The transition of the brain economy from theory to actuality is increasingly becoming a focus for Rice University and its partners in Houston. Provost Amy Dittmar brought the conversation to the United Nations General Assembly and moderated a panel titled “The New Wealth of Nations: Brain Economy Leadership in Action.”
“The brain capital is built locally,” Dittmar said. “The key word here is build.”
The challenge is partly one of translation: How does a broad concept such as brain capital become something that governments, businesses and communities can actually measure and act on?
“The demographic changes we’re experiencing, the artificial intelligence that is coming on board makes investments in human capital all that more important,” she said. “We’re going to be talking to you today about the importance of the human aspects, the human skills, the deeply relevant part of who we each are that makes the world what it is and how we can invest in that. It’s important to think broadly. And so when we think about brain health, we’re not just talking about science. We’re not just talking about medicine. We’re really talking about a breadth of different disciplines and fields and policies that have to come together.”
Canada, for example, is working to connect brain-related initiatives across provinces, territories and communities through shared indicators and an emerging Canadian Brain Capital Index. Elizabeth Allen, a senior Canadian federal government executive and public policy adviser, described an opportunity to make existing efforts more visible and easier to connect rather than simply creating another institutional layer.
Malaysia is approaching the issue from the government level. Professor Dato’ Dr. Jafri Malin Abdullah described a national effort via the Ministry of Science organized around brain health across the life course, cognitive capacity and human capital development, mental health and workforce productivity, neuroinnovation and whole-of-government governance.
In Argentina, neurologist and former national politician Facundo Manes focused on a different challenge: turning scientific knowledge into durable public policy.
“Evidence doesn’t implement itself,” Manes told the audience.
His argument is that brain health cannot be treated solely as a medical issue. It also affects economic productivity, social cohesion and the ability of societies to develop and adapt. Investing in healthy brains, in that view, is not simply an outcome of economic development; it is part of the foundation for it.
Australia offered another approach. Cheryl Batchelor, CEO of Yiliyapinya Indigenous Corporation, described the organization’s Growing Deadly Brains initiative, which combines Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural knowledge with neuroscience and trains trusted local brain health coaches.
The model reflects a broader principle: Interventions are more likely to create lasting change when they are carried through existing relationships and community institutions. Batchelor also argued that culture itself can be a protective factor for brain health.
Taken together, the examples showed why there is unlikely to be a single blueprint for a brain economy. The underlying goals may be shared, but implementation depends on political systems, cultures, institutions and the communities themselves.
For Rice, that local dimension is more than a theme from an international conference. It is becoming part of a regional effort in Houston.
“It’s really important and increasingly clear that in order to solve some of these challenges, we need global frameworks,” Dittmar said. “We need to understand what the consequences are in the locations where a difference can be made. Though they are global and social problems, they will be solved at home. They’ll be solved in our communities. They’ll be solved with policies as they take root in specific locations.”
Rice is a partner in Project Metis, a collaboration led by the Center for Houston’s Future with the University of Texas Medical Branch and Memorial Hermann Health System. The initiative is working to position the Houston region as a leader in brain health and the emerging brain economy while developing tools that can help communities understand and strengthen their own brain capital.
One of those tools is the Metis U.S. Brain Capital Index Dashboard, which organizes indicators related to brain health, brain skills and the conditions that support them at the state and county levels.
The goal is not simply to rank communities. Measurement can instead give leaders a way to identify strengths and gaps, understand the conditions shaping brain health and consider where investment or policy could make a difference.
That same idea is reflected in the Barcelona Declaration on Brain-Positive Place, developed with collaborators including Rice’s Harris Eyre. The declaration shifts attention toward the environments in which brain health and human capability are formed — cities, neighborhoods, schools, workplaces and other everyday settings — and asks how those places can be designed and governed to support healthier brains and stronger communities.
The question, in other words, is becoming less about whether brain health matters and more about what communities can do about it. That shift also broadens the role of neuroscience — brain health is influenced far beyond hospitals and laboratories. Education, employment, technology, culture, the built environment and public institutions all shape the conditions in which brains develop and remain healthy.
That perspective is central to Rice’s Brain Institute and its Brain and Society Initiative, led by Simon Fischer-Baum, as well as the Global Brain Economy Initiative based at Rice and the university’s partnerships in Houston and around the world.
The work underway across those efforts reflects the same lesson that emerged from the U.N. General Assembly panel: Global collaboration can provide shared knowledge, frameworks and momentum, but brain capital ultimately has to be built in places where people live.
For Houston, that creates an opportunity to turn an international conversation into a regional experiment — one that connects neuroscience and economics with education, public policy, community development and everyday life.