Saturday, January 24, 2026

 

Rice establishes Global Brain Economy Initiative in Davos, aligned with new report on brain health and AI




Rice University
Rice establishes Global Brain Economy Initiative in Davos, aligned with new report on brain health and AI 

image: 

Harris Eyre is the Harry Z. Yan and Weiman Gao Senior Fellow for Brain Health and Society at Rice’s Baker Institute for Public Policy, senior adviser for neuroscience in Rice’s Office of Innovation and co-lead of the Brain and Society Initiative at the Rice Brain Institute. 

view more 

Credit: Photo by Jeff Fitlow/Rice University.



Rice University launched the Global Brain Economy Initiative (GBEI) Jan. 21 during the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. This initiative positions brain capital, or brain health and brain skills, at the forefront of global economic development, particularly in the age of artificial intelligence.

The GBEI, based at Rice and launched in collaboration with The University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) and the Davos Alzheimer’s Collaborative, aligns with a recent World Economic Forum and McKinsey Health Institute report titled “The Human Advantage: Stronger Brains in the Age of AI,” co-authored by Rice researcher Harris Eyre.

Led by Eyre, the GBEI aims to establish brain capital as an essential asset for the 21st century. As AI transforms workplaces and the global population ages, Rice’s strategy connects neuroscience with economic policy to promote long-term growth, workforce resilience and social well-being.

“One of Rice’s strengths is connecting research with real-world impact,” said Amy Dittmar, the Howard R. Hughes Provost and executive vice president for academic affairs. “With an aging population and the rapid transformation of work and society driven by AI, the urgency has never been greater to focus on brain health and build adaptable human skills — both to support people and communities and to ensure long-term economic stability.”

GBEI to move ideas into action

The GBEI aims to convert research into practical solutions for governments, employers and investors to enhance brain health and human skills. Its mission is to address disparities in support for brain capital across health care, education, workplaces and public policy.

The initiative functions as a global center of excellence and coordinating platform and advances brain capital through four core strategies, including:

  • Defining a shared framework that integrates brain health and skills as a unified driver of human and economic performance.
  • Measuring impact by establishing common research agendas, standards and metrics for brain capital.
  • Testing solutions through real-world pilots that improve cognitive health, workforce performance and local economic outcomes.
  • Supporting investment in brain health by developing financing frameworks to attract capital that is aligned with long-term value creation.

In its first year, the GBEI will establish a global brain research agenda, piloting brain economy strategies in select regions and introducing a framework to guide funders and financial leaders. It will also advocate for brain economy public policies at major global forums, including the G7 Summit in France, G20 Summit in the U.S., United Nations General Assembly, World Health Assembly and COP31 in Turkey.

Through this work, the initiative unites partners across various sectors to strengthen workforce resilience, support innovation and improve long-term economic outcomes. 

“Together, these efforts aim to translate the concept of the brain economy into action by aligning research, policy and investment around human potential,” said Eyre, the Harry Z. Yan and Weiman Gao Senior Fellow for Brain Health and Society at Rice’s Baker Institute for Public Policy, senior adviser for neuroscience in Rice’s Office of Innovation and co-lead of the Brain and Society Initiative at the Rice Brain Institute. 

Why brain capital matters for global growth

The World Economic Forum report highlights the increasing importance of brain capital in the AI age. Created through the Brain Economy Action Forum, an initiative focused on brain capital as an economic asset, the report was produced in collaboration with the McKinsey Health Institute and features key contributions from Eyre. It defines brain capital as encompassing both brain health and brain skills such as adaptability, empathy and complex problem-solving. 

The report estimates that implementing proven brain health interventions could reclaim more than 260 million disability-adjusted life years and yield $6.2 trillion in economic gains by 2050. It also emphasizes that brain health conditions make up a significant portion of the global disease burden across all age groups.

“By enhancing brain health and brain skills, societies can boost productivity, workforce participation and overall quality of life,” Eyre said.

Rice’s role in advancing the brain economy

Through the GBEI, Rice is bridging brain science with practical actions by integrating neuroscience research with workforce performance, investment strategies and public policy.

This initiative works directly with the Rice Brain Institute, which connects neuroscience and neuroengineering with economics, policy and social systems to better understand how brain health affects human and economic outcomes.

Moreover, Rice serves as co-chair of the Center for Houston’s Future Project Metis, a city-level brain economy transition project that functions as a blueprint for a place-based approach. In addition to Rice, collaborators include BP, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, UTMB and Memorial Hermann Health System.

By prioritizing brain capital in economic strategy, Rice is positioning itself as a model for how universities can create real-world impact in response to technological changes and demographic shifts.

“Stronger brains build stronger societies,” Eyre said. “When we invest in brain health and brain skills, we contribute to long-term growth, resilience and shared prosperity.” 


Written: by Joseph Ditezgen, with an introduction by Anton Pannekoek, edited by Eugene Dietzgen; First Published: by Charles. H. Kerr & Co., Chicago 1906;


Peter Kropotkin. March 1890. Brain Work and Manual Work. First Published: The Nineteenth Century, March 1890, pp. 456-475. Source: Archive.org



Center for BrainHealth launches Fourth Annual BrainHealth Week in 2026



Event invites industry leaders, scientific community, students and the community at large to “think about how you think”



Center for BrainHealth

BrainHealth Week 2025 at UT Dallas 

image: 

UT Dallas Dean of the School of Behavioral and Brain Sciences Adam J. Woods, PhD, is returning to participate in BrainHealth Week 2026.

view more 

Credit: Center for BrainHealth




Center for BrainHealth, a global leader in brain health research and its practical application, announces its fourth annual BrainHealth Week, February 23–28, 2026. The week-long conference features a diverse lineup of events designed to educate and inspire people of all ages to take action for better brain health. As brain health takes center stage at global forums like Davos and the UN General Assembly, BrainHealth Week 2026, presented by Ciridian, marks a pivotal moment in cognitive neuroscience. This event brings together world-renowned neuroscientists and brain performance experts to translate breakthrough research into "brain gains." Moving beyond theory, the week provides a practical roadmap for longevity, featuring science-backed strategies that offer measurable improvements in daily performance and quality of life.

In addition to actionable takeaways to improve their own brain health, attendees will get a first look at the latest science from The BrainHealth Project and inaugural data from the BrainHealth Network — a national collaborative set to present critical updates on the exploration and future of precision brain health.

For over 25 years, the Center for BrainHealth has been redefining how people understand and address the brain’s health and cognitive performance. While approximately 90% of people understand that their brain’s capacity can be improved, fewer than 30% of them know how to make those changes.

"BrainHealth Week was founded to bridge the gap between scientific discovery and the daily habits that can improve brain health," said Dr. Sandra Bond Chapman, founder and chief director of Center for BrainHealth at The University of Texas at Dallas. "With a strategic focus on resilience this year, we are highlighting that proactive brain health isn’t just about fixing problems, it’s about building capacity, adaptability and longevity so we can function at our best every day and protect against future decline.”

BrainHealth Week 2026 will define the future of precision brain health—exploring the frontier of biosensor technology, the secrets of "superagers," and the next generation of mental resilience. The week’s events feature a world-class lineup of speakers and visionaries, including:

  • Sandra Bond Chapman, PhD - Chief Director of Center for BrainHealth and a pioneer in cognitive neuroscience. She leads The BrainHealth Project, a landmark population-scale study focused on defining and improving brain performance across the lifespan.

  • Mark D’Esposito, MD - World-renowned neurologist at the University of California, Berkeley and member of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, whose research explores the neural mechanisms of the mind.

  • Adm. William McRaven - Retired U.S. Navy four-star admiral and former chancellor of the University of Texas System.

  • Russell Foster, PhD FRS - Professor of Circadian Neuroscience and Chair Department of Ophthalmology at Oxford University. He is an expert in circadian rhythms and their impact on health and well-being across the lifespan.

  • John Cryan, PhD - Vice President for Research and Innovation at University College Cork, whose research on the microbiota-gut-brain axis is emerging as a key area of brain health.

To see a full schedule of BrainHealth Week 2026 and register for events, visit:https://centerforbrainhealth.org/events/brainhealth-week

Center for BrainHealth wants to acknowledge and thank the sponsors and partners that have made BrainHealth Week 2026 possible including Ciridian, GoMo Health, H-E-B, Corgan, Aging Mind Foundation, Avanci, Blessing Family Foundation, Hillside Fund, Slalom, Mary Kay Family Foundation and others.

About Center for BrainHealth Center for BrainHealth, part of The University of Texas at Dallas, is a nonprofit translational research institute committed to enhancing, preserving, and restoring brain health across the lifespan. Major research areas include the use of functional and structural neuroimaging techniques to better understand the neurobiology supporting the continual growth of cognition, well-being and social connections in health and disease. This leading-edge scientific exploration is translated quickly into practical innovations to improve how people think, work and live, empowering people of all ages to thrive and unlock their brain potential. Translational innovations leverage 1) the BrainHealth Index, a proprietary measure that uniquely charts one’s upward (or downward) brain health trajectory whatever their starting level; and 2) Strategic Memory Advanced Reasoning Tactics (SMART™) brain health training, a strategy-based toolkit developed and tested by BrainHealth researchers and other teams over three decades.

February's annual BrainHealth Week in Dallas, Texas features a diverse lineup of events designed to educate and inspire people of all ages. Pictured: Guests engage in a dynamic panel discussion about art at Center for BrainHealth, with Dallas-area artists and educator Bonnie Pitman, former Director of the Dallas Museum of Art.

Credit

Center for BrainHealth

On the final day of BrainHealth Week, families take a whirlwind journey into the human brain at the annual Family Fair. Pictured: NFL legend Jason Garrett and young author Shawn Leftford ("the creative kid") gave talks at BrainHealth Week Family Fair 2025.

Credit

Center for BrainHealth

 


Rushing a major strategy announcement can be a mistake for new CEOs




University of Notre Dame




When a new CEO takes over at a firm, it creates uncertainty for important stock market participants such as financial analysts who meet regularly with them and influence the investing patterns for the world’s largest institutional investors. They wait eagerly for the new leader to reveal their first major strategy and the future direction of the firm.

Past research offers conflicting views on whether a swift plan or a patient, deliberate approach is better.

A new study from the University of Notre Dame introduces a concept called “new CEO strategic action speed,” which represents the number of days a new chief executive takes to announce the firm’s first large-scale strategic action.

How analysts respond to new CEO strategic action speed depends on the circumstances into which the chief executive is thrust, according to lead author John Busenbark, the Mary Jo and Richard M. Kovacevich Associate Professor of Management & Organization at Notre Dame’s Mendoza College of Business. Busenbark’s findings in the article titled “Moderately Fast and Furious: A Screening and Behavioral Theory of New CEO Strategic Action Speed” are forthcoming in the Academy of Management Journal.

Along with Robert Campbell from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Diego Villalpando from the University of Texas at Arlington, Busenbark shows that if the CEO’s transition was fairly routine, analysts appreciate information sooner than later so they can glean a better picture of the firm’s prospects and provide that information to their clients. But if the CEO was appointed during a period of turmoil or has limited knowledge of the company’s structure, analysts appreciate the CEO taking a little more time to orient themselves to the role and demonstrate that they understand the demands the company faces.

“After that period of time — around 35 days on average — analysts begin to react unfavorably to longer strategic action speeds; after all, their patience only extends so far,” Busenbark said.

Yet, the majority of new CEOs wait more than 200 days to reveal their first major strategy, which is far longer than reasonable in the minds of vital capital market information intermediaries like financial analysts.

The study found that when a company is in trouble — specifically when the last CEO was fired, the new one is an outsider or performance has been poor — analysts prefer a cautious approach, and moving too fast or too slow is seen as a risk. However, if the company is already doing well and the new CEO is an insider, analysts have no patience for delays — the faster the CEO acts, the better.

“In other disciplines and contexts, this type of speed is viewed as key information,” Busenbark said. “Political scientists, sociologists and journalists often note how people form opinions about new U.S. presidents based on how quickly they announce their major policy decisions. Much like new presidents, new CEOs are often expected to balance altering the firm’s strategic trajectory with maintaining the core elements the firm already does well. Yet, unlike the incredible academic scrutiny on how long presidents take to make those types of decisions (typically within the first 100 days), there has been only passing conjecture in the organizational sciences about what it means for new CEOs to make quicker or slower decisions after ascending to their role.”

The researchers gathered data from several sources: a list of new CEO appointments between 2005 and 2019, strategic action announcements pulled from various business newswires, and financial analyst reactions found in academic databases.

“We even dug through thousands of earnings call transcripts for stories and found that analysts are typically eager for clues about the new CEO’s plans,” Busenbark said. “But questions about where the firm is heading often get redirected, so analysts usually have to wait much longer than what they believe is reasonable for information.”

The study notes, “On a call introducing Léo Apotheker as Hewlett-Packard CEO, one analyst asked, ‘Can you comment on when … we can expect your readout and early action items on the company?’ Similarly, on Joseph McGrath’s first earnings call as Unisys CEO, an analyst inquired, ‘When can we expect to see new major [actions]?’”

Along with advancing management theory, the study serves as a practical guide for new CEOs aiming to make their firms more successful on the stock market.

“New CEOs in turbulent situations would be wise to take a bit of time to gather and analyze information,” Busenbark said, “but they should still be cautious of waiting as long as they usually do since periods greater than a month tend to agitate analysts and invite more unfavorable evaluations.”

Contact: John Busenbark, 574-631-1735, jbusenba@nd.edu

Kenya’s big cats under pressure – cattle push lions away


SAME AS THEY DO TO WOLVES IN NORTH AMERICA

Cattle herds are driving lions and other wildlife away from their habitats in Kenya, even though herders enclose their livestock at night when predators are most active.



Aarhus University




On the Kenyan savannah, lions and livestock essentially live in shifts: cattle graze during the day and are enclosed at night when lions are active. Nevertheless, lions are being pushed out of their habitats by large numbers of cattle. This affects both the ecosystem balance and the nature-based tourism on which many Maasai communities in Kenya depend on.

This is shown in a new study from Aarhus University, led by Niels Mogensen, a PhD student at the Department of Biology.

Together with local collaborators, Niels Mogensen recorded different groups of animals – lions, other predators, and grazing livestock – in the Masai Mara Conservancies, a conservation area in southwestern Kenya. The area is roughly the size of Lolland and a large part of Falster and is known for its high lion densities and the annual wildebeest migration.

The Masai Mara is also one of Africa’s most popular tourist destinations, especially for visitors hoping to see the “Big Five” (lions, leopards, rhinos, elephants, and buffalo). Lions in particular are under pressure from the Maasai’s large cattle herds. According to Niels Mogensen, the study is extensive, with a large dataset collected over nine years and covering several conservancies.

“Even though cattle are supervised by herders and brought into enclosures at night when lions become active, the wildlife is still indirectly affected. Lions have a natural fear of cattle and their herders, and as cattle numbers increase, it is the lions that retreat. They simply change their behaviour,” explains Niels Mogensen.

Data collection was carried out by dividing the study area into one-by-one-kilometre grid cells. Each time the researchers drove through a cell, they recorded all lions and livestock and the distance travelled. The data were then analysed using spatial modelling methods, meaning that geographical or spatial factors were taken into account.

Less space creates new problems

Nearly 70 percent of Kenya’s wildlife now lives outside national parks, often in the same areas that local communities use for grazing their cattle. In the community-run Masai Mara conservancies, the goal is for wildlife, tourism, and livestock farming to coexist.

But finding that balance is difficult, says Niels Mogensen.

“Even though lions and cattle are not on the grasslands at the same time, our data show that lions avoid  areas where cattle graze. It is very rare for people to kill lions or directly threaten them in the conservancies. Nevertheless, human use of the landscape has created areas that lions are afraid to enter,” he says.

The consequence is that lions have less space to move, creating new problems.

“Lions may be pushed into unsuitable habitats, their ability to reproduce may be affected, and they may be driven into the territories of other lion prides. At the same time, the risk increases that lion prides move closer to villages, creating insecurity.”

Create more refuges

Niels Mogensen points to several solutions, one of the most important being more targeted grazing management.

“The more cattle there are, the harder it becomes for lions to find space. It is therefore crucial that livestock numbers are kept low in areas preferred by lions, especially near rivers and in areas with dense vegetation,” he says.

Another recommendation is to establish clear boundaries for where livestock may graze and to rotate grazing so that some areas experience periods of rest.

“By rotating grazing between different areas, pressure on the most important habitats for lions and other wildlife can be reduced.”

Lions’ safe resting areas should also be better protected. This applies especially to areas along rivers and places with dense bush or forest cover, where lions can hide and rest during the day.

“These areas function as refuges for lions. If they disappear, lions lose some of the last places where they can feel safe,” he explains.

He therefore advises against allowing cattle to graze in these lion refuges and stresses the importance of maintaining a varied landscape.

Use data in management

A third recommendation is to use data more actively in the management of the conservancies. According to Niels Mogensen, knowledge about where lions and livestock actually occur should play a much larger role in grazing planning.

“We now have a detailed picture of how lions respond to livestock. That knowledge should be used directly in management so that grazing decisions are based on evidence rather than assumptions,” he says.

Finally, Niels Mogensen emphasises the need for continued monitoring.

“When lions are pushed into smaller areas, it can have long-term consequences that we do not yet fully understand. That’s why it is important to keep monitoring developments closely,” he says.

Future studies should, among other things, examine how denser populations affect lions’ social structure, pride stability, and cub survival.