The International Ranger Federation (IRF) is a network of regional, national, and sub-national ranger membership-based professional-worker associations. In this paper, we discuss the significant support that ranger associations receive from rangers across the world. A global ranger association model is presented that builds on the existing structure of IRF, and the relationship between three tiers of association is detailed. For the first time, the roles and responsibilities of the three levels of ranger associations are articulated and the benefits to members presented. Ranger associations can be vehicles for the provision of legitimacy and credibility to the ranger profession, the creation and promotion of a shared global vision of the ranger profession, advocating for members’ interests and those of rangers who are not yet members, supply of thought leadership on professional development, and networking, sharing knowledge, and promoting good practices among the world’s rangers. In other words, ranger associations are ideally positioned to facilitate the implementation of the white papers presented in this issue if they can build the required capacity, partnerships, and resources to do so.

A new infrastructure is urgently needed at the global level to facilitate exchange on key issues concerning genome editing. We advocate the establishment of a global observatory to serve as a center for international, interdisciplinary, and cosmopolitan reflection. This article is the first of a two-part series.

A new infrastructure is urgently needed at the global level to facilitate exchange on key issues concerning genome editing. We advocate the establishment of a global observatory to serve as a center for international, interdisciplinary, and cosmopolitan reflection. This article is the second of a two-part series.

In September 2020, a detailed report on Heritable Human Genome Editing was published. The report offers a translational pathway for the limited approval of germline editing under limited circumstances and assuming various criteria have been met. In this perspective, some three dozen experts from the fields of genome editing, medicine, bioethics, law, and related fields offer their candid reactions to the National Academies/Royal Society report, highlighting areas of support, omissions, disagreements, and priorities moving forward.