In this episode, host Sue Stockdale interviews Jojo Mehta, the co-founder and executive director of Stop Ecocide International. Jojo talks about the organisations mission of advocating for the criminalisation of ecocide and make the destruction of nature a global crime. She shares her experiences and some of the obstacles she faced while inspiring and influencing people to change. Jojo explains how fracking led her to environmental campaigning, where she went on to co-found the organisation with Polly Higgins. Then more recently how she coped with carrying on their work alone after Higgins passed away.
Jojo Mehta co-founded Stop Ecocide in 2017, alongside barrister and legal pioneer the late Polly Higgins, to support the establishment of ecocide as a crime at the International Criminal Court. The core work to make ecocide an international crime at the international criminal court, is supported and progressed by a large network of over 45 teams and associate groups globally. There are over 50,000 endorsing signatories across civil society and faith groups, and a growing number of endorsing businesses and organisations. Jojo is Chair of the charitable Stop Ecocide Foundation and convenor of the Independent Expert Panel for the Legal Definition of Ecocide chaired by Philippe Sands QC and Dior Fall Sow. She is a graduate of Oxford and London universities and has a background in communications, entrepreneurship and environmental campaigning.
- “Making mass destruction of nature a crime at the international level.”
- “So it’s literally to kill one’s home.”
- “What I think is so important is that people need to see hope.”
- “I don’t know anyone that has got into kind of making change in the world or activism in any way without it beginning in some form with outrage.”
- “I think it’s that combination of what is the thing you’re outraged about and what is the thing you love doing and how do you put those together?”
- “We’ve had agricultural companies say to us that we don’t necessarily tick all our regulatory boxes because we know nobody’s checking and it’s cheaper not to.”
Partners and Supporters
We partnered with the Royal Scottish Geographical Society to bring you this series. Take a look at their Climate Solutions course, developed by leaders and experts in climate change and endorsed by the Institute of Directors.
We are also supported by Squadcast –the remote recording platform which empowers podcasters by capturing high-quality audio and video conversations.
Action to take after listening to the podcast
- We have created a list of questions to help you reflect on the podcast episode and what you heard
[00:05:45] Coping with loss and adaptation.
[00:09:09] Ecocide and its meaning.
[00:15:20] Ecocide movement gaining momentum.
[00:18:29] Finding purpose and passion.
[00:21:09] Corporate responsibility and ecocide.
[00:25:05] Urgency of adopting stop ecocide law.
[00:27:07] Ways to get involved
Transcript: Jojo Mehta
Sue Welcome to the podcast, Jojo. It’s great to speak to you this afternoon.
Jojo Oh, thank you for having me.
Sue Now, I’m wondering how would you describe who are you and what do you do?
Jojo I guess my title is co-founder and executive director of Stop Ecocide International. And in a nutshell, we’re an international advocacy organisation working on a very, very specific thing, which is effectively advocating for the criminalisation of ecocide or the worst harms to nature. In other words, making mass destruction of nature a crime at the international level.
Sue Now, that sounds such a clear mission and campaign that you’re working on and yet a huge challenge, no doubt, to undertake. And I’ll be interested to get into our conversation today about the importance of inspiring and influencing people to change and your experiences and some of the obstacles you faced along the way in doing that, Jojo. And maybe we could start right at the beginning. When you were a youngster, did you wake up and suddenly think that’s what I want to do? Or how did this come about in the first place?
Jojo Well, I think the sort of thread of care for the earth and care for nature was there from when I was a child. My mother is a singer and a songwriter and her deep inspiration has always been the earth and the seasons. And so I guess perhaps subconsciously that was always a thread for me. But I actually had a sort of fairly meandering kind of career. I wouldn’t even necessarily call it a career. I spent my 20s in travel, my 30s in manufacturing and design. I came to environmental campaigning actually in my early 40s, partly as a result of discovering about the practice of fracking, which absolutely shocked me when I read about it and actually sort of got me out of my armchair where I was sending off petitions in the odd letter to MPs and moved into more of a sort of boots on the ground, doing the research, giving the talks, all of that. And that is actually ultimately what led me to meet Polly Higgins, who was already working on criminalising ecocide.
Sue Thinking back then to where you were in your life at that time, could you imagine yourself as a campaigner?
Jojo I think as a campaigner in the sense of I always had a kind of advocacy sort of leaning, I suppose. I was always very vocal about the things I cared about. But if you’d have said to me in 10 years time, will you be running an international advocacy organisation? Will you be talking to politicians, diplomats and everybody else in between about criminalising harm to nature? I would have said, what? I absolutely didn’t expect to be where I am now. But I think at the same time, maybe it doesn’t feel like it isn’t a fit in the sense that there’s something about who I’ve always been in terms of being vocal about what I care about that is absolutely logical that I would be doing something like this.
Sue And therefore you’re calling, if one might call it that, is to this issue by the sounds of it. And that’s where you’re adding most value to the world.
Jojo I feel so, yes. And actually there have been many times in, as I say, my sort of rather meandering path where I’ve thought, well, OK, this is fine what I’m doing and I can do it and maybe I can do it well. But is it really what I’m passionate about? And I think that when I started working with Polly and working on this issue, I think I finally felt at home in what I was doing. I felt like all the skills I’ve accumulated were finally all being put to the right use. Does that make sense?
Sue Yes, so absolutely. Now, I know sadly that Polly passed away a few years ago. And I’m imagining between the two of you, there was a powerful combination of skills and experience. Take part of that half away and you’re left with what you’re bringing. How did you cope with that? And therefore, how did you then adapt?
Jojo I think that’s an excellent question. And we came together to start up what was originally this public campaign back in 2017. And obviously I was bringing the environmental campaigning. She was bringing the lawyer side. And obviously, yes, in a very sort of obvious way when she left and actually quite and perhaps quite understandably, I had certainly for a while had terrible imposter syndrome because I mean, not so much the politicians because I was used to that as a campaigner, but dealing with the lawyers and so on. And effectively, while law wasn’t my academic training, I did languages and I did anthropology. What I did have was a very, you know, quite a deep understanding of this particular area of law. But what I also found, which was perhaps slightly surprising, is that it was almost an advantage, the fact that I wasn’t coming to it from illegal training. And the reason I say that my natural mode was a communicator. And actually, what’s interesting about lawyers is quite often they’re not naturally collaborative. The whole training of law is adversarial. And it also is quite kind of maybe boxed in is a bit harsh, but effectively a lawyer will be trained in what they believe, you know, the law is and how it can be used and particularly by barristers.
It used to very much a kind of adversarial context where they were kind of on their own. And so what was interesting was that, I mean, when Polly became ill, we had a whole bunch of people saying, my God, what will happen if she goes? Will the work die with her? And what actually happened was the opposite in the sense that people started getting in touch with me as their closest associate and saying, we really don’t want this work to die. What can we do to help this continue? So actually, in reality, I was anything but on my own.
In fact, what it became really over the sort of subsequent months and now years was actually felt like a kind of gigantic dot joining exercise of bringing people together. And that’s included bringing many lawyers involved as well, as well as campaigners and politicians and many others at grassroots level and so on as well. I think that interestingly and perhaps ironically, that might have been difficult to do if I’d been a lawyer. So out of the void, people stepped in to fill it. And did that then mean that your role changed to be more of an orchestrator and a facilitator, a catalyst, as well as the activism? Very much so. And actually, the whole organization has evolved so much in those last few years. It’s becoming obviously much more widespread, very collaborative. And yes, I suppose in a sense, what I’ve ended up doing is kind of coordinating between the sort of diplomatic and political traction on the one hand and the sort of legal developments.
But also the kind of public conversation narrative on the other hand, because in the past, you know, we kind of talked to anyone who would listen because that’s that’s all we could do and all we could afford to do. And what we’ve realized over time is that’s become an active strategy, because what we’ve realized is that for politicians to get behind something, they need to above all to feel safe doing so. And actually, that happens when the conversation is widespread, because politicians never like being the first to a party. So effectively, what we’ve ended up doing is a remarkable sort of exercise in networking and cross feeding of information so that this conversation has grown at an accelerated rate. It’s very much not in competition, for example, with other environmental campaigns. Indeed, it’s hard to imagine an environmental campaign that won’t be supported by criminalizing ecocide. So effectively, there’s been this kind of build up in so many different sectors from faith to youth to NGOs to academia, actually sort of bringing this this conversation forward. So yes, absolutely. In terms of a coordinator role. And I’m also on the whole, I’m the kind of mouthpiece. So I do a lot, a lot of talking.
Sue Well, hence why you’re on our podcast. Thank you very much. Now, Jojo, I’m wondering, what does success look like then for the campaign? What’s that end vision that you’re aiming at?
Jojo The end vision is really to have ecocide listed alongside genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Court. Now, obviously, we also support national developments, regional developments towards criminalizing ecocide. But the ultimate goal is really to have it up there in the Rome Statute, along with those crimes that are considered the most heinous crimes in the world. And there are a number of reasons for that. But one sort of perhaps intuitive one is that, you know, we have spent a very long time treating nature as a bank of resources and nothing more and being effectively sort of separated, alienated from the world, which we actually are deeply intertwined part of and that we completely depend upon.
And so when you say ecocide or mass destruction of nature is as bad, as wrong, as dangerous as mass destruction of people, what you’re doing, although on the one hand, you’re just adding one crime to a list of crimes, on another hand, you’re actually sort of subtly but profoundly shifting our understanding of how important that is. And ultimately, of course, I mean, genocide is destruction of a people or a part of a people. But, you know, ecocide, ultimately, if we continue along the line we’ve been doing for the last few decades, could actually mean curtains for civilization as we know it. So it very much does when you think about it that way in terms of the consequences, it does belong in that category of most serious crime.
Sue So you’ve got a very clear outcome that you’re seeking for it to be part of that Rome Statute, as you described it. I imagine that’s no easy journey to embark upon. And I’m sure if our listener is involved in any sort of influencing or change campaigns in their workplace or in their local environment or area, then they probably have found similar things. So what are some of the biggest challenges that you have faced, Jojo? And then how have you overcome them?
Jojo Well, it’s an interesting one, isn’t it? Because journalists at interviews nearly always say this, where are the obstacles? Where’s the resistance? Now, there is a level at which this is the easiest campaign in the world simply because it’s very difficult to actually argue against it in the sense that who’s going to say to you, no, it shouldn’t be a crime to massively destroy the environment? I mean, on the contrary, what we actually often get is, well, how comes it isn’t already a crime? And of course, more at the political level, there’s an acknowledgement that this is something that absolutely has to be confronted. But it wasn’t always that way. So a few years ago, it was considered quite left field and quite extreme. But I think what we’ve seen over the last few years is a massive growth in awareness of the extent of the climate and ecological crisis and how serious it really is. And we’re seeing that again with things popping up this week around how close we are to sort of crossing the 1.5 degree mark. So there is a kind of raising of the public awareness.
And I think that has partly come through international reports like the IPCC reports, but also through grassroots mobilizations like Extinction Rebellion or like the school strikes. Which have really kind of opened up that conversation in the media where sometimes it requires. And of course, we know this from history. All the big changes like the civil rights movement, the suffragettes movement, the sort of trigger is that is a level of disruption that opens up that conversation. And if you like, it’s into that space that we have stepped. And so something that we have been saying for many years was suddenly able to be heard. So in a sense, part of the sort of obstacles, if you like, have been overcome by others or by circumstances. But a lot of this is actually about simply about informing people, because I think part of the issue with ecocide is it’s just a bit of an unfamiliar concept. And people might need a little bit of explanation to kind of grasp what it is.
But that said, the word itself helps a lot. It really does help because it has echoes of genocide. So there’s this sense of it being serious. And of course, eco, you know, people are used to thinking of that as relating to the environment. And interestingly, of course, the real origin of the word ecocide is from the Greek oikos, meaning home, and the Latin caerere to kill. So it’s literally to kill one’s home. And that sort of hits quite deep, I think, because I think it’s something that people can see is happening to the world around us. So that has been hugely helpful in overcoming sort of initial resistance. And of course, sometimes it’s also sounds a bit scary. Some politicians are like, whoa, that sounds like a scary thing that we really want to get behind that. But I think, as I’m sure we’ll go into a bit more, there is something also hugely helpful about having a framework, a parameter and a boundary that really sets out what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. And that’s what criminal law does so well.
Sue So it sounds like it’s been a little bit of serendipity that’s helped you to overcome some of those obstacles just in the way that the world is is evolving. I’m wondering, what’s your view around the use of language in any instigation of change? We’re the Access to Inspiration podcast. So we’re trying to inspire people to change. And on the other hand, there can be a fear based approach to change. And I’m wondering whether you even have a strategic approach to using both of those ways of languaging something in the work that you’re doing?
Jojo We absolutely do. And we are absolutely on the positive framing side of things really strongly, because while obviously there are certain functions, and I would say that, for example, the climate activism movement and the grassroots has fallen more into the fear camp in terms of raising the alarm. And I understand that. And there’s a place for it. But what I think is so important is that people need to see hope. I need to see the achievability of something positive. And that is one of the things that’s so exciting about this particular initiative, if you like, is that it is so precise. It’s so simple and so precise. And it’s so achievable, actually. And in this area of work, you know, we come across quite often people with kind of five point plans to save the world. And some of those utterly brilliant and some less so. But the thing with what we’re doing is it is so very precise and it is so doable that I think what we see and we see this quite often in people’s faces. And my co-director calls it a pop moment where you see that obviously the light go on in people’s eyes and they go, wow, we could actually do that.
We could actually say that, you know, this level of damage is simply not acceptable. And just to give us sort of a bit of a sense of the potential reality of that, because we are in what I would describe as perhaps a snowball phase of this initiative, is that while four years ago there were no governments talking about this publicly, you know, this is now on public record being discussed by over 25,000 people. Governments who are members of the International Criminal Court and therefore have direct ability to get behind this. And then there are more behind closed doors who just maybe aren’t ready to talk about it publicly. But we’re also seeing, for example, the European Parliament approving a text which effectively would include ecocide level crimes into EU law. And that happened just a few weeks ago. So from what you could call a standing start to a direction of travel that is now clearly established at the diplomatic level, that has been a very fast trajectory.
Sue So it sounds like there’s been a great pace of progress that you’ve been making. I’m wondering in your role now, what do you personally find most rewarding?
Jojo I have to say what I love doing is finding the space of where to meet a given audience, because one of the things that’s so beautiful about this is that although it is so precise, I mean, almost kind of surgically precise, it also has this almost, I sometimes call it an acupunctural effect in the sense that hitting a whole system by hitting a particular point. And of course, different groups that we speak to, different people that we speak to, relate to different aspects of that. So I might have a very different conversation, for example, with an indigenous leader than I would with an industry decision maker. But actually, for all of those people, there is a very concrete positive effect of putting this law in place. And so that constant kind of challenge and sort of flexibility, versatility, I found that hugely, hugely enjoyable. And we also work with some amazing people. I now have a sizable team and we have groups in over 45 countries, you know, associate groups or branches or so on.
Sue So that’s amazing. So if you were in the shoes of one of our listeners who may want to do something that creates a positive impact in this space in terms of sustainability, environment, climate change and so on, they have ambition, but they’re not quite sure where to start or how to move forwards. What would you suggest to them that they could be doing or thinking about that would give them inspiration to take some action?
Jojo Absolutely. I think that the best way perhaps to identify what area that you want to apply your energy to is the thing that makes you annoyed. Actually, I would say the thing that outrages you, because I don’t know anyone that has got into kind of making change in the world or activism in any way without it beginning in some form with outrage. You know, that kind of, oh, my God, that shouldn’t be like that or that’s not fair. There’ll be an area that does that. And that, for me, identifies the kind of area to work in. But that feeling is difficult to maintain. And of course, activists can burn out a lot. They’re just fueled by anger and that’s kind of not ultimately inspiring. That can be really, really exhausting.
So the way that I see it, the other thing to look for is what is it that you love doing? What is the thing that you really enjoy doing or the thing that if you asked your friends, you know, what would you say I’m good at? Often it’s the thing that you don’t even realize yourself that you’re completely natural at that you just do effortlessly. But the people around you will know what that thing is almost certainly if you don’t. And so applying that to the area that has made you outraged, that for me is a fantastic recipe because then effectively you’re doing something that you do naturally or that you love. But you’re doing it in an area where you can make a difference.
And it could be I mean, it could be anything. It doesn’t have to be, you know, activism doesn’t have to be being on the street with a placard at all. You know, it can be all it can be all sorts of different things. It can be it could be something that’s a literal creative thing in terms of arts and crafts. It could be a communicational thing. It could be that I know you could be an accountant and you want to find somebody that needs your skills that actually is working in an area you care about. So there are so many different ways of approaching it. But I think it’s that combination of what is the thing you’re outraged about and what is the thing you love doing and how do you put those together.
Sue Well, that that sounds like a great answer, Jojo, because it’s probably one of the reasons we started up this podcast. You mentioned something that I would categorize as self-care in what you talked about there is that you can burn out very quickly if your passion becomes too strong and you’re overplaying your strength. So how do you, did I say relax, kick back, have time off? Or is it kind of 24-7, full on and never a rest?
Jojo It could easily be, but obviously that would be dangerous. So, so no, I do make space for certain things. I’m lucky enough to have a lovely garden and I do every day get out in that garden barefoot, even if it’s snowing. Although that could be for a short moment, if it is. Just to like to earth and to reconnect with nature, because obviously that’s very much what this is all about and and spend some time in nature and obviously time with family as well. I try to make sure that there’s at least one day a week when I’m not actually working. Occasionally that’s difficult if there’s a deadline to meet, but I usually try and keep either Saturday or Sunday completely work free just to give the whole brain a rest. And and I also have a lovely group of friends that I meet up with once a month and it’s just a chance to download and not be constantly caught up in the in the work environment, I guess.
Sue . Well, it’s good to know that you’re practicing what you’re preaching earlier on there and making sure that you do give yourself a break and not burn out. Now you’ve talked about diplomats and I’m sure you’re also trying to influence those that are working in industry to support what you’re working on here as well, because it can often be seen that they are the instigators of the crimes against the planet. So if you were in the shoes of a senior leader in an organization and you’ve got shareholders requirements to meet and so on, what would you want to be doing differently to also take care of the needs of nature at the same time?
Jojo I think I’ll answer that by thinking about how we frame this for business decision makers, what we’re doing, because it’s not always what you would expect. Politicians and particularly lawyers actually end up often concentrating on how will this work when it’s in place, who will get prosecuted, all of those kinds of things, the sort of technicalities of it. And of course, that’s important. But actually, what’s interesting is that those in the corporate world sometimes get one of the aspects of this is really powerful. Much more easily. And that is this idea of framing, because I think that what’s happening in a lot of cases is a lot of corporate leaders actually don’t know what to do in the context of the level of crisis that we’re facing. It’s really quite a massive thing. And how do we approach this? And of course, you end up with people kind of feeling the need to sort of tick the boxes for ESG or for CSR or for all these different acronyms and be seen to be doing the right thing.
But we also see issues where, for example, we’ve had, you know, agricultural companies say to us that we don’t necessarily tick all our regulatory boxes because we know nobody’s checking and it’s cheaper not to. And it’s like, so actually having a framework within which to work. And the interesting thing about the definition of Ecocide is it fits on the back of a business card, which is because the core of it is so concise. And the brilliant thing about that is it allows those who know their sector to use it as a lens and they can’t help it. The thing is, if you know your area of business, that’s exactly what you’ll do. You’ll look at that definition, which incidentally I’ll read because very short. Ecocide means unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there’s a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long term damage to the environment being caused by those acts. So although that’s very established legal language, it’s also very straightforward language.
And so as an industry leader, I can be looking through that at what I do within my sector. And what will happen is I’ll come up with a number of questions, quite specific questions quite quickly. And actually, that’s gold dust, because that’s part of the problem is people not knowing what the questions are that they should be asking. So once they start asking those questions, you know, what about the concrete we’re using? What about the way we engineer this? What about? And it obviously will vary by sector, but it takes it a bit deeper than paper versus plastic straws or electric vehicles in your fleet or things like that. It goes really more to the nitty gritty of what does the whole train of what I do? How does it how does it respond to this? And actually, to sort of come back to your thought around shareholders and so on, it was very interesting.
One of our advisory board gave a talk to an auditorium in Paris full of CEOs and she got a standing ovation at the end of it. This is about ecocide law. And she literally had people coming up to her in tears of relief saying when this comes in, I can go to my board and I can say, do you know what? We can’t do things this way anymore because we’re not allowed to. So we’re going to have to find a healthier approach. And it was this sense that actually there are so many people in the business world who want to be doing the right thing, but who are disadvantaged by the fact that the frameworks aren’t there. And the fact that what that means is that those who are leading in the sustainability area are disadvantaged because the finance continues to flow to the sort of old ways of doing things. And so putting this in place will create that kind of leveler for the playing field, as well as being able to sort of frame those questions that are so needed. So I think that’s one of the real kind of positives, I think, in that context. No, that makes great sense that the bounding effect that you described earlier is so important. People know where the line is, where the edges are, what’s in and what’s not in. And also it allows you to get creative. I mean, I spent 10 years as an entrepreneur and there’s nothing that spurs innovation better than having a clear set of parameters. If you know where you can’t go or what you can’t do, then you get very good at working out what you should do.
Sue So if I was to sneak into the office of your organization and look on the whiteboard that is on the wall or at least a visual there, is there a date when you want this to be completed by?
Jojo That’s an excellent question. And we think that it’s entirely possible that this law could be being adopted within three to five years and certainly before 2030. And I think that there have been crimes added to the statute before, the crime of aggression has been added to their own statute before. And of course, it may be that regions like the EU actually get there first, who knows? But I think there’s a kind of positive sense that the urgency is there, the discussions are happening at the diplomatic level. And also, of course, that there is this kind of growing strength of civil society demand as well around this. And that is something that perhaps wasn’t there at the time of crime of aggression.
And therefore, it was perhaps more of a lonely mission to get that to get that in place. But I think that with Ecocide, there’s such a sense of timeliness around it that we don’t think it’ll take that long. Of course, there are those who say, what do you mean, you know, three to five years? We need it tomorrow. And yes, on one level, that’s true. But actually, for industry to see it coming and therefore be able to make strategic positive change is actually really important. So we do want a time span, not too big of a one, because we don’t have that kind of time, but at the same time, not so immediate that it terrifies people and makes them unable to act.
Sue You’re just reminding me of the transition towards electric vehicles, for example, there needs to be time to put infrastructure in place and for people to then change their buying habits to be able to meet that particular ambition.
Jojo Exactly so. And I think it’s interesting with regard to buying habits while we’re on that subject is that there can be a bit of a tendency, obviously aided very much by the corporate PR machine to see people as consumers. We’re not just consumers. We’re also citizens and we’re given options by governments and by industry. And so an awful lot of people simply cannot afford to make ecological choices because the right frameworks are not in place at the highest level. So this actually has a way of being able to rebalance that to some extent, because it’s not fair that the vast majority of the world can’t decide to act ecologically. It should be the other way around.
Sue Well, there’s no getting away from the energy that you’ve got for this mission, Jojo. We have listeners in many countries, I think over 25 at the last analysis. If you were a listener in not in the UK, for example, listening to this podcast, what would you what would your call to action for them be if they were interested in what you’d been saying about the Stop Ecocide campaign?
Jojo So firstly, I would be hoping that they’d been able to follow me because I know I talk quite fast. Secondly, I’d be encouraging them to go to our website, which is StopEcocide.earth. And we have an Act Now menu on that site, which is as long as my arm. There are so many different things that people can do to get involved. It could be anything from joining a local group that’s working on this to giving a talk to working on social media to dedicating something in their next bit of research. There are really so many different ways. And we also have a growing number of special interest networks as well. Youth to faith to oceans to farming, all these different areas where people can connect in. So I’d certainly encourage that. But I think also above all, I would also encourage just talking about Ecocide because I think, again, the word itself has such a kind of momentum of its own that familiarization with that is kind of half the half the work. So it would be amazing for those who’ve heard this podcast to tell their friends, tell their family that’s what that’s what mass destruction of nature should be called. And it should be a crime.
Sue Well, you’ve been very clear in terms of the go to activities that people can follow on with Jojo. So that’s fantastic. We’ll put a link to that on our show notes as well. And be rest assured that we provide a transcription for this podcast as well. So anybody who’s not been following along with you quite so easily with your enthusiastic conversation can read the transcription as well and get it from there. Fantastic. Finally, before we finish, if you could go back and ask the 14 year old Jojo a question and encouraging her to reflect on her life at that stage, what advice would you give to Jojo?
Jojo Gosh, you wouldn’t believe this, but people don’t normally ask me this. I think I think I would probably tell her to think about where’s the passion. What is it? What is the thing that really makes you passionate? I mean, actually, I realize I spent most of my life very much as a kind of generalist and I was interested in lots of things. But I think that really moving towards the thing makes your heart sing, as Polly Higgins used to say, I think is probably what I would what I would advise.
Sue Wonderful. Well, thank you so much for your time today, Jojo. It’s been enlightening and inspiring to listen to what you had to say. And I for one, I’ll be heading on over to that website to find out more. So thank you again.
Jojo Oh, thank you for having me.
Sound Editor: Matias de Ezcurra
Producer: Sue Stockdale