 We trust our hammer, we trust our light bulb, we trust our towel and these things may sound trivial but they are in fact technology so the question to ask is why do we feel that certain classes of technology are a threat to levels of trust and I think there are some different ways in which that manifests itself. One is that we don't understand how that technology has come about, we don't feel we have agency over its shape, nature and direction. I think the second is that when the technology starts to change very rapidly it forces us to change our own beliefs quite quickly because systems that we had used before don't work as well in the new world of this new technology. We understand that we trust citizens as jurors to make very difficult moral decisions but we've now established through processes known as citizens assemblies or you know participatory democracy that you can look at highly contentious issues. In the case of Ireland they looked at a constitutional amendment around abortion, in the case of France they looked at recommendations around euthanasia law. They established a process in both countries about a decade apart of a citizen's jury which took a representative of our peers and over the course of several weeks listening to all sorts of evidence, both head evidence from experts and heart evidence from people who had personal experience and through that the juries came up with a statement which in a sense was a statement of policy, a statement of values that represented their society. It builds trust because when other members of the community look at the process and they recognize who's involved and they recognize it's people like them or people who are not like them but who they also recognize you build up a sense of trust. Nine percent of people all over the world are breathing unhealthy air according to the World Health Organization so bringing that pollution level down will significantly reduce the eight million deaths per year that happen prematurely because of pollution and will really improve people's quality of life, reducing strokes, asthma attacks and cancer cases. Around the world it's usually the lowest income families that would live on a busy roadside or next to an industrial facility because they can't afford to move away so everywhere it's those lowest income communities breathing the most air pollution. Children are a lot more exposed to air pollution and more vulnerable and they're more exposed because they're spending a lot of time outside playing and also because they're small or they're in a pram or a pushchair close to the ground pollution levels are actually higher there because it's quite heavy so they're breathing in a lot more pollution than adults. So reducing it is great for children it helps our education because pollution really affects concentration and it means that things can be much more equal. There's some kids that grow up in slum or in households that are burning rubbish or poor quality fuel that have much greater health impact than kids that are able to or whether families are able to afford air purification so if everybody is breathing cleaner it really makes children much more equal in their development. Two-thirds of outdoor air pollution is caused by burning fossil fuels which are obviously also the cause of the greenhouse gases that are causing climate change so if the causes can be the same the solutions can also be the same things like renewable energy, clean public transport, more walking and cycling electric vehicles. Particles of black matter which absorb heat in the atmosphere and re-emit it much more climate forcing than carbon dioxide so by reducing pollutants like that we're having an impact on our health and on climate change at the same time. Obviously the health damages from air pollution cost a lot. They're costing governments in terms of the health service the World Bank says that six percent of global GDP is being spent on the health damages from air pollution and they also cost businesses in terms of productivity. If pollution was reduced agricultural crop yields would increase solely yields would increase because more sunlight could get to the panels and there'd be a greater amount of international tourism in cities that at the moment are quite polluted. Trust is a confident relationship with the unknown so when you see trust through this lens you start to realise why it's the social glue of relationships, why it enables collaboration and organisations why you can't have innovation without trust. So what's happening is trust for a long time in organisations particularly workplaces is what I call institutional trust. It worked in a very top-down and hierarchical and linear fashion so if you were a leader you expected to be trusted if you said something you expect to be trusted. Now what technology does is it blows that up and trust now flows through networks and marketplaces and platform. They've grown up in an age of institutional trust right this is how they've been trained this is their professional development is how they've learned to operate as a leader. So to learn these new dynamics of a distributed world of trust where it flows in all these different directions and peers have an enormous influence on how you behave it's very chaotic and it's very unsettling. So I will never say the word building trust I always talk about earning trust now building trust thinks I have control over you I'm going to do something and then trust will follow but actually who has the power the power is the giver the power is the employee not the employer they can decide whether they to give you their trust or they don't. They have a healthy degree of skepticism and there's kind of there's kind of this disconnect in their lies where I always say speed is the enemy of trust right so they're given all these tools that speed up their trust decisions but in some way they are more skeptical in a healthy way around who they give their trust to they realize that that is something precious. People are realizing that too much focus has been put on trust and leadership on individuals versus systems and you know very robust trustworthy systems can withhold untrustworthy people and so investment at a systemic level I think we're starting to go right it's not the individual it's the system that is broken so how do you fix the financial system the media system system of democracy these huge things that can withhold untrustworthy individuals. Like climate like pandemics like poverty like security forced migration forced population movements refugees are a global challenge that requires global responses it is very important to convey one message that refugee crises are not important only when they happen in rich countries that was the case of the Ukrainian refugee crisis mostly in Europe same for the Syrian refugee crisis when people came across the Mediterranean into Europe it's important to convey the sense that the majority of refugees live actually in countries with few resources poor or middle income countries think of Sudan seven million people forced from their homes in the last year by this insane war between military groups think of the Rohingya refugees from Myanmar they've been now seven years six years and a half in Bangladesh almost a million of them and we're losing world attention which means that we're losing support for humanitarian assistance and for trying to solve this problem in the political domain an unresolved crisis an attended crisis very much far away can have an impact also in terms of displacement in rich countries so we're all in it just like climate just like global health issues we are all concerned and we need to respond together. The people are saying we need to prevent this conflict from spreading it is already spreading look at what's happening in the Red Sea look at what's happening in Lebanon the conflict has already has already spread in an extremely volatile region and the spread can cause just further human suffering as is happening for the Palestinians right now these complicated conflicts are generated by this unity and can only end with unity but without conflict ending we will have more humanitarian needs and the vicious circle that will condemn many people to death and suffering.