 |
|
|
|||||
Americas federal public lands are unique, part of our birthright as citizens. No other country in the world has such a system. More than 640 million acres, including national parks, forests, and wildlife refuges, as well as lands open to drilling, mining, logging, and a variety of other uses, are managed by the federal government but owned collectively by all American citizens. Together, these parcels make up more than a quarter of all land in the nation. Congressman John Garamendi, a Democrat representing California, has called them one of the greatest benefits of being an American. Even if you dont own a house or the latest computer on the market, you own Yosemite, Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, and many other natural treasures, he wrote in 2011. Despite broad, bipartisan public support for protecting public lands, these shared landscapes have come under relentless attack during the first 100 days of President Donald Trumps second term. The administration and its allies in Congress are working feverishly to tilt the scale away from natural resource protection and toward extraction, threatening a pillar of the nations identity and tradition of democratic governance. Theres no larger concentration of unappropriated wealth on this globe than exists in this country on our public lands, said Jesse Deubel, executive director of the New Mexico Wildlife Federation, a conservation nonprofit. The fact that there are interests that would like to monetize that, theyd like to liquidate it and turn it into cash money, is no surprise. Landscape protections and bedrock conservation laws are on the chopping block, as Trump and his team look to boost and fast-track drilling, mining, and logging across the federal estate. The administration and the GOP-controlled Congress are eyeing selling off federal lands, both for housing development and to help offset Trumps tax and spending cuts. And the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, led by billionaire Elon Musk, is wreaking havoc within federal land management agencies, pushing out thousands of civil servants. That purge will leave Americas natural heritage more vulnerable to the myriad threats these lands already face, including growing visitor numbers, climate change, wildfires, and invasive species. The Republican campaign to undermine land management agencies and wrest control of public lands from the federal government is nothing new, dating back to the Sagebrush Rebellion movement of the 1970s and 80s, when support for privatizing or transferring federal lands to state control exploded across the West. But the speed and scope of the current attack, along with its disregard for the publics support for safeguarding public lands, makes it more worrisome than previous iterations, several public land advocates and legal experts told Grist. This is probably the most significant moment since the Reagan administration in terms of privatization, said Steven Davis, a political science professor at Edgewood College and the author of the 2018 book In Defense of Public Lands: The Case Against Privatization and Transfer. President Ronald Reagan was a self-proclaimed sagebrush rebel. Deubel said the conservation community knew Trumps return would trigger another drawn out fight for the future of public lands, but nothing could have prepared him for this level of chaos, particularly the effort to rid agencies of thousands of staffers. The country is in a much more pro-public lands position than weve been before, Deubel said. But I think were at greater risk than weve ever been beforenot because the time is right in the eyes of the American people, but because we have an administration who could give two shits about what the American people want. Thats whats got me scared. The Interior Department and the White House did not respond to Grists requests for comment. In an article posted to the White House website on Earth Day, the Trump administration touted several key actions it has taken on the environment, including protecting public lands by opening more acres to energy development, protecting wildlife by pausing wind energy projects, and safeguarding forests by expanding logging. The accomplishments list received widespread condemnation from environmental, climate, and public land advocacy groups. That same day, a leaked draft strategic plan revealed the Interior Departments four-year vision for opening new federal lands to drilling and other extractive development, reducing the amount of federal land it manages by selling some for housing development and transferring other acres to state control, rolling back the boundaries of protected national monuments, and weakening bedrock environmental laws like the Endangered Species Act. Meanwhile, Trumps DOGE is in the process of cutting thousands of scientists and other staff from the various agencies that manage and protect public lands, including the National Park Service and the Bureau of Land Management, or BLM. Nearly every Republican senator went on the record this month in support of selling off federal lands to reduce the federal deficit, voting down a measure that would have blocked such sales. And Utah has promised to continue its legal fight aimed at stripping more than 18 million acres of BLM lands within the states border from the federal government. Utahs lawsuit, which the Supreme Court declined to hear in January, had the support of numerous Republican-led states, including North Dakota while current Interior Secretary Doug Burgum was still governor. To advance its agenda, the Trump administration is citing a series of emergencies that close observers say are at best exaggerated, and at worst manufactured. A purported energy emergency, which Trump declared in an executive order just hours after being inaugurated, has been the impetus for the administration attempting to throw long-standing federal permitting processes, public comment periods, and environmental safeguards to the wind. The action aims to boost fossil fuel extraction across federal lands and watersdespite domestic oil and gas production being at record highswhile simultaneously working to thwart renewable energy projects. Trump relied on that same emergency earlier this month when he ordered federal agencies to prop up Americas dwindling, polluting coal industry, which the president and his cabinet have insisted is beautiful and clean. In reality, coal is among the most polluting forms of energy. This whole idea of an emergency is ridiculous, said Mark Squillace, a professor of natural resources law at the University of Colorado, Boulder. And now this push to reinvigorate the coal industry seems absolutely crazy to me. Why would you try to reinvigorate a moribund industry that has been declining for the last decade or more? Makes no sense, its not going to happen. Coal consumption in the U.S. has declined more than 50% since peaking in 2005, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, largely due to market forces, including the availability of cheaper natural gas and Americas growing renewable energy sector. Meanwhile, Trumps tariff war threatens to undermine his own push to expand mining and fossil fuel drilling. The threat of extreme wildfirean actual crisis driven by a complex set of factors, including climate change, its role in intensifying droughts and pest outbreaks, and decades of fire suppressionis being cited to justify slashing environmental reviews to ramp up logging on public lands. Following up on a Trump executive order to increase domestic timber production, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins signed a memo declaring a forest health emergency that would open nearly 60% of national forest lands, more than 110 million acres, to aggressive logging. Then theres Americas housing affordability crisis, which the Trump administration, dozens of Republicans, and even a handful of Democrats are pointing to in a growing push to open federal lands to housing development, either by selling land to private interests or transferring control to states. The Trump administration recently established a task force to identify what it calls underutilized lands. In an op-ed announcing that effort, Burgum and Scott Turner, secretary of Housing and Urban Development, wrote that much of the 500 million acres Interior oversees is suitable for residential use. Some of the most high-profile members of the anti-public lands movement, including William Perry Pendley, who served as acting director of the Bureau of Land Management during Trumps first term, are championing the idea. Without guardrails, critics argue the sale of public lands to build housing will lead to sprawl in remote, sensitive landscapes and do little, if anything, to address home affordability, as the issue is driven by several factors, including migration trends, stagnant wages, and higher construction costs. Notably, Trumps tariff policies are expected to raise the average price of a new home by nearly $11,000. Chris Hill, CEO of the Conservation Lands Foundation, a Colorado-based nonprofit working to protect BLM-managed lands, said the lack of affordable housing is a serious issue, but we shouldnt be fooled that the idea to sell off public lands is a solution. The vast majority of public lands are just not suitable for any sort of housing development due to their remote locations, lack of access, and necessary infrastructure, she said. David Hayes, who served as deputy Interior secretary during the administrations of Barack Obama and Bill Clinton and as a senior climate adviser to President Joe Biden, told Grist that Trumps broad use of executive power sets the current privatization push apart from previous efforts. Not only do you have the rhetoric and the intentionality around managing public lands in an aggressive way, but you have to couple that with what youre seeing, he said. This administration is going farther than any other ever has to push the limits of executive power. Aaron Weiss, deputy director of the Center for Western Priorities, a Colorado-based conservation group, said Trump and his team are doing everything they can to circumvent normal environmental rules and safeguards in order to advance their agenda, with no regard for the law or public opinion. Everything is an imagined crisis, Weiss said. Oil, gas, and coal jobs. Mining jobs. Timber jobs. Farming and ranching. Gas-powered cars and kitchen appliances. Even the water pressure in your shower. Ask the White House and the Republican Party and theyll tell you Biden waged a war against all of it, and that voters gave Trump a mandate to reverse course. During Trumps first term in office, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke repeatedly boasted that the administrations conservation legacy would rival that of his personal hero and Americas conservationist president, Theodore Rooseveltonly to have the late presidents great-grandson, Theodore Roosevelt IV, and the conservation community bemoan his record at the helm of the massive federal agency. Like Zinke, Burgum invoked Roosevelt in pitching himself for the job. In our time, President Donald Trumps energy dominance agenda can be Americas big stick that will be leveraged to achieve historic prosperity and world peace, Burgum said during his confirmation hearing in January, referencing a letter in which the 26th president said to speak softly and carry a big stick. The Senate confirmed him to the post in January on a bipartisan 79 to 18 vote. Some public land advocates initially viewed Burgum, now the chief steward of the federal lands, waters, and wildlife we all own, as a palatable nominee in a sea of problematic potential picks. A billionaire software entrepreneur and former North Dakota governor, Burgum has talked at length about his fondness for Roosevelts conservation legacy and the outdoors. Whatever honeymoon there was didnt last long. One hundred days in, Burgum and the rest of Trumps team have taken not a stick, but a wrecking ball to Americas public lands, waters, and wildlife. Earlier this month, the new CEO of REI said the outdoor retailer made a mistake in endorsing Burgum for the job and that the administrations actions on public lands are completely at odds with the longstanding values of REI. At an April 9 all-hands meeting of Interior employees, Burgum showed off pictures of himself touring oil and gas facilities, celebrated cleancoal, and condemned burdensome government regulation. Burgum has repeatedly described federal lands as Americas balance sheetassets that he estimates could be worth $100 trillion but that he argues Americans are getting a low return on. On the worlds largest balance sheet last year, the revenue that we pulled in was about $18 billion, he said at the staffwide meeting, referring to money the government brings from lease fees and royalties from grazing, drilling, and logging on federal lands, as well as national park entrance fees. Eighteen billion might seem like a big number. Its not a big number if were managing $100 trillion in assets. In focusing solely on revenues generated from energy and other resource extraction, Burgum disregards that public lands are the foundation of a $1 trillion outdoor recreation economy, nevermind the numerous climate, environmental, cultural, and public health benefits. Davis, the author of In Defense of Public Lands: The Case Against Privatization and Transfer, dismissed Burgums balance sheet argument as shriveled and wrong. You have to willfully be ignorant and ignore everything of value about those lands except their marketable commodity value to come up with that conclusion, he said. When you add all their myriad values together, public lands are the biggest bargain you can possibly imagine. Davis likes to compare public lands to libraries, schools, or the Department of Defense. There are certain things we as a society decide are important and we pay for it, he said. We call that public goods. The last time conservatives ventured down the public land privatization path, it didnt go well. Shortly after Trumps first inauguration in 2017, then-Congressman Jason Chaffetz, a Republican representing Utah, introduced legislation to sell off 3.3 million acres of public land in 10 Western states that he said had been deemed to serve no purpose for taxpayers. Public backlash was fierce. Chaffetz pulled the bill just two weeks later, citing concerns from his constituents. The episode, while brief, largely forced the anti-federal land movement back into the shadows. The first Trump administration continued to weaken safeguards for 35 million acres of federal landsmore than any other administration in historyand offered up millions more for oil and gas development, but stopped short of trying sell off or transfer large areas of the public domain. Yet as the last few months have shown, the anti-public lands movement is alive and well. Public land advocates are hopeful that the current push will flounder. They expect courts to strike down many of Trumps environmental rollbacks, as they did during his first term. In recent weeks, crowds have rallied at numerous national parks and state capitol buildings to support keeping public lands in public hands. Democratic Senator Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, who voted to confirm Burgum to his post and serves as the ranking Democrat on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, has taken to social media to warn about the growing Republican effort to undermine, transfer, and sell off public lands. I continue to be encouraged that people are going to be loud. They already are, said Deubel, the executive director of the New Mexico Wildlife Federation. Were mobilizing. Weve got business and industries. Weve got Republicans, weve got Democrats. Weve got hunters and weve got nonhunters. Weve got everybody speaking out about this. In a time of extreme polarization on seemingly every issue, public lands enjoy broad bipartisan support. The 15th annual Conservation in the West poll found that 72% of voters in eight Western states support public lands conservation over increased energy developmentthe highest level of support in the polls history; 65% oppose giving states control over federal public lands, up from 56% in 2017; and 89% oppose shrinking or removing protections for national monuments, up from 80% in 2017. Even in Utah, where leaders have spent millions of taxpayer dollars promoting the states anti-federal lands lawsuit, support for protecting public lands remains high. Even in all these made up crises, the American public doesnt want this, Hill said. The American people want and love their public lands. At his recent staffwide meeting, Burgum said Roosevelts legacy should guide Interior staff in the mission to manage and protect federal public lands. Those two things, management and protection, must be held in balance, Burgum stressed. Yet in social media posts and friendly interviews with conservative media, Burgum has left little doubt about where his priorities lie, repeatedly rolling out what Breitbart dubbed the four babies of Trumps energy dominance agenda: Drill, Baby, Drill! Map, Baby, Map! Mine, Baby, Mine! Build, Baby, Build! Protect, Baby, Protect, Conserve, Baby, Conserve, and Steward, Baby, Steward have yet to make it into Burgums lexicon. By Chris DAngelo, Grist This article originally appeared in Grist, a nonprofit, independent media organization dedicated to telling stories of climate solutions and a just future. Sign up for its newsletter here.
Category:
E-Commerce
Hiring professionals who see countless job applications every year begin to notice patterns of red flags that can instantly disqualify a candidate. Here, experts share their thoughts on the most commonly made mistakes. Avoid the White Fonting Trick Surprisingly, many candidates still use the “white fonting” tactic on their résumés. This practice stems from an outdated piece of advice that has spread over time: include extra keywords or copy the entire job description, reduce the font size, and change the color to white. The intention is to make the text invisible to the eye but still detectable by applicant tracking systems. It’s essentially an attempt to game the system. As a recruiter, I’ve encountered this more times than I can count. However, the moment I highlight the text or open the file in dark mode, the trick becomes glaringly apparent. It immediately raises concerns about the candidate’s integrity, making it a clear red flag. Indeed, résumés should be keyword-optimized. However, the correct approach is to naturally incorporate relevant terms from the job description into your bullet points. Demonstrate how you’ve applied those skills through concrete examples and results. The simplest way to avoid this mistake is to refrain from using the trick altogether. Remember that the objective isn’t to outsmart the software. Instead, it’s to present your experience in a clear, relevant, and compelling manner for the people reviewing it. Ana Colak-Fustin, Founder, HR Consultant and Recruiter, ByRecruiters Proofread Thoroughly Another red flag we consistently notice in job applications is grammatical errors and typos. These mistakes immediately signal a lack of attention to detaila quality we consider essential in any professional role. We recently reviewed a candidate with stellar qualifications who was eliminated early because their résumé contained multiple spelling errors. What makes this particularly unfortunate is how easily these mistakes can be avoided. For example, the candidate had mistyped the name of their previous employer and used inconsistent formatting throughout the document, giving the impression of carelessness despite their impressive background. To sidestep this issue, we recommend a three-step approach. First, always proofread your application thoroughly before submission. While spell-checking tools are helpful, they don’t catch everything and can struggle with things like industry terminology. Second, we recommend candidates have someone else review their application documents. A fresh pair of eyes often spots errors we’ve become blind to after multiple revisions. Third, never rush the application process. Employers can tell when something has been hastily assembled, and it suggests you might bring that same hurried approach to important work tasks. In our experience, candidates who submit polished, error-free applications demonstrate the professionalism and meticulousness that employers value. This attention to detail in your application reflects how you’ll approach your worksomething we always look for when identifying top executive talent for our clients. Remember, a résumé is often a first impression, so its best to make sure it represents the caliber of work you’re capable of delivering. Julia Yurchak, Talent Sourcing, Acquisition & Management Specialist| Senior Recruitment Consultant, Keller Executive Search Follow All Job Posting Instructions Some application red flags stand out before I even review a candidate’s materials. The most common is failing to follow the instructions in the job posting. If a candidate skips steps, submits their application to the wrong place, or neglects to include requested materials, it signals one of two things: either they didn’t read the posting carefully, or they struggle with following directions. Both are concerning. Even in independent roles, employees must adhere to guidelines and standards, and strong reading comprehension is essential in today’s workplace. When a candidate makes these mistakes early in the process, it suggests they may not be genuinely interested in the roleor that they would face challenges if hired. This issue often arises when candidates rush to submit as many applications as possible in a short time. While applying broadly can be beneficial, a scattershot approach is rarely effective. A better strategy is to focus on a handful of well-matched opportunities and take the time to read and respond to each job posting carefully. By tailoring your résumé and cover letter to the role and ensuring you follow every instruction, you’ll significantly improve your chances of moving forward in the hiring process. Instead of prioritizing quantity, aim for quality by choosing roles that are the best fit and submitting thoughtful, well-prepared applications. Archie Payne, Cofounder & President, CalTek Staffing Replace Buzzwords with Concrete Achievements Another warning sign in job applications is an over-reliance on buzzwords without quantifiable results to back them up. Résumés filled with generic phrases fail to instill confidence in a candidate’s abilities and can even sound like they’re copy-pasted or AI-generated. Even if the listed skills are relevant, vague and overused terms do little to differentiate the applicant or demonstrate their true expertise. When I see a résumé or cover letter overloaded with buzzwords but lacking meaningful content, I question both the candidate’s qualifications and their genuine interest in the role. As a result, I’m unlikely to move them forward in the hiring process. For example, phrases like “results-driven professional” or “hardworking team player” may sound positive, but without supporting evidence, they are meaningless. Instead of stating that you’re results-driven, demonstrate itprovide quantifiable, data-backed achievements from past roles. A statement like “Increased sales by 30% in six months by implementing a new client outreach strategy” is far more impactful than simply calling yourself results-driven. By replacing vague language with concrete accomplishments, candidates can make a stronger impression and significantly improve their chances of moving forward in the hiring process. Matt Erhard, Managing Partner, Summit Search Group Use a Customized Résumé One of the most common mistakes I see is when candidates fail to tailor their résumé to the specific job they’re applying for. When a résumé is too generic and doesn’t highlight the skills and experiences most relevant to the role, it makes it difficult for recruiters to see the candidate as a strong fit. For example, if a candidate is applying for a software engineering position but their résumé primarily focuses on general IT support skills, without any mention of relevant programming languages or technical achievements, it’s a missed opportunity. They need to align their résumé with the job description, highlighting specific skills and accomplishments that demonstrate their expertise in the areas that matter most to the employer. To avoid this mistake, candidates should carefully read the job description and adjust their résumé to match the keywords, required skills, and experiences listed. Instead of sending out a one-size-fits-all résumé, personalize itto each role to show recruiters that you’ve taken the time to understand the position and how your background aligns with the company’s needs. This small effort can make a big difference in how your application is received. Mary Southern, Founder at Resume Assassin, Resume Assassin Avoid Instability Perhaps the number-one red flag we look for is the lack of stability within organizations. Candidates can avoid this by taking the time to research the companies they are joining and making the best choices when switching jobs, rather than simply following easy money. If candidates do not have strong longevity in their work history, I would advise them to structure their résumé to showcase the experiences and successes they have had and minimize the appearance of frequent job changes. Another problem that has been emerging recently is candidates using AI or ChatGPT to write their résumés without proofreading them on their own. Please, please, read your own résumé before you submit it and do not rely solely on technology to write it for you. Ashleigh Bechtel, President, Bex Partners Show Your Motivation for the Role A candidate who cannot clearly articulate why they want the role or what draws them to the company is sending up another red flag. This often shows up in interviews, but it begins in the application itself. A lack of clarity around motivation suggests the candidate is casting a wide net without much thought, which raises concerns about long-term fit and engagement. I recall a hiring manager sharing an example about a candidate with a strong technical background who applied for a leadership role at a mission-driven health tech company. When asked why they were interested, their response focused entirely on compensation and titlenot once mentioning the product, the team, or the impact of the work. It was a missed opportunity to connect with the company’s purpose and values. This kind of response immediately makes decision-makers question alignment. Skills may get you in the door, but motivationreal, specific interest in the role and the companyis what sustains success and growth in the long run. Candidates who take the time to research, reflect, and connect their goals to the organization’s mission are the ones who stand out. Not because they know the “right answer,” but because they’ve done the work to find a meaningful fit. Anna Radulovski, Founder & CEO, WomenTech Network Demonstrate Career Progression I have recruiting experience in 10 countries, and what I want to say is that one major red flag I consistently notice is inconsistent career progressionwhen a candidate’s experience jumps across unrelated fields without a clear connection. I have seen various examples: a career path that moves from photographer to Test Engineer, while also including marketing courses and an extra interest in medicine, raises questions about the candidate’s professional focus and long-term goals. My personal advice to candidates is to ensure that your career path has a logical flow. If you have career shifts, explain how this experience adds value to your current expertise. Liliia Yankovska, Global recruiter, ALLSTARSIT Be Truthful About Your Employment History One way this issue comes up is through discrepancies between an applicant’s application and their social media presence. I recently worked with a client who had a candidate who claimed on their CV that they had held three jobs over the last six years. However, a search of their Posts timeline on LinkedIn revealed two additional short-term roles. Upon further investigation, these turned out to be failed probation periods and unsuccessful positions that had not been disclosed. The hirer considered this omission to be misleading, as it gave an inaccurate representation of the candidate’s employment history. Such discrepancies are significant danger signs for employers. Always be truthful on job applications, even if it makes you look bad. When companies discover the truth, they will not look kindly upon it. Matt Collingwood, Founder and Managing Director, VIQU IT Recruitment Explain CV Gaps While career breaks are common and often justifiable, failing to provide a clear explanation can raise concerns about reliability or commitment. For example, a six-month gap without context might lead recruiters to question whether the candidate left a role under difficult circumstances or struggled to secure new employment. To avoid this mistake, candidates should proactively address any gaps in their cover letter or during the interview, highlighting constructive reasons such as personal development, caregiving responsibilities, or pursuing further education. Being transparent and framing the gap positively can help reassure recruiters and demonstrate self-awareness and professionalism. Sam Bradshaw, Head of People, Astute People Balance “I” and “We” Statements When a candidate uses too many “I” statements and not enough “we” in their résumé or interview, it raises a red flag about their ability to work in a team. Most jobs require collaboration, and if someone only talks about what they did without mentioning teamwork, it can make them seem self-centered or difficult to work with. Recruiters want to see that you can contribute to a team, not just that you want to take all the credit. For example, I once interviewed a candidate for a product management role who kept saying, “I built this feature,” “I launched this product,” and “I made this decision.” But when I asked about their team, they struggled to explain how they worked with engineers, designers, or marketers. This made me question whether they were really a team player or just exaggerating their contributions. A better way to frame achievements is to balance “I” and “we.” Instead of saying, “I built a new dashboard,” say, “I collaborated with engineers to design and launch a new dashboard that improved user engagement.” This still highlights your role but also shows teamwork. Recruiters love candidates who acknowledge their team’s efforts while still showcasing their own impact. Kevin Liu, VP of Products, Octoparse
Category:
E-Commerce
Whether its political leaders like Donald Trump expressing concern about immigration, or individuals forced to leave their homes due to conflict, the movement of people across bordersand where they end upis a highly debated global issue. Its also an area plagued by a lack of high-quality data. But a new solution may be on the horizon, offering near-real-time data sourced from Facebook. Researchers from Meta, the parent company of the social media platform, used anonymized data from more than 3 billion Facebook users to track and estimate global migration patterns. Their study, published in Cornell Universitys preprint server arXiv, monitors changes in users predicted home locations, covering 181 countries with monthly data from January 2019 to December 2022. It identifies genuine moves to another countrydefined as living abroad for 12 months or more, according to United Nations standardsby analyzing location signals such as IP addresses, self-reported hometowns, and activity patterns. In 2022, the system estimated that 39.1 million people migrated to a new country, representing about 0.63% of the studys population. The United States recorded the largest net inflow of migrantsnearly 3.3 million peoplewhile Ukraine saw the greatest outflow, with 2.34 million leaving after Russias full-scale invasion in February 2022. The data revealed the rapid and vast scale of such movements: Migration from Ukraine increased tenfold after the war began, according to Facebook data. Traditional destination countries like the U.S., UAE, and Saudi Arabia led the inflow rankings, while India, Ukraine, and Pakistan topped the outflow list. But Ukraine wasnt the only example of migration following major events. After Myanmars 2021 military coup, the model tracked a fivefold increase in migration to Singapore. Likewise, emigration from Hong Kong to the U.K. surged fifteenfold after the 2020 passage of a controversial national security law critics saw as ushering in a Chinese-style surveillance state. To account for potential biases in the dataset, researchers implemented a correction. A single worldwide offset, which is calculated based on administrative migration data from New Zealand, is added to control the degree to which the bias of migrants on Facebook varies with GDP/capita, Guanghua Chi, a research scientist at Meta, writes in an email to Fast Company. This method allows us to account for the fact that in poorer countries, wealthier individuals are more likely to both use Facebook and also more likely to migrate. The results closely aligned with established migration datasets, but were produced much more quickly. We benchmarked our estimates against administrative datasets drawn from statistical offices of different countries and found a very high level of accuracy, Chi writes. For example, the correlation between our estimates and those produced by the New Zealand Statistical Office is 0.98. Chi hopes this level of accuracy will make the data a tool for future policymaking. We find that our estimates are aligned with administrative figures where they are available, he writes. In the [three in four] countries where these estimates are not available, we hope that these estimates can inform evidence-based policies and programs that benefit diverse communities and the governments that support them.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||