Wrangell-Fellow Prof. Lucia A. Reisch
From Diane Fossey to Consumer Research
Lucia A. Reisch is an economist who focuses on how our consumption behavior can become more sustainable. She studied at the University of Hohenheim and, after her doctoral thesis, first moved to Denmark and then to the prestigious University of Cambridge in the United Kingdom.
Since then, she has been leading the El-Erian Institute for Behavioral Economics with a focus on sustainable development. In an interview, she discusses how the Wrangell Fellowship paved the way for her professorship.
“Even as a 10-year-old girl, I said: I want to become a professor one day!”
Lucia A. Reisch
When did you discover your passion for science?
When I was ten years old, it was already clear to me that I would go into science. In primary school, we discussed our career aspirations, and I stood up and said, “I want to become a professor!” – back then, we didn’t say ‘professor’ in the feminine form. That’s how I was socialized. I come from a household of scientists; both of my parents were involved in research, and I always noticed how wonderful it is to be able to pursue one’s own projects, to determine the content and time oneself – without a boss. Or how exciting it is to work internationally. Therefore, I have always aimed to be independent and financially self-sufficient. My parents played a significant role in that.
However, it wasn’t clear in which field I wanted to become a professor. As a child, I was actually fascinated by primatology. My heroes were Diane Fossey and Biruté Galdikas, who conducted fieldwork with primates. During my school years, I developed a strong interest in history and politics and was also politically active. After graduating from high school, I became more pragmatic and thought I should study something that would quickly lead to employment and where I would certainly get a job. Thus, I studied economics.
But I truly discovered my passion for economics in the USA. After my studies, I went there with a DAAD scholarship and got my first taste, delving into consumer research. When I returned to Hohenheim, I was fortunate to work at a chair as a research assistant that was already dealing with ethical consumption, sustainability, and environmental issues back then.
What fascinated me was: how do people make decisions? What determines their consumption behavior? There were indeed parallels to primate research, as I noticed in conversations with a primatologist friend. We used to laugh when I talked about certain board meetings or faculty council sessions. So, by training, I am an economist, but I am also a social scientist at heart.
Topics like Evolutionary Economics, which deal with female choice, or Socio-Economics and Behavioral Economics, captivate me. That’s how I eventually found my niche and did my Ph.D. in Behavioral Economics.
“They told me after my PhD, ‘With this topic, you won’t get a job in Germany.’ Now, I’m at an elite university.”
Lucia A. Reisch
Prof. Lucia A. Reisch during a lecture
What was the biggest challenge in your career path?
A critical turning point for me was when the chair, where I had done my Ph.D., was discontinued. Not because of the subject matter, but simply because there wasn’t enough funding. Essentially, every scientist knows the uncertainty of not knowing whether there is a future after the doctorate. This is clear from the outset and isn’t a unique challenge that only I faced.
However, it was a challenge because, at that time in Germany, there was no university researching my topics. So it was only logical that I had to go abroad. Of course, it was a significant leap back then to venture into something new. But as a scientist, you have to be agile, be on the move, be mobile.
Fortunately, my Ph.D. supervisor, who, by the way, was an early feminist, had always worked very strongly internationally. He paved the way for me to Scandinavia, and I took the opportunity. Sometimes I also think that I was very fortunate to be in the right place at the right time.
Did you have a mentor or a role model?
Yes, I had a remarkable mentor in Professor Gerhard Scherhorn. At that time, he was a member of the German government’s scientific advisory board, one of the “Five Wise Men,” and a highly respected economist. From the faculty’s perspective, he was engaging in outlandish subjects at the time: compulsive shopping, environmental issues, ethical investments. This was in the 90s, and he was far ahead of his time. I found it utterly captivating.
For me, he was always an individual with many of interests, someone with whom you could have intellectual exchanges on a myriad of topics. It was incredibly enjoyable. His lab at the time was already interdisciplinary, populated by political scientists, economists, and psychologists. This was somewhat unusual and slightly frowned upon back then, deemed not empirical enough. Today, in contrast, it’s highly sought after. Looking at how universities in the UK are assessed, these are precisely the criteria that contribute to high evaluations.
Professor Scherhorn held the only chair in Consumer Theory and Consumer Policy at the University of Hohenheim throughout Germany. He looked at markets from a consumer’s perspective, attempting to grasp why people buy certain things, why they might overspend, and why they opt for specific products.
He was the one who introduced me to the topic of sustainable consumption, an area I continue to explore today. How can we influence people to make climate-friendly or biodiversity-friendly decisions on significant matters like mobility, finance, or nutrition? What role does the society play in this? What biases emerge? He was a pioneer in these areas, and much of it was later “rediscovered.”
The most vital support I received from Professor Scherhorn was the vast amount of freedom he gave me for my work. I recall him stating, “These are your responsibilities and your time. If you have queries, my door is always open.” Essentially, he let me take the lead. I wasn’t burdened with mentoring large numbers of students he wasn’t interested in. Instead, I could grow within a working group and receive feedback.
This freedom indeed facilitated my Wrangell Fellowship. Without this liberty, I wouldn’t have been able to publish at such a pace and at such a level. It’s not just intellectual freedom but academic freedom as well. While I did teach, and it was crucial for building my teaching experience, it wasn’t overwhelming. I’m so grateful that the then women’s representative informed me about the fellowship. In retrospect, I’d say it was an immensely crucial component of my academic career.
Prof. Lucia A. Reisch at Cambridge Judge Business School, 2022
“The Wrangell-Fellowship was a major game changer for me. Without this fellowship, I don’t know where I’d be today.”
Lucia A. Reisch
When did you realise that you would indeed become a professor?
Well, from a young age, it was my wish, but I would have pursued another path as well. I never had the notion that my career path would be entirely straightforward. Such a thing doesn’t exist. I was always aware that I needed to be persistent and flexible. Perhaps even work in places I didn’t initially want to. I knew it would be a challenging journey filled with many compromises and requiring a lot of perseverance.
The turning point for me was indeed the Wrangell Fellowship. It was a significant game-changer. Without that support, I don’t know where I would be today. Thirty years ago, topics like sustainability or behavioural economics were not mainstream, but rather on the fringes of economics. Back then, I wasn’t taken very seriously.
Therefore, being selected for such a fellowship gave me a tremendous boost in motivation. The independence and visibility it granted me, especially the respect, was truly immense. It laid the foundation for my subsequent positions, from “Assistant Professor” to “Associate Professor” in Denmark, and finally the last stop as a professor in Cambridge.
How do you view the Wrangell Fellowship in hindsight?
I wholeheartedly support it and found it to be excellent. Particularly praiseworthy was its combination with a mentoring programme. There was an offer for group coaching amongst like-minded individuals. Topics discussed included “writing EU proposals” or “presenting at international conferences”. We could address subjects that one wouldn’t typically discuss in public, such as “What should I wear?” or “How can I breastfeed my child during a conference?”.
I believe, at some point, I earned a reputation as the one who would attend every conference with a baby in tow. However, that was important to me, I wanted that, and my husband supported me by bringing our son to me during breaks. Yet, I never had role models in this regard.
At my faculty, there wasn’t a single female professor. Thus, it was all the more crucial to see that other fellows from different faculties faced similar daily challenges as I did. This exchange resonated deeply with me, especially seeing that many of the challenges were universal. Observing how others tackled these issues and learning from them was incredibly beneficial. I perceived the entire mentoring experience as immensely valuable, something I hadn’t encountered in this manner before.
Before the fellowship, I had considered changing my field to something more mainstream. However, the passion wouldn’t have been there. Another option could have been relocating to the USA. Yet, pursuing further qualifications in Germany without the Wrangell Fellowship would have been impossible. In Denmark, of course, no one was familiar with the Wrangell Fellowship. Still, being selected was in itself an accolade; after all, significant efforts were required to secure the fellowship and to be among the chosen few.
For me, this programme – with its financial security, the freedom it provided, and the acknowledgment of my niche subject – was an outstanding comprehensive package. Merely knowing that my topic was intriguing enough to be taken seriously was incredibly reassuring. I’m profoundly grateful to whoever conceived this initiative. I’ve prominently featured it in my CV, even though it’s unfamiliar to many abroad.
I hold immense respect for Dagmar Höppel, who was then in the Equality Office at the University of Hohenheim, and contributed significantly to the programme’s success. And if the question ever arose back then about the necessity of having a women’s representative, I can wholeheartedly say, “Yes, absolutely!”
“I never wanted to be a ‘quota woman’ in the past. But it’s through this that a lot has changed, especially in appointment committees.”
Lucia A. Reisch
Do women still need special support programs or assistance?
Being an empirical researcher, I always turn to data. Therefore, my first question is, what do the numbers tell us? What has genuinely changed, and why? In fields that require significant lab work, most women don’t have children. Yet, in other areas, shifts are noticeable. So, before jumping to conclusions, we should look at the data.
When my mother began studying agricultural sciences in Hohenheim in 1949, her cohort consisted of two female students and approximately 500 male students. Intriguingly, her admission letter was addressed to my grandfather. She was allowed to study on the condition that she would forfeit her spot if a man wanted it. This was merely a generation ago.
To be honest, I was never a fan of quotas in the past. The thought crossed my mind – “How terrible would it be to be labeled a ‘quota woman’?” That’s a title I never aspired for. But much has changed since then, especially within committees. In the past, members were chosen based on familiarity, mostly individuals who had studied together.
Today, this method isn’t feasible. We are compelled to broaden our horizons, actively searching for female scientists. It makes a big difference. Although it may require a bit more effort, platforms like AcademiaNet, a database for outstanding female scientists, developed by the Robert Bosch Foundation, make the task simpler. Yes, there might be a slight risk in hiring someone unfamiliar, but it was a necessary change to ensure diverse committee compositions, breaking the pattern of appointments within friend circles.
Nowadays, almost all appointment committees I’ve been involved with, be it in Denmark, Sweden, or England, operate “Gender Blinded”. They consider factors like child-rearing or homeschooling, particularly during the COVID era, for both men and women. However, I’ve noticed most men straightforwardly list their COVID-era commitments, while many women refrain. Sometimes, while reviewing applications, I’ve found myself amused, thinking, “Interesting”.
One thing is certain: publications are our currency. No matter how intelligent or methodologically skilled you are, writing a publication demands time. And a publication in Science remains precisely that. Careers in academia don’t hinge on after-work beers with the boss. Everyone can shine purely through merit. But having children undeniably limits available time, slowing down one’s progress.
Throughout my life, I’ve never seen a woman ascend in her field without substantial expertise. In academia, mediocrity doesn’t cut it. The standards are high, and publications transparent. We gauge this using the Impact Factor, even if its method can be contested. But when a woman boasts an Impact Factor of 39, I can confidently challenge my male counterparts, asking, “What’s your score?” When allocating third-party funds, we have firm assessment criteria, focusing on teaching experience, publication numbers, and time factors.
For me, the answer is evident. If we ponder whether further support programs are necessary, we only need to review the statistics. How many female professors are there in Germany? I’m not talking about assistant, guest, or junior professorships, but full professorships with chairs. The answer is clear: we still have a long way to go.
Academic career and family
Naturally, it was a demanding time when the children were still young. I had my elder son in 1994 after completing my PhD and took a six-month break. Then, I learned about the Wrangell-Fellowship and applied. The timing was indeed impeccable, as with a young child, it would have been unlikely for me to successfully apply for a full-time position. My second son was born towards the end of the Wrangell-Fellowship. The fellowship was a true game-changer, providing me with five years of stability.
What also immensely benefited me was the childcare program of the University of Hohenheim called “Die kleinen Hohenheimer”. It was a newly introduced initiative and served as a daycare for employees and postdocs. It was fantastic. Located just 500 meters from my office, it allowed me to breastfeed, and I trusted the high-quality care provided on-site.
Nevertheless, this meant I had to write papers late into the night and over weekends. There was a phase when I was perpetually exhausted. But many can relate to that. Especially the years when the kids are young, they are quite draining. With the advent of remote working due to COVID-19, things have certainly improved – such opportunities weren’t available back then.
Have you ever heard comments or felt disadvantaged because you are a woman?
When I presented my postdoctoral thesis topic in Hohenheim’s faculty in 2006, the chairman remarked, “Young lady, with this topic, you won’t get a job in Germany!” Although probably not meant maliciously, it was during such instances I learned the importance of resilience and not letting intimidations deter me. I’ve since developed a thick skin. Things have significantly changed since then, with today being markedly better than the environment three decades ago at universities.
Economics has traditionally been male-dominated, and for a long time, I felt like a lone wolf during many conferences. Consequently, my contributions weren’t always taken seriously. Research reports even show that women face a harder time gaining acceptance in orthodox economics. Overall, especially when my children were younger, I felt I was constantly battling headwinds. However, adversity isn’t always a negative.
In Denmark, the situation was the polar opposite. There, I consistently felt supported. The Danish societal model inherently assumes both parents work and share childcare responsibilities. Consequently, no meetings took place after 4 pm, and it was commonplace for individuals to leave to pick up their kids.
Denmark’s history as a small country requiring full workforce participation probably contributes to this approach. Yet, if you look closely, at the Copenhagen Business School where I spent nearly 20 years, the top echelons still lacked gender diversity. I believe only 10% were female professors – a disappointingly low number.
What I’ve come to realize is that women’s career paths are often slower, winding, and less straightforward. Ultimately, a lot depends on the support one receives. After my second child, I resumed full-time work within six weeks out of necessity. In contrast, many in Scandinavia take a year-long parental leave, shared with their partners, driven partly by the need to maximize state benefits. Different societal norms and laws provide broader opportunities and varying perceptions of career trajectories. Evaluations, too, are different, and these can cascade into numerous ramifications.
The wind metaphor aptly captures my experience. In some countries, I faced headwinds, while in others, I enjoyed tailwinds.
When do female scientists need support in their career path?
While the biological reality remains that only women can bear children, this implies that there are crucial years during which they will inevitably have limited time for career advancement due to childbearing and rearing. The question arises: how do we compensate for this to ensure there’s no gender-based disadvantage when tenure or appointments commence? It is essential to provide a buffer during these critical years of child-rearing, and I firmly believe support is still necessary during this time.
When aiming for a professorship, other factors come into play, including the environment. There are also instances where men might have to wait five years, especially in niche fields without vacant chair positions. However, if we aspire to be a family-friendly nation and retain excellent researchers, we must ensure that they can stay in academia during these pivotal years. Offering ‘Career Packages’ and seeking positions for their partners could be invaluable. Moreover, there shouldn’t be any stigma attached to both partners working in academia.
A concern that has come up, especially when I hear my two sons voice sentiments like, “Men are at a disadvantage; they always prefer women,” is about perpetuating myths of reverse discrimination. While I always challenge them with, “Could it be that they were simply better?” we must remain vigilant to prevent any backlash. It’s counterproductive for young men to feel systematically marginalized.
Progress has been significant over the years, and young female colleagues today have vast opportunities. For me, the Wrangell-Fellowship was an advantage as it offered unparalleled flexibility coupled with security. We still need such initiatives, and many other countries have their versions. If we want to compete internationally, we need to benchmark ourselves against these standards. Equally vital are role models so that young female scientists can envision possibilities, thinking, “I can achieve that.”
They need to see women who have balanced familial responsibilities, excelled in committees, and, like everyone, occasionally had off days – because that’s life.
Scientific career abroad
There are vast differences in education systems across Europe. Scandinavia possesses a system where virtually everyone can study, and everyone secures a place in universities. Students even receive funding, around 1.000 Euro per month, for their undergraduate studies without needing to repay. However, this also means there’s limited motivation and hardly any elite presence. Only a few disciplines where Scandinavian countries are at the forefront in research. They provide excellent general education, but top-tier research is limited.
England’s academic system is highly elitist, much like the USA’s. It heavily depends on one’s birth circumstances. There are opportunities for advancement, but it’s challenging for children from non-academic families. Scholarships are available, but securing them is tough. The elite circle has become quite insular.
When I observe from the outside, I believe we’re doing many things right in Germany. The sheer fact that we have numerous excellent public universities is commendable. There are hardly any German universities that are truly lacking. Everywhere, one can get a quality education “for free”. There’s also the Bafög, and significantly more children from working-class backgrounds in universities compared to England. Also, many migrants – that’s a remarkable achievement! We possess a diverse system featuring universities, dual universities, universities of applied sciences, teacher training colleges, and quality vocational training. Such diversity is unparalleled.
Nowadays, there are also excellence programs to promote cutting-edge research. In my opinion, we have the perfect blend.
Do you have any tips for young female scientists?
The most important tip I give my own mentees is to get involved outside of science. Do not just focus on publications, but also participate in committees or advisory rounds. I believe women are just used to being insanely efficient and spending the last minute between picking up children, doing laundry, and publishing productively. Some wonder: „And then I should also be part of such a talk-club? I don’t have time for that!“ But that’s a big mistake. Many scientists have no idea how valuable that is. You learn so much about conversation leadership or about how to forge coalitions.
However, many women do not like to get involved in these topics. It’s a bit like salary negotiations, which many women also do not like. But that’s exactly what we should do. Of course, selectively, but to engage outside of the core of actual academic work, because that takes you much further and trains completely different skills, and socializes and nuances us in a different way. I myself have met some of my closest female colleagues in the scientific advisory board of the federal government for food and consumers and in the sustainability council.
When I was appointed to the scientific advisory board in the federal government by Renate Künast, the first Green consumer minister, I immediately said yes. I remember how desperate she was at first because she couldn’t find any woman from Southern Germany who was an expert on consumer issues. For me, as a doctoral student, that was a huge springboard because I suddenly found myself in the middle of federal politics, met completely different people, and there were completely new platforms on which I could suddenly play.
In addition, I have been working for a scientific magazine as an editor for 35 years. I started as a scientific assistant when I just came back from the USA, because I spoke good English and they were looking for someone. Until today, I am still an editor there and have thus gained a completely different network. All men, great men, who are now well-known professors at major universities.
That’s why I advise every female scientist: Look where you can get involved. Trust yourself to do it. And even if you have one publication less because you don’t have time for it, it can sometimes earn you more. Just the motivation that I got from colleagues, from people outside of my own university, to look over something and bring in new inspiration or thoughts. That is worth its weight in gold! Tips that you get through such networks, also from completely different disciplines, are totally underestimated.
Of course, you should not do it during a phase when you have small children at home. But there is a time before and after that. I reduced my editor activity to 10 percent while the children were small, but then I was able to fully re-engage.
That is also fun, and I have learned a lot. How are political decisions made in ministerial administration? How do they tick? What incentives are there? Who are the real decision-makers? What do the power constellations look like? This is important background knowledge to classify some things and in the end, you also gain credibility.
“We women are just used to being incredibly efficient, making every last minute productive between picking up the kids, doing laundry, and publishing. That’s why we often underestimate the value of engagement outside of academia.”
Lucia A. Reisch
Is it more difficult to pursue the scientific career path today?
Much has changed – but so have the circumstances. My generation, born in ’64, grew up and was shaped during golden years. Our most pressing concern was whether someone had the wrong taste in music. It was a time of awakening. Now, we’ve experienced the pandemic, the conflict in Ukraine continues, and climate change stands as one of our most pressing challenges. Given such times of uncertainty, it’s no surprise that there’s an increased emphasis on seeking security.
What I’ve observed is that young scientists nowadays aren’t as flexible. They’re less willing to go abroad or assume they can always remain at the same university. But it’s essential to engage with the wider world, especially in an era characterised by growing internationalisation. On the flip side, we now ponder questions like, how should I travel to a conference? Should I even do so given the carbon emissions? The younger generation is operating under entirely different conditions.
Back in our day, it was quite typical to have just a part-time job – say, half or a third of a full-time position. I took pride in that. In essence, we took potential uncertainties into account, and everyone seemed to be in the same boat. My cohort was particularly large. Everywhere I went, there were already a hundred others.
Things are different now. Of course, there are still phases, especially when someone has children, which are challenging. But this applies to all working women, not just those on an academic career path.
Opportunities today are more abundant, and there are more support programmes available. Female scientists, in particular, are in demand, with targeted initiatives in place. It’s also more commonplace these days to make a temporary shift – into politics, a think tank, or a startup, and test oneself there. The options are numerous. However, the readiness to move abroad or accept a less-than-ideal position seems to have waned. Many are seeking stability and continuity, but that’s not how academia operates.
When I received the offer from Cambridge, I had to consider if I was really prepared to leave my successful lab in Copenhagen to start afresh in my late 50s. Starting anew at a different university, without any immediate contacts. That certainly required a bit of entrepreneurial spirit and a willingness to take risks.
I took the leap because I yearned for a fresh experience. With my children having flown the nest, I was ready for a new challenge. Hence, my advice to young scientists: Seize the opportunities presented to you! Dare to take a risk, and you will reap the rewards.
“On the whole, I consider it a great luxury to be a professor. There’s nothing more delightful than researching one’s passion from morning till night.”
Lucia A. Reisch
How do you reflect on what you´ve achieved?
What I’ve accomplished is truly remarkable, and I couldn’t be more content. Though I always aspired to become a professor, there was no certainty that it would come to pass. Ultimately, everything has unfolded even better than I could’ve hoped for. I now find myself at a top-tier university surrounded by exceptional colleagues and presented with incredible opportunities.
Over recent years, I’ve built up my lab, welcoming a blend of young individuals, many of whom are women, bringing an international and interdisciplinary flavour. The privileges of being at an elite university are not something I take for granted; I value them deeply.
Prof. Lucia A. Reisch speaking at the BDI in Berlin
In the grand scheme of things, I consider it a profound luxury to be able to pursue my profession. After all, what’s more gratifying than dedicating one’s entire day to researching a subject close to the heart, discussing it, and engaging with others on the same? Hence, I can only say, it’s been utterly worth it! Naturally, nothing comes “for free” – I had to invest in this journey and carve out my own path.
But where else can I find this degree of independence and freedom? It doesn’t start just when one becomes a professor; it begins as early as the postdoc phase. A crucial factor for me has always been the autonomy to manage my own time. For this, I was willing to compromise on other aspects, such as job security or salary. Being a professor is a fantastic profession, especially for women, and I’ve never had a moment of regret.
I’ve always advocated for the need for more female role models. Only recently, it dawned on me that I’ve become a role model myself.
At the core of my research is always the question: How do people behave? What can we do to change their behaviour? For instance, to promote sustainable consumption. What stimuli are necessary for this, and which minor interventions can guide them in the right direction? I study patterns, such as dietary habits or mobility behaviours. How can we adjust these for better climate protection? What infrastructure is required to facilitate this? Until a few years ago, I constantly had to justify why we should make our consumption habits more sustainable. That’s no longer the case.
After 30 years in consumer research, I’ve come to understand that people only change when they are content. Yes, occasionally, sacrifices are made, but they don’t last. Our immediate environment, especially our families, must be thriving. Pricing is a significant influencer, as are laws, especially in conjunction with price. It’s possible to enforce bans and set new standards, but prohibitions also pose significant risks – the debate around the heating law of the coalition parties in Germany serves as an example. Such actions can propel populist parties, leading to quick setbacks.
Currently, we’re embarking on an extensive study aiming to make meals at the cafeterias of the 31 colleges of the University of Cambridge more sustainable. We’re experimenting with making vegetarian dishes the new standard. However, we’re not banning anything, as this tends to garner higher acceptance. We prioritize maintaining the freedom of choice. We live in a world with increasing regulations and controls. Hence, preserving freedoms wherever possible is paramount. Our experimental approach gives us a clear insight into potential effects or unintended consequences.
In other projects, I delve into topics like energy or biodiversity. The primary goal is usually to reduce conflicts. Our methodology is empirical, employing experiments and extensive fieldwork. The human model we operate with suggests: We aren’t perfectly rational but often carry biases or look for mental shortcuts. We get tired, distracted, and overwhelmed – all of which influence our decisions. If this is the case, how can we leverage this to change behaviour? It requires a lot of adaptability to make it work.
Name: Lucia A. Reisch
Research Area: Behavioural Economics and Policy with a focus on Sustainable Development
University & Institute: University of Cambridge, El-Erian Institute of Behavioural Economics and Policy, Cambridge Judge Business School
Family: 2 Children (aged 28 and 23)
Academic Career of Lucia A. Reisch
1983 to 1988, University of Hohenheim, Department of Economics and Social Sciences
September 1985 to April 1986, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Anderson Graduate School of Management; Integrated International Programme Master of Business Administration (DAAD Scholarship)
September to December 1988, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) Anderson Graduate School of Management, MBA programme
1994 Doctorate in economics (Dr. oec.) University of Hohenheim
Post-doctoral Research Scholarship (Baden-Württemberg) (including times of parental leave)
1997 – 2004 Lecturer in the Department of Consumer Theory and Policy, Institute for Household and Consumer Economics, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Hohenheim
09/98 – 10/98 Visiting Assistant Professor, Department of Marketing, Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen, 03/99 - 08/99 Visiting Associate Professor, Department of Marketing, Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen
Guest Lecturer at the Technical University of Munich, Economics Faculty, Consumer Science Masters Programme
02/06 – 09/06 Visiting Associate Professor at the Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen; Guest Professorship funded by Otto Mønsted Foundation
from 09/06 Professor (MSO) at the Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen, Department of Intercultural Communication and Management, Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility, cbsCSR
from 03/14 Full Professor at the Copenhagen Business School, Copenhagen, Department of Intercultural Communication and Management
from 09/21 El-Erian Professor of Behavioural Economics and Policy at the University of Cambridge, Cambridge (UK)
Director of the El-Erian Institute of Behavioural Economics and Policy, an endowed Institute at Judge Business School
Interview with Prof. Lucia A Reisch on 29.08.2023