Women’s Empowerment Month – A reflection on Feminism

WHT Scholar David Hernandez (Colombia, Master of Public Policy, Oxford-Weidenfeld-Hoffmann/Chevening)

Since I was admitted as a Weidenfeld-Hoffmann scholar, the activity I have enjoyed the most has been the Robin Hambro Moral Philosophy seminars. During these meetings, I have realized how unaware I have been of the discussions that entangle our relations as human beings and as part of a broader society. I am an engineer, and in this field of knowledge most of the challenges have a ‘right’ answer and a straightforward solution. In contrast, in Moral Philosophy Seminars, I have witnessed how complex the social science discussions are and how communal and individual perspectives can shape a shared knowledge; sometimes finding overlapping agreements and sometimes only disagreement.  However, I have never been privy to a discussion with such a rich and honest amount of agreement between a diverse group of males and females from as multifaceted a background as those at the WHT’s Moral Philosophy Seminar on Feminism.

The Seminar on Feminism was moderated by Diana Popescu and led by Nikolas Kirby. The core readings for the seminar involved important feminist thinkers like Mary Wollstonecraft, Simone de Beauvoir, Sojourner Truth and Iris Young. Taking these readings as a base for the discussion, on the first day of March 2019 at Nuffield College, more than 20 scholars from politics, business, environmental sciences and other areas provided me with the tools to understand what feminism is about.

Women’s struggle for equality has been developed by three main movements; sufferage, access to education and equity in the professional world. These are just the beginning of the decades long fight for women’s rights. These ideas represent the so called ‘first wave’ of feminism.  With every achievement of women, it has become obvious that the problem is more complex; it has deep roots in society and more subtle forms of discrimination remain.  Thus, the surge of the ‘second wave’ of feminism continues the struggle to overcome the public and private oppression of women. We must be concerned by the lack of understanding within patriarchal / male dominated societies that ‘equal rights’ are not enough if women are not able to exercise them effectively.

In my opinion, our collective imagination has been very limited in tackling these problems. There are still forms of direct and indirect discrimination and the idea of women as “The Other” in relation to men still frames them in a secondary role. We need to address these big issues, not only through direct action by women but also the efforts of men. Men need to understand the problem and in addition to all concerns of ‘second wave’ movements, we need to realize and recognize the diversity within the women’s empowerment movement too i.e. the problems of a white women are not necessarily the same as those of a black women. The concerns of women need to be fundamentally understood and acknowledged first and maybe then, our imaginations can really start providing pragmatic and relevant solutions beyond ‘providing’ rights.

During the seminar, many of the comments were related with what Iris Young established as the five faces of oppression. Women are still marginalized, 50% of the world’s population is still deprived of properly participating in social life. They are still exploited, for example, women still have a double work day; combining career and a highly active role in the private/family setting.  There is a form of ‘cultural imperialism’ at play and the domination of men has rendered the perspective of women in a secondary role. Additionally, women still lack access to power positions in public and private affairs thus being subjected, in the worst cases, to actions of violence by a dominant group of men.

As a man, having the opportunity to listen to examples and points of view of fellows WHT Scholars, women from all around the world, really piqued my interest in the feminst agenda and significantly enlightened my perspective. It is after participating in this forum that I have come to realize how relevant and necessary it is for men to take concrete actions to avoid another 100 years of women’s struggle for equality. As my dear friend Zamiyat Abubakar from Nigeria said, “men listen to men” and those of us who consider understanding this relevant issue must “call out sexist remarks, encourage men to educate themselves and contribute everyday to make the 50% of population lives better”.

About the Scholar

David Hernandez Benitez

Master of Public Policy (MPP), 2019
Pembroke College, Oxford
Oxford-Weidenfeld/Chevening Scholar

Hilary Term 2019 Executive Overview

Dear friends and supporters of WHT

2019 began with a flourish for us – thanks to André Hoffmann’s generosity, we were given a space to showcase our bespoke Leadership Programme at the World Economic Forum at Davos in January. We were undoubtedly the youngest and least experienced contributors, but I can honestly say that the WHT group wowed the audience. In the end, a dozen scholars and alums gave short presentations about the problems facing their countries. The audience of business people, non-profit executives and those interested in education (including Oxford’s Vice Chancellor, Professor Louise Richardson, who introduced the session) asked many questions, complimented the young people on the positivity of their approach and left with a sense of hope about the future. This trip seemed a distant possibility when the visas were not forthcoming, no one quite knew what they should do or say, and we had no idea whether anyone would come and listen to our ‘young voices of hope’. . . But we did get visas albeit at the eleventh hour, the students helped each other to polish their performances and the tent was filled to standing-room-only. If you haven’t already, please look at the short highlights video on our landmark trip to the World Economic Forum.

We also chose this moment to launch a fundraising campaign for the all important Leadership Programme. Some of the alumni that couldn’t make it to Davos sent messages from their home countries, it gives a wonderful idea of what the Leadership Programme has meant – please take a few minutes to enjoy it. Professor Roland Rosner has become our latest supporter – his family foundation is generously donating towards the Leadership Programme for the next cohort, for which we are very grateful.

Otherwise, this term has sped by with an outstanding Moral Philosophy follow up session on Feminism where, for the first time, our male scholars participated in the same numbers as the female ones; the Town Hall was packed with people both ‘Town and Gown’ to listen to a topical scholar run debate entitled: ‘This House believes countries should restrict immigration to preserve national culture’.

The Annual Debate at Oxford Town Hall.

Our scholars continue to impress us with extra-curricular feats from fencing to debating and taking on leadership positions in their respective colleges. Our alumni have also returned to Oxford in waves to collect their various awards and take another walk down memory lane; Sagar Dhakal (Nepal, MSc Water Science, Policy and Management, Oxford-Weidenfeld and Hoffmann) brought several generations of family, from grandparents to young cousins, for his graduation and introduced me to the art of making special sounds like gongs with a wonderful gift from their country – perhaps they, rightly, thought I needed some quiet, contemplative moments!  

A memorable moment with WHT Alumni, Sagar Dhakal and his family.

Congratulations also to several alumni who have shared their personal and professional successes with us this term. Saadia Gardezi (Pakistan, MPhil Modern South Asian Studies, Oxford-Weidenfeld and Hoffmann-Rausing/Abraham) took the opportunity over the Christmas holiday to get married. She shared the following colourful and brilliant photos of her and her family’s festivities with us:

Saadia Gardezi and her husband at their traditional Pakistani wedding’.

Manisha Nair (India, DPhil Public Health, Louis Dreyfus) has been shortlisted for the Asian Women of Achievement Awards

Mastish  Taddese Terefe (Ethiopia, Master of Public Policy, Louis Dreyfus), who is our first scholar from Ethiopia, wrote to say that she had returned home with new and interesting prospects for the development of her home country, which recently made news for the election of the first woman President, Sahle-Work Zwede.

Mowmita and Baby Ayan, the newest member of the WHT Network.

Mowmita Basak Mow (Bangladesh, Master of Public Policy, Louis Dreyfus-Weidenfeld and Hoffmann) shared the happy news that she has given birth to a lovely little boy.

And so the list goes on. . .

We now begin the process of selection for the next cohort and look forward to welcoming some of you back for our end of term celebration in June.

Best wishes


About the Scholar


(), I am not a scholar
, Oxford

Robin Hambro Moral Philosophy Seminar – Feminism and the Proliferation of Women’s Rights

WHT Scholar, Zamiyat Abubakar (Nigeria, MSc, Oxford-Hoffmann)

One event I always look forward to is the Robin Hambro Moral Philosophy Seminar. By far my favorite activity of the many things we do as WHT scholars; I was excited to find out that the subject of the second follow-up Moral Philosophy Seminar would be Feminism, as this is something I’m passionate about. I went to the seminar with the expectation of being intellectually stimulated and enlightened and I was not disappointed. The Seminars have typically been an avenue for us to critically consider and dissect topics of importance in today’s world and this was no different.

At about 5:30PM on Friday the 1st of March, scholars at the height of the stress of Hilary term gathered at Nuffield College around now familiar faces to have open intellectual and moral examination of a contemporary issue as they have done a few times before. The seminar was hosted by Dr Nikolas Kirby, WHT Academic Advisor, and moderated by Dr Diana Popescu. The event had a great turnout, with most of the scholars taking the time out of their busy terms to come and share thoughts on this very relevant issue.

The seminar opened up with Dr Diana Popescu stating the importance of allowing everyone to share their diverse ideas on the issue of Feminism. Participants began by defining what feminism meant to them. For example, Hannah Kamaric relayed the importance of women having ‘true choice’ in defining feminism (as opposed to traditionally prescriptive definitions). Antonio Beun, added the acknowledgement that sexism is carried out in everyday life, saying that “things we take as normal, are actually oppressive to one gender of human beings.”

The discussion featured readings from historic and contemporary feminist thinkers like Mary Wollstonecraft, Simone De Beauvoir, Sojourner Truth, and more.  Scholars were able to examine how discussions around women’s rights have evolved over time, and the relativity of what is considered as “radical” feminism. In discussing approaches to “radical” feminist rhetoric and shock value in social movements; Ayushi Agarwal articulated the significance of making choices on rhetoric that was either more palatable to the masses or that would garner results in the long term.

The discussion moved to analyzing the inhibitions that have hampered the level of success of feminism so far. The scholars discussed how women negotiate their identities and defining women as “The Other” in relation to men, with men always being the template for humanity. Zuzana stressed the importance of feminism having a relationship with men that was both oppositional and allied, since women have positive emotional relationships with men as no other group has with its ‘oppressor’.

The scholars also discussed intersectionality in feminism, and how important it is to take into account the different meanings and interpretations of feminism to women as influenced by their race, social class, and culture. We progressed to the topic of work and economic freedom for women, exploring how economic opportunities for women are hampered by them still having to do the majority of work at home, and the need for a change in the extent to which we attach economic value to the work that women do in the home.

For some contrast, Grace Mzumara discussed an example of a matriarchal society, citing a town in her home country of Malawi. She elaborated that there were problems of marginalization of men in that situation as well and urged the need for a focus on equality as a solution to oppression.

As discussions progressed, we were so engrossed in our debates that we hardly realized we had used up the allotted time while everyone still had much to say. We opted to take a break for dinner and made our way to the large dining room where a delicious assortment of food awaited us. During dinner the discussion carried on as everyone dined and socialized, smiles and laughs of friendship resonating all around the long dinner table.

We reconvened after dinner in the meeting room for a second round of discussions, glasses of wine and cups of tea in hand as we picked up where we had left off with a discussion of ‘third wave feminism’. Pornography and its influence on behavior in society as relates to rights and perceptions of women was at the heart of this discussion. There was some division in views on whether or not pornography and sex work in general, is degrading to women. In the end, consensus was that there is a need for reform in that industry. Ayushi articulated the need for a rethink on the ‘proliferation of porn’, considering the harmful effects it has on how men view women as sex objects. We agreed that there is a definite need for reform in society to inform reform in porn, as it is a consumer-based industry that feeds off of the desires of men in a patriarchal society.

As the evening wore on, we were eventually able to wrap up discussions so scholars could disperse for the night. The seminar was no doubt an incredible learning experience for all of us and it was with wistful hugs that the scholars finally parted that night, the wonderful experience a fitting finale to WHT events for this Hilary term.

About the Scholar

Zamiyat Abubakar

Social Science of the Internet (MSc), 2019
Kellogg College, Oxford
Oxford-Hoffmann Scholar

‘This house believes countries should restrict immigration to preserve national culture’

The WHT Annual Debate room in the Oxford Town Hall. Pic: Laura Stewart

Reflections on the 2019 Weidenfeld Hoffmann Trust scholar debate.

A good leader can engage in a debate frankly and thoroughly, knowing that at the end he and the other side must be closer, and thus emerge stronger. You don’t have that idea when you are arrogant, superficial, and uninformed.” – Nelson Mandela  

To debate one must put to the test three liberal arts essentials for leadership and for putting forth ideas: grammar, logic and rhetoric. However, as Mandela points out, the motive for debating must be more profound than merely winning. In engaging in a debate, the aim is to challenge your assumptions and to critically assess the arguments of your opponent. The goal is not only to be understood, but to understand, and at the end to emerge more united with your opponent.

Going through the scripted components of our debate one last time.  Pic: Kapil Yadav

The Weidenfeld-Hoffmann Trust debate gave the scholars an incredible opportunity. We could leave the ivory tower and take our thoughts and ideas to the streets. The debate took place in a public forum, the Oxford Town Hall, and allowed us to engage with the people of the wonderful town we get to call home for one magical year.

From the beginning we set out to make the most of this unique opportunity. As we began to plan the event, it was critical that the topic of discussion was something that truly mattered to the people of Oxford. A topic that people were divided on. One where it was important to understand and engage with the arguments of the opposing side, so that both parties could become closer and emerge stronger.

Naturally, our minds turned to the decision made in the UK on the 23rd of June 2016 that has not stopped making headlines world-wide since. Britain voted to leave the European Union (EU). One key factor that influenced that decision was the high rate of immigration from an enlarged EU. Alexandra Henderson, Director of WHT, aptly pointed out that it would be helpful to connect two key issues of the EU debate, national culture and immigration. This led to the choice of topic: “This house believes that countries should restrict immigration to preserve national culture.”

The scholars distributed all the tasks and took on the roles necessary to make the event a success, including marketing, PR, debating, IT and logistics. I won’t mention all the names, as it will eat into my word count. However, I must say that Zuzana Hlavkova’s impeccable leadership meant that we arrived at the day of the debate with trained and effective speakers, technology that facilitated participation from the crowd and, most importantly, a full house.

I really enjoyed that we set a really challenging proposition for ourselves. I loved the questions and provocations we got from the audience — it showed they were engaged and eager to participate.” – Claudio Gonzalez, WHT Scholar

I was excited to have the opportunity to participate as a debater. However, it is important to note that I seldom speak in public because it terrifies me. In the past I have even become physically ill and not been able to sleep for several nights before a speech. Yet, a strong conviction drove me to participate. Let me explain. I wish to improve the condition of the most vulnerable in urban areas. Several examples come to mind such as making water, hygiene and sanitation accessible and improving air quality. I know that systemic change is necessary and that having a position of influence will allow me to reach my goal. But having a position of influence comes with a responsibility – I must speak on behalf of those who have no voice. This year at Oxford, I am seeking out opportunities to get better at public speaking and at defending my ideals. What better forum then a debate at Oxford Town Hall!

WHT provided the resources for incredibly useful training sessions that were run by two former world debating champions. The rest was up to us. Six scholars volunteered to participate as debaters and we were randomly assigned to the proposition and opposition of the motion. I wish I could take you into the backroom conversations where we thoroughly enjoyed the critical discussion as friends on a topic that mattered to us. It was a privilege to spend those preciously thought-provoking hours with my fellow scholars. What I can do, however, is give you a glimpse of the outcome.

Here are a few of our favorite quotes from the speeches:


“It is important to note that we are operating under the premise that all national cultures are equally valuable and that not one national culture is better than another.” – Francisco Obando

“Complete adaptation to the local culture rarely happens and to cope, links are maintained with their homeland through family, friends, and social and cultural networks that reach across borders.” – Lizaveta Trakhalina

“Be proud of your language, your scientific achievements, literature, food but be equally ashamed of your failures as a culture, as a nation. Have a sober appreciation of your culture then be intoxicated with it.”  – Kapil Yadav

Lizaveta Trakhalina responds a tough question from the crowd. Pic: Laura Aristizabal


“However, culture is never enough reason for government to prevent individuals from pursuing their better lives.” – Simonetta Spavieri

“We can take a narrow and ethnic-based view of national culture which is inherently unstable or we can take an inclusive and civic-based view of national culture that expounds common values and traditions.” – Claudio Gonzalez

“As long as there is any interaction with the outside world, directly, or through the media, culture will change.” – Grace Mzumara

Our mission was accomplished. Based on the results of the poll taken at the beginning and the end of the debate, the proposition was able to change the minds of about 10% of the audience. I was told that was a technical victory for the proposition. I think we were all winners that day. We put ourselves in the shoes of another person. It was uncomfortable but necessary to reach an understanding. One thing we have some control over in this chaotic world is striving to understand each other and we did just that.

I will leave you with a few comments from the audience. Maybe you have your own. Go ahead and discuss them with somebody who disagrees!

“How is limiting migration different from racial segregation?” – anonymous member of the crowd.

“What about countries which base their national identity on immigration and multiple identities (ie. Canada)?” – anonymous member of the crowd

About the Scholar

Francisco Obando

International Health and Tropical Medicine (MSc), 2019
Wolfson College, Oxford
Oxford-Hoffmann Scholar

WHT and Chevening – Thank you from Laos

“Thank you, Weidenfeld-Hoffmann Trust and Chevening, for giving me the chance to break out of my comfort zone”

My name is Aditta. I am from Laos and honoured to be the first Weidenfeld-Hoffmann-Chevening Scholar from my country. I also have the peculiar title of being the first person from my country to have a Facebook account. It should come as no surprise that, for almost a decade now, I’ve been working in the marketing and media sector in Laos, inevitably requiring a frequent and intimate use of Facebook. In my role as an observer and participant to the platform since December 2004, I have witnessed its evolution from an obscure social networking site to an all-encompassing media powerhouse that has taken my country, and many others, by storm.

I believed early on that the ‘Facebook phenom’, especially in many emerging markets, would have serious implications in the future of the Internet: I knew that I had to understand it. While searching for the best place to study the Internet, every search engine query led me to The Oxford Internet Institute.

Frankly-speaking, after ten years of intense but stable corporate life, I also wanted to step out of my comfort zone. I wanted to learn new things, to meet new people and believe me, I got what I wished. Allow me to share a little anecdote – which brings the point home nicely.

At a college “formal” dinner one evening, I was remarking on the intensity and lengths of Oxford readings during a conversation with another student and I was comparing it to the readings from other universities in the UK – one of my friends at another university said that his readings for the entire term for one course was approximately 10 pages. I said: “my reading list itself is 10 pages.”, to which a college advisor (not mine) replied, “If you had wanted an easy time, you should have gone to Harvard.”


(That’s how we, Lao netizens, express laughter. The Lao word for the number five is translated as “HA.” Three “HA’s” make HAHAHA. Therefore, 555 was essentially the Lao version of LOL (laugh out loud)).

But I digress.

Back to comfort zones. My country and I have one thing in common – we are too complacent in the way we manage our life and our nation and we are beginning to witness and experience things that we are not prepared for, namely, the digital revolution and all that this entails. Social media and other internet platforms have a tendency to show us what we want to see, but it does not show us what we should be seeing. I was afraid of living in a filter bubble – an echo chamber of my very own making.

I knew that we as a people needed to better understand the rest of the world to prepare us for its coming challenges. To do that, we need to step out of our comfort zones, break our echo chambers and expose ourselves to new ways of thinking so that we don’t get left behind.

This is what the Weidenfeld-Hoffmann-Chevening Scholarship has done for me; it has given me the chance to voluntarily expose myself to new concepts, to challenge some of my deepest internal biases, to consider the stark inconsistencies in some of my thought processes and to question my implicit moral foundations. I would have expected nothing less from Oxford.

Aditta, Mohsin and Alfredo at the Drop-in lunch

Among those that have contributed to opening my eyes, have been my WHT cohort which consists of some of the most fascinating, talented and ambitious scholars of this generation. For example; the ‘astute Antonio’, a conscientious policymaker from Argentina who traces his roots and heritage to Korea and who challenged my views on national identity; the ‘doughty Dana’, an education expert who is passionate for social change and committed to sharing only the most constructive criticism; ‘learned Lizaveta’, who is well-versed in legal affairs and whose reflections on her own moral positions inspired me to revisit mine; ‘kinetic Kapil’, with a kind heart for the environment, who speaks his mind while entertaining us all and teaching us to remember that we are all young at heart; ‘zealous Zamiyat’, a champion of women’s rights, who gives voice to the unheard females of her country and beyond; ‘sophisticated Saadia’, whose empathy and compassion for her people inspires us all to think about our very common ancestry and humanity (Saadia also heads a non-profit called Project Daastan, an Urdu word meaning story, which bears a striking resemblance to the Lao word for story, Nitan); ‘ambitious Alfredo’, who valiantly fights for human rights and against abuses of power; ‘benevolent Busan’ who is equal parts brilliant and spirited about grass-roots participation and good governance; ‘mindful Mohsin’, a doctor-cum-entrepreneur who is as caring of people as he is careful with words; and ‘legendary Laura’, a lawyer who showed me that famous internet celebrities like herself are in no way self-serving or vain, but in fact quick-witted, thought-provoking, and honest.

I’m incredibly glad to call these amazing souls and others, my friends. And yes, not only on Facebook.

I would like to convey my greatest appreciation to the Weidenfeld-Hoffmann-Chevening Scholarship for helping me to step out of my comfort zone, to expose me to some of the richest and most challenging ideas, to meet the best of the new generation’s talent – an experience we all need to have if we are to become stronger, better and build a future that is inclusive, tolerant and just; for all.

About the Scholar

Aditta Kittikhoun

Social Science of the Internet (MSc), 2019
Green Templeton College, Oxford
Weidenfeld-Hoffmann/Chevening Scholar

Young Voices of Hope – WHT in Davos

Shortly after arriving in Zurich – hopeful, inspired and ready to host our panel.

Participating at the WHT side event to the World Economic Forum, was about first; being inspired, second; overcoming fears and prejudices and third; opening my heart to a hope in a better future.

Being inspired.

The preparation process was an incredibly nurturing learning experience. We were asked to combine our personal stories with a subject we felt passionately about, by doing this I got to know better some of my fellow scholars and alumni. I was inspired to hear from Ramon and Atherton who at early ages lost one or both parents and have devoted their lives to improving conditions of education in Mexico and health access in Africa, in a bid to do justice to the legacy of their beloved ones. I also learnt of the struggle of my fellow scholar and friend, Dana, who has decided to work towards women empowerment in Jordan; She explained to us the paradox of women not taking part of the workforce despite having equal or even better qualifications. Kapil, June and Cedric described their encounters with environmental degradation and poverty in rural India, Kenya and Zimbabwe, and how that pushed them to act. Irina told us how she has always been an environmental entrepreneur, from her upbringings in Vladivostok to her current work through a company she co-founded, Carbon Engineering.

Prior to our trip, we met in London to practice and receive advice from communication experts at AGL. Just hearing these stories and those of the rest of the team, interacting and learning from each other, made me feel inspired and humbled. Going to Davos was almost secondary to this, but it put us together and made us pour honesty and passion into words.

Overcoming fears and prejudice.

Sharing a message from Venezuela with leaders from across the globe!

The World Economic Forum at Davos is a controversial place, particularly for those who, like me, are conscious that lock-in into our unsustainable development paths is easily traceable to decisions of those attending this event. Furthermore, those of us suffering from the all too common Oxford disease – the impostor syndrome – are still coming to terms with the shock of leaving our demanding developing world surroundings to be immersed in the stimulating and at times overbearing Oxford environment. We frequently ask ourselves if we belong in this ‘hotspot’ of world intellectuals? Imagine, only to be invited to Davos? What role could we possibly play there?

I found that there was a genuine interest in listening to ‘real and fresh’ young speakers. I also found that there is not one Davos, but multiple ones, with different levels of access and with buzzing events taking place at multiple locations where stimulating conversations take place. My prejudice was in finding ‘self-patting’, accomplished leaders, that were unwilling to lead the transformations required at the local level. However, although I cannot generalize from my experience, I can say that the atmosphere at the WHT event was of conscious philanthropists and leaders across sectors who wished to be challenged and were willing to take risk and invest in change. . .

Hope in a better future.

On returning to Oxford, here with my fellow WHT Scholar, Laura Aristizabal, and another Oxford Grad student who joined in solidarity to call for democratic transition in Venezuela.

My whole pitch for the event was coming from anger and disappointment. I feel that the world is failing on climate action and this is accompanied by a sense of disappointment in how my country -Venezuela- has been allowed to slip into a state of collapse. In fact, our time in Davos coincided with massive protests in Venezuela; backing the path towards a transition to democracy. I felt, in a small way, that my participation in Davos was a contribution to this protest too. I believe the room shared my anger and disappointment. My feeling was that everyone in the room was well-aware of the scale of environmental degradation, there was no denial in the air, there was also no shying away from blame. What there was most was an eagerness for solutions, for answers, for what to do next. I was asked how to create a platform to channel the youth’s anger towards solutions on climate change. I was also asked what could be done about the corrupt Venezuelan elites and the plundering of Venezuela’s oil resources. . .

Ultimately, I found inspiration in the work we managed to produce and in the ideas that my fellow scholars and alumni are already undertaking to solve some of the most pressing issues in their home countries. I was especially moved to find a willing and empathetic crowd of experienced leaders in Davos; equally eager for solutions and to transform our reality. My anger and disappointed seems to have opened the door for some hope of a better future. . .

About the Scholar

Simonetta Spavieri

Environmental Change and Management (MSc), 2019
Pembroke College, Oxford
Louis Dreyfus-Weidenfeld and Hoffmann Scholar