Category Archives: Technology

The "Technology Landscape, Trends and Opportunities in the Global Motion Sensor Market" report has been added to ResearchAndMarkets.com's offering.

This report analyzes technology maturity, degree of disruption, competitive intensity, market potential, and other parameters of various technologies in the motion sensor market.

The technologies in motion sensor market have undergone significant change in recent years, from narrow coverage area to wider coverage area. The rising wave of new technologies, such as infrared and microwave are creating significant potential for advanced motion sensor in home security and automotive applications, and driving the demand for motion sensor technologies.

In motion sensor market, various technologies, such as MEMS gyroscope, MEMS accelerometer, MEMS magnetometer, MEMS combo, infrared, ultrasonic, microwave, dual technology, and tomographic sensors are used for monitoring device movement.

Increasing penetration of motion sensors in smartphone and tablets, growing interactive motion gaming, and increasing safety and security features in the automotive industry are creating new opportunities for various motion sensor technologies.

The study includes technology readiness, competitive intensity, regulatory compliance, disruption potential, trends, forecasts and strategic implications for the global motion sensor technology by application, technology, and region.

Some of the motion sensor companies profiled in this report include STMicroelectronics, Murata Manufacturing, Honeywell International, NXP Semiconductors, Analog Devices, Microchip Technology, TDK InvenSense, Bosch Sensortec, Memsic, and Kionix.

This report answers the following 9 key questions:

What are some of the most promising and high-growth technology opportunities for the motion sensor market?

Which technology will grow at a faster pace and why?

What are the key factors affecting dynamics of different technologies? What are the drivers and challenges of these technologies in motion sensor market?

What are the levels of technology readiness, competitive intensity and regulatory compliance in this technology space?

What are the business risks and threats to these technologies in motion sensor market?

What are the latest developments in motion sensor technologies? Which companies are leading these developments?

Which technologies have potential of disruption in this market?

Who are the major players in this motion sensor market? What strategic initiatives are being implemented by key players for business growth?

What are strategic growth opportunities in this motion sensor technology space?

Key Topics Covered:

Story continues

1. Executive Summary

2. Technology Landscape

2.1. Technology Background and Evolution

2.2. Technology and Application Mapping

2.3. Supply Chain

3. Technology Readiness

3.1. Technology Commercialization and Readiness

3.2. Drivers and Challenges in Motion Sensor Technologies

3.3. Competitive Intensity

3.4. Regulatory Compliance

4. Technology Trends and Forecasts Analysis from 2013-2024

4.1. Motion Sensor Opportunity

4.2. Technology Trends (2013-2018) and Forecasts (2019-2024)

4.2.1. MEMS Gyroscope

4.2.2. MEMS Accelerometer

4.2.3. MEMS Magnetometer

4.2.4. MEMS Combo

4.2.5. Infrared Sensor

4.2.6. Ultrasonic Sensor

4.2.7. Microwave Sensor

4.2.8. Others

4.3. Technology Trends (2013-2018) and Forecasts (2019-2024) by Application Segments

4.3.1. Consumer Electronics by Technology

4.3.2. Automotive by Technology

4.3.3. Aerospace & Defense by Technology

4.3.4. Healthcare by Technology

4.3.5. Industrial Electronics by Technology

4.3.6. Others by Technology

5. Technology Opportunities (2013-2024) by Region

5.1. Motion Sensor Market by Region

5.2. North American Motion Sensor Technology Market

5.2.1. United States Motion Sensor Technology Market

5.2.2. Canadian Motion Sensor Technology Market

5.2.3. Mexican Motion Sensor Technology Market

5.3. European Motion Sensor Technology Market

5.3.1. The United Kingdom Motion Sensor Technology Market

5.3.2. German Automotive Motion Sensor Technology Market

5.3.3. French Automotive Motion Sensor Technology Market

5.4. APAC Motion Sensor Technology Market

5.4.1. Chinese Motion Sensor System Technology Market

5.4.2. Japanese Motion Sensor System Technology Market

5.4.3. Indian Motion Sensor System Technology Market

5.4.4. South Korean Motion Sensor Technology Market

5.5. ROW Motion Sensor Technology Market

6. Latest Developments and Innovations in the Motion Sensor Technologies

7. Companies/Ecosystem

7.1. Product Portfolio Analysis

7.2. Market Share Analysis

7.3. Geographical Reach

8. Strategic Implications

8.1. Implications

8.2. Growth Opportunity Analysis

8.2.1. Growth Opportunities for the Motion Sensor Market by Technology Type

8.2.2. Growth Opportunities for the Motion Sensor Market by Application

8.2.3. Growth Opportunities for the Motion Sensor Market by Region

8.3. Emerging Trends in the Motion Sensor Market

8.4. Disruption Potential

8.5. Strategic Analysis

8.5.1. New Product Development

8.5.2. Capacity Expansion of the Motion Sensor Market

8.5.3. Mergers, Acquisitions, and Joint Ventures in the Motion Sensor Market

9. Company Profiles of Leading Players

9.1. STMicroelectronics

9.2. Murata Manufacturing

9.3. Honeywell International

9.4. NXP Semiconductors

9.5. Analog Devices

9.6. Microchip Technology

9.7. TDK InvenSense

9.8. Bosch Sensortec

9.9. Memsic

9.10. Kionix

For more information about this report visit https://www.researchandmarkets.com/r/1q1n3d

View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20210226005196/en/

Contacts

ResearchAndMarkets.comLaura Wood, Senior Press Managerpress@researchandmarkets.com

For E.S.T Office Hours Call 1-917-300-0470For U.S./CAN Toll Free Call 1-800-526-8630For GMT Office Hours Call +353-1-416-8900

Go here to see the original:

Technology Landscape, Trends and Opportunities in the Global Motion Sensor Market, 2021 Report - ResearchAndMarkets.com - Yahoo Finance

Dont let anyone tell you that lawyers cant change or that they hate technology. Recent history proves that, despite some foot-dragging, the legal industry has completely reinvented itself thanks to technological advances. Whether youre a tech-skeptic or well-versed in what new tools have to offer, its worth reflecting on how technology has shaped the practice of law we know today and what that history can tell us about where were going.

The legal industry has come a long way in the last 50 years. Once upon a time, dictating letters and briefs onto tapes for secretaries to type out, flipping through the Rolodex before making a call, and poring over law reporter volumes for relevant case law was the norm. Then came word processing software, and with it the ability to cut and paste text and reuse entire sections of argument or research. Attorneys started getting their own computers and connecting them to big clunky printers through local area networks or LANs and in-house email. And, while telephones saw plenty of use, most meetings occurred in-person, necessitating the time and expense of travel. Even then, though, discovery was largely paper-based, with rooms of document review attorneys laboriously sorting and tagging potential evidence.

The next major changes came with the internet, which in turn, birthed social media and eventually the cloud. Portable devices like the BlackBerry, smartphones, and tablets then replaced desktops as vehicles for digital activity. Todays lawyers assemble documents from existing precedents in a fraction of the time it used to take and manage their cases with sophisticated document and practice management software. Files, billing, and time-tracking have all gone digital, as have calendars and contacts. While discovery (now mostly eDiscovery) is still costly, technology-assisted review or TAR has revolutionized the process to the point where its use is now accepted as black-letter law.

The coronavirus pandemic has pushed the legal technology evolution into overdrive, demanding an overnight adoption of video conferencing technology like Zoom and Microsoft Teams, collaboration platforms like Slack, and cloud storage solutions such as Box and Dropbox. Artificial intelligence and legal analytics are no longer pie-in-the-sky possibilities: theyre business necessities.

Its no surprise that lawyers tend to hang back and wait to see how technology works out before jumping on board. The law itself changes slowly: societal norms evolve and cases follow suit, lagging by years to decades as legislatures pass new laws and judges gradually overturn precedents. Weve seen this initial resistance, and the ability to overcome it, over and over in recent legal history.

From email and smartphones to TAR and document management systems, legal history is rife with tools that lawyers once resisted but now take for granted.

From email and smartphones to TAR and document management systems, legal history is rife with tools that lawyers once resisted but now take for granted.

But weve also seen that the right motivation can turn that usual pattern on its head, as occurred in March 2020 when offices closed and law firms instantly adopted an entirely remote workforce. This shift gave an immediate boost to cloud-based technology: just a few years ago, many lawyers still feared the cloud, considering it less secure and more risky than on-premise software and file storage. Now, 79 percent of CEOs support moving their operations into the cloud to maintain operations and promote resiliency, leaving lawyers with no choice but to adapt.

However, some of lawyers tech skepticism is warranted due to requirements that the practice of law imposes on tech implementation. Technology used by lawyers or by companies that dont want to end up in trouble with the law must meet stringent requirements around information governance, compliance, preservation, and eDiscovery. Such technology must integrate seamlessly into existing legal and data workflows if it is to gain widespread acceptance.

But the use of technology is not longer optional, a fact underscored by the American Bar Associations 2012 decision to amend the rule of competence to clarify that lawyers must not only be competent in their knowledge of the law and its practice but also in their understanding and application of technology.

The technological advances of the last 50 years dont represent an endgame, of course. To stay ahead of the changes that are inevitably coming, lawyers need to be forward thinkers. That means not wasting time and energy fighting against technology, but rather looking for best-of-breed tools that integrate well with existing technology stacks. A recent IDC Market Spotlight proved the value of this approach, finding that companies that adopted three or more integrated best-of-breed applications saw a 37 percent increase in productivity, with productivity gains rising to 75 percent for companies that deployed six or more integrated tools.

So whats next for legal tech? For our money, there is untold potential in turning vast swaths of data into readily consumable knowledge. With this capability, the most tech-forward legal minds can not only make sense of the mountains of information that come standard in litigation, internal investigations, and audits, but also harness that information to also generate valuable strategic insights for the wider business.

Go here to read the rest:

Learning from history: How forward-thinking legal professionals approach technology - JD Supra

There is no substitute for customer feedback, and farmland is the ultimate testing ground for agriculture technology startups. The multiple benefits for farmer and company provide a blueprint for the success of AgLaunch, an organization connecting pre-commercial, cutting-edge tech businesses with farmers as beta-testers.

Speaking during a session at the 2020 Online Top Producer Summit*, Margaret Oldham, along with Grant Norwood, Alex Forsbach, and Patrick Henry, provided an overview of the AgLaunch system and the mutual advantages available for participating growers and startups.

Norwood grows 3,000 acres of corn, soybeans, and wheat in northwest Tennessee on 100% no till, with a third of his acreage under irrigation, and has participated in two AgLaunch-associated trials. Forsbach farms 3,000 acres of corn, grain sorghum, soybeans, and wheat, in southwest Tennessee, and has tested five AgLaunch-related products since 2018.

For several seasons, Norwood has tested GroGuru, a strategic irrigation management platform that aims for increased yield and water-use efficiency. The value AgLaunch brings in working with new technologies, Norwood said, gives me very good insight into what is potentially available for my farm, and it helps me to help shape the product in a way to help farmers.

In addition, Norwood also serves on GroGurus Farmer Advisory Board of GroGuru: It works great for both sides, Norwood emphasized. With AgLaunch working with companies like GroGuru, its a big step step forward for improving the product for company and farmer.

Henry, CEO of GroGuru, said direct farmer involvement with growers such as Norwood and Forsbach in developing ag technology is invaluable: I was attracted to the model where farmers get involved early. One of the real challenges is identifying farmer-customers that are willing to test stuff out. The AgLaunch model is ideal for getting hold of commercial farmers.

AgLaunch is a matchmaker in being able to identify those farmers who have a real passion for this and can be helpful to us starting new companies and creating new technologies, Henry continued.

Forsbach has been a beta-tester for GroGuru, in addition to four other startups: Rabbit Tractors utilizing farm robots, Kilimo with water management, Continuum Ag for soil testing and fertilizer recommendations, and TeleSense for grain bin monitoring system.

From the kickoff of practical testing, farmers are involved with each AgLaunch endeavor, described Oldham, who steers Business Development for AgLaunch. Part of the AgLaunch model is to have farmers engaged from the very beginning, so our farmers get engaged and select the teams that have technologies theyre interested in, Oldham emphasized. Then AgLaunch works with those teams to develop their business model, and to develop on-farm trial plans, and help them get to the point where they can truly provide value.

*You can still register for the Online Top Producer Summit, which gives you access to content through March 31. Use the code ONDEMAND to take $25 off your registration fee.

Read more coverage of the Top Producer Summit.

Read the rest here:

Farm-Tested Technology a Win for Grower and Startup - Agweb Powered by Farm Journal

Andrew Bosworth AKA Boz, an advertising expert for Facebook, gives a talk at the Online Marketing Rockstars marketing trade show in Hamburg, Germany, 03 March 2017. Photo: Christian Charisius/dpa | usage worldwide (Photo by Christian Charisius/picture alliance via Getty Images)

Christian Charisius | picture alliance | Getty Images

Facebook's head of hardware on Thursday confirmed a report that the company is "looking at" incorporating facial recognition technology for its upcoming smart glasses devices, but only if people want that feature.

Andrew "Boz" Bosworth confirmed the report in a video posted to his Instagram account Thursday evening during a Q&A session with his followers.

Asked if "Facebook is considering offering facial recognition on its smart glasses products?," Bosworth said, "We're looking at it."

"It's really a debate we need to have with the public," Bosworth added. "If people don't want this technology, we don't have to supply it. The product is going to be fine either way. There are some nice use cases out there, if it's something people are comfortable with."

The comments come after BuzzFeed on Thursday reported that the hardware executive said Facebook was weighing the legal implications of such a technology during an internal company meeting.

Bosworth noted that there are ethical concerns with the numerous ways that face recognition and always-on cameras and microphones could be abused.

"All the ways they can be abused, in particular for marginalized communities by authority structures," Bosworth said. "What are all the ways that we can prevent those? And is it enough?"

During the Instagram Q&A, Bosworth reiterated that Facebook is on track to release its smart glasses product in partnership with Luxottica, the maker of Ray-Ban, at some point in 2021.

"We're working hard with our partner Luxottica making sure the form factor is right, making sure the functionality is good, and it's coming together pretty nicely," he said.

See the original post here:

Facebook is 'looking at' facial recognition technology for upcoming smart glasses, executive confirms - CNBC

On 27 January, 2021, TransPerfect Legal Solutions (TLS) held the second day of the inaugural EU/UK Competition Regulation Virtual Conference. Day one focused on the changing regulatory landscape. Day two turned to the advent of big data and how technology is a vital tool in the arsenal of the modern competition practitioner.

Sasha Toussaint, Director in TLSs London office, was joined by Guillaume Aubron, Counsel at Darrois Villey Maillot Brochier; Greg Bonn, Senior Associate at Latham & Watkins; Bryant Isbell, the Managing Director of Global eDiscovery and Data Advisory at Baker McKenzie and TransPerfects very own Katie Perekslis, Vice President of E-Discovery Project Management.

Whether its for merger control, dawn raids or cartel investigations, competition proceedings require the interrogation of significant amounts of documentation production in short timelines. In the big data era, budgetary concerns as well as compliance itself often turn on the scope of the information available and timelines imposed on its production.

Clients, lawyers and regulators must fight fire with fire.

Across the board, we are seeing both clients and regulators demand the use of technology. For clients, applying technology drives down the cost associated with these proceedings and limits the amount of information required for production. For regulators, it allows them to see key material faster and using fewer resources. Furthermore, there is empiric evidence (in mainstream litigation versus competition work) that technology can be more consistent and accurate than human review.1

In France, legal technology is not used as widely as in the US or UK. However, French lawyers see clear benefits to using technology in merger control and dawn raids. In the latter, technology needs to be deployed early, as the FCA seizes entire mail boxes before extending a fairly short time frame for lawyers to complete a privilege review ahead of their own review. Speed, therefore, is really of the essence. Unlike many other jurisdictions, there are no requirements for internal document production on the filing form itself and that really only comes into play later on in proceedings. However, it is accepted that as data volumes continue to grow, technology will be a necessity to ascertain risk for these matters, regardless of the regulatory burden.

In the UK, the technology-agnostic CMA is increasingly making use of its formal information-gathering powers. Those powers are also being used at varying stages during the process including working to establish evidence for an alternative counterfactual or a theory of harm claim. Parties similarly use technology at the back end regularly to formulate their strategy in response to these growing requests.

The constant across both jurisdictions (and likely others) is the use of technology to speed up the privilege review. Automating the workflow in its entirety is risky, but the technology can significantly accelerate human review.

What is considered responsive plays a large role in the documents produced in these proceedings. These decisions will have an effect on how and what data is collected and shared. Whilst the CMA retains significant control on the determination of responsiveness (described in more detail below), the European Commission takes a more balanced, collaborative approach, often engaging with lawyers and technologists.

TLS has assisted on these negotiations first hand and rather than simply paying lip service, we (together with outside counsel) have materially impacted search and responsiveness parameters. In a recent RFI, we analysed the resulting set of responsive documents based on the Commissions proposed search terms and determined the terms were overly board. When we presented these metrics to the Commission, together with the methodology used, they were amenable to refining the search terms and data pool.

Ultimately, the regulators are amenable to changing the scope of their requests as long as the law firm and vendor work with the regulators to provide transparency and prove their methodology is logical and defensible.

If law firms can continue, as above, to guide regulators with quantitative data and defensible methodology, there will be a shift in the way data is gathered, culled and reviewed. Deploying technology and analytics is beneficial to all parties involved, particularly given its ability to better manage the never-ending increase in data volumes and sources as well as time constraints in competition proceedings.

The CMA, as compared to the DOJ, FTC or the Commission, can and is asking for more extensive information earlier in the process.

As law firms and their clients lean on the benefits of legal technology, so too do the regulators. They are becoming increasingly more engaged in the process, which has procedural and legal implications.

In English proceedings, e-discovery technology has been a common feature for many years but only recently in merger control. The main question focuses less on the if and more the when. The CMA is increasingly looking to gather evidence, which encourages parties to lean on the guidance and the CMA as they gather the information required. This can include internal documents and even emails and instant messaging chats. Similar to train of enquiry investigations, once they have a handle on the data they are able to issue further requests. These can be topic and custodian specific, or wider using search terms. Unsurprisingly, the CMA is actively recruiting legal technology professionals to help analyse the data that comes in to better inform its requests for information.

This is likely to cause significant delays at pre-notification resulting in a knock-on effect for the entire timetable, as was the case in Amazons acquisition of 16% in Deliveroo.

Regulators, particularly the CMA, are throwing their weight around when it comes to the issue of responsiveness. They believe they have the power determine what is and is not responsive through various search strategies. However, this poses an issue around personally identifiable information, documents being produced that fall out of the scope of the investigation and the general feeling that this type of information-gathering request is a regulator-sponsored fishing expedition.

In general, document production in competition proceedings has become more of an iterative process and the CMA expects to be involved. As a lawyer or e-discovery professional, you can anticipate engaging with your e-discovery and forensic counterparts at the CMA every step of the way.

Whether leveraging basic technology like search terms and email threading or more complex technology like TAR 1.0 and Continuous Active Learning (CAL), legal teams and technologists must ensure proper processes are followed.

As technology advances, it is easy to see the benefits of using advanced analytics, TAR 1.0 or TAR 2.0 (Continuous Active Learning) in data-heavy matters. Regulators do not dictate what type of technology is used, but they are leaning on technologists and law firms to understand the what, how and why.

TAR 1.0 (Technology-Assisted Review) was one of the first AI-based workflows. It is an iterative process where technologists develop an initial training set of documents and a subject matter expert reviews that data before stopping review to run the algorithm that will predict the relevance of the remainder of the documents. Additional documents may be added to the training set based on the richness of the data set, and a separate control set that is statistically representative of the data set is then reviewed by the same subject matter expert and used to validate the results, producing metrics such as precision, recall, depth of recall and F1 score very much a start-stop-start-stop process.

CAL is a newer iteration of TAR and prioritises the data in real time based on the coding decisions of reviewers. As with linear review, a lawyer begins tagging documents for responsiveness. The difference is the technology is working in the background, in real time, to pull other documents that are likely similar to the previously tagged responsive documents until the reviewers reach a point of diminishing returns.

In TLSs experience with merger control projects where the goal is compliance to produce a large quantity of relevant documents in a short period, there is a tendency to stick with TAR 1.0 because it is not cost or time effective to put human eyes on as many documents as you would with CAL. The key in this process, however, is to make sure the subject matter expert is available to review the training and control sets to ensure consistent and accurate results because we apply their review decisions for a small population to the larger document set. Unlike in a linear or CAL review, a few miscoded or inconsistently coded documents can have detrimental effects on both the quality of the review and the time it takes to reach stabilisation. Due to that limitation and a need to put human eyes on all relevant documents for fact finding, TAR 2.0 still tends to be the more widely used workflow in general litigations and arbitrations given its accessibility. With either of these workflows, law firms must produce a clear methodology on actions taken, including validation process. Some of these methods include:

In TLSs experience, regulators tend to focus on achieving high recall and are less concerned with low precision (AKA overly producing documents). But precision is very important to clients, as they dont want more data to go to the regulators than necessary, particularly if data is sensitive in nature.

All panellists agree that it is critical to produce very clear, step-by-step methodology before work has begun, both in privilege and responsiveness reviews. If the work is completed but the method is not approved, the law firm will be required to start over, which can be problematic given the tight deadlines associated with competition work.

Transparency is key in assuring the regulators that law firms have met their requirements and provided the documents required to make their decisions. As long as law firms and technologists are being defensible and reasonable about the methods, the regulators will typically approve the use of technology to work with them and with their clients.

What does the future hold?

There is a clear appetite from clients and regulators to adopt the use of legal technology in competition proceedings. Law firms and litigation support providers will continue to spearhead this movement and are constantly looking at new tools and workflows to manage big data in a defensible and efficient manner.

Law firms will leverage analytics and investigations tools where time is of the essence the first to apply for leniency or immunity or to assess risk. Getting a handle on what their clients have early will be key.

In time, the FCA, CMA and Commission may collaborate and follow certain DOJ practices given its experience with larger data sets, deal flow and technology. And it will be in parties best interests to work alongside them to design a process that works for everyone.

Data is inescapable. Clients, lawyers and regulators continue to play an ever-changing game of catch-up to leverage technology. The procedural and legal considerations grow and change as data volumes increase and data sources diversify, and it is imperative to lean on these tools to provide the best outcome for all parties involved.

You canwatch the full recording of this panel here.

1 Pyrrho Investments Ltd v MWB Property Ltd: [1] [2016] EWHC 25. Paragraph 31

Read more:

Leveraging Technology to Manage Big Data in Antitrust - JD Supra

KULR Technology Group Inc () CEO Michael Mo tells Proactive the developer of lithium-ion battery safety and thermal management technologies is partnering with the CSA Group to develop a new battery safety and testing procedure.

Mo says the collaboration with the CSA Group (formerly the Canadian Standards Association) is the most recent of several alliances it has formed, to which it can apply its expertise and help shape the regulatory and industry standards for battery shipments

Add related topics to MyProactive

Create your account: sign up and get ahead on news and events

The Company is a publisher. You understand and agree that no content published on the Site constitutes a recommendation that any particular security, portfolio of securities, transaction, or investment strategy is...

In exchange for publishing services rendered by the Company on behalf of KULR Technology Group, Inc. named herein, including the promotion by the Company of KULR Technology Group, Inc. in any Content on the Site, the...

More:

KULR Technology forms partnership with the CSA Group to develop a new battery safety standards - Proactive Investors USA & Canada

The American Museum of Science and Energy is considered one of the top tourist attractions in Oak Ridge, attracting around 65,000 per year, according to officials.

OAK RIDGE, Tenn. A museum teaching visitors about science and technology in Oak Ridge signed a new agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy to improve their education methods, exhibits and advance the museum's mission.

The American Museum of Science and Energy Foundation announced that it signed the three-year deal with the DOE on Thursday. The foundation will manage the K-25 History Center, fundraising, collections management and develop other partnerships as part of the agreement as well as manage AMSE.

The DOE will stay involved with the AMSE Foundation's public education and outreach efforts, help manage its exhibits and displays and generally help advance the museums' missions.

"This is a huge milestone for AMSE," said Jim Campbell, AMSE Foundation President. "After 73 years of proud service and partnership with the Department of Energy, we are excited to build on our rich history and celebrate a bright future."

Officials said that the museum is a vital part of the Oak Ridge community and that the agreement will help the museums grow.

In the past, the museum's operations were funded by the DOE through subcontracts with corporations and the AMSE Foundation played a supporting role. With the agreement, the foundation will be at the forefront of the museum's mission, according to a release from officials.

The museum is currently closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, on March 1, officials said they will release a new series of programs called "Destination AMSE." It will highlight several virtual resources and online offerings, including an AMSEcast podcast.

Officials said there will also be new additions to come at AMSE and the K-25 History Center when they reopen.

Originally posted here:

AMSE and Dept. of Energy partner to teach history of technology and science in Oak Ridge - WBIR.com

Emerge Education, LLC, a leading education solutions provider for colleges and universities looking to rethink their approach to enrollment growth, earlier this week announced a new capital investment from Ben Franklin Technology Partners of Central & Northern Pennsylvania.

The Camp Hill-based company plans to employ the funds to further develop its technology platforms and improve its services and process for greater conversions of leads to student enrollments for its client institutions, a press release said.

Emerge Education also will leverage the new investment to support its newest partnership with Messiah University in Grantham, Cumberland County, which was launched in early 2020 at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. While new and continuing student enrollment, both on the ground and online, slowed across most colleges and universities over the past year, student marketing trends are indicating a potential upswing in the coming months as therapies and vaccines for the virus encourage more confidence in the economy and job market.

The company hopes to fuel higher enrollment at Messiah University and its other private and public institutions with the advances in technology and processes achieved through the new investment dollars, the release said.

We are truly privileged and appreciative to now be associated with Ben Franklin Technology Partners, James M. Hunter, CEO of Emerge Education, said. As a leading education services provider, we constantly challenge our existing technology and processes to deliver better outcomes for our client institutions. This new investment will help us continue on our path to set ourselves and our clients apart from our competition by exploring new technology initiatives and allowing Emerge to continue to hire experienced professionals who understand the changing landscape of higher education today.

James M. Hunter, CEO of Emerge Education, said that 'this new investment will help us continue on our path to set ourselves and our clients apart from our competition by exploring new technology initiatives and allowing Emerge to continue to hire experienced professionals who understand the changing landscape of higher education today.'

Emerge Education is part of an online program management (OPM) market that is growing, with an estimated annual growth rate of 13.2 percent from 2020 to 2025, according to some industry analysts. Since its inception with three founding employees in 2014, Emerge has grown to 26 full-time employees, nearly 100 percent of whom are based in Pennsylvania, according to the release, which noted that the firm also works with a number of subcontractors and advertising agencies located within the region.

Ben Franklin Technology Partners of Central & Northern PA provides investment capital and business support services to tech-startups and small manufacturers located in a 32-county footprint. The program invests in innovators sharing the risk that is inherent in starting a business while providing a funding opportunity that does not require fees, points, collateral, or personal guarantees.

The organization is an initiative of the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development and is funded by the Ben Franklin Technology Development Authority. For more than three decades, Ben Franklin Technology Partners has served as a catalyst for economic growth in Pennsylvania by providing access to capital, business expertise and a network of resources that foster innovation, growth and success for both startup companies and established businesses, the release said.

Our mission is to create synergy among business, industry, and higher education representatives to help stimulate economic development in Pennsylvania, so supporting a locally-grown, education-focused company like Emerge is truly a perfect fit, John Sider, Director of Second Stage Capital, Ben Franklin Technology Partners of Central & Northern Pennsylvania, said in the release. Our investment opportunities are earmarked for entrepreneurs, small business owners, and existing manufacturing-based companies that want to produce a new technology-based product or improve an existing process. Ultimately when they succeed, we all succeed. The region gains expertise in an emerging technology and new, high-paying jobs are created.

Ben Franklin Technology Partners of Central and Northern PA provides early-stage funding and business support services to emerging technology-based companies, as well as small, existing manufacturing businesses within a 32-county footprint.

Emerge Education provides higher education solutions to colleges and universities interested in 21st century relevancy by growing revenues through enrollment. The firm works with its partner institutions by investing its own capital and service resources to support lead generation, marketing and recruiting, allowing its partners to focus on what they do best: educating students. Emerge forges unique partnerships with each client institution, always reaching for more students, higher revenue, less expense, the release said.

For more information visit http://www.emergeedu.com.

Follow this link:

Camp Hill-based company to use partnership to develop technology platforms for client institutions - PennLive

In The News26 Feb 2021

The European Commission released the new EU Climate Adaptation Strategy on 24 February, 2021. During the strategys introduction, Executive Vice-President for the European Green Deal, Frans Timmermans, highlighted the need to make adaptation smarter using data, as well as more systemic by focusing on local communities and ecosystems, and leveraging nature-based solutions (NbS).

According to the EU Climate Adaptation Strategy: Climate change is happening today, so we have to build a more resilient tomorrow. The world has just concluded the hottest decade on record during which the title for the hottest year was beaten eight times. People, planet and prosperity are vulnerable to climate change, so we need to prevent the un-adaptable and adapt to the un-preventable. And we must do it faster, and in a smarter and more systemic way.

One of the ways to approach climate adaptation systemically according to the strategy and to Timmermans is by using NbS: We will promote nature-based solutions as much as possible, he said. They help adaptation and at the same time biodiversity.

According to the EU Climate Adaptation Strategy: Implementing nature-based solutions on a larger scale would increase climate resilience and contribute to multiple Green Deal objectives For example, protecting and restoring wetlands, peatlands, coastal and marine ecosystems; developing urban green spaces and installing green roofs and walls; promoting and sustainably managing forests and farmland will help adapt to climate change in a cost-effective way.

With the urgent, widespread and systemic nature of climate change, technological innovations can be used synergistically with NbS to better adapt to its effects.

As soon as technology allows you to be agile, it can help, said Daniel Zimmer, Director of Sustainable Land Use, EIT Climate-KIC. For instance, agriculture and forestry can benefit from innovative sensors and improved monitoring to develop new pest control strategies. And new precision machinery for tillage can be used to reduce soil carbon loss.

EIT Climate-KIC has developed a suite of initiatives with systemic impact that use NbS and/or technological innovations, such as granular-level urban greening, normalising climate resilience labelling for properties, scaling sustainable food production and reducing emissions through plant-based diets. Learn more about these activities here.

Nature is, at the same time, affected by climate change and an instrument to be used, said Zimmer. To build resilience, you need to either become very strong, by building a dike for example, or by becoming more agile and adaptive.

Supporting biodiversity through NbS, such as conserving old forests and rewilding, is a way to be adaptive because it makes it more likely some species of the ecosystem will be better suited to new climatic conditions or to the threats associated with these conditions. For instance, forests are expected to be subject to increased diseases and pest invasions due to climate change. Having biodiversity represented in groups like pollinators (e.g. insects, bats and birds) and seed-dispersal organisms (e.g. birds and mammals), for example, supports the proliferation of various plant and tree species, thereby enhancing a forests resilience to such threats. A forest attracting and housing more variety of species will be much less vulnerable than a tree plantation.

EIT Climate-KICs Landscapes as Carbon Sinks Deep Demonstration is currently working in Scotland and Chlons-en-Champagne, France, to look at land use systemically and transition ecosystems from sources of carbon into sinks. Its supporting NbS such as forest, peatland and wetland conservation, tree planting, and soil regenerationwhich also foster biodiversity. Learn more about this work in an interview with Zimmer.

Another nature-based solution is soil carbon sequestration (SCS), a process in which atmospheric carbon is strategically stored in soil thereby increasing its organic matter, which in turn leads to more water retention capacity and fertility. These properties enable crops to adjust more easily to drought conditions brought about through climate change. SCS is done through a variety of methods and is often targeted at regenerating agricultural land. Some examples are: Reforestation or grassland restoration, reduced tillage, addition of organic amendments like compost and manure, use of cover crops like clover, the creation of wetlands and ponds, and irrigation of pasture or rangelands.

EIT Climate-KICs Carbon Farming project is using a systemic approach to increase SCS, while also considering the needs of multiple stakeholders and partners, as well as local context. Exemplifying NbS, the project is incentivising farmers to implement cover cropscrops like clover that are grown mainly to benefit the soil. Specifically, cover crops can suppress weeds, reduce soil erosion, enhance soil fertility and quality, discourage diseases and pests, and promote biodiversity. The Carbon Farming project is also integrating NbS and technology in a fascinating way, by using satellites to monitor crop health, which results in greater precision for cost savings and scalability, and ultimatelyclimate change mitigation and adaptation. The Carbon Farming project currently has pilots in France and Switzerland.

Taking a more urban focus on NbS, the winner of the Most advanced idea at the global EIT Climate-KIC Climathon Awards2020, Start Park, aims to redesign parks so they become key elements of the city of Florences adaptation strategy. Specifically, its concept is an urban green area whose infrastructure and services are dedicated to water reuse and drainage, and is supplemented by activities to raise climate awareness in the local community. The team is now developing a toolkit to allow other cities in Europe to replicate the Start Park prototype and measure its impact.

More examples of EIT Climate-KICs work on integrating NbS and technological solutions in an innovative way for climate change mitigation and adaptation may be found in its Innovations in land use case studies booklet.

Related Goal

Read the rest here:

Integrating nature with technology to strengthen climate adaptation - Daily Planet`

On this fifth episode from the Blueprints for American Renewal and Prosperity project, two Brookings experts discuss their blueprints for strengthening governance to meet key international challenges in the technology arena. Senior Fellow Landry Sign is co-author with Stephan Almond of A blueprint for technology governance in the post-pandemic world, and Senior Fellow Joshua Meltzer is co-author with Cameron Kerry of Strengthening international cooperation on artificial intelligence.

Also on this episode, Senior Fellow David Wessel, director of the Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy at Brookings, looks at the politics and the economics around raising the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour. Listen to this segment on Soundcloud.

See below for excerpts from the transcript.

Subscribe to Brookings podcastshereor oniTunes, send feedback email toBCP@Brookings.edu, and follow us and tweet us at@policypodcastson Twitter.

The Brookings Cafeteria is part of theBrookings Podcast Network.

EXCERPTS FROM THE DISCUSSION

MELTZER: So this is the paper coauthored with Cameron Kerry, and it focuses on strengthening international cooperation on artificial intelligence. And the basic approach of the paper is to identify what the existing approaches to AI policy development, both at the domestic level but also whats happening in various international and other multilateral forums to look at some of the challenges that are arising that essentially drive the need for international cooperation on AI, to look at the limitations of the current sort of mechanisms for international cooperation. And then we propose a range of policy recommendations for this administration to take forward to really build a more systemic approach to AI cooperation internationally.

SIGN: The paper, A Blueprint for Technology Governance in the Post Pandemic World, was coauthored with Stephen Almond. As a matter of fact, too often regulations struggle to keep pace with innovation, whether we speak about new ideas, products, or business models, they are hampered while citizens are so often left without options. So as government seeks to build back better in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, a more agile, innovative, enabling approach to regulation is needed. So, our paper presents a blueprint for regulatory reforms offices to introduce a more innovative enabling approach to regulation across government and to seize the opportunities of technological change. So, I think we really try to ensure that on the one hand, the fast pace of technological innovation can continue. And on the other hand, the ability of governments to regulate those innovations such so that they serve the greater good is also enabled.

Full Transcript (pdf)

See the original post here:

Proposals to meet global challenges in artificial intelligence and technology regulation - Brookings Institution