time at the IMF so I'm about to say that global rules set by multilateral organizations have a role. But I think ultimately at the end of the day when it comes to climate I think the best policies originate at home. The best policies built on domestic political support in a government's ability to rally its population that this is a significant risk for the country. And so therefore there needs to be resolute policy steps taken. Now the private sector certainly in the international banks, institutional investors in the kind of capital flows that they deploy in Southeast Asia will require the investing companies to comply with ESG standards. And I think on the private sector space I'm a little bit more optimistic that standards overall standards are going to be lifted worldwide including in Southeast Asia. But I think when you look at the entire multilateral space for climate negotiations, that is a mess. This entire debate on climate space on providing developing countries with a little bit more time in decarbonizing. But we've seen in this Russia-Ukraine context that Europe is likely to delay its own decarbonization plan which had originally set an intermediate target for 2030 mainly because of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. So I would say the best policies start at home. And if you look back 40, 50 years if the debate in Southeast Asia in the late 1960s was what would be your new development model. I think Southeast Asian countries pretty much figured out on their own that it was going to be exports and investment. So I would really focus a lot of attention in domestic political resilience in getting this done. Thanks for that, Vasuki. I think we could actually keep going with this line of topics for quite a long time. But I wanna go back to what Vasuki, you put on the table in your opening remarks about globalization and this having been the engine for Southeast Asia's economies over the previous decades and then now the question marks over the future of that and that's driven of course in part by geopolitics between the United States and China in part around some of the concerns around resilience that have been revealed by COVID-19 as well as by Ukraine and indeed concerns related to the climate impacts as well associated with the industrialization based model. But focusing on what's the ability of Southeast Asian economies really to continue to benefit from globalization and use that as a driver of future economic development. I mean, right now they're trying to navigate between the United States and China trying to maintain access between the two. Is that a viable strategy? What's its limits? Vasuki, maybe I could put that to you and then go to the others. Yeah, if you look at what the geopolitical experts are saying, what they're essentially saying is this is gonna be a protracted long-term battle for regional and global supremacy between the US and China. Steps taken by the US over the last few years, particularly with active participation from many Southeast Asian countries. I mean, the Indo-Pacific economic framework, I think it's a classic example where the US and its allies are trying to build this parallel set of standards on, for example, on digital. And essentially conditioning all of this that there will be money available for climate infrastructure development. But decoupling really is a reality at the moment. I think for the near-term Southeast Asia is going to benefit from the fact that a lot of multinational companies are looking at Vietnam and other countries to move away from China, which has been the final assembly point for regional supply chains for the last three decades. But the decoupling process is going to take a little bit of time. So, you know, this is the space, this is the time I think for Southeast Asia to reflect on, there could be near-term benefits from manufacturing coming into the region, but the way the geopolitical terms are being set, it is increasingly likely that we're going to be in this parallel world of a Sinosphere, a China-dominated economic space and a US-dominated economic space. That may imply lower economic growth, that may imply, you know, less investment flows. We don't know the answer to that. You know, Southeast Asia may well realize that aligning with IPF may generate windfall investment flows, right? So that needs to be established a little bit more work needs to be done on that. So this is the time really to look out for domestic violence because, you know, this geopolitical reality is going to be there for the next few decades. This is the time for the Southeast Asia to shift against. Thank you, Suki. I might go to Tricia next. If you have any thoughts on this question, response to Vasuki and his comments, but also in particular this one of Vasuki, your key points is to focus more on domestic demand as a driver of the region's economies in the future. Tricia, what are your thoughts on all of these points? Yeah, so thank you. I think I respond first to that point about how, yes, while multilateral standards are important, I mean, ultimately it is about domestic political reforms. I would love to agree with that. And I do think that that would be ideal. So that would be the highest standard. However, there are exceptions where there is, you know, no potential opportunity for such domestic political reform. And then what do we do then? We can't just wait. So I think they have to happen simultaneously. So, you know, in Malaysia, for example, domestic political reform is still at large. One would say, in fact, we're having our election soon and the last few years have seen the country going through a particularly unusual and unprecedented period of political instability. So to expect the reforms to come from within at this point in time is actually quite unrealistic. But moving over to the question of geopolitics and US and China, you know, even before the most recent trends of the tech decoupling, I think there were already a lot of questions about how Southeast Asia is benefiting from the US-China trade war. So you're talking about research and analysis that would have been done about three to four years ago. And I do remember reading a paper by the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies saying that selected economies in Southeast Asia have benefited from the US-China trade war, but not all. So, you know, countries' economies like Vietnam have benefited, but not actually economies like Malaysia, which we would expect to have been able to take advantage of that trade war, unfortunately, at that point in time it did not yet happen. But I do agree that we are actually well-placed. So all Southeast Asian economies are well-placed to be able to take advantage of this decoupling. However, the ongoing, and I predict, increasing tensions between both US and China will actually also, number one, provide challenges to our economies. I think our economies are actually quite well integrated already, a country like Malaysia.  We have strong trading relationships with both US and China. But on the other hand, countries like ours have also historically been very open to dialogue and communication with both. A country like Malaysia has never really stuck its neck out to favor one side over the other. So it will be interesting to see how it is that it maintains both the relationships with both of these superpowers in the future. So just a last word on the IPF. I think that's certainly an interesting development. I think some parts of the IPF are going to have some regulatory standards to be met and some others not. But if you look at, again, I go back to the CPTPP, it's also interesting that China has put its bid forward to want to sign and rectify the agreement that originated in the US in the first place. So China has also taken advantage of this agreement that has already many economies, 10 and more joining it. So just pitting these two really large multilateral agreements with each other, and it will be interesting to see where this takes all of the other economies in the future. Just a final word about digitalization. I think one of the questions was whether we see digitalization as an opportunity or a threat moving forward, I think it certainly can and it should be seen as an opportunity just given the fact that COVID-19 has seen digital trade soar in ways that never before happened. And Southeast Asian economies really, again, we are well placed to take advantage of this digital lead. However, we do need to be very cognizant of issues like number one, data privacy, number two, the digital divide, which evidently happens in economies which are still very much developing. During the pandemic, there was a big news item in Malaysia where a young girl had to climb up a tree in order to access Wi-Fi to get to her school. So these stories are very relevant in our economies. And I think that's just, while we are thinking about the digital wave, we need to think about the realities on the ground as well. Thank you. Thank you, Trisha. And finally, let's come to Teaser. How do you see these issues around US-China geopolitics and de-globalization, disruption to supply chains? How do you see that affecting where you think the Southeast Asian nations need to go? I think globalization or now the trend towards de-globalization is affected and impacted by politics more than economic factors. And I would always want to ask back, take a step back and ask again to ourselves, what do we want out of globalization? Because the beginning at the outset is that we want globalization to deliver decentralized welfare and resources, essentially, right? We want resources to be spread out more evenly across the globe. But because of the way that they've been negotiated and various political factors in play, instead production is centralized. It's not a centralized at the source of the natural capital necessarily, nor at the source of the innovation or not at the source of the local wisdom. Besuki alluded to local solutions being the best solution. There are lots of local wisdom solutions for climate change, not necessarily they get to become on top of the economic global supply chain, but instead production is centralized at the source of capital, the wealth owners. And this results in many trade practices that exacerbate environmental health and local resilience. And all this is nothing new. I mean, there's a wealth of research and anecdotes and debates about this since JTT. But we need to always remember that if an ecosystem is designed to produce fish for one million people and is forced to produce for one billion people across the globe, there will be problems. So I think if we hark back to the ecosystem limits, then we need to rethink how globalization is managed. And so I would just like to add because there was a point about digitalization. And I think that is a promising update to globalization because knowledge is a resource with unlimited tradability and mobility. Knowledge to produce things and knowledge to innovate and knowledge to create things are now being spread and disseminated at a much faster rate and reaching more and more people, even in isolated places. I mean, if you spend enough time on YouTube, like I do, there is a wealth of practical business-making skills from, I don't know, embroidery to making robots. So I mean, I think commodity trade can be less of a focus in the future of globalization. There's less need for centralized production systems if the knowledge to produce is spread out, decentralized and democratized. And people will get creative with limited resources. Innovation will explode, I think. Thank you, Tees. I mean, certainly digital growth and consumption of digital services, hopefully poses less of a burden on the environment. So we can all just do more of that and spend more time online. I'm not sure how good it is for our mental health, but unless you're watching Lowy Institute panel discussions, at least it'll be better for the environment perhaps. We are starting to run out of allocated time, but I do want to ask one quick, maybe lightning round style question. We started this conversation by noting that, of course, all the nations within Southeast Asia are very different. There are questions about what is the model, what is the commonality and so on. Another related question then is, is what is the role of ASEAN? And I'm perhaps less interested in the organization itself of ASEAN, but rather what is the relationship between Southeast Asian nations as a group, as a bloc, and what could be done with this, where is this headed? So I'd like to put it to each of you as your final sort of comments. Where would you hope that the region can go in the future as a group in order to deliver the changes that you think it requires? Maybe if we can start with you, Vasuki. I would say three areas since it's a lightning round. Let me boil this down to, ASEAN should be more from financial integration. This has been an objective for many, many years, but it's actually not delivered tangible economic benefits in integrating financial systems of the region, certainly on climate finance and on climate resilience. I mean, the ASEAN economic community is a wonderful objective, but we're seeing very little evidence of how that is going to work in terms of climate change. The funny point is on digitalization, where I think there's a profound tension between command and control, between many countries in Southeast Asia thinking that the China, the great firewall model of digital control and surveillance is the best way, where it's actually a more decentralized model and the ability to deliver e-governance actually is going to benefit not only citizens, but overall is going to improve the efficiency of these economies. So if ASEAN is able to knock its heads together on these three areas as priorities, I think we're going to go a long way on this rebalancing issue for the next decade. Thank you, Rasuki. Trisha, maybe we go to you next. All right, thank you. So we actually do this annual report on ASEAN integration every year, looking at how well the Southeast Asian economies are being integrated as envisioned in the original ASEAN economic community documents and visioning integration by 2025. So in short, we're not very well integrated yet, as Rasuki pointed out. So I think just taking a leaf from him, I think I also will focus on these three areas. So I would like to see greater integration, not at ASEAN level, don't have it necessarily dictated by the bureaucracy of ASEAN secretariat, but as Southeast Asian dynamic economies as we are. Number one, again, going back to economics and trade. We already trade a lot with each other, but I think with digital trade coming in, there are a lot of opportunities there for the region. If the region can get its act together in, for example, harmonizing its digital standards, I think that's really great opportunity for us to pitch as a region to other regions and other businesses from abroad. So that's one. Number two, I think going back to again, like standards of human rights. So ASEAN has a sort of human rights declaration, but I think linking it to business and human rights, if we also have some kind of standards that would really help each of our economies to progress better, to be more visible internationally, maybe even compliance with other standards like the EU and so on. And this also again goes back to the first point in increasing trade and digital trade. And finally, I think people-to-people integration. This is less talked about. There's a report that we've also done on migration within the region. Why not think outside the box and think about not having passports within the region? Is that something that we can ever envision to happen? Because that would actually really help in terms of business travel and ensuring that there's some kind of harmonization and community that's created in a more organic manner. Thank you. Yeah, thank you, Trisha. And finally, Teza for the final word. I think the three areas where Southeast Asia could do a lot of transformative work on is number one, rethinking the primary indicator for growth, the primary goal for growth. I mean, there's a lot of countries, a few, not a lot. A few countries now toying with the idea that GDP should not be the main indicator for growth. New Zealanders, Bhutan, I think that could be an interesting discussion to be held at the Southeast Asian level where we could then start talking about better indicators like climate resilience, like well-being and equality. And then number two, Southeast Asia could also, needs to also, it's already being discussed, carbon pricing has already been being discussed, but it needs to be in a more coordinated fashion and with a regional view instead of, I think, the current more domestic view of carbon pricing, placing itself as a future giant region for carbon pricing equal to the European region, equal to the East Asian region, just start thinking more regionally on that perspective. And number three is harking back to my earlier point on climate risk integration and what Trisha said on standards, financial standards, that's an important discussion to be had. It's not just about what Southeast Asia can do as a green finance hub or as a destination for green investment, but also how Southeast Asia can position itself in the negotiations and discussions on the global financial architecture and what could be done to transform the global financial architecture to include climate risk to provide more benefits for emerging economies and vulnerable communities in Southeast Asia. Thank you, Tisa. And I think we're coming to the end of our allocated time. So thank you to all three of you for what's been a really fascinating discussion. I found it even more interesting, I think, than even all the written contributions that we've had so far. So thanks to all three of you for today. Thanks to our audience as well for joining us for this discussion of Southeast Asia's future prospects. If you haven't already, please check out the online debate series where you can find the articles by our panelists as well as several other leading thinkers from the region. And a special thanks, of course, again, to our panelists, Vasuki Trisha and Tisa.