part 3 three steps towards global disaster resilience
DESCRIPTION
TOWARDS GLOBAL DISASTER RESILIENCE: Step 1: Integrating Today’s Global Knowledge Into Global Books of Knowledge Step 2: From Today’s Books of Knowledge to Innovative Capacity Building Step 3: From Today’s Paradigm to Tomorrow’sTRANSCRIPT
YOUR
NATION
YOUR
NATIONDATA BASES AND INFORMATIONDATA BASES AND INFORMATION
HAZARDS: GROUND SHAKING GROUND FAILURE SURFACE FAULTING TECTONIC DEFORMATION TSUNAMI RUN UP AFTERSHOCKS
• MONITORING• HAZARD MAPS• INVENTORY• VULNERABILITY• LOCATIONR
RISK
ACCEPTABLE RISK
UNACCEPTABLE RISK
BOOKS OF KNOWLEDGE
• PREPAREDNESS• PROTECTION• EARLY WARNING• EM RESPONSE• RECOVERY
5 PILLARS OF DISASTER RESILIENCE
GLOBAL DISASTER RESILIENCE
The Paradigm for 2014 That Makes Our Tomorrows Better
STEP 2
TOWARDS GLOBAL DISASTER RESILIENCE
• Step 1: Integrating Today’s Global Knowledge Into Global Books of Knowledge
• Step 2: From Today’s Books of Knowledge to Innovative Capacity Building
• Step 3: From Today’s Paradigm to Tomorrow’s
STEP 2: To Move From Today’s Books of
Knowledge to Innovative Capacity Building For Disaster Resilience
LET’S REVIEW THE FACTS FROM STEP 1 FIRST
Integrating Today’s Global Knowledge Into Global Books of
Knowledge
FACT 1: THE PROBLEM IS NOT A LACK OF DISASTER KNOWLEDGE
FACT 1: THE PROBLEM IS NOT A LACK OF DISASTER KNOWLEDGE
• ALL 200 NATIONS HAVE A HISTORICAL RECORD OF THEIR OWN DISASTERS
• ALL 200 NATIONS HAVE A HISTORICAL RECORD OF THEIR OWN DISASTERS
THE PROBLEM IS NOT A LACK OF DISASTER KNOWLEDGE (Continued)
THE PROBLEM IS NOT A LACK OF DISASTER KNOWLEDGE (Continued)
• MANY NATIONS, BUT NOT ALL, HAVE ALSO LEARNED FROM OTHER NATION’S DISASTERS
• MANY NATIONS, BUT NOT ALL, HAVE ALSO LEARNED FROM OTHER NATION’S DISASTERS
FACT 2: THE PROBLEM IS NOT KNOWING WHAT TO DO
FACT 2: THE PROBLEM IS NOT KNOWING WHAT TO DO
• ALL 200 NATIONS HAVE ADOPTED POLICIES FOR DISASTER RESILIENCE
• ALL 200 NATIONS HAVE ADOPTED POLICIES FOR DISASTER RESILIENCE
FACT 3: THE PROBLEM IS AN IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEM FACT 3: THE PROBLEM IS AN IMPLEMENTATION PROBLEM
• KNOWING WHAT TO DO TECH-NICALLY AND HOW TO DO IT POLITICALLY ARE DIFFERENT PROCESSES
• KNOWING WHAT TO DO TECH-NICALLY AND HOW TO DO IT POLITICALLY ARE DIFFERENT PROCESSES
FACT 4: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR IMPLEMENTATION
FACT 4: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR IMPLEMENTATION
• TECHNICAL AND POLITICAL CAPACITY ARE NEEDED FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF EACH OF THE FIVE PILLARS OF DISASTER RESILIENCE
• TECHNICAL AND POLITICAL CAPACITY ARE NEEDED FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF EACH OF THE FIVE PILLARS OF DISASTER RESILIENCE
YOUR
NATION
YOUR
NATIONDATA BASES AND INFORMATIONDATA BASES AND INFORMATION
HAZARDS: GROUND SHAKING GROUND FAILURE SURFACE FAULTING TECTONIC DEFORMATION TSUNAMI RUN UP AFTERSHOCKS
• MONITORING• HAZARD MAPS• INVENTORY• VULNERABILITY• LOCATIONR
RISK
ACCEPTABLE RISK
UNACCEPTABLE RISK
BOOKS OF KNOWLEDGE
• PREPAREDNESS• PROTECTION• EARLY WARNING• EM RESPONSE• RECOVERY
5 PILLARS OF DISASTER RESILIENCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• TURKEY: PROPER PRIOR PRE-PAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• TURKEY: PROPER PRIOR PRE-PAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• HAITI: PROPER PRIOR PRE-PAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• HAITI: PROPER PRIOR PRE-PAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• KAZAKJSTAN: PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• KAZAKJSTAN: PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• RUSSIA: PROPER PRIOR PRE-PAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• RUSSIA: PROPER PRIOR PRE-PAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• RUSSIA: PROPER PRIOR PRE-PAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• RUSSIA: PROPER PRIOR PRE-PAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• THE PHILIPPINES: PROPER PRIOR PRE-PAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• THE PHILIPPINES: PROPER PRIOR PRE-PAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• THE PHILIPPINES: PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• THE PHILIPPINES: PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• BOLIVIA: PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• BOLIVIA: PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• CARIBBEAN (SAINT LUCCIA): PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• CARIBBEAN (SAINT LUCCIA): PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• ARIZONA (USA): PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• ARIZONA (USA): PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
FACT 5: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PREPAREDNESS”
• EGYPT: PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• EGYPT: PROPER PRIOR PREPAREDNESS PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
• EGYPT: PRO-TECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• EGYPT: PRO-TECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
• CHINA:PROPER PRIOR PRO-TECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• CHINA:PROPER PRIOR PRO-TECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
• ALGERIA:PROPER PRIOR PRO-TECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• ALGERIA:PROPER PRIOR PRO-TECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
• ITALY: PROPER PRIOR PRO-TECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• ITALY: PROPER PRIOR PRO-TECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
• OKLAHOMA, USA: PROPER PRIOR PROTECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• OKLAHOMA, USA: PROPER PRIOR PROTECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
FACT 6: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “PROTECTION”
• JAPAN: PROPER PRIOR PROTECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
• JAPAN: PROPER PRIOR PROTECTION PREVENTS POOR PERFORMANCE
FACT 7: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EARLY WARNING”
FACT 7: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EARLY WARNING”
• INDONESIA: PROPER PRIOR WARNING PRECEDES PEOPLE EVACUATIONS
• INDONESIA: PROPER PRIOR WARNING PRECEDES PEOPLE EVACUATIONS
FACT 7: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EARLY WARNING”
FACT 7: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EARLY WARNING”
• CHILE: PROPER PRIOR WARNING PRECEDES PEOPLE EVACUATIONS
• CHILE: PROPER PRIOR WARNING PRECEDES PEOPLE EVACUATIONS
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
• PERU: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE (SEARCH AND RESCUE)
• PERU: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE (SEARCH AND RESCUE)
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
• JAPAN: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE
• JAPAN: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
• NORTH DAKOTA, USA: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE
• NORTH DAKOTA, USA: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
• CHINA: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE (SEARCH AND RESCUE AFTER LANDSLIDE)
• CHINA: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE (SEARCH AND RESCUE AFTER LANDSLIDE)
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
• NEW ZEALAND: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE
• NEW ZEALAND: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
• PAKISTAN: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE
• PAKISTAN: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
• CHINA: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE (EMERGENCY HEALTH CARE)
• CHINA: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING ASSURES TIMELY EMERGENCY RESPONSE (EMERGENCY HEALTH CARE)
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
FACT 8: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “EM. RESPONSE”
• UNITED NATIONS DISTRIBEUTING FOOD NEEDS TO BE TIMELY AND COST-EFFECTIVE DURING EM. RESPONSE
• UNITED NATIONS DISTRIBEUTING FOOD NEEDS TO BE TIMELY AND COST-EFFECTIVE DURING EM. RESPONSE
FACT 9: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “RECOVERY”
FACT 9: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “RECOVERY”
• LOS ANGELES: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING PROMOTES TIMELY AND COST-EFFECTIVE RESTORATION OF SERVICES AND RECOVERY
• LOS ANGELES: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING PROMOTES TIMELY AND COST-EFFECTIVE RESTORATION OF SERVICES AND RECOVERY
FACT 9: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “RECOVERY”
FACT 9: THE PROBLEM IS A LACK OF CAPACITY FOR “RECOVERY”
• VENICE: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING PROMOTES TIMELY AND COST-EFFECTIVE RESTORATION OF SERVICES AND RECOVERY
• VENICE: PROPER PRIOR PLANNING PROMOTES TIMELY AND COST-EFFECTIVE RESTORATION OF SERVICES AND RECOVERY
CONCLUSION
FACT 10: DISASTER RESILIENCE REQUIRES THE
INTEGRATION OF “POLITICAL AND TECHNICAL SOLUTIONS”
FOR A COMMON AGENDA
STEP 2From Today’s Books of
Knowledge to Innovative Capacity Building For Disaster Resilience
THE GOAL
DEMANDS ON COMMUNITY
DEMANDS ON COMMUNITY
NO DISASTERS:
CAPABILITIES OF COMMUNITY
CAPABILITIES OF COMMUNITY
REALITY
INCREASED DEMANDS ON COMMUNITY
INCREASED DEMANDS ON COMMUNITY
A DISASTER:
INSUFFICIENT CAPABILITIES OF
COMMUNITY
INSUFFICIENT CAPABILITIES OF
COMMUNITY
BOOK OF
KNOWLEDGE
- Perspectives
On Science, Policy,
And EM HI-ED
EVERY YEAR, EVERY NATION HAS DOZENS OF “WINDOWS OF
OPPORTUNITY” AFTER A NEW DISASTER TO USE THE UPDATED
BOOKS OF KNOWLEDGE FOR INNOVATIVE CAPACITY BUILDING
THE CAPACITY BUILDING PROCESS
UNDER-STANDUNDER-STAND
IDENT-IFY
IDENT-IFY
HEARHEAR
PERSON-ALIZE
PERSON-ALIZE ACTACT
PERIOD OF INTEGRATION
WINDOW OF OPPORTUNITY
PERIOD OF IMPLEMENTATION
THE GOAL: CREATING A COMMON AGENDA FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF
TECHNICAL AND POLITICAL SOLUTIONS
HAZARDSHAZARDS
ELEMENTS OF RISK IN EVERY NATION
ELEMENTS OF RISK IN EVERY NATION
EXPOSUREEXPOSURE
VULNERABILITYVULNERABILITY LOCATIONLOCATION
RISKRISK
TOWARDS INCREASED CAPACITY FOR GLOBAL DISASTER RESILIENCE
TOWARDS INCREASED CAPACITY FOR GLOBAL DISASTER RESILIENCE
GOAL: TO FIND THE COMMON AGENDA(CA) OF TECHNICAL
AND POLITICAL SOLUTIONS
GOAL: TO FIND THE COMMON AGENDA(CA) OF TECHNICAL
AND POLITICAL SOLUTIONS
TECHNICAL SOLUTIONSTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS
POLITICAL SOLUTIONSPOLITICAL
SOLUTIONS
CA
TOWARDS GLOBAL DISASTER RESILIENCE
TOWARDS GLOBAL DISASTER RESILIENCE
FACT: THE COMMON AGENDA IS BASED ON EACH NATION’S STAPLE FACTORS
FACT: THE COMMON AGENDA IS BASED ON EACH NATION’S STAPLE FACTORS
TECHNICAL SOLUTIONSTECHNICAL SOLUTIONS
POLITICAL SOLUTIONSPOLITICAL
SOLUTIONS
STAPLE FACTORSSTAPLE
FACTORS
PPTT
SSOO
CA
EACH NATION’S STAPLE FACTORS WILL VARY WITH
EACH NATION’S STAPLE FACTORS WILL VARY WITH
• TIME• PLACE• CIRCUMSTANCES
• TIME• PLACE• CIRCUMSTANCES
SOCIAL (ARE THE PEOPLE AWARE OF WHAT THEY NEED?)
COMMUNITYCOMMUNITY
TECHNICAL (IS THE STATE OF KNOWLEDGE AND PRACTICE BEING
APPLIED?)
ADMINISTRATIVE (WHO IS RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE?)
POLITICAL (ARE PUBLIC POLICIES RELEVANT IN TERMS OF THE
THREAT?)
LEGAL (ARE EXISTING LEGAL MANDATES ENFORCED?)
ECONOMIC (WILLINGNESS AND CAPACITY TO PAY FOR SAFETY?)
GOAL: COMMUNITY DISASTER RESILIENCE
SOCIAL SYSTEMS
SOCIAL SYSTEMS
STAPLE FACTORSSTAPLE FACTORS
DIFFERENCES IN PERSPECTIVES OF POLITICAL AND TECHNICAL
PROFESSIONALS
DIFFERENCES IN PERSPECTIVES OF POLITICAL AND TECHNICAL
PROFESSIONALS
BASED ON “NOT WELL ADVISED,”
SZANTON (1981)
BASED ON “NOT WELL ADVISED,”
SZANTON (1981)
POLITICAL VERSUS TECHNICAL THINKING
POLITICAL VERSUS TECHNICAL THINKING
• POLITICAL• THE GUIDING
PRINCIPLE FOR THE BEST POLITICAL DECISION IS TO HAVE THE “LEAST REGRETS”
• TECHNICAL• THE GUIDING
PRINCIPLE FOR THE TECHNICAL DECISION IS TO HAVE THE “BEST SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY”
POLITICAL VERSUS TECHNICAL THINKING
POLITICAL VERSUS TECHNICAL THINKING
• POLITICAL• THE DESIRED
OUTCOME IS APPROVAL OF THE DECISIONMAKER’S CONSTITUENTS (ELECTORATE, STOCK HOLDERS)
• POLITICAL• THE DESIRED
OUTCOME IS APPROVAL OF THE DECISIONMAKER’S CONSTITUENTS (ELECTORATE, STOCK HOLDERS)
• TECHNICAL• THE DESIRED
OUTCOME IS RESPECT OF THE SCIENTIST’S OR ENGINEER’S PEERS
• TECHNICAL• THE DESIRED
OUTCOME IS RESPECT OF THE SCIENTIST’S OR ENGINEER’S PEERS
POLITICAL VERSUS TECHNICAL THINKING
POLITICAL VERSUS TECHNICAL THINKING
• POLITICAL• THE TIME HORIZON
IS SHORT AND A SOLUTION IS WANTED NOW
• TECHNICAL• THE TIME HORIZON
IS LONG AND “THE BEST SOLUTION” TAKES A LITTLE MORE TIME
POLITICAL VERSUS TECHNICAL THINKING
POLITICAL VERSUS TECHNICAL THINKING
• POLITICAL• THE MOST VALUED
OUTCOME IS A RELIABLE SOLUTION WITH NO UNCERTAINTIES
• TECHNICAL• THE MOST VALUED
OUTCOME IS SCIENTIFIC INSIGHT WITH UNCERTAINTIES EMPHASIZED
DECISIONS FOR DISASTER RESILIENCE
DECISIONS FOR DISASTER RESILIENCE
• INTEGRATE THE STAPLE FACTORS
• BALANCE THE COMMUNITY’S STAPLE FACTORS
• DETERMINE BENEFIT/COST
• INTEGRATE THE STAPLE FACTORS
• BALANCE THE COMMUNITY’S STAPLE FACTORS
• DETERMINE BENEFIT/COST
BENEFITS OF A COMMON AGENDA FOR DISASTER RESILIENCE
BENEFITS OF A COMMON AGENDA FOR DISASTER RESILIENCE
• REDUCTION OF VULNERABILITY
• REDUCTION OF UNACCEPTABLE RISK
• REDUCTION OF VULNERABILITY
• REDUCTION OF UNACCEPTABLE RISK
• POLITICAL SUCCESS (No Regrets)
• ENHANCED DISASTER RESILIENCE
• POLITICAL SUCCESS (No Regrets)
• ENHANCED DISASTER RESILIENCE
STEP 3From Today’s Paradigm to
Tomorrow’s
SEE NEW FILE