We present the most sensitive and detailed view of the neutral hydrogen ( ${\rm H\small I}$ ) emission associated with the Small Magellanic Cloud (SMC), through the combination of data from the Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder (ASKAP) and Parkes (Murriyang), as part of the Galactic Australian Square Kilometre Array Pathfinder (GASKAP) pilot survey. These GASKAP-HI pilot observations, for the first time, reveal ${\rm H\small I}$ in the SMC on similar physical scales as other important tracers of the interstellar medium, such as molecular gas and dust. The resultant image cube possesses an rms noise level of 1.1 K ( $1.6\,\mathrm{mJy\ beam}^{-1}$ ) $\mathrm{per}\ 0.98\,\mathrm{km\ s}^{-1}$ spectral channel with an angular resolution of $30^{\prime\prime}$ ( ${\sim}10\,\mathrm{pc}$ ). We discuss the calibration scheme and the custom imaging pipeline that utilises a joint deconvolution approach, efficiently distributed across a computing cluster, to accurately recover the emission extending across the entire ${\sim}25\,\mathrm{deg}^2$ field-of-view. We provide an overview of the data products and characterise several aspects including the noise properties as a function of angular resolution and the represented spatial scales by deriving the global transfer function over the full spectral range. A preliminary spatial power spectrum analysis on individual spectral channels reveals that the power law nature of the density distribution extends down to scales of 10 pc. We highlight the scientific potential of these data by comparing the properties of an outflowing high-velocity cloud with previous ASKAP+Parkes ${\rm H\small I}$ test observations.

Antarctic and Southern Ocean science is vital to understanding natural variability, the processes that govern global change and the role of humans in the Earth and climate system. The potential for new knowledge to be gained from future Antarctic science is substantial. Therefore, the international Antarctic community came together to ‘scan the horizon’ to identify the highest priority scientific questions that researchers should aspire to answer in the next two decades and beyond. Wide consultation was a fundamental principle for the development of a collective, international view of the most important future directions in Antarctic science. From the many possibilities, the horizon scan identified 80 key scientific questions through structured debate, discussion, revision and voting. Questions were clustered into seven topics: i) Antarctic atmosphere and global connections, ii) Southern Ocean and sea ice in a warming world, iii) ice sheet and sea level, iv) the dynamic Earth, v) life on the precipice, vi) near-Earth space and beyond, and vii) human presence in Antarctica. Answering the questions identified by the horizon scan will require innovative experimental designs, novel applications of technology, invention of next-generation field and laboratory approaches, and expanded observing systems and networks. Unbiased, non-contaminating procedures will be required to retrieve the requisite air, biota, sediment, rock, ice and water samples. Sustained year-round access to Antarctica and the Southern Ocean will be essential to increase winter-time measurements. Improved models are needed that represent Antarctica and the Southern Ocean in the Earth System, and provide predictions at spatial and temporal resolutions useful for decision making. A co-ordinated portfolio of cross-disciplinary science, based on new models of international collaboration, will be essential as no scientist, programme or nation can realize these aspirations alone.

The authors of this article argue that companies' high cost of capital or short investment horizons do not explain the decline in global competitiveness of many U.S. industries in the 1970s and 1980s. Instead, they find the source of malaise in the capital-budgeting and financial-planning systems that arose after the Second World War. Although they allowed managers in large companies to evaluate some aspects of their business efficiently and comprehensively, these systems also obscured the value of investment in organizational capabilities, because such investments were hard to quantify—indeed, even to describe—within the financial models in widespread use. As a result, companies often invested vigorously—but in the wrong things. The authors define a set of desirable capabilities and, using case studies, describe both the problems of the recent past and the requirements for successful investment in the future.