Future Earth
Assembly meeting 2021

November 2021

Table of Contents
1. Welcome and Introductions

1

Introduction by Maria Uhle, co-chair of the Governing Council for Future Earth1

Welcoming remarks by Andrea Hinwood, UNEP Chief Scientist

2

Welcoming remarks by Heide Hackmann, Executive Director of the International Science Council 2
Welcoming remarks by Meriem Bouamrane, Programme Specialist, Man and the Biosphere
Programme, UNESCO

3

Welcoming remarks by Johan Rockström, co-chair of the Future Earth Advisory Committee

4

Welcoming remarks by Leena Srivastava, co-chair of the Future Earth Advisory Committee

4

2. Implementation Team process and outputs

6

3. The new Future Earth governance structure

7

4. The new Future Earth Secretariat

9

5. Election of the Governing Council’s members

11Election results

11

Discussion on the election process

13

6. Closing remarks

14

Annex 1: Questions and Answers

15

Annex 2: List of Assembly members

23

1. Welcome and Introductions
Introduction by Maria Uhle, co-chair of the Governing Council for Future Earth
The first Assembly meeting is the culmination of many efforts from many people who dedicated theirtime and energy to help Future Earth create and realize a more inclusive and transparent structure.
This new structure will hopefully help catalyze more international collaboration to help us accelerateknowledge and action on some of the most pressing issues that are facing humanity and this planet.
I want to warmly thank the external Review Committee for providing an honest assessment of ourstrengths and weaknesses and their recommendations on how to move forward, as well as the current
Governing Council, the whole community, and especially their representatives on the Implementation
Team, for all their input on how to create a more cohesive and collaborative structure.
The main objectives of the meeting are: to build a common understanding of the various aspects of
the Future Earth transition (mission and objectives, governance and Secretariat organization); and toselect representatives from the various assembly groups on the Governing Council. While this first
Assembly meeting is about structural aspects of Future Earth, the next Assembly meetings will focus
on the scientific strategic directions of Future Earth and topical contributions.
The Assembly has 139 assembly members, who are broken up into different groups defined by the
Implementation Team in consultation with the Governing Council and the whole community. The
Implementation Team has defined the various Assembly groups with the goal of gathering a diversityof members, a s recommended by the Review Committee (see Figure 1a & 1b).

10

10Researchers from Low andMiddle Income Countries

Continental
Distribution

National Committees /Structures

35
52

Regional Committees /Entities

Low and Middle
Income 36,7%

Country
IncomeHigh Income
63,3%

Partner Organizations

Female 44,6%

Gender10
14

8

Male 55,4%Global Secretariat Hubs &BoardsGlobal Research Networks(GRPs+KANs)

Mid to Late Career
83,5%CareerStage

0%

Figure 1a: Groups of the Assembly and their number ofrepresentatives (total number of representatives = 139)

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Early Career
16,5%
60%

70%

80%

90%

Figure 1b: Diversity of the Assembly representatives in geographicallocation, country income, gender and career stage, in percentage

The entities of Future Earth have worked incredibly hard over the past year. A lot of the science hascontinued, and I want to thank the community for keeping going while the structure was being
developed.
Highlights of the recent work of the Global Research Networks, the national, subnational and regional
committees and the Early Career Network can be found on the Future Earth website here.

1

100%

The Secretariat has helped facilitate the cross-fertilization of the knowledge and actions from thecommunity, through the Earth Commission, the Pathways initiative and the 10 new insights in climate
science. The Secretariat has also worked to build and mobilize our networks through various activities,
and in support of early career researchers. The Secretariat was instrumental in unfolding SRI 2021,
which was a great success. Finally, the Secretariat has continued to shape the global narrative, which
is another pillar of Future Earth, for instance through the Anthropocene Magazine or the annual report.
Welcoming remarks by Andrea Hinwood, UNEP Chief Scientist
It’s an absolute pleasure to represent UNEP in this Future Earth meeting. This is good timing as UNEP
heads for its 50th year. It was established in 1972 against the backdrop of a range of scientific reports
telling the world that we had major problems with our global environment. The world is even more
complex now and we are within a new era characterized by the three planetary crises of climatechange, pollution and waste, and biodiversity loss. Working together on these cross-cutting issues isimperative. Our research report on achieving the environmental dimension of the sustainable
development goals shows that of the 93 environmental related SDG indicators, good progress has
been achieved for 22 over the last 15 years. There are not enough data and/or progress regarding
the other indicators. It is unlikely that we will reach the SDGs without substantial action. We needinnovation, collaboration, open and transparent transdisciplinary and out of the box solutions.
Together with the other custodian partners, we will continue to engage, both in stating agendas andleveraging science and innovation to feed into the complex mandate of living in harmony with nature.
UNEP looks forward to working with you all and to working on solutions to achieve positive change.
Welcoming remarks by Heide Hackmann, Executive Director of the International Science
CouncilI’m delighted to have this chance to congratulate Future Earth and therefore all of us, on the first
Future Earth General Assembly. The creation of this Assembly is a significant institutional milestone.
It creates ownership and accountability for the work of Future Earth amongst its community andserves the pursuit of our Future Earth core values, including diversity and inclusivity. It is a basis forbuilding a community that has a powerful global voice on sustainability science, and also forconvening a multistakeholder community around global collaboration. This is needed more than ever,given the pressures of trends towards divergent nationalisms. In the face of a global pandemic, theagenda of Future Earth has never been more important. Covid 19 is a global wakeup call for all of us;
it has highlighted the reality and urgency of the risks faced by humanity, and the need for us to reallyre-double our efforts to achieve global sustainability.
Notwithstanding the tremendous scientific successes of Future Earth and its global networks, theGRNs, Future Earth has had to navigate its way through institutional teething problems and throughwhat has proved, I think, to be persistent and powerful divergences in understanding what thefundamental Future Earth purpose and approach should be. A lot of energy and time have gone into
matters of mandate, governance, architecture, structure, and process, with the recent review of Future
Earth having generated a further round of really serious rethinking and restructuring. Having been
deeply involved in these processes, I really do believe that all of us have managed to address thenecessary and sufficient conditions for Future Earth to now flourish in realizing its substantive scienceled mission. That’s where our joint focus and combined efforts now need to fall.
2

As we move ahead in pursuing influence and impact for sustainability science in all parts of the world,
Future Earth can count on the full support of the International Science Council. We are a proud andcommitted custodian of Future Earth. As most of you know, the ISC itself is a rapidly evolvingorganization. We were established three years ago and have made significant progress in finding andusing our global voice for science. We have developed and implemented forward looking strategies,
policies and action plans and built an ambitious, relevant and responsive portfolio of scientific activities
that address major contemporary global challenges, not only for society but also for science. Our new
action plan, for the coming three years, will be adopted by the ISC General Assembly in just over two
weeks’ time; and like the first action plan, global sustainability is a central priority domain of action.
For the Council, there is no doubt the biggest and most urgent challenge for contemporary science is
to identify pathways to global sustainability and to assist in the creation and promotion of policies andpublic action that can advance societies along those pathways. As a custodian organization, we will
support Future Earth in addressing this challenge. We will also rely on Future Earth to work with us
as we seek to amplify and accelerate resource investment in sustainability science globally throughthe work, for example, that we are doing with the Global Forum of Funders. We will also work together
to increase the visibility and influence of all science, within global policy processes.
I do want to thank the colleagues on the outgoing Governing Council, the leadership and members of
the Advisory Committee, the Secretariat staff, all those involved in the task forces and theimplementation processes, and you, the Future Earth community, for your input, your advice, yourwisdom and for the work that lies ahead.
Welcoming remarks by Meriem Bouamrane, Programme Specialist, Man and the Biosphere
Programme, UNESCO
It is very nice to be with you from UNESCO, from Paris, addressing this first assembly. It has been ajourney, like Heide has said, and I also thank everybody who has brought us together today. UNESCO
has been part of Future Earth since the beginning and we will continue to do so as custodian. It is
more than ever crucial to have an entity such as Future Earth for sustainability science. The learningfrom all this journey together, from the start, is really that science, more than ever, is needed, as called
for by the youth movement ‘Unite Behind Science’. More than ever, we need to base our decisions
on fact and on good evidence. At a time where the polarities are more vivid than ever, the governancework that Future Earth has done under the chairmanship of Maria Uhle is crucial. This is really a time
to build bridges between different fields of knowledge, between science, indigenous and local
knowledge, between different generations. In this respect, UNESCO is very happy with the progress
made in Future Earth with the Early Career and Youth Fellows. Youth are calling upon all of us tochange, to transform and it is very important from UNESCO’s perspective that Future Earth builds
those bridges and that the Early Career Researchers feel supported in this big transformation that weare going through. Lastly, Future Earth can also help to build bridges between different sectors. It is
crucial that the science is done by scientists and that the recommendations are implemented by policy
makers, and owned by all the different sectors. The crisis we are facing and the limited amount oftime we have is calling for working together, and from different perspectives, respecting the point ofview of different people. It is my wish also from UNESCO that all the work we have done and thediscussions we will have during this first assembly show that everybody has a part to play, and that3

science and sustainability science can really change people’s lives. UNESCO remains committed tohelp you build all those bridges, to reach out to different communities and to transform science into
practice in our different programs, and with support from the UNESCO Chairs Network.
Maria Uhle thanked all the Custodians, and as the co-chair of the Belmont Forum which is anothercustodian organization for Future Earth, echoed everything UNEP, ISC and UNESCO representatives
said. She introduced Johan Rockström and Leena Srivastava, co-chairs of the Future Earth Advisory
Committee, and thanked the Advisory Committee for all the dedication that they put into providing
extremely invaluable points of view to help Future Earth get to where we are today.
Welcoming remarks by Johan Rockström, co-chair of the Future Earth Advisory Committee
It is great to be with you at this transformative moment. Last week, the United Nations Secretary
General Antonio Guterres concluded, based on the scientific evidence provided in the IPCC 6th
Assessment, that we have reached code red, and called for a planetary guardianship of the entire
Earth system for humanity’s future. This conclusion originates from 30 years plus of scientificadvancements. We should be proud of where we come from, in terms of advancing integrated Earthsystem and sustainability science, and this origin is something that is incredibly important also inthinking about how we navigate our future because scientists are but one stakeholder in a diverse
landscape faced with turbulence and large transformative changes ahead. The 19 Global Research
Projects and the 8 Knowledge Action Networks of Future Earth originate from the International
Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Diversitas and the International Human Dimensions Programme
and Earth System Science partnership. These programs were iconic, major investments that brought
us to the take-off point of Future Earth, and the fundamental conclusion that we have created our own
Geological Epoch, the Anthropocene, and that we need transformations across the entire world for afair and equitable future within a resilient and stable earth system. My conclusion is, as co-chair of
the Advisory Committee of Future Earth, that our comparative advantage as a Future Earthcommunity is to be at the frontier of advancing interdisciplinary global sustainability science. We
should very humbly recognize that we cannot do everything under the Sun in this global transition
towards a fair and prosperous world future. The entire SDG agenda cannot lie on our scientificshoulders, but we can add incredible value, by filling knowledge gaps, providing invaluable insights
and solutions, by filling knowledge gaps in partnership across natural and social sciences, and byholding hands with stakeholders around the world. We are today the world’s largest network ofscientists pursuing interdisciplinary global sustainability research. We have a tremendous opportunity
to attract young scholars from north and south, east and west to really be the place where you want
to be in order to advance the frontier of our understanding. I would like to hand that over as one of
the testimonies of the Advisory Committee. We need to hold on tight to what is our identity and what
is our comparative advantage: advancing knowledge in support of the global sustainability
transformation.
Welcoming remarks by Leena Srivastava, co-chair of the Future Earth Advisory Committee
Let me start by saying what a great privilege it was for me to be on the Advisory Committee of Future
Earth and to work with our really illustrious Governing Council. Let me also congratulate Future Earthon this massive exercise that strives to create a much greater ownership of the scientific community.
A lot of time and effort has gone into this process and the outcome is extremely promising for the4

world as a whole. From the experience of the last few years, the new solid organizational structure -with clearly defined rules, responsibilities and agreed upon expectations -- is crucial to help every
entity within this community to play its role more effectively and also enjoyably. As co-chair of theAdvisory Committee, I do hope that Future Earth will be THE institution that will produce thetrustworthy and actionable research that is going to pull planet earth back into a safe zone. Today,
we do see a much greater acceptance of the science of climate change and of other global
environmental challenges. Undoubtedly, we need to continue to refine our research but also look at
the colliding forces of other global challenges. The need of the hour is to see how we translate thisknowledge, and science-based solutions, into a universal response and accelerated action. Thismeans a sharp focus on trust building, partnerships, participatory governance, and inclusive
knowledge. In particular, we do have to bring in the developing world in a much stronger manner
through inclusive finance and other related mechanisms. The Assembly will have a key role to play inenhancing the relevance and impact of Future Earth research.

5

2. Implementation Team process and outputs (presented by Cornelia Krug, Chair of
the Implementation Team, see the presentation here)
The external review completed in 2020 recommended that we reflect on the roles that the different
entities of Future Earth play and how we could improve collaboration among these entities. As a
response to that review, an Implementation Team was established with representatives from theGoverning Council, the Advisory Committee, the Secretariat, the Regional and National Committees,
the Global Research Projects, the Knowledge Action Networks, and the Future Earth Early Career
Network.
The work of the Implementation Team was divided into four working groups according to Future
Earth’s:
1. Mission and Objectives;
2. Governance;
3. Global Research Networks (which encompass the Global Research Projects and theKnowledge Action Networks); and4. Secretariat.
The mandate of the Implementation Team was to resolve differences in inputs to the Future Earthtransition process, and provide detailed mechanisms, processes, and policies to move Future Earthforward. In consultation with the Future Earth community, the working groups met regularly amongst
themselves, with the Implementation Team as a whole and with the Governing Council to draft
recommendations. The recommendations were then reviewed, modified where necessary, andendorsed by the Governing Council.
The Governing Council approved the following documents:- Future Earth Mission and Objectives;- Future Earth Global Coordination Hub Terms of Reference;- Future Earth Global Secretariat Hub Terms of Reference;- Future Earth Assembly and Governing Council Terms of Reference;- Future Earth National Committee Structure Terms of Reference.
Two documents will need approval by the new Governing Council:- Global Research Networks Terms of Reference;- Core Fund Terms of Reference.
Throughout the transition process, the work of the Implementation Team was also important inbuilding trust among the different members of the community.

63. The new Future Earth governance structure (presented by Stephanie Burton,
member of the Implementation Team Working Group on Governance, see thepresentation here)
The Future Earth External Review provided the following recommendations on Future Earth’s
governance structure:
1. Transition to a more bottom-up governance;
2. Including more scientists in the governance of Future Earth;
3. A governance structure representative and inclusive of the whole Future Earth community.
The new governance structure of Future Earth, proposed by the Implementation Team and approvedby the Governing Council is illustrated in figure 2 below.
The interactions among Assembly members and groups and between the Assembly and theGoverning Council are a key aspect of the new governance structure. Assembly meetings are an
opportunity for all the different sectors of Future Earth to meet, to become familiar with each otherand to work together on developing the scientific strategy and the direction of Future Earth. Each of
the groups in the Assembly represents a wider community within their sector and has the opportunity
to self-organize, to develop a shared message, and to interact with their representatives on the
Governing Council. The communication between the Governing Council and the Assembly should bea two way process so that the Governing Council makes decisions based on the principles ofinclusivity and representativity of the whole Future Earth community.
The main roles of the Assembly, which will gather annually and must act in accordance with the Future
Earth vision and mission, are to:
1. Identify, discuss and advise on new and emerging priorities for the scientific and broader
strategic development of Future Earth;
2. Make regular recommendations to the Governing Council on strategic and scientific priorities
for Future Earth;
3. Elect the Governing Council and pass decision-making authority to it;
4. Review key initiatives and outcomes each year;
5. Review and advise on the Future Earth budget.
The Governing Council is the operational decision-making structure working on behalf of theAssembly. The Governing Council will gather at least quarterly and is composed of 17 members
representing all of the groups in the Assembly. The main roles of the Governing Council are to:
1. Oversee the strategic and scientific directions of Future Earth;
2. Support timely decision processes to advance Future Earth’s agenda, strategies, activities
and structures;
3. Oversee the Secretariat operations and the development of Future Earth policies andpractices;
4. Report to the Assembly each year during the Assembly meeting.

7

Figure 2: The Assembly is composed of representatives from each Future Earth entity, who are gathered ingroups: Global Research Networks (GRPs + KANs), Regional Committees and Structures, National and Local
Committees and Structures, Global Secretariat Hubs Funders and/or Boards, Early Career Researchers
Network of Networks, Researchers from Low and Middle Income Countries, Partner organizations. In addition
to these groups, the following entities/persons are invited as non-voting members of the Assembly: Custodianorganizations (Belmont Forum, ISC, UNEP and UNESCO), Elected Governing Council members, Global
Secretariat Hubs directors.
Relevant Assembly groups elect their Governing Council representatives which is composed of 17 voting
members and each Custodian organization and Secretariat hub director is invited as observer of the Governing
Council.
The Assembly makes recommendations and advises the Governing Council who is the decision maker of Future
Earth, and who oversees the secretariat implementation of activities. The Secretariat reports to the Governing
Council, who reports to the Assembly.

8

4. The new Future Earth Secretariat (presented by Fumiko Kasuga, Director of theJapan Hub of the Future Earth Secretariat, see the presentation here)
The Future Earth External Review provided recommendations on the Secretariat’s structure to:
1. Empower the Secretariat to fulfil its mandate; and2. Improve the operational efficiency of Future Earth.
Accordingly, the Implementation Team proposed a new structure for the Secretariat that includes a
Global Coordination Hub as the Secretariat’s headquarters and an expansion of Global Secretariat
Hubs through an open-bidding process. The Implementation Team also developed their Terms ofReference, which were approved by the Governing Council, and the key points of which aresummarized in table 1 below. The detailed Terms of References as approved by the Governing
Council can be found here: Future Earth Global Coordination Hub Terms of Reference; Future Earth
Global Secretariat Hub Terms of Reference.
Table 1: Future Earth Secretariat Hubs’ Terms of Reference (Key Points)
Global Coordination Hub
•
•
•

•

Executive representation through the
Executive Director
Management of the governance and common
resources (“Core Fund”)
Leading strategy development with guidancefrom GC, network oversight, and monitoringand evaluation, fundraising efforts andmanagement of partnerships
Leading of global communications (internaland external) and overall coordination

Global Secretariat Hubs••••

Constitute the distributed Future Earth Secretariat
Work with the Global Coordination Hub as a single
unit to deliver the key functions of the Secretariat
Contribute to the main functions and operations of
the Future Earth Secretariat
Support with a fixed annual contribution to theCore fund, including any financial or in-kind
support for any International Program Offices(IPOs) of the Future Earth Global Research
Networks within their country or region

As part of the open-bidding process, a committee was established to review the proposals for hosting
the Global Coordination Hub and Global Secretariat Hubs and provide a recommendation to theGoverning Council for approval. On July 9th, the Governing Council approved all 8 proposals for
hosting Global Secretariat Hubs (including the 5 existing Hubs). The search for Global Coordination
Hubs is ongoing and additional proposals to host Global Secretariat Hubs remain welcome. Currently,
in the absence of a Global Coordination Hub and Executive Director, the Hub directors are sharing
the executive roles.
In the past two months, several meetings were held with the new Hubs to learn of their ideas andplans. Additionally, a series of on-boarding workshops gathered the eight Global Secretariat Hubs to
discuss their visions for Future Earth, to share Secretariat roles, and to explore their strengths andnew ways to support each other, and to connect regional and local activities to global ones.

9

Figure 3: The Future Earth Secretariat is currently composed of 8 Global Secretariat Hubs. The 5 pre-existing
Hubs (Canada, France, Japan, Sweden, and USA) are joined by the following new Hubs: China, South Asia,
and Taipei.

105. Election of the Governing Council’s members
Governing Council members are elected for a three-year term, renewable once. In order to allow
rotation every year, the first elected Governing Council members will have staggered terms (of 1, 2
or 3 years). The Governing Council has 17 seats, distributed among the following 5 groups:- Global Research Networks (GRPs and KANS): 3 seats;- National and Local Committees and Structures and the Regional Committees and Structures:
3 seats;- Researchers from low- or middle-income countries: 3 seats;- Early Career Researchers: 3 seats;- Global Secretariat Hubs’ boards and/or funders: 5 seats.
Ahead of the Assembly meeting, a call for nominations for the Governing Council members was publishedon the Future Earth website and circulated within the community. A total of 42 eligible nominations werereceived (7 for the Early Career Researchers’ group; 11 for the Global Research Networks’ group; 6 forthe group of Global Secretariat Hubs’ boards and/or funders; 8 for the group of National and Local
Committees and Structures and the Regional Committees and Structures; and 10 for the group of
Researchers from Low- or Middle-Income Countries).

All Assembly members from the 5 groups were invited to vote online for their respective group’s
representatives 48h prior to the second day of the Assembly meeting. All Assembly members fromand working in a low or middle income country were invited to vote for the election of the Governing
Council representatives of the group of researchers from low and middle income countries. All
Assembly members who are also early career researchers were invited to vote for the election of theGoverning Council representatives of the group of early career researchers.
On day 2 of the Assembly meeting, each group gathered to discuss and ratify the outcomes of theelection of their respective representatives. Each group had the possibility of not ratifying the election
outcomes if at least two thirds of the group’s voting members agreed not to ratify the election results.
In case of non ratification in a group, the group would have gathered in October again to repeat theelection process.
Election results
Of the 179 voting rights, 149 were cast and all groups reached the required quorum of two-third. On
the day 2 of the Assembly meeting, all groups ratified the election outcomes. The 17 elected
Governing Council members are presented in the table 2 below.

11

Table 2: Elected Governing Council Members, 2021 Future Earth General Assembly meeting
Assembly and Name
Governing
Council Groups

Gender Nationality

Country ofwork

Institution

Gaby
Langendijk

Female The
Netherlands

Germany

Helmholtz-Zentrum Hereon

Arijit Paul

Male

Austria

University of Graz

Gemma Purser

Female United
Kingdom

UnitedKingdom

University of Edinburgh

Lisa Miller

Female U.S.A. andCanadaCanadaInstitute of Ocean Sciences

Female Tunisia

Tunisia

University of Carthage

Female Finland

Finland

University of Helsinki

YukariTakamura

Female Japan

Japan

Science Council of Japan

Maria Uhle

Female USA

USA

US National Science
Foundation

Deliang Chen

Male

SwedenSwedenUniversity of Gothenburg

Ursula Eicker

Female Germany

CanadaConcordia University

Jean-Marie
Flaud

Male

FranceFrench Ministry of Research

Stephanie
BurtonFemale South Africa

South Africa

University of Pretoria

Female Finland

Finland

University of Helsinki

Male

Japan

Japan

University of Tokyo andUnited Nations University

Female India

India

Institute for Sustainable
Development and Research

Lucas Enrico
Experts from
Low and Middle
IncomeCountries

Male

Argentina

Argentina

National Scientific andTechnological ResearchCouncil (CONICET) andNational University of
Córdoba

Gete Zeleke

Male

Ethiopia

Ethiopia

Addis Ababa University

Early Career
Researchers

GlobalResearch
Faten Attig
Networks (GRP Baharor KAN)
Sirkku Juhola

GlobalSecretariat
Hubs Boards
and Funders

Regional,
National, Local Hanna
Lappalainen
Committees
and Structures
Taikan Oki
Kalpana
Chaudhari

India

France12

Discussion on the election process
A series of break-out sessions were held for each group to ratify the election outcomes, discuss theelection process, their representation on the Governing Council, and their internal organization as agroup. The main points of these discussions are summarized below.
●

Improving the election process:○ Many groups suggested that in the next elections, members should have theopportunity to interact with the candidates before the election to get to know thembetter.
○ Given that in most of the groups the votes for the candidates were very close, one
group suggested that nominees should not be allowed to vote for themselves in future
elections.

●Representation of the different groups on the Governing Council:○ The Global Research Networks group highlighted that while their group represents thebiggest part of the Assembly, they have three representatives on the Governing
Council, like smaller groups.
○ Each Assembly group and the Assembly as a whole will have to think carefully of thecritical diversity criteria they want to fulfill in the next elections of Governing Council
members, as the Governing Council is not currently representative of all types ofdiversity136. Closing remarks
Maria Uhle highlighted the following points regarding the next steps for the Assembly and theGoverning Council:● The next Assembly meeting will take place in conjunction with SRI2022 in June 2022 in
Pretoria, South Africa. It will be a hybrid format. While the 2021 Assembly focused on theelection of the Governing Council, the next Assembly meetings will be an opportunity for themembers and Future Earth groups to meet and set the tone for where Future Earth needs togo and what its priorities are.
● The new Governing Council will meet by the end of 2021 and will have, among other things,
to finalize the Global Research Networks Terms of Reference and the Core Fund Terms ofReference.
● As no nominations for the Assembly co-chairs have been received ahead of the first Assembly
meeting, an election will be organized before the next Assembly meeting. The Assembly's two
co-chairs will serve in their individual capacity for 3-year staggered terms and can be reelected for one additional term of 3 years. The Assembly co-chairs responsibilities include:○ Guiding and overseeing the work of the Assembly;○ Ensuring that the Assembly acts in accordance with the Future Earth vision, mission,
objectives, and core values;○ Overseeing the election of the Governing Council and possibly other votes when noconsensus is found within the Assembly regarding recommendations to the Governing
Council;○ Preparing the annual Assembly meeting agenda with the Organizing Committee andthe support of the Secretariat.
Maria Uhle warmly thanked the outgoing Governing Council and Advisory Committee, theImplementation Team and the funders of the Secretariat Hubs for the work they have done in the lastyears. She also thanked all the Assembly members for their active participation in the meeting andthe team who organized the meeting.

14

Annex 1: Questions and Answers
Throughout the Assembly meeting, Q&A sessions were organized. The questions and their answers arepresented below. A first set of questions is related to the Future Earth community (how engagement andcollaborations are fostered), a second set of questions is related to the new governance structure and athird set of questions is related to the Secretariat. Questions and answers in blue boxes are questions
which were not answered during the meeting by lack of time. The Secretariat answered those questions
after the meeting.

Fostering engagement and collaboration in the Future Earth community
How does the new Future Earth structure encourage collaboration between GRPs and KANS?
Cornelia Krug: To begin with, from the next Assembly, our discussions will focus on science so that
Assembly members learn about the various teams of work done by the Future Earth community. The
Core Fund put in place by the Secretariat will be used to support collaborative activities between GRPs
and KANs.
How does the new structure integrate collaboration work through Global Research Projects andKnowledge Action Networks for Low and Middle Income Countries?
Each Global Research Network can request and offer collaboration opportunities to be disseminated via
their liaison officers. Previous Future Earth decision making bodies as well as the External Review havestressed the importance of developing fair representation in each (Scientific) Steering Committee ensuring (1) representation from every major populated continent, (2) good gender balance, and (3)representation of different career stages. The Future Earth secretariat continues to promote thesediversity criteria in the decision making bodies of the Global Research Projects and Knowledge-Action
Networks as well as in other initiatives. The secretariat offers various cross-disciplinary synthesis
opportunities to experts from all networks (which, in some cases, extends beyond the Future Earthcommunity). Cross-network meetings are organized quarterly for the Global Research Networks,
wherein two representatives from each Global Research Project and Knowledge-Action Network can
attend.
How can Future Earth support scientists from Low and Middle Income Countries and early
career researchers that are not members of Belmont Forum?
The Future Earth Secretariat supports scientists from Low and Middle Income Countries and early
career researchers independently of Belmont Forum through different events and activities.
Is there any plan for engagement of youths from Low and Middle Income Countries to identify
core problems and find solutions for different sectors ?
Various opportunities should be provided and active dialogue should be encouraged to engage youth inany country/region. Early career networks, various types of capacity building programs have beendeveloped at Future Earth with such purposes.
What specific efforts were made by the Future Earth Secretariat to involve low- and middleincome countries, since its early onset. What actions can improve their engagement?
Wendy Broadgate: One of the Future Earth principles is to engage people from all parts of the world
in all our activities, events or scientific committees. Some examples of past activities include theSeedbeds of Transformation conference in South Africa in 2018, the call for applicants for the SDG
Labs in Africa, the Belmont Forum Collaborative Action on Pathways for which the Future Earth
Secretariat funded African partners. More can be done and the many representatives from low- and15

middle-income countries in the Assembly through their advice and engagement will certainly help theSecretariat to be even more active on this aspect.
Fumiko Kasuga: The former Future Earth regional centers in Asia (which have become or joined
Global Secretariat Hubs) have helped to establish national committees for Future Earth and haveencouraged local research activities.
There is no presence of national or local organizations of Future Earth in any country in Latin
America. How will Future Earth participate in this region?
Veera Mitzner: Future Earth does not have a National Committee or Regional Office in any of the Latin
American countries. However, we have a partner organization, which is the Inter-American Institute for
Global Change Research, which has wide networks in the region. We have started the conversation
with them regarding future engagement. The Global Hub in Canada and the Global Hub in the US are
working together to see how we can strengthen our presence and engagement in Latin Americancountries. And if you are a Future Earth community member, based in Latin America, please reach out
and be in touch with us because we really would like to support the community there, better, going
forward.
I'm a physical scientist from a Global Research Network. How can I get involved in, contributeto, "Knowledge Action Network" activities?
Engagement with each Knowledge-Action Network or other Global Research Project is different. The
best step forward on this is to contact the International Program Office (IPO) of the group oralternatively, when there is no IPO, a designated liaison to the network (from the Future Earth
Secretariat). It is important that your interest in engagement has a tangible piece, for example, you wish
to engage because of a specific need in your research, or your wish to contribute to the development of
the broader network. Furthermore, interested individual scientists might join memberclicks directly andsocialize there via the existing circles.
Could Future Earth somehow start engaging with scientists in Russia?
Future Earth has a National Committee in Russia, which works to mobilize and support sustainability
science in the country. If you are a researcher working in Russia and interested in engaging in Future
Earth activities, we suggest contacting the National Committee directly. You can find the contact
information on the Future Earth website here.
Is there a strategy to engage national funding agencies to provide support for Future Earthprojects?
Maria Uhle: National Committees and Global Secretariat Hubs in a given country can help theresearchers engaged in the GRNs, in the Early Career Network or in other Future Earth activities makeconnections with national funding agencies. It is the strategy we have pursued in the US in order toallow funders and various Future Earth entities to talk about how these groups can be supported
through different programs and through different agencies. We have a shared responsibility and acommitment to helping to support the different entities and mobilizing resources so that we can allcontribute to the whole of Future Earth.
What is the composition between social and life scientists within Future Earth?
It is difficult to respond precisely to this question as Future Earth is a network of networks.
Nevertheless, given the history of Future Earth, its community remains dominated by natural scientists.
The Secretariat works towards engaging the Humanities and Social Sciences community through mostof its initiatives (see for instance the Pathways initiative) and through building partnerships (for instancewith PERN or BRIDGES).

16

How does Future Earth apply transdisciplinarity in its organizational structure and ways ofworking?
Maria Uhle: Transdisciplinarity is a critical piece of sustainability science. It is also not the only piecethat happens; there still needs to be some of the fundamental science that happens to generateknowledge and then work across the disciplines. Having the Global Research Projects and theKnowledge Action Networks coming together under the same “Global Research Networks” wasdecided to highlight that the action of developing and disseminating the knowledge and engaging withstakeholders is an integral part of all the Global Research Networks. We do not expect everybody todevelop transdisciplinary approaches, but Future Earth wants to be able to facilitate the connections
needed within its networks so that we can access and integrate the strengths of our different networks
toward a common goal. I would really push us to think about having different ways to create thoseconnections and to support transdisciplinary research. Transdisciplinarity is not the only thing that
Future Earth does, neither is “disciplinary science” or “interdisciplinary science”. Future Earth covers
the full spectrum and is about learning how to benefit from and utilize that whole spectrum as we move
forward to advance sustainability science at large.
What are the challenges to engage nonacademic organizations in Future Earth activities? And
do we overcome them?
Wendy Broadgate: We need to be efficient with people’s time when we are engaging nonacademicorganizations and think carefully about what is in it for them because generally, there is not a
bandwidth within external organizations to contribute to the deep, long flow of the research process.
One thing that we want to do in the Secretariat is to help share experiences and learnings from different
parts of the community about engaging different stakeholders in our work.
Maria Uhle: The Belmont Forum has been issuing calls for proposals on various topics with a focus ontransdisciplinary approaches since 2012. The Belmont Forum can help fund engagement withstakeholders. If your national funding agency participates in a call of the Belmont Forum, you are
eligible to be part of a consortium to compete within that call for proposals. We, as the Belmont Forum,
see the projects and the community that we are building through this transdisciplinary community as
also part of the Future Earth group.
How does Future Earth collaborate with WCRP?
Wendy Broadgate: We have a long-standing collaboration with WCRP, primarily through
WCRP’s deep engagement in some of the Global Research Projects. For example, the Global Carbon
Project, and SOLAS are co-sponsored by WCRP. At a strategic level, Future Earth attends the Joint
Scientific Committee of WCRP and WCRP joined this Assembly as a partner. We have a collaborationagreement that outlines our commitment to collaborate strategically. For example, WCRP recently
joined the Ten New Insights in Climate Science. Overall, there is a very strong collaboration groundedin the origin of the global change research programs and we are delighted that there is still a deep
commitment from the leadership of WCRP to work with Future Earth. It makes us, as a community, verystrong and we really appreciate that collaboration.
What are the main provisions that safeguard Future Earth's image as a trustworthy party (freefrom undue influence from e.g funders, or ideological stances over science)?
Co-design and stakeholder engagement are at the core of transdisciplinary research, so Future Earthbasically promotes collaboration with the private sector. At the initiation of a new project, however, it isimportant to fully discuss the purpose of the collaboration and roles to be shared among the engaged
parties, and we usually exchange agreement documents with the collaborating stakeholders. These
include privacy policy, funding purposes, sharing principles of the project products, etc.

17What has the current governance overhaul revealed about how to improve inter- andtransdisciplinary research, and collaboration amongst partners in practice?
Cornelia Krug: There is a clear need to make space for scientific interaction in Future Earth. We needto start with the science/research, and not the processes, and not focus too much on theories ofchange and how to make transdisciplinary research happen. The GRNs are very varied and diverse,
working on a broad range and topics, at various levels of engagement with stakeholders. We need totap into this variety and diversity, and create the space for the research community (and associatedstakeholders) to meet, to discuss ideas, concepts and research questions. We also need to create
opportunities that allow for fruition of these ideas - e.g. in the form of seed grants.
The assembly needs less of a discussion of governance and procedure, and more of science. We needto make the assembly the science body of Future Earth governance.
Creating the space for GRNs to “talk shop” will lead to an improvement of inter- and transdisciplinary
research. The desire is there to interact and collaborate, Future Earth is the platform to allow for theinteraction, and to foster collaboration.

Future Earth GovernanceHow does the Assembly reach decisions, by voting or consensus? How does the Assembly
ensure compliance with decisions if national Hubs are independent?
Stephanie Burton: The Assembly will reach decisions by voting. There will be a process of voting andrepresentatives of all the different community groups will have opportunities to vote.
Maria Uhle: There are no national Hubs. The Global Secretariat Hubs are part of a larger collective
and work with each other. They commit to fulfil their part of a larger role, to be part of the team, and towork and bring their resources and assets to the team. The Secretariat Hubs are therefore notindependent in the sense that they work together on implementing the direction set by the Assemblyand prioritized by the Governing Council on the basis of the available resources. Having the group of
the funders and boards of the Hubs on the Assembly and the Governing Council helps get the direction
for the Secretariat actions.
What is the specific role of the Governing Council members? The Terms of Reference explains
the role of the Governing Council as a whole, but do individual Governing Council members
represent the interests of their group?
Individual Governing Council members are representing their group, but not their entities. For instance,the 3 Governing Council members from the Global Research Networks group are representing andcarrying the voice of all Global Research Networks, and not the one of their own Global Research
Project or Knowledge-Action Network. Groups of Governing Council members are therefore invited to
be in touch with the Assembly group they represent.
Why does the Governing Council endorse the terms of reference for the Global Research
Projects and others? Doesn't the Governing Council report to the Assembly, who should
endorse?
The Governing Council is the elected, operational decision-making structure of Future Earth. It also
oversees the development of Future Earth policies and practices. It supports timely decision processes,
in consideration of guidance provided by the Assembly.
If partners are part of the Assembly but not of the Council, how are their voices and priorities
heard and considered at the Council level?
Stephanie Burton: Partners are organizations who are not Future Earth entities; they collaborate with
Future Earth. Partners are not voting members for the election of the Governing Council but they18

participate in the election of the Assembly co-chairs and have the opportunity of sharing their views in
the Assembly and can provide strategic and forward-looking thinking about the priorities for Future
Earth. In addition, partners can apply to become members of Future Earth and the decision is made by
the Governing Council.
Why is the structure so complex? Why is there a need for a Governing Council? It doesn’t seemvery bottom-up.
Stephanie Burton: Bottom-up does not mean horizontal. Bottom-up means that you draw input andfeedback from a very broad community. It needs to feed into a feasible decision-making body while acompletely horizontal kind of structure would be very cumbersome because of the complexity of themembership of Future Earth. The recommendations and the proposals that were accepted on thegovernance structure might look complicated but it is not nearly as complicated as it would be if we had
the same input from all of the different members. The emphasis has been placed on representativity.
Every group has its membership, and that membership has representation in the Assembly and then in
the Governing Council with the goal to feed up opinions, views, and priorities towards the decision
making. It is the reason why it is complex but we do think that the representativity is such that all voices
can be heard in the Assembly and can inform what the Governing Council makes decisions about.

Can members of the Implementation Team be nominated for the Assembly or Governing Council
or there is a conflict of interest?
The Implementation Team’s work ended before the Summer 2021. So, there is no conflict of interest andindividuals who were members of the Implementation Team can be nominated for the Assembly andGoverning Council.
Which actions will be set up to encourage each group of the Assembly to self-organize?
The Future Earth Secretariat will have one liaison for each group who will support its internalorganization.
How is the representation and seats of each group in the Governing Council determined?
Maria Uhle: The number of seats of each group in the Governing Council was defined through aprocess of consultation having in mind that the Governing Council needs to be operational. The
Assembly provides a platform to bring people together, to bring the community together and think about
where Future Earth needs to go. The Governing Council helps prioritize. We wanted to haverepresentation from all of the different groups in the Governing Council. It is therefore really importantthat the Governing Council members are willing to represent the voices of their group. We also needed
to make sure that the Governing Council could help prioritize the actions based on the available
resources. That is why we needed to have the funders of the Secretariat around the table. Overall theGoverning Council is predominantly composed of members from the science community and thefunders are on the Governing Council to make sure that we can actually implement the decisions andto help open doors for potential expansion of activities by bringing in other funders to help us expand.
Cornelia Krug: I’d like to stress that we had long discussions about diversity as well. We have madespace for representatives from lower- and middle-income countries and from the early career
researchers to be in the Assembly and in the Governing Council so that we actually have this built-in
diversity measure already in our Governing Council and Assembly.
Why are the elections being held very early before we understand the whole new transformed
Future Earth?
Maria Uhle: We have thought that establishing the Assembly and the Governing Council as early as
possible was the best option to provide a stable structure and move Future Earth forward. Moreover,19there will be elections for the Governing Council every year. So, there is a way to modify and increase
diversity in the coming years.
How do we decide the candidates who are going to serve one, two or three years on the
Governing Council ?
Clément Brousse: Assembly members do not decide on who is going to serve one, two or three years,
but it is the Governing Council members themselves who will discuss their terms among them in eachgroup, who is going to serve for one, two or three years. The persons who are going to serve for either
one or two years will have the possibility to be nominated again and to be reelected for a second threeyear term.
What is meant by Structures in “national and regional, local committees, and structures” ?
Veera Mitzner: We work with organizations that have a lot of different set ups: National Committees,
Regional Committees, Regional Offices, etc. “Structure” is an umbrella term that captures the different
ways these groups have been organized.

Can the elected Governing Council change the terms of the Governing Council, for instance,
rotate two thirds out after the first two years, rather than one third each year?
Maria Uhle: That is certainly a possibility. However, let’s remember that the Implementation Team did
spend quite a bit of time talking about how they wanted to ensure the clean rotation of the Governing
Council members. It would be a proposal that the Governing Council would have to present to the
Assembly for approval.
Is there a term limit for Assembly members?
Clément Brousse: Assembly members are designated for three-year terms but there is no limit tothese terms because some of your groups have too few members and we want to make sure that one
group does not lack representatives on the Assembly.
What if none of the elected Governing Council members want to step out after one third of theirterm?
Maria Uhle: In such a scenario, I would suggest that the group who elected those people makes adecision on who should serve one, two or three years. However, the Governing Council representatives
should keep in mind that even if they are on the Governing Council for one year, they can be
nominated again and may serve three additional years. It is up to the groups to make sure that theirrepresentatives on the Governing Council actually represent them and help the group have a voice
within the structure of Future Earth.
Is there a Secretariat budget review scheduled for this year, before the next Assembly, once a
Global Coordination Hub is found?
The global Secretariat budget is reviewed and approved by the Governing Council every year, and weplan to do so this fiscal year before the next Assembly, regardless of having the Global Coordination
Hub.
Who elects the Future Earth Scientific Advisory Committee? Were these people hand-pickedwithout any consultation in 2018? How long will they serve?
In the new governance structure, there is no Advisory Committee. However, if the Assembly and/or theGoverning Council come to the conclusion that a scientific committee is needed, a change in the20

Governance ToR to include an Advisory Committee can be decided by the Governing Council andratified by the Assembly.
How will the diversity of the whole Governing Council be ensured if each group is voting for its
own representatives?
Ensuring diversity within each group of the Governing Council (GRN, ECR etc.) contributes to a fairly
diverse Governing Council. In future Governing Council elections (every year some members will
rotate) it will also be possible to add diversity criteria to the nomination calls to enhance diversity.

Future Earth Secretariat
What are the synergies and overlaps of Global Coordination Hubs and Secretariat Hubs (interms of activities and functioning)?
Some coordinating functions of the Secretariat, such as external and internal communications andadministration may need to be shared and jointly supported between the Global Coordination Hub andGlobal Secretariat Hubs. Overlaps should be reduced for efficient management, but considering
geographical distribution of the Future Earth Secretariat activities, role sharing must be helpful as well.
What are the relationships between Global Coordination Hub and Global Secretariat Hubs andhow do they coordinate?
Both types of hubs will take prioritized, separate roles of the Secretariat functions, as presented at theAssembly. Global Secretariat Hubs will provide a fixed annual contribution to the Core fund, which will
be managed by the Global Coordination Hub. The entire Secretariat will be led by an Executive
Director, who will sit at the Global Coordination Hub. All the hubs will work as a single Secretariat team.
Can there be more than one Hub per country?
Yes, this is a possibility.
How does Future Earth plan to manage the impacts of GDPR legislation on collaborating acrossregions and sharing various forms of data over borders?
The Future Earth Secretariat has updated the Privacy Notice to be compliant with GDPR and requiresthat all staff complete data protection training. The Privacy Notice is included when collecting data (forexample: in forms). When sharing personal data with members of the Future Earth network (outside of
the Secretariat), collaborators agree to follow data protection procedures.
Do you expect to have a hub per country? How do they relate to other groups belonging to theGeneral Assembly?
We encourage Future Earth communities to promote Future Earth research by developing national andregional structures, though we do not expect to have a hub in each country. As a separate strategy foran empowered Secretariat, we do hope to have an increasingly diverse and well-distributed global
Secretariat.
How can Governing Council members interact with different Hubs ?
Each Governing Council group has a liaison who will be able to put each Governing Council member intouch with various Secretariat Science officers, function leads or Directors depending on the topic.

21

Can you tell us when we will have confirmation about the level of the Future Earth Secretariat
support to Knowledge Action Networks and Global Research Networks for 2022?
We have been in close contact with the new hubs as we establish the functioning and support
structures of the new distributed Secretariat. We will do our best to confirm the level of support as soon
as possible.
How will Future Earth avoid taking the funding out of the mouth of the research andresearchers?
The Secretariat of Future Earth receives funding to coordinate, synthesize, convene workshops andconferences and for communications etc. (from ministries, national funding agencies and private
foundations). There is a very limited risk of competition with funding of research projects. Moreover, theFuture Earth Secretariat uses a part of its funding to support the research community through funding
workshops, etc.

22Annex 2: List of Assembly members
Global Research Network (GRPs and KANs)
•

AIMES
o
o

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Hannah Liddy
Mark Rounsevell
bioDISCOVERYoCornelia Krugo
Lynne Shannon
Earth System Governanceo
Gustav ThungrenoÅsa Persson
EvolvESo
Sibylle SchroeroElla Vazquez
Future Earth Coastso
Tim SmithoXiuzhen Li
Global Land ProgrammeoAriane de BremondoSharachchandra Lele
Global Mountain Biodiversity Assessmento
Eva SpehnoDavnah Urbach
IGACoLangley DeWittoClare Murphy
IHOPEoThomas McGovernoRuth MorganiLEAPSoBenjamin PoulteroSemeena Valiyaveetil Shamsudheen
IMBeRo
Carol RobinsonoJohn Claydon
Integrated Risk Governance ProjectoPeijun ShioQian YeMAIRSoJiaguo Qi
oJayes Srinivasan
oneHEALTHoPeter DaszakoCatherine Machalaba
PAGESoMarie-France LoutreoMichael N. Evans
Programme on Ecosystem Change and Society(PECS)oMaike HamannoOdirilwe Selomane
SOLAS
oJessica Giero
Minhan Dai
Sustainable Water Future Programme (Water
Future)oAnik BhadurioRabi Mohtar

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Finance and Economics KANo Roger Cremades
o Masachika Suzuki
Health KANo Kristie Ebi
o Anthony Capon
Natural Assets KAN
o Unai Pascualo Maria Jose Martinez-Harms
NEXUS KANo Faten Attig Baharo Marja Spierenburg
Ocean KANo Anna Zivian
o Linwood Pendleton
Risk KANo Jo-Ting Huang-Lachmano Sirkku Juhola
SSCP KANo Maurie Coheno Charlotte Jensen
Urban KANo Kensuke Fukushio Shuaib Lwasa

National and Local Committees / Structures
•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Future Earth AustraliaoJoanne ChongoTayanah O’Donnell
Future Earth National Committee Austria(National Committee for Global Change
Austria)oMargreth Keiler
Future Earth National Committee Chinao
Wenjie DongoBojie Fu
Future Earth National Committee FinlandoStephany MazonoEeva Furman
Future Earth National Committee for MongoliaoBattogtok DorjgotovoSuvdantsetseg Balt
Future Earth National Committee France(Comité National Francais des Changements
Globaux)oWolfgang CrameroThierry Lebel
Future Earth National Committee GermanyoDaniela Jacobo
Sebastian Sonntag
Future Earth National Committee IndiaoSandeep TambeoVandana Prasad
Future Earth National Committee IrelandoDiarmuid TorneyoMary Dobbs

23

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Future Earth National Committee JapanoTaro YamauchioNobuko Saigusa
Future Earth National Committee KoreaoSoonchang Yoono
Joon Kim
Future Earth National Committee PhilippinesoLourdes J. CruzoRico C. Ancog
Future Earth National Committee RussiaoVladimir KolosovoEvgeny Gordov
Future Earth National Committee South AfricaoColeen Vogelo
Neville Sweijd
Future Earth National Committee SpainoLuis SantamariaoEmilio Casamayor
Future Earth National Committee Switzerland(Sustainability Research Initiative)oJanet HeringoPeter Edwards
Future Earth Local Committee TaipeioYue-Gau Cheno
Chia-Hsing Jeffery Lee
Future Earth National Committee UKoPhilip Lewiso
Melissa Leach

Regions
•

•

•

•

•

Africa Future Earth CommitteeoChrispin KowenjeoAllali Abdelkader
Asia RegionoMohd Nordin Bin HassanoHein Mallee
Future Earth MENA Regional CenteroManfred LangeoRiyad Y. Hamzah
Future Earth Regional Office for Southern
Africa (FEROSA)oJane OlwochoBelinda Reyers
South Asia Regional OfficeoJaanaki GooneratneoKanupriya Harish

o
o

•

•

•

Makoto Taniguchi
Yukari Takamura
Global Secretariat Hub SwedenoDeliang Cheno
Stefan Claesson
Global Secretariat Hub TaipeioChao-Han LiuoTzu-Ching Meng
Global Secretariat Hub USAoMaria UhleoLisa Vaughan

Partners•••••

START International: Jon Padgham
Mountain Research Initiative: Carolina Adler
WCRP: Detlef Stammer
CCAFS: Bruce Campbell
STS Forum: Kanji Fujiki

Early-Career Researchers
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Gaby Langendijk
Meng WANG
Jay Dean Pocklington
Giovanni Avila-Flores
Sally Torres
Erna Karalija
Ajibola Akanji
Rachel Kelly
Kabir Rasouli
Mais Aljunaidy

Sustainability Researchers from Low andMiddle Income Countries (LICMIC)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Najet Aroua
Jurgenne H. Primavera
Gete Zeleke
Filipo Zulu
Yulia Sugandi
Kalpana Chaudhari
Eduardo Erazo Acosta
Leopoldo Cavaleri Gerhardinger
Joeli Veitayaki

Global Secretariat Hubs Boards and / orFunders••••

Global Secretariat Hub Board FranceoJean-Marie FlaudoStéphane Blanc
Global Secretariat Hub CanadaoRémi QuirionoGordon McBean
Global Secretariat Hub Chinao
Lin Yino
Tianjun Zhou
Global Secretariat Hub Japan

24