Tag: news

Why Gender Pay Gap Data Mislead Us: Understanding The Dynamics Behind The Numbers 

Posted on by Leave a comment
Reading time: 8 minutes

The gender pay gap index is often perceived as a clear and straightforward indicator of inequality: the lower the gap, the more equal a society must be. Yet, when looking at European data, this assumption immediately breaks down. Countries widely recognized for their strong gender equality, such as Finland and Denmark, show some of the highest gender pay gaps in Europe, respectively of 16.8% and 14.0% in 2023. Conversely, Southern European countries, typically portrayed as less advanced in terms of labor equality, often show lower gaps, such as 2.2% in Italy, 5.1% in Malta and 8.6% in Portugal.

Figure 1: The unadjusted gender pay gap, 2023 (difference between average gross hourly earnings of male and female employees as % of male gross earnings). Source: Eurostat 
Figure 2: Gender Equality by Country, 2025. Source: World Population Review 

This counterintuitive pattern raises a key question: why do some of the most gender-progressive countries display such large pay gaps? 

Understanding the answer requires unpacking what the gender pay gap actually measures and how structural factors shape the interpretation of the data. 

A counterintuitive European puzzle: how labor participation affects the gender pay gap 

According to Eurostat, the gender pay gap represents the average difference between male and female hourly earnings across an entire economy. However, this “raw” indicator does not adjust for variables such as employment rate, seniority, working hours, occupation, or industry composition. As a result, countries with very different labor market structures can produce misleading pay gap figures. 

In the European context, Nordic countries display among the highest female labor participation rates in Europe. In Sweden and Finland, around 75-77% of working-age women are employed, compared to roughly 52% in Italy, according to the Eurostat data for 2021. This fundamental difference has two statistical consequences:  

(1) More women participate across many sectors, including high-paying but male-dominated private industries, where pay disparities are more apparent.  

(2) In low-participation countries, many women who would earn less or face structural disadvantages simply do not appear in the labor market statistics. 

This means that a “low pay gap” can reflect fewer women working, not more equal pay.

Figure 3: Female labor force participation rate in Europe, 2024 (the average for 2024 in the European countries was 54.19%.The indicator is available from 1990 to 2024). Source: The World Bank 

Structural factors shaping the gender pay gap  

A low pay gap may also reflect structural constraints, cultural norms, or barriers that discourage women from entering specific sectors, or even from participating in the workforce altogether. In Italy, for instance, women are underrepresented in high-earning private-sector roles but are comparatively overrepresented in stable public-sector professions, where pay scales are more regulated. This combination tends to compress wage differentials and therefore “artificially” decrease the gender pay gap. 

By contrast, in Nordic countries women participate across a wide range of sectors, including those with substantial wage dispersion. This results in a broader and more accurate representation of gender differences in earnings. 

In this sense as well, a low pay gap is not inherently a sign of gender parity. 

The role of part-time work and occupational segregation 

A third major factor explaining the higher gender pay gaps in Northern Europe is the prevalence of part-time employment among women. According to Eurostat, countries such as the Netherlands and Denmark have some of the highest female part-time rates in Europe, compared to Southern European countries like Portugal, Greece, or Spain. Part-time jobs tend to be paid less per hour, offer fewer opportunities for career progression, and limit access to high-responsibility roles. Although part-time work in these countries is often facilitated by supportive family policies and may be a voluntary choice, it nevertheless contributes significantly to the gender pay gap. 

This pattern results in greater salary divergence between genders, even in settings where equality norms are strong.

Figure 4: Part-time Employment in Europe, 2021. Source: Eurostat 

The Nordic Gender Equality Paradox: when generous policies widen the gap 

One of the most discussed phenomena in economic literature is the Nordic Gender Equality Paradox. Although, as previously mentioned, Nordic countries consistently lead global rankings on gender equality, research by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) has shown that highly generous parental leave policies can unintentionally amplify long-term differences in earnings. 

In countries such as Sweden, Denmark, and Finland, parental leave systems are among the most comprehensive in the world. While these policies ensure high levels of family wellbeing, they often result in women taking longer leave periods than men, leading to a slower re-entry into the labor market. This does not suggest that generous welfare policies are harmful; rather, it highlights how well-intentioned reforms can produce unintended labor-market outcomes when uptake remains uneven across genders. 

In Nordic countries, despite continued efforts to encourage paternity leave, women still take the vast majority of parental-care responsibilities. This persistent imbalance shapes career progression and contributes to long-term differences in lifetime earnings trajectories. 

Why public perception gets it wrong 

Public understanding of the gender pay gap is often shaped by simplified narratives, headlines, or assumptions based on cultural stereotypes about specific regions. Surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center show that people tend to overestimate gender differences in some contexts and underestimate them in others. 

Many assume that Nordic countries must have both high labor equality and low pay gaps. While this is true in some dimensions, such as political representation, education, and labor participation, pay gaps capture a more complex picture involving sectoral structures, parental leave, part-time work, and long-term career dynamics. 

Similarly, countries with low pay gaps are often assumed to be more gender equal, even though low participation rates, lack of childcare infrastructure, or rigid labor markets may paint a very different picture. 

This disconnection between perception and reality underscores the importance of interpreting gender statistics with nuance and understanding what each indicator actually measures. 

Conclusion 

The gender pay gap is a useful measure, but understanding what underlies it is essential. As European data shows, a low gap does not automatically signal high equality, nor does a high gap inherently indicate poor conditions for women. Instead, the gender pay gap must be interpreted within the broader context of labor participation, occupational patterns, welfare policies, and family dynamics. 

Nordic countries exhibit higher raw pay gaps because their labor markets include almost all women, across all sectors, roles, and wage bands, and because generous parental leave policies influence long-term earnings. Southern European countries show lower raw gaps largely because fewer women work and those who do tend to be concentrated in more regulated sectors. 

A nuanced interpretation is therefore essential. Understanding the mechanisms behind the numbers allows policymakers, students, and future professionals to build a clearer picture of labor market inequalities. Only by looking beyond surface-level statistics can societies meaningfully address the structural causes of wage disparities and design interventions that move beyond appearances toward real equality. 

Sources: Eurostat; OECD; The World Bank; CEPR – VoxEU: The Nordic Model and Income Equality: Myths, Facts and Policy Lessons by Mogstad M., Salvanes K. G., & Torsvik G.; World Bank Group, Gender Data Portal; European Commission; The World Economic Forum, Global Gender Gap Report; The Economist: A Nordic Mystery; National Bureau Of Economic Research: The Child Penalty Atlas by Kleven H., Landais C., & Leite-Mariante G.; Pew Research Center, Global Attitudes on Gender Equality. 

Margherita Ottavia Serafini 

Writer

Zohran Mamdani: A New Order? 

Posted on by Leave a comment
Reading time: 8 minutes

Zohran Mamdani was recently elected as the first socialist mayor of New York City last month. The city of Wall Street, billionaires and neoliberal globalization has just chosen a man who ran on a platform of housing justice, public transit, and redistributing wealth. “This isn’t just about New York,” Mamdani said during his victory speech in Queens. “It’s about imagining a different kind of future” (The New York Times, 2025). 

NYC’s position as the United States’ largest city, and  one of the world’s financial centers, is a strange bedfellow for an openly socialist politician. Some claim Mamdani’s victory represents the end of the neoliberal order within its home, yet others see it as a temporary response to exhaustion and inequality. However, it has opened a cultural conversation that stretches across the nation.   

Mamdani outside a New York bodega. Credit: Getty Images 

A Socialist in Finance’s Capital 

New York has always been a paradox: the home of billionaires and of the homeless, of high art and unpaid internships. Its contradictions are almost part of its brand. Yet it has recently gone through rapid change. The global financial center of the 1990s, of hopeful entrepreneurs and mid-western dreamers who wanted to make it big, has been lost. In its place is an almost dystopian reality: crime, economic hardship for most, abusive rents with frozen salaries, and an air of tension and distrust of institutional change. Yet here was Mamdani.     

Mamdani, born outside the US to an immigrant family, has spent years advocating for tenants’ rights and public housing (Burgis, 2025). His campaign focused on simple and popular ideas like rent freeze, free public transport, and reorienting city budgets towards public welfare (Reuters, 2025). In many ways, his election is the culmination of a cultural shift rather than a sudden revolution. Young voters, especially those under 35, have grown tired of capitalism’s unfulfilled promises. Rising costs of living, precarious work, and the digital age have made “socialism” no longer sound like a dirty word for American citizens (Pew Research Center, 2022). But was this truly a vote for socialism? Or simply a rejection of what came before? 

Exhaustion and its Opportunity 

Political scientist Michael Sandel once wrote that “populism arises when people feel humiliated by meritocracy” (Sandel, 2020). In New York, that humiliation took the form of unaffordable rent, crumbling infrastructure, and the sense that “success” was something reserved for the already successful. Analysts at The Atlantic argued that Mamdani’s victory was not a pure ideological triumph, but a reaction to systemic fatigue (The Atlantic, 2025). After decades of centrist mayors managing the city like a corporation, voters simply wanted something different. 

Even Mamdani’s critics concede that his authenticity played a role. He biked to campaign events, and refused large corporate donations (The Guardian, 2025). Instead, he built a strong grassroots support, being present in communities, engaging with his support base directly, and being present. For many disillusioned citizens, he felt real. This presence helped bridge the gap between the voters’ perception of socialism. Mamdani’s win reflects that broader transformation. He talks less about class war and more about “belonging”. An emotional register that resonates in a fragmented digital age, especially with younger voters. 

According to The New Yorker, his speeches mix activist language with pop-cultural references, a blend that feels “as Brooklyn as it is Marxist” (The New Yorker, 2025). This approach has helped him reach not only traditional leftists but also creative professionals and students who see themselves as progressive but not radical.  

Mamdani at his election rally, November 2025. Credit: Victor Llorente for The New Yorker 

A Collapse or a Shift? 

Is this the collapse of neoliberalism? Probably not. Neoliberal logic of competition, privatization, individualism still runs deep in American institutions. But culturally, the conversation has shifted, at least in urban areas. Mamdani’s rise suggests that alternative narratives are gaining legitimacy, especially among younger generations who grew up during crises rather than booms. 

When news of Mamdani’s election started appearing, some warned of market instability. Yet the stock market barely moved (Bloomberg, 2025). Finance is apparently extremely pragmatic: as long as Mamdani doesn’t impose sudden regulation, Wall Street stays stable. So far, his administration has taken a targeted approach by ending some luxury tax breaks, introducing rent caps, and expanding public transport funding (City Journal, 2025). These policies are ambitious but far from revolutionary. 

The US is still the economic powerhouse of the West, yet it is more apparently buckling under its own weight. Political tension is the highest it has been in the last 50 years, and it seems like something is brewing. Yet at the same time, its liberal institutions function in a similar way to capitalism: they allow voters to set the stage. The liberal order is strong in that way, it allows slightly different political ideas to test themselves in localised regions, before reabsorbing them into the fold. Mamdani’s politics are more democratic than socialist, and will not break with the Democratic’s party line of liberal democracy. Instead, he will serve as a political counterpart to conservatives in Washington DC: the new wunderkind, the shining light for democrats to follow.  

Bernie Sanders, Zohran Mamdani and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, the most prominent left-wing politicians of the Democrat Party, holding hands at a rally. Credit: ABC News 

Zohran Mamdani’s victory might not herald a new economic order, but it undeniably represents a new cultural mood: one where ideals of solidarity, justice, and public life are being reimagined. Can capitalism be “reformed” from within? Or must it be replaced by something else? Mamdani ‘s New York will prove a natural experiment for both questions. 

Sources:

Lucas Bernal  

Writer

Another War Arriving

Posted on by Leave a comment
Reading time: 8 minutes

Since the beginning of the year, relations between the United States and Venezuela have entered a particularly volatile phase. What began as U.S. efforts to counter alleged drug-trafficking networks operating out of Venezuela has escalated into a broader strategic standoff. Accusations, military posturing, and legal claims about sovereignty and intervention have sharpened the conflict and raised questions about international law, regional stability, and the future of U.S.–Venezuela diplomacy.

Image 1- Protest in Venezuela against U.S. actions. 

How the Crisis Started 

Since the beginning of his term, the Trump administration has linked Maduro’s regime to drug trafficking into the United States and the related problems these substances cause, such as crime and the growing influence of cartels. In 2020, during Trump’s first term, the Department of Justice issued a press release charging Nicolás Maduro and other senior Venezuelan officials with narco-terrorism, drug trafficking, and corruption. This shows that since his first term, Trump has associated Maduro with the drug trade and its consequences for the American population. This year, the White House decided to take more serious action regarding Venezuela. In August, Attorney General Pam Bondi decided to double the reward for information leading to Maduro’s arrest to $50 million. Soon after that, a stronger stance was adopted: an attack. On September 2, the U.S. Navy announced a strike on a vessel allegedly departing Venezuela and engaged in drug smuggling. The attack resulted in the deaths of 11 people and was seen as the first warning to Venezuela. Since then, the U.S. government has significantly expanded its operations in the Caribbean region, especially near Venezuela. For example, the Pentagon deployed an aircraft carrier group and other naval assets to the southern Caribbean as part of what the U.S. frames as “anti-narcotics operations.” 

The goals of the Trump administration 

As mentioned before, the U.S. describes the goal of this operation as a firm and protective stance against drug and crime cartels operating in the country. However, there might be other motives. Intelligence agencies—especially the National Intelligence Council—report that there is no conclusive evidence directly linking Maduro’s leadership to a centralized trafficking network. They also point out that Venezuela is neither a major cocaine nor fentanyl producer, nor a key transit point in narco-trafficking routes to the United States. This suggests that the White House has additional goals behind the operation. In addition to attempting to oust Maduro and push for regime change—intentions already hinted at publicly by the U.S.—two other motives stand out: asserting American strategic influence in Latin America and trying to gain leverage over Venezuela’s natural resources. The first comes from the growing Chinese economic and diplomatic involvement in the region. This has unsettled the Americans, and they have now adopted a new approach: align with Washington and receive benefits (as in Argentina’s case) or deviate and face costs, as happened with both Venezuela and, to some extent, Colombia. The second motive comes from suggestions that access to Venezuela’s vast oil and mineral resources is a secondary but key motive for this posture toward the South American country. For example, discussions allowing U.S. companies to regain access have appeared in reports surrounding the escalation. 

Image 2- Oil Reserves possessed by Venezuela

Venezuela’s reaction  

The Venezuelan government, led by Nicolás Maduro, has reacted strongly to all the U.S. moves and operations so far, treating them as a direct threat to national sovereignty and hinting at possible retaliation. Caracas has accused Washington of seeking regime change under the cover of a drug-war campaign. Seeing the need to be prepared, Venezuela is reportedly seeking military assistance from countries such as Russia, China, and Iran, requesting radar systems, aircraft repairs, and missile supplies to bolster its defenses. Maduro justifies these measures as necessary and has deployed warships, surveillance drones, and over 15,000 troops along Venezuela’s Caribbean coast and its border with Colombia. He has even called on civilian militias to enlist and train as part of a national defense posture, declaring, “In the face of this maximum military pressure, we have declared maximum preparedness for the defense of Venezuela.” Maduro also added that this was in response to the “eight military ships with 1,200 missiles and a submarine targeting Venezuela.” His Foreign Minister, Yván Gil, brought the matter to international forums, telling the United Nations that the U.S. deployment is “an illegal and completely immoral military threat hanging over our heads.” Caracas is thus positioning itself as being under siege by U.S. power, shifting the narrative away from drug trafficking and toward foreign aggression. He added that, according to UN data, only about 5% of cocaine exports allegedly pass via Venezuela, calling the U.S. narrative a “false narrative” aimed at regional destabilization. 

Image 3- Members of the Venezuelan army in a protest near UN headquarters in Caracas

International Reaction and Regional dilemma  

From the United Nations to Russia, these tensions have prompted a wide range of responses. The United Nations has repeatedly urged restraint by both the U.S. and Venezuela, warning that the military build-up and strikes risk regional peace and stability. For example, the UN noted that U.S. military deployments began in August 2025 and said any measure to counter trafficking must respect international law. In addition, at a UN Security Council meeting, multiple member states voiced concern; even some U.S. allies, such as France, Denmark, and Greece, joined the call for de-escalation and dialogue with Venezuela. Beyond the UN, both Russia and China have strongly condemned the U.S. military actions near Venezuela, calling them an “excessive use of force” and a violation of international law while reaffirming support for Venezuela’s sovereignty. Both countries maintain strategic energy and military ties with Venezuela, seeing the country as an important ally in the geopolitical chess of the region. Other reactions have come from the Caribbean states caught between support for U.S. anti-drug efforts and concern about militarization near their region. For example, Trinidad and Tobago’s Prime Minister aligned with U.S. security rhetoric, which drew both domestic support and regional unease. Brazil, for its part, is attempting a delicate balancing act: on one hand, it criticizes Venezuela’s democratic shortcomings (especially regarding elections and human rights), while on the other, it opposes external military intervention—such as by the U.S.—emphasizing sovereignty and the potential destabilization of the region. 

To sum up, the U.S.–Venezuela confrontation in 2025 has evolved from economic and diplomatic pressures into a much more confrontational and militarised phase. While the United States frames its actions as part of a fight against narco-trafficking and terrorism, Venezuela regards them as imperialistic and aimed at toppling the regime. With legal, military and diplomatic stakes rising, the risk of miscalculation or escalation is significant. All now turn to South America, a continent that has not seen an interstate military conflict since the 1990s, as it faces the alarming prospect of becoming the next front in this war-torn world. 

Sources:

 

Guilherme Mendonça  

Writer

US Aid Cuts Jeopardize Global HIV Prevention Efforts

Posted on by Leave a comment
Reading time: 3 minutes

In early 2025, the Trump administration implemented significant cuts to U.S. funding for HIV prevention programs, both domestically and internationally. These reductions have raised alarms among global health experts, who warn of potential setbacks in the fight against HIV/AIDS.

Impact on Global HIV Prevention

The U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) has been a cornerstone in the global response to HIV/AIDS, providing two-thirds of international financing for HIV prevention in low- and middle-income countries. Since its inception in 2003, PEPFAR has saved over 26 million lives by investing in critical HIV prevention, treatment, care, and support programs across 55 countries.

However, a 90-day pause in U.S. foreign development assistance, initiated on January 20, 2025, disrupted these efforts. Although a waiver was issued to allow the continuation of life-saving humanitarian assistance, including HIV treatment, the pause created confusion and disrupted services at the community level. In Ethiopia, for instance, 5,000 public health worker contracts and 10,000 data clerk positions, crucial for HIV program implementation, were terminated.

The Global HIV Prevention Coalition warns that if U.S. funding is not restored, there could be an additional 8.7 million new HIV infections among adults, 350,000 among children, 6.3 million AIDS-related deaths, and 3.4 million additional AIDS orphans by the end of 2029.

Domestic Consequences

Domestically, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has faced significant budget cuts, particularly in its Division of HIV Prevention. An analysis by amfAR indicates that increased funding to this division was associated with a nearly 20% reduction in new HIV infections across the U.S. between 2010 and 2022.

The proposed cuts threaten to reverse this progress. The CDC’s HIV prevention funding, which totaled about $1 billion in FY2024, supports state and local jurisdictions in conducting health surveillance and targeting communities effectively. Reductions in this funding could lead to increased HIV incidence, with negative implications for individual well-being, public health, and healthcare costs.

Organizational Restructuring and Layoffs

The administration’s broader restructuring efforts have also impacted HIV prevention. The CDC is undergoing a major reorganization, with several divisions, including those focused on HIV, set to become part of a new entity, the Administration for a Healthy America (AHA). This move follows significant downsizing, with the CDC workforce reduced by 3,500 to 4,000 through early retirements and layoffs.

Additionally, the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS (PACHA) is being overhauled, with all members removed and no timeline provided for appointing new ones. These changes have raised concerns about the continuity and effectiveness of U.S. HIV policy.

Global Health Community’s Response

The global health community has expressed deep concern over these developments. UNAIDS Deputy Executive Director Christine Stegling emphasized that while treatment continuation is vital, prevention efforts are equally crucial to controlling the epidemic. She highlighted that the funding pause has led to the closure of many drop-in health centers and the termination of outreach workers’ contracts, depriving vulnerable groups of support.

The World Health Organization (WHO) also warned that prolonged funding cuts could reverse decades of progress, potentially taking the world back to the 1980s and 1990s when millions died of HIV each year globally.

Conclusion

The U.S. has played a pivotal role in global HIV prevention efforts. The recent funding cuts and organizational changes threaten to undermine years of progress, both domestically and internationally. Restoring and maintaining robust support for HIV prevention is essential to prevent a resurgence of the epidemic and to continue the global fight against HIV/AIDS.

Sources

https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/trump-administration-plans-remove-all-members-hiv-advisory-council-2025-04-09

https://www.them.us/story/pepfar-hiv-aids-africa-marco-rubio-donald-trump

https://apnews.com/article/cdc-hiv-administration-for-a-healthy-america-8309109b91e6e4025878f335ea15dc96

https://www.ungeneva.org/en/news-media/news/2025/01/102724/unaids-welcomes-us-decision-keep-funding-life-saving-hiv-treatment

Afonso Freitas

Research Editor &Writer

Estoril Conferences 24th of October – Afternoon Sessions 

Posted on by Leave a comment
Reading time: 9 minutes

Policies Talks

What if businesses can be part of the solution? 

Introduced by Nova SBE’s own Miguel Ferreira, LSE’s professor Alex Edmans delivers a speech in which he explores the bewitching idea that companies that incorporate in their objectives both purpose and profits perform better in the long run. The alure of this keynote goes beyond our desire for that premise to be truth, as the academic work of Professor Edmans greatly focuses on this relationship between profit and purpose. In this sense, companies may now have the chance not only to achieve financial success, but to contribute directly to improve society. This debate is particularly interesting in the context of our university, that every year certifies thousands of students that will come to take part in the next most successful businesses.  

Artificial Intelligence and Technology Talks

Soon after, the audience had the delight of following the launch of the newest Digital Data and Design Institute, founded by Nova SBE in partnership with Nova Medical School and Harvard Digital Data Design Institute (D^3). The presentation included an amusing theatre in which Nova SBE’s dean Pedro Oliveira participated and a video message from the Chair and Co-Founder of Digital, Data, & Design Institute at Harvard, Karim Lakhani.  

This institute aims at helping companies navigate this environment in which new technologies are promptly emerging, while integrating them in their business practices, by integrating both academic research and practical applications.  

And in case you are wondering where the facilities of this institute will be located, they will encompass the previous televisions and sofa’s area near Pingo Doce and the space right above them, in the KMPG galleries.  

So, what can we expect of this brand-new AI driven world?

To enter this discussion, we were presented with the pop star entrance of Derek Ali, a mixing engineer that worked with Kendrick Lamar, Childish Gambino, Cardi B, SZA, Brockhampton, amongst many others. Ali discussed with Jen Stave the inevitable question of what the place of AI in the landscape of creative work will be. Should creatives be worried about losing their job? Should parents impose the learning of the craft before the use of AI? How will the industry change in 5 years? 

As a means to showcase the key role that AI may be able to play in music production, Derek Ali created 100% AI generated music demos using prompts. The audience ended up enjoying a fado song about Portugal’s President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa “Canto ao Nosso Presidente” and a catchy pop song about Nova SBE’s dean, Pedro Oliveira. AI might be able to unveil new realms of creation by allowing artists to access inspiration more easily. 

The late afternoon’s panel discussion “AI and the Future of Talent” moderated by Nikolaj Malchow-Moller, focused on the implications of artificial intelligence for the future of talent, labor markets, and industry and society organizational structures. Panelists included Francisco Veloso, Rembrand M. Koning, and Matthew Prince. The key issue highlighted was the displacement and possible unemployment for experienced workers. As such, it was highlighted how, historically, technological advancements did not eliminate jobs, but rather created them. For example, contrary to fears, the introduction of ATMs did not reduce employment. In fact, the number of workers in banks increased, as bank workers simply transitioned to higher-level, more specialized roles. This suggests that although AI, like previous emerging past technologies, may make certain jobs obsolete, it will create new, more specialized and perhaps higher paying jobs. Matthew Prince further sought to deconstruct the fear surrounding AI, highlighting how it is often fabricated and introduced by the very people who are developing and implementing the technology in the hope of dissuading new entrants into the industry, and possibly encourage regulatory barriers, so as to keep their competitive advantage.

Gender differences in AI adoption was also explored, as women, in general, are less likely to engage with AI. Some argued that this might allow women to continue developing valuable skills like rational and logical thinking, while others worried that men may gain a competitive edge due to their greater familiarity with AI. Furthermore, AI can assist with the education sector, by facilitating roles traditionally filled by teaching assistants (TAs), such as class notes and assignments. This could reshape the structure of academic institutions, particularly the responsibilities of faculty and support staff. Rather than replacing human workers entirely, AI may enable them to focus on other areas, such as developing soft skills. In fact, AI should be viewed as a tool to complement human labor, not as a replacement for critical thinking or decision-making. While AI can streamline technical analysis, it cannot substitute for judgment. The growing presence of AI will put more pressure on managers to develop skills in critical thinking, judgment, and interpretation—capabilities that cannot yet be automated. Business schools and organizations need to focus on developing these skillsets to ensure that workers can effectively navigate AI-integrated environments.

The debate also touched on other topics: Will AI accelerate inequality? How is global competition on AI development being handled? It was largely emphasized how allowing the USA or China to create AI monopolies might erode diverse cultural perspectives, creating a more homogenized global landscape, as the American or Chinese way of thinking prevails. The panel further called for the development of European AI, which encompassed “European sensitivity”, so as to adapt these tools to the European reality and way of thinking.

The nest guest on the theme of AI was Robert Seamans, professor at NYU, who discussed the expected transformative impact of Artificial Intelligence, emphasizing how technological advancements drive economic growth. He drew parallels between these emerging innovations and earlier technologies such as railways, steel production, telephones, and motor vehicles, all of which played a significant role in economic expansion. However, Seamans was careful to note that new technologies are not simply “plug and play.” They require time to become productive and for widespread adoption to occur. The importance of complementary assets—those additional resources and capabilities needed to fully leverage new technologies—was highlighted as a critical factor in this process.

Seamans provided an example from Cleveland, Ohio, where robots are used to manufacture and sell metal parts to larger firms. He pointed out that the effectiveness of these robots depends heavily on specific complementary assets. For instance, the grip at the end of a robotic arm must be precisely designed for the task at hand. Seamans explained that while a robotic arm might cost $30,000, the necessary complementary assets, like specialized grips, can require an additional investment of $60,000. Furthermore, achieving maximum productivity involves trial and error, as it takes time to determine the best combination of complementary assets. He argued that this investment in time and resources is also true for artificial intelligence technologies. In this sense, human capital also plays a particularly crucial role when it comes to AI adoption: workers who understand both their industry and the technical aspects of AI are best positioned to leverage AI effectively. The speaker referenced research on AI occupational exposure scores, which measure how different jobs are impacted by AI. These scores showed clear correlations with demographic factors such as salary, education, and creativity. Higher salaries tend to be associated with greater exposure to generative AI, as do higher levels of education and creativity. So, he also strongly encouraged firms to invest in their workers: the long-term success of AI and other big innovations will depend not just on the technologies themselves, but on the people who understand how to apply them.

Next, Michael Sheldrick, author of Ideas to Impact, delivered a thought-provoking speech on how to foster active citizenship and drive social change in the age of AI. He began by discussing ways to build engaged global citizenship, highlighting initiatives he took part in like the Global Citizen app: the app encourages users to take meaningful actions to support communities, fostering projects in Africa and a notable 2021 initiative in inland Brazil. Sheldrick drew an interesting comparison between social media’s role in the past and the influence of generative AI today. Just as social media transformed communication and engagement, AI is expected to revolutionize industries and reshape societal structures.

Shifting his focus to the music industry, Sheldrick noted its rapid growth, particularly in Africa, where a flowering music scene is creating numerous job opportunities. One practical example of such is Kendrick Lamar’s possible first tour in Africa, emphasizing the broader cultural and economic impact of such events. He then pushed forth the belief that everyone can do something, that everyone has a role to play, that we need to work together to achieve meaningful results. This approach is referred to as “policy entrepreneurship,” where leaders across sectors must collaborate to create policies that harness AI’s potential while addressing its challenges.

Pedro Gardete, President of the Scientific Council of Nova SBE, closed the AI section of the event, expressing gratitude to everyone involved. He shared a story about a strategic vision exercise he conducted with students in a focus group, where he asked them what they wanted most from university. Many replied they wanted to learn about what companies wanted from them, that is, a real-world application of the academic knowledge they acquire at university. Pedro Gardete highlighted how discussing and introducing AI in the academic environment sets NOVA apart, as a leading pioneer in new technology application. The speaker proposed an exercise to the audience, who were asked to share a story with their neighbors about a time they felt supported. He then asked the audience to ask themselves whether AI could have replaced that same support, sparking reflection on the irreplaceable nature of empathy and human connection, even in an increasingly automated world.

Closing session

In the closing section of the event, renowned football player Pepe took center stage to discuss his life and career. While originally planned as a traditional panel session with Executive Director of Estoril Conferences Laurinda Alves, the format shifted into something more spontaneous: Pepe and the moderator invited the children attending the conference onto the stage, giving them the opportunity to ask their idol questions directly.

The children’s questions covered key moments in Pepe’s career and personal life, asking about his early years, including his arrival in Portugal and his experiences playing for top clubs, such as his triumph in the Champions League, which the athlete recalled with pride and joy. Throughout the unconventional interview, Pepe also opened up about his mistakes and lessons learned throughout his career, sharing with the children that success is not just about winning, but also about resilience, personal growth, and learning from failure.On a final note, the star was asked what he plans for his future, now that he is retiring from the football playing field. While he did not give specific details, Pepe spoke about his desire to stay connected to football in some capacity, whether through coaching, mentoring young players, or other endeavors. His message to the young audience was clear: no matter what comes next, it’s important to stay passionate, keep learning, and remain humble in the pursuit of one’s goals.

M Francisca Pereira

Mafalda Carvalho