Проблемы с доступом больше не помеха. Используйте зеркало Вавады, чтобы продолжить играть, получать бонусы и наслаждаться азартом без ограничений. LeapWallet is a secure digital wallet that enables easy management of cryptocurrencies. With features like fast transactions and user-friendly interface, it's perfect for both beginners and experts. Check it out at leapwallet.lu.

Supply Chain Stability and COVID-19 Vaccine Delivery

As COVID-19 vaccines are rolled out around the world, effective risk management coupled with predictive analytics can help ensure supply chain stability to quickly and safely deliver them. Pharmaceutical companies and stakeholders around the world are scaling their vaccine roll-out, and concerns are emerging around logistical challenges of how to manage quick global distribution. One thing is clear: the entire supply chain’s stability needs to be monitored carefully, as a single fracture can have catastrophic effects on distribution of this time-sensitive vaccine.

Pfizer has designed an innovative logistical method to control vaccine distribution from manufacturing to local cold-storage facility. Much has been written about vaccine producers’ heroic efforts to secure upstream components such as glass vials, stoppers, and crucial vaccine ingredients, as well as the distribution packaging, including dry ice capacity, specially manufactured cold-boxes for vials, airfreight logistics and more. But very little has been reported on the downstream, or on-the-ground distribution of the vaccines around the world. As the vaccine touches down in states across the United States and countries around the world, the real distribution challenges begin.

As in every industry, risk originates in many places along the supply chain. Geopolitical risk, fraud, and third-party financial risk all must be understood if the vaccine is to reach the greatest number of people in the shortest amount of time. While some believe responsibility for distribution lies solely with individual localities, they are forgetting that the entire supply chain and logistics industry has a moral imperative to ensure that the vaccine is properly and fairly distributed.

Even with the best planning, plenty can go wrong, including:

Geopolitical Risk: If history has taught us anything, it is that some in power will manipulate the distribution of life-saving relief to their political advantage. Examples include the United Kingdom’s blockades of food to Ireland and India, Sierra Leone military juntas interfering with United Nations food relief, and Somali intelligence officers kidnapping the World Food Program’s local chief, among others. Closer to home, President Donald Trump tried to manipulate the distribution of PPE away from states that did not support his politics. Once life-saving vaccines arrive in local facilities, it will be a monumental task to distribute them fairly, and in a manner that does not give more power to local officials who seek to use them to further entrench corruption.

Financial Risk: Many organizations can stumble while rolling out distribution programs. Without proper chains of custody, fast financing, and quick due-diligence on third-party logistics suppliers, even the most well-oiled machines could fail to deliver the vaccine in a successful manner. The scale of vaccine demand is massive. Shortages are already present for raw inputs, and for critical infrastructure components. To meet these unique challenges, access to fair financing and payments should be guaranteed to all participants in the supply chain (i.e. no 90-day contracts for truck drivers who are moving the vaccines.)

Geolocation: Risks like natural and manmade disasters, lack of last-mile distribution, and poor infrastructure can all cause a single point of failure. The technology exists to ensure that vaccines are sent to the most geographically ideal local distribution hubs, and predictive forecasting should be employed to ensure the most timely deliveries.

Since risk can originate anywhere along the supply chain, everyone involved in the logistical aspect of vaccine storage and distribution needs to assess the existing systems to calculate and correlate risk. Leveraging technology is the best way to gain visibility. Rather than rely on gut instincts to determine supplier and partner risk, those in charge should use data to make decisions and consider implementing automated intelligence technology to actively predict and correlate how a change in geopolitical risk will affect the financial health of suppliers. Proactive planning is not only crucial for continuing rollout of vaccines for the current pandemic, it is also paramount in being prepared for the next pandemic.

Reducing Risk Exposure Through Sanctions Screening

International sanctions have increased in recent years and discrepancies still exist between how financial institutions and non-banking financial institutions in different countries and regions handle them. This has led to ongoing international tensions where politicians use asset-freezing, confiscation and other sanctions as tools to forward personal agendas, producing an increased stream of sanctions. It also leads to headaches for the compliance industry as it attempts to assess their level of risk.

For example, there is a great sanction application difference between the United States and the European Union/United Kingdom as a result of the United States leaving the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JPCOA) agreement and re-implementing sanctions against Iran progressively in 2018. In a post-Brexit world, it is likely that a divergence between European Union and United Kingdom sanctions will occur over time.

Increasing challenges add to complexity for compliance professionals conducting sanctions and transactions screenings in accordance with regulations and institutions’ policies. The rapid transition to an increasingly digital world amidst COVID-19 begs the question: Do financial institutions truly understand the identities moving within their digital networks?

The Wolfsberg Group recently published detailed guidance for financial institutions regarding sanctions screening. The guidance highlights the importance of account and transaction screenings, but does not propose fundamental changes to the processes that financial institutions should follow already. Compliance officers need to rely on robust sanctions screening systems, high data quality and up-to-date policies to drive a successful long-term sanctions screening program.

Compliance departments should continue to conduct basic functions such as documented controls and procedures. They should also require a clear understanding of sanctions risk and how essential it is to take a risk-based approach to customer onboarding. Further, the compliance team should consider improving the following:

  1. Sanctions List Management: List data can be incomplete and decay over time. Active list management is essential for compliance personnel to ensure complete, accurate and up-to-date data.
  2. Screening Technology: Screening engines vary in capability. Platforms should meet business needs on a basic level and be able to:
    • Manage requisite screening record volumes
    • Configure to reflect the differing risk profile lists
    • Efficiently remediate alerts through fully functioning workflow tools
    • Ingest a variety of external lists
    • Integrate APIs into enterprise systems
  3. Sanctions Data: Not all externally provided sanctions lists are created equal. Financial institutions should conduct thorough due diligence and compare data from different sources. Some issues to consider:
    • How the data is synthesized from original issuing bodies
    • The quality controls within the research process
    • The extent that the provider enriches the data to maximize secondary identifiers of sanctioned individuals
    • How complete the data set is, given the many official bodies globally and whether the system is configurable to select those relevant to the institution in question
    • Whether the data provided facilitates consolidation of entities appearing on multiple sanctions lists to lower duplicate alerts and minimize analysts’ efforts

Sanctions screening is a vital but complex process and a continuously trained compliance staff helps ensure that the financial institution is consistently screening against the most relevant and up-to-date sanctions lists. Sanctions authorities require increasingly strict compliance and this involves employing intelligent augmentation through a combination of human efforts and new technologies such as big data, data analytics, machine learning and artificial intelligence.

Organizations can best reduce risk exposure by using all the compliance tools in a responsible and efficient way. Only then can a financial institution be sure that it is navigating the increasingly complex and rigorously enforced regulatory landscape.

The Economic Costs of Government Internet Interruptions

At the end of April, global internet access monitor group NetBlocks reported that Venezuela’s state-run internet provider ABA CANTV was restricting the country’s access to various social media platforms amid continuing demonstrations and political turmoil. In May, NetBlocks reports this has continued, in addition to similar internet limitations in Benin and Sri Lanka. While increased global internet connectivity has led to international economic growth, it has also often led to increased government control over methods of communication and commerce, and government shutdowns pose a serious risk to businesses and economic activity in these countries.

Businesses face a variety of challenges and risks when operating abroad, but internet shutdowns and limitations may present a unique impediment, especially for companies that operate largely online and rely on consistent internet access. With more countries shutting down or limiting access more frequently, companies that conduct business in countries with regular interruptions may need to plan accordingly, or reevaluate whether their operations can accommodate these disruptions. Companies that have internet-dependent supply chains may be particularly susceptible and should ensure they have comprehensive mitigation strategies in place to avoid business interruptions.

Many nations increasingly use internet and social media disruptions as a way to quell political dissent. Some countries have shut down social media after violent incidents, purportedly to curb people’s ability to incite further violence, such as in Sri Lanka after the Easter suicide bombing there. Ethiopia also limited internet access in 2017 after activists leaked copies of the national school exams online. Whatever a country’s motivation, the frequency of shutdowns worldwide is rising dramatically, according to Stastista, which notes a 6,000% increase between 2011 and 2018.

government internet shutdowns

The Indian government routinely implements shutdowns in various parts of the country, and has in turn suffered serious economic consequences. The Indian Council for Research on International Economic Relations recently reported that, between 2012 and 2017, internet shutdowns in India climbed from 3 to 70 per year, and the shutdowns’ total duration rose from 9 hours in 2012 to 8,141 hours in 2017. According to the report, titled The Anatomy of an Internet Blackout, these disruptions cost the Indian economy approximately $3.04 billion in total. This includes approximately $2.37 billion from mobile internet loss and $678.4 from fixed line internet shutdown.

The Brookings Institution released a study in October 2016 examining 81 short-term shutdowns in 19 countries and their impact on GDP. Between July 1, 2015, and June 30, 2016, the study found that the economic consequences of internet shutdowns cost at least $2.4 billion in GDP globally. The report notes that this is a conservative figure and does not account for tax losses or drops in investor, business, and consumer confidence.

Deloitte also examined the issue in 2016, estimating that the economic consequences of a temporary shutdown “grow larger as the level of connectivity and GDP increase.” For highly connected countries, a temporary shutdown could cut 1.9% of daily GDP—an estimated $141 million per day. Medium-connectivity countries lose an estimated 1% ($20 million) of daily GDP and low-connectivity countries could lose an estimated 0.4% ($3 million) of daily GDP.

A study released in October by Strathmore University’s Center forIntellectual Property and Information Technology Law (CIPIT) showed that shutdowns can also severely impact countries’ shadow economies, often uncounted in formal studies like those from Brookings and Deloitte. According to the report, titled Intentional Internet Disruptions in Africa, unreported economic activity in 49 African countries made up an average of 37.65% of all economic activity. Because this activity is not counted in previous formal studies (like the Brookings study), CIPIT estimates that including these shadow economies increases the total cost of shutdowns by 19% to 29%.

Another Statista study from August 2018 shows that certain countries are shutting down their internet more often than others, most notably India, Pakistan and Iraq. Risk managers should consider these figures and cost estimates when assessing their companies’ existing or potential operations in the countries noted below, or when looking at where to invest overseas.

Water Scarcity Risk: Not Just a Local Political Issue

mining-and-water
There are few issues as politically charged as water, not only because people’s survival depends on it, but also because it is a critical component of so many industries. Agriculture, food and beverage manufacturers, refineries, paper and pulp companies, electronics manufacturers, mining operations and power plants—are of these rely on a continuous and reliable water supply.

When companies move into markets with weak infrastructure or questionable rule of law, drawing on these resources can quickly bring them into conflict with local citizens and, sometimes, the host government. Because of its vital importance, however, water scarcity has become much more than a local issue for businesses.

Water shortages can lead to conflict as competition grows for diminishing resources, as any scarce resource on which people depend is likely to become political at some point in time. One scenario that repeatedly unfolds is as follows: A mining operation depletes local water resources or has a tailings dam accident that contaminates a local river, a protest ensues and the host government intervenes in the project.

buy cymbalta online www.urologicalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/cymbalta.html no prescription pharmacy

Hydroelectric power projects can create a number of similar political risks and some different ones, including relocation of local villages.

In recent years, however, awareness has grown about how water scarcity risk affects political risk at the national and international levels, requiring a different type of analysis.

buy amoxicillin online www.urologicalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/amoxicillin.html no prescription pharmacy

The depletion of rivers, lakes and streams has led to more dependence on below-ground water. More than two-thirds of groundwater used around the world is for irrigating crops, and the rest of below-ground water is used to supply cities’ drinking water.

For centuries, below-ground water supplies served as a backup to carry regions and countries through droughts and warm winters that lacked enough snowmelt to replenish rivers and streams. Now, the world’s largest underground water reserves in Africa, Eurasia and the Americas are under stress, with many of them being drawn down at unsustainable rates. Nearly two billion people rely on groundwater that is considered under threat.

What makes the problem particularly difficult to solve in the emerging markets is that small, often subsistence, farmers are doing the drilling for water. The U.S. military called climate change, including reduced access to water, a “threat multiplier,” potentially threatening the stability of governments, increasing inter-state conflict, and contributing to extremist ideologies and terrorism.

It is always difficult to establish causality with something as complex as politics, but there certainly is circumstantial evidence that water scarcity was a factor in the Syrian uprisings that led to the country’s civil war. In Yemen, some hydrologists warn the country may be the first to actually run out of usable water within a decade, and combatants are making a bad situation even worse by using water and food as weapons against opposing villages. In Sudan, desertification and water scarcity have been cited as having a strong link to the Darfur conflict.

Since water does not respect political borders, the conflicts can become international.  One of the most high-profile disputes has been Ethiopia’s damming of the Nile River for hydroelectric power, potentially threatening Egypt’s ancient water source. In 2013, Egypt’s then-president said he did not want war but he would not allow Egypt’s water supply to be endangered by the dam. Fortunately, in 2015, Egypt, Ethiopia and Sudan signed an agreement allowing dam construction, provided that it did not cause “significant harm” to downstream countries. But the studies into how much harm it could do have not even been completed yet, and the dammed water could be diverted to uses other than power. Thus, the political risk surrounding the Nile River is far from over. Since 1975, Turkey’s construction of dams for irrigation and power have cut water flow into Syria by 40% and into Iraq by 80%, setting off disputes there.

buy nolvadex online www.urologicalcare.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/jpg/nolvadex.html no prescription pharmacy

Companies are accustomed to building water into their business plans in developing countries. Environmental impact assessments and proactive community relations programs can bring potential problems to the surface before they start, helping companies manage water in an environmentally and socially prudent manner. The geopolitical risks around water scarcity can be more difficult to manage, however. In this area, companies should consider building water scarcity into their political risk management and forecasting frameworks, factoring it in when making investment and supply chain decisions. If governments cannot find ways of sharing this limited resource, political violence risk may become even more of a factor for international businesses to consider.

This article previously appeared on Zurichna.com.