IN: Ann Margaret Veneman (born June 29, 1949) was the Executive Director of UNICEF from 2005 to 2010. Her appointment was announced on January 18, 2005 by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. Previously, Veneman was the United States Secretary of Agriculture, the first, and as of 2018 the only, woman to hold that position. Veneman served as USDA Secretary from January 20, 2001 to January 20, 2005, leaving to become the fifth executive director of UNICEF.

Veneman has received several awards and distinctions throughout her career. In 2009 Veneman was named to the Forbes 100 Most Powerful Women list, ranking 46th. In 2009 she received the Award of Distinction from the University of California Davis College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. Veneman is an Honorary Member of Rotary International (2008), received Sesame Workshop's Leadership Award for Children (2006), and a Humanitarian Award from the United Nations Association of New York (2006). In 2004 Veneman was honored with an Honorary Membership with the U.S. State Department's U.S.-Afghan Women's Council and an Honorary Membership with Sigma Alpha Sorority, the national professional agriculture sorority. She was also awarded the Main Street Partnership John Chaffee Award for Distinguished Public Service, the American PVO Partners Award for Service to People in Need, and the Grape & Wine Public Policy Leadership Award. Additional awards include the Richard E. Lyng Award for Public Service (2005), the UC Berkeley Goldman School of Public Policy Alumni of the Year Award (2003), the California State Fair's Agriculturalist of the Year Award (2003), and the National 4-H Alumni Recognition Award. In 2002, Veneman received the California Council for International Trade Golden State Award, the Dutch American Heritage Award, Junior Statesman Foundation Statesman of the Year Award and the United Fresh Fruit & Vegetable Distinguished Service Award. In 2001 Veneman received the Outstanding Woman in International Trade Award, the UC Davis Outstanding Alumna of the Year Award and the Food Research and Action Center Award. In 1995 she received a Cal Aggie Alumni Citation for Excellence and the Kiwanis Club of Greater Modesto National Farm-City Week Award. Veneman is currently a board member of Malaria No More, a New York-based nonprofit that was launched at the 2006 White House Summit with the goal of ending all deaths caused by malaria. Veneman is also co-chair of Mothers Day Every Day, along with former U.S. President Bill Clinton's Health and Human Services Secretary Donna Shalala. The "campaign was launched by CARE and the White Ribbon Alliance supporting access of basic health care and maternal services for women around the world." Veneman also serves as a board member of the Close Up Foundation, a civic education organization, and has served previously on a number of advisory councils and committees, particularly those involving higher education. In 2002, Veneman was diagnosed with breast cancer and received successful treatment. Veneman is also a second cousin of Star Wars creator George Lucas.
QUESTION: What was her distinctions
IN: Roberto Mangabeira Unger (; born 24 March 1947) is a philosopher and politician. He has developed his views and positions across many fields, including social, political, and economic theory. In legal theory, he is best known by his work in the 1970s and 80s while at Harvard Law School as part of the Critical Legal Studies movement, which is held to have helped disrupt the methodological consensus in American law schools. His political activity helped the transition to democracy in Brazil in the aftermath of the military regime, and culminated with his appointment as Brazil's Minister of Strategic Affairs in 2007 and again in 2015.

Unger's critique of economics begins with the identification of a key moment in economic history, when the analysis of production and exchange turned away from social theory and engaged in a quest for scientific objectivity. In Unger's analysis, classical economics focused on the causal relations among social activities, which were connected with the production and distribution of wealth. Classical economists asked questions about the true basis of value, activities that contributed to national wealth, systems of rights, or about the forms of government under which people grow rich. In the late-nineteenth century, in response to attacks from socialist ideas and debates about how society works, and as a means to escape the conundrums of value theory and to answer how values could become prices, marginalist economics arose. This movement in economics disengaged economics from prescriptive and normative commitments to withdraw the study of economies from debates about how society worked and what kind of society we wanted to live in. For Unger, this moment in the history of economics robbed it of any analytical or practical value. Unger's critique of Marginalism begins with Walras' equilibrium theory, which attempted to achieve a certainty of economic analysis by putting aside normative controversies of social organization. Unger finds three weaknesses that crippled the theory: foremost, the theory claimed that equilibrium would be spontaneously generated in a market economy. In reality, a self-adjusting equilibrium fails to occur. Second, the theory puts forth a determinate image of the market. Historically, however, the market has been shown to be indeterminate with different market arrangements. Third, the polemical use of efficiency fails to account for the differences of distribution among individuals, classes, and generations. The consequences of the marginalist movement were profound for the study of economics, Unger says. The most immediate problem is that under this generalizing tendency of economics, there is no means by which to incorporate empirical evidence and thus to re-imagine the world and develop new theories and new directions. In this way, the discipline is always self-referential and theoretical. Furthermore, the lack of a normative view of the world curtails the ability to propose anything more than a policy prescription, which by definition always assumes a given context. The discipline can only rationalize the world and support a status quo. Lastly, Unger finds that this turn in economics ended up universalizing debates in macroeconomics and leaving the discipline without any historical perspective. A consequence, for example, was that Keynes' solution to a particular historical crisis was turned into a general theory when it should only be understood as a response to a particular situation.
QUESTION:
what do u mean turned away