Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sasha Grishin, Adjunct Professor of Art History, Australian National University

Review: Escher x nendo, National Gallery of Victoria.

M. C. Escher (1898-1972) is an artist whose name is synonymous with mathematically challenging, optically intriguing and intellectually perplexing prints. This Dutch artist created a world of impossible objects, endless staircases and radical visual transformations that challenge our grasp of reality and our understanding of the shape of time. His woodcuts, lithographs and engravings, at least in reproduction, have become iconic, where the image is known better than the artist’s name.

In his lifetime, Escher had to wait until he was in his fifties to receive widespread popularity and only at the age of 70 did he achieve his first retrospective exhibition. Escher, with his intricate tessellations, complex geometric structures and mathematical riddles, steered a course in his art that seemed a long way from the popular trends and styles in 20th century modernism and attracted the support of fellow intellectual travellers rather than mainstream art critics and art historians.

M. C. Escher, Day and night February 1938, woodcut, printed in grey and black inks Escher Collection, Gemeentemuseum Den Haag, The Hague, the Netherlands. © The M. C. Escher Company, the Netherlands. All rights reserved

In recent years, there has been an explosion of interest in the work of Escher with a hugely successful exhibition of his art held in Rio de Janeiro in 2011. A major exhibition at the Scottish National Gallery of Modern Art in Edinburgh in 2015 toured to London and throughout Italy, attracting huge crowds in each venue. The time for Escher has arrived.

The last major Escher show I saw was the substantial centennial tribute exhibition that I caught in San Diego, two decades ago. Curated by Ruth Fine from the National Gallery of Art in Washington DC, it thematically presented the development of the artist’s vision in a fairly didactic manner.

In the previous history of exhibiting Escher, there is nothing to prepare us for the shock to the senses in the National Gallery of Victoria show. Borrowing about 160 Escher prints and drawings from the Gemeentemuseum in The Hague, the NGV engaged the nendo design studio in Tokyo and its Chief Designer and Founder, Oki Sato, not to design an exhibition around Escher, but to enter into a collaborative dialogue with the artist.

M. C. Escher, Ascending and descending March 1960 lithograph, Escher Collection, Gemeentemuseum Den Haag, The Hague, the Netherlands. © The M. C. Escher Company, the Netherlands. All rights reserved

A hallmark of a great exhibition, one that revisits a repertoire of world-famous art, is that it allows us to find a new perspective on what we thought we already knew. In this exhibition, we see Escher afresh – not through the eyes of 20th century empiricism, but through those of 21st century digitally liberated design. One of the main challenges that Escher set himself was to replicate three-dimensional form on a two-dimensional surface. His intention was not to completely embrace illusionism and treat the piece of paper like a frame for a window into the world, but to continuously explore the tension between these dimensions. nendo works in reverse. The studio operates in three-dimensional real and digital worlds but wishes to replicate two-dimensional effects.

Throughout the exhibition, there are numerous visual ambushes that subvert our grasp on reality as we are invited to enter an exciting labyrinth of visual ambiguities. Oki Sato’s “icon image” for Escher is a little schematic house design through which the fantastic world of Escher is engaged. This design is replicated in many completely unexpected ways, such as a giant “chandelier” made up of tens of thousands of these tiny houses that becomes a kinetic fabric of vision and a metaphor for the distorting mirror created by Escher.

A giant ‘chandelier’ made up of tens of thousands of tiny houses, designed by nendo. Sean Fennessy

In another exhibition space, the viewer encounters a house-shaped tunnel, or an illusionistic space made up of these house designs of ever-diminishing sizes, allowing you to be initially physically, and then visually, drawn into an impossible space. This acts as a metaphor for the optical illusions so close to the heart of Escher.

The most impressive of the nendo interventions and one of the most impressive installation designs attempted in any Australian gallery, is a huge space accessible from an elevated platform where scores of these simplified houses have been constructed leading from positive to negative spaces. It is within this installed, completely immersive environment, consisting of improbable constructions, that we encounter some of the classic pieces of Escher.

M. C. Escher, Eye October 1946, mezzotint, 7th state, Escher Collection, Gemeentemuseum Den Haag, The Hague, the Netherlands. © The M. C. Escher Company, the Netherlands. All rights reserved

These immersive environments seduce and intrigue the viewer, constantly leading them into the fantastic imagination of Escher. This is less an exhibition of the prints of Escher than a physical encounter with the world of Escher and the experience of his improbable inventions.

The exhibition does include most of the classic works by Escher, such as the “Drawing hands” lithograph (1948), where each hand appears to be drawing the other; the perfectly observed “Eye” mezzotint (1946) and his most famous images – the “Day and Night” woodcut (1938) and the “Ascending and Descending” lithograph (1960). A rare treat is his bewilderingly complex late woodcut “Snakes” (1969) – an exploration of interlinking shapes of infinity – now shown within the “snake house”, a serpentine, waist-high installed room replicating and reinterpreting Escher’s snake design.

M. C. Escher, Drawing hands January 1948, lithograph, Escher Collection, Gemeentemuseum Den Haag, The Hague, the Netherlands. © The M. C. Escher Company, the Netherlands. All rights reserved

This exhibition is not so much a presentation of the work of Escher, but an interpretation of his art from a very contemporary perspective. It will surprise, delight and challenge the viewer and suggests that, perhaps, this cerebral sombre Dutchman had a dry sense of humour that he hoped would be discovered in posterity.

Escher x nendo: Between two worlds is showing at National Gallery of Victoria International until April 7 2019.

– ref. Escher x nendo will surprise, delight and challenge – http://theconversation.com/escher-x-nendo-will-surprise-delight-and-challenge-108036

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Blair, Emeritus Professor, ARC Centre of Excellence for Gravitational Wave Discovery, OzGrav, University of Western Australia

Four new detections of gravitational waves have been announced at the Gravitational Waves Physics and Astronomy Workshop, at the University of Maryland in the United States.

This brings the total number of detections to 11, since the first back in 2015.

Ten are from binary black hole mergers and one from the merger of two neutron stars, which are the dense remains of stellar explosions. One black hole merger was extraordinarily distant, and the most powerful explosion ever observed in astronomy.

Read more: The search for the source of a mysterious fast radio burst comes relatively close to home

The latest news comes just a month after doubts were raised about the initial detection. In late October an article in New Scientist, headlined Exclusive: Grave doubts over LIGO’s discovery of gravitational waves, raised the idea that it “might have been an illusion”.

So how confident are we that we are detecting gravitational waves, and not seeing an illusion?

Artist’s conception shows two merging black holes. LIGO/Caltech/MIT/Sonoma State (Aurore Simonnet)

Open to scrutiny

All good scientists understand that scrutiny and scepticism is the power of science. All theories and all knowledge are provisional, as science slowly homes in on our best understanding of the truth. There is no certainty, only probability and statistical significance.

Years ago the team searching for gravitational waves with the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO), determined the levels of statistical significance needed to make a claim of detection.

For each signal we determine the false alarm rate. This tells you how many years you would need to wait before you have an even chance of a random signal mimicking your real signal.

The weakest signal detected so far has a false alarm rate of one every five years, so still there is a chance that it could have been accidental.

Other signals are much stronger. For the three strongest signals detected so far you would have to wait from 1,000 times to 10 billion billion times the age of the universe for the signals to occur by chance.

Knowing what to listen out for

The detection of gravitational waves is a bit like acoustic ornithology.

Imagine you study birds and want to determine the population of birds in a forest. You know the calls of the various bird species.

When a bird call matches your predetermined call, you jump with excitement. Its loudness tells you how far away it is. If it was very faint against the background noise, you may be uncertain.

But you need to consider the lyre birds that mimic other species. How do you know that sound of a kookaburra isn’t actually made by a lyre bird? You have to be very rigorous before you can claim there is a kookaburra in the forest. Even then you will only be able to be confident if you make further detections.

In gravitational waves we use memorised sounds called templates. There is one unique sound for the merger of each possible combination of black hole masses and spins. Each template is worked out using Einstein’s theory of gravitational wave emission.

In the hunt for gravitational waves, we are searching for these rare sounds using two LIGO detectors in the US and a third detector, Virgo, in Italy.

To avoid missing signals or claiming false positives, the utmost rigour is needed to analyse the data. Huge teams look over the data, search for flaws, criticise each other, review computer codes and finally review proposed publications for accuracy. Separate teams use different methods of analysis, and finally compare results.

Next comes reproducibility – the same result recorded again and again. Reproducibility is a critical component of science.

The signals detected

Before LIGO made its first public announcement of gravitational waves, two more signals had been detected, each of them picked up in two detectors. This increased our confidence and told us that there is a population of colliding black holes out there, not just a single event that could be something spurious.

The first detected gravitational wave was astonishingly loud and it matched a pre-determined template. It was so good that LIGO spent many weeks trying to work out if it was possible for it to have been a prank, deliberately injected by a hacker.

While LIGO scientists eventually convinced themselves that the event was real, further discoveries greatly increased our confidence. In August 2017 a signal was detected by the two LIGO detectors and the Virgo detector in Italy.

On August 17 last year a completely different, but long predicted type of signal was observed from a coalescing pair of neutron stars, accompanied by the predicted burst of gamma rays and light.

The black hole mergers

Now the LIGO-Virgo collaboration has completed the analysis of all the data since September 2015.

The ten black hole mergers.

For each signal we determine the mass of the two colliding black holes, the mass of the new black hole that they create, and rather roughly, the distance and the direction.

Each signal has been seen in two or three detectors almost simultaneously (they were separated by milliseconds).

Eight of the 20 initial black holes have masses between 30 and 40 Suns, six are in the 20s, three are in the teens and only two are as low as 7 to 8 Suns. Only one is near 50, the biggest pre-collision black hole yet seen.

These are the numbers that will help us work out where all these black holes were made, how they were made, and how many are out there. To answer these big questions we need many more signals.

Graphic showing the masses of recently announced gravitational-wave detections and black holes and neutron stars. LIGO-Virgo / Frank Elavsky / Northwestern

The weakest of the new signals, GW170729, was detected on July 29, 2017. It was the collision of a black hole 50 times the mass of the Sun, with another 34 times the mass of the Sun.

Read more: Explainer: why you can hear gravitational waves when things collide in the universe

This was by far the most distant event, having taken place, most likely, 5 billion years ago – before the birth of Earth and the Solar system 4.6 billion years ago. Despite the weak signal, it was the most powerful gravitational explosion discovered, so far.

But because the signal was weak, this is the detection with the false alarm rate of one every five years.

LIGO and Virgo are improving their sensitivity year by year, and will be finding many more events.

With planned new detectors we anticipate ten times more sensitivity. Then we expect to be detecting new signals about every five minutes.

– ref. New detections of gravitational waves brings the number to 11 – so far – http://theconversation.com/new-detections-of-gravitational-waves-brings-the-number-to-11-so-far-107962

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Rebel right wing Liberal Craig Kelly is a paradox – a man who chronically lacks the numbers but possesses the power to force prime ministers to protect him.

On Monday, fresh from a G20 where he was less than feted, Scott Morrison heavied a few moderates on the NSW Liberal executive, and a wobbly cross-factional deal to preserve Kelly held.

In the process former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull’s nose was bloodied. Turnbull had tried to persuade the moderates to veto the endorsement, which would have pushed Kelly to a preselection ballot he’d have lost.

Turnbull’s foray was counter-productive, for the party and himself. Moderate backbencher Trent Zimmerman told the ABC that “Malcolm’s intervention made it hard for the executive to do anything other than what they did”.

Though once Morrison’s authority was on the line, it could do little but what he wanted.

It was very different from 2016 when Turnbull urged support for Kelly, writing that he had “a fine reputation for standing up for his local constituents and was unafraid of taking on controversial issues”.

Back then, pressure from Turnbull led Kelly’s opponent Kent Johns to agree not to stand for the preselection.

Johns kept up his branch numbers and prepared for another tilt. But lightning struck twice.

In a tweet on Monday that seemed remarkable for its restraint Johns, who is a NSW Liberal vice-president, said, “While disappointed, I respect and accept the Party’s decision, and will continue to serve the Party and proudly campaign for the re-election of the Coalition Govt”.

Before the last election supporters of Kelly were quoted as warning “a challenge against him would send the message the party is becoming a version of the Labor Party.” Kelly’s backers never let up on referring to Johns’ Labor background.

This year, the times suited Kelly. The right is strong within the party. And with the Morrison government now dealing with a hung parliament, the risk that a disendorsed Kelly could defect to the crossbench, and run as an independent, loomed large.

Morrison asserted on Thursday that the possibility of Kelly going to the crossbench had “never been the subject of our conversations.”

It didn’t have to be – the threat has hung in the air for months – although Kelly has been all over the place in his comments.

For example in May the ABC reported Kelly was “understood to have told local members that he will resign from the Coalition and sit as an independent, if the ‘higher powers that be’ do not secure his nomination’. But he’s now told Sky News he will remain a Liberal no matter what happens.”

Kelly is a favourite of the right wing commentariat.

In 2016 Alan Jones said: “Let me say to Kent Johns and anyone else who’s thinking of standing for the preselection out there and to put a torpedo under this bloke. You’d better pull your head in, Kent Johns. Because I’ll tell you what: if you put your head up, there’ll be a hell of a story that’ll be told about you, Mr Johns.”

On Sunday night Sky’s Paul Murray went through Turnbull’s tweets on the Kelly preselection, branding them “lies”.

Kelly has had a special place on Sky, with so many appearances his colleagues joke he must have a sleeping bag there.

As chair of the Coalition’s backbench energy and environment committee, a spruiker for coal, and close to Tony Abbott, Kelly ran a constant and unhelpful commentary on the Turnbull government’s attempt to get an energy policy together.

He helped kill the NEG (and thus Turnbull’s prime ministership) – he was one of those threatening to cross the floor if the associated legislation on emissions went ahead.

Turnbull is correct when he says that overriding a local preselection contradicts the recent push by the right of the party for a more democratic structure.

This point isn’t negated by the fact that the preselection panel Kelly would have faced was a transition one – changes that have been made to the system are not fully operating yet. It would have been a more democratic preselection than the executive deciding to have no ballot at all.

It is reasonable for some Liberal women, and others, to compare the treatment of Kelly with that of Jane Prentice, a moderate from the Queensland LNP.

When she lost a preselection in May, there was no special fix, despite the fact she was an assistant minister. Prentice did not threaten to go to the crossbench. She’s now quietly on the backbench serving out her term.

There are multiple messages in the Kelly affair. They are about the power of the right; the willingness to abandon process (the closeness to an election is no excuse – the Kelly preselection should have been held months ago), and the desperation of the Prime Minister.

Postscript: In the Senate on Monday Labor’s Glenn Sterle asked members of the public observing proceedings, “How many people in the gallery respect your politicians? Put your hand up if you do.” No hands went up.

– ref. View from The Hill: Craig Kelly triumphs in the ‘outwit, outplay, outlast’ game of Survivor – http://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-craig-kelly-triumphs-in-the-outwit-outplay-outlast-game-of-survivor-108097

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Samantha Hepburn, Director of the Centre for Energy and Natural Resources Law, Deakin Law School, Deakin University

Indian mining multinational Adani has announced that it will self-fund a significantly smaller coal mine in the Galilee Basin, after failing to secure finance from more than 30 domestic and international banks and lenders.

Federal Resources Minister Matt Canavan has described Adani as a “little Aussie battler” and praised the newly scaled-down project’s purported regional economic benefits.

The scaling down of the project has been extensive. Adani Mining chief executive Lucas Dow said the mine will cost A$2 billion and initially produce up to 15 million tonnes of thermal coal per year, with plans to ramp production up to 27.5 million tonnes per year.

That is far more modest than the A$16.5 billion investment in digging up 60 million tonnes of coal a year which the company first announced in 2010. The original plan was to transport the coal along a new 388km rail line to a specially built terminal at Adani’s Abbot Point coal port, for export to India. Under the scaled-down version of the project, Adani will need to secure access to existing rail infrastructure.

Read more: Infographic: here’s exactly what Adani’s Carmichael mine means for Queensland

But there is still no guarantee that the mine will necessarily go ahead. Opening a new coal mine – even one with a relatively modest A$2 billion price tag – is socially and environmentally irresponsible, given the urgency with which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says we need to reduce global greenhouse emissions, the fact that Australia is not currently on track to meet its own emissions targets, and of course the fact that 2018 is on course to become the fourth-hottest year on record.

The economics barely stack up either. A recent IEEFA report indicated that coal is facing a terminal decline as Asian markets make the transition to cheaper and more efficient renewable alternatives. Existing thermal coal power in India costs US$60-80 per megawatt-hour, roughly double the cost of new renewable generation. The Mundra coal plant, where much of the Adani coal was destined, is already operating under capacity and has been closed for significant periods.

Adani has decided not to proceed with its initially planned 388km rail link, and will instead aim to use the existing Aurizon rail infrastructure. However, there is a 200km gap in this link which will cost a significant amount to bridge – albeit almost certainly much less than the A$2.3 billion cost of the originally planned railway. Aurizon Network is legally obliged to consider Adani’s access application, but has not yet assessed and approved it.

Environmental and Indigenous issues

Then there are the existing and significant concerns regarding Adani’s environmental management of issues such as water contamination in the Caley Valley Wetlands near the Abbot Point terminal. These will not disappear just because the project has been revised.

Read more: Latest twist in the Adani saga reveals shortcomings in environmental approvals

Gaining the consent of Traditional Owners will also be crucial, yet the 12-member native title representation group is split down the middle. Adani’s existing Indigenous Land Use Agreement has been appealed in the High Court by the Wangan and Jagalingou people, on the basis that the group has not genuinely consented to the agreement, and that overriding native title to make way for a coalmine is socially and culturally regressive. If the court does not uphold the agreement, this would create profound difficulties for the project as they may not be able to proceed with the development of the coal mine to the extent that it interferes with Indigenous landholdings.

So, while the decision of Adani to self-fund a scaled-down coalmine in Queensland might indicate determination, it also suggests a resistance to, and misunderstanding of, a rapidly changing energy sector and the broader social and environmental responsibilities that this change necessitates.

– ref. Adani’s new mini version of its mega mine still faces some big hurdles – http://theconversation.com/adanis-new-mini-version-of-its-mega-mine-still-faces-some-big-hurdles-108038

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Stephen Bright, Senior Lecturer of Addiction, Edith Cowan University

Media reports last week linked the use of “nangs” to the death of a teenager at schoolies week on the Gold Coast. Hamish Bidgood died when he fell from a balcony. He and his friends had reportedly been using “nangs” that day.

Nangs is a slang term for nitrous oxide, an anaesthetic that has been used for more than 100 years. Most people probably know it as laughing gas.

In a medical setting, it is usually inhaled, mixed with oxygen, through a small mask that fits over your nose. It is generally used to help you relax during procedures that don’t require a general anaesthetic, such as childbirth and minor dental surgery.

It has been used to help people withdraw from alcohol – with mixed results.

Read more: Weekly Dose: from laughing parties to whipped cream, nitrous oxide’s on the rise as a recreational drug

Nitrous oxide is also used as a propellant to make whipped cream, sold at supermarkets for around A$10 for a box of ten canisters, and in the automotive industry to improve engine performance.

It has been used recreationally since the late 1700s, when British aristocrats held “laughing gas parties”. With the expansion of its use in medical settings in the late 1880s, and hence its availability, it became more popular as a recreational drug.

What are the effects?

Nitrous oxide provides a short-lived (20 second) high, in which people who use it feel euphoria and relaxation. They can also feel dizziness, have difficulty thinking straight, and fall into fits of laughter.

In higher does, some people report a sense of floating and dissociation of the mind from the body, which is why in medical circles it is referred to as a dissociative anaesthetic.

How dangerous is it?

If a person has small infrequent doses, there is a low risk of significant problems with this drug.

It is very rare to overdose from recreational use of nitrous oxide, but it can affect coordination and judgement. Overdose deaths have been reported in the United Kingdom and United States but we are not aware of any in Australia.

Nitrous oxide is the seventh most popular drug worldwide, excluding caffeine, alcohol and tobacco. Lenscap Photography

Given the effects on coordination and dizziness, it shouldn’t be used in risky situations and it’s advisable to have a person present who isn’t using.

In very large doses, without the addition of oxygen, it can cause loss of blood pressure, fainting and even death by hypoxia (oxygen deficiency).

Chronic, regular heavy use is very rare, but can lead to a vitamin B12 deficiency. B12 is essential for good brain functioning and if left untreated can lead to irreversible neurological problems.

How widespread is its use?

Given its easy availability as whipped cream bulbs, the drug seems to be growing in popularity among young people.

Read more: Three charts on: Australia’s changing drug and alcohol habits

Recent media stories have reported a “nang epidemic”. One newspaper claimed schoolies have been spending thousands of dollars on nitrous oxide. But the story seems to be based on a single Facebook post in which one alleged school leaver said they had spent “A$49,000 on nangs”, which equates to about 49,000 bulbs. It’s likely he was embellishing for his Facebook audience.

We don’t know for sure how many young people use this drug, or how often. Our best data source for population drug trends in Australia, the National Drug Strategy Household Survey, doesn’t specifically ask about nitrous oxide use.

Respondents to the Global Drug Survey put nangs as the seventh most popular drug worldwide, excluding caffeine, alcohol and tobacco.

Should we ban this drug?

Concern about the behaviour of youth is not new, and moral panic about drugs, in particular, is often part of this perennial worry about young people.

It is well documented that the media can influence perceptions and interest in drug use, and poor media reporting can work as an advertisement for drugs, piquing curiosity and normalising use.

The concern is that media-driven panic about drugs can create a perception that more people are using the drug than they actually are, and when teens think “everyone” is doing it, they are more likely to want to do it too.

Read more: Weekly Dose: from laughing parties to whipped cream, nitrous oxide’s on the rise as a recreational drug

Research has shown that interest in a drug peaks after widespread media coverage and that restricting the availability can lead to increased use.

Prohibiting drugs does not prevent people using them, and more harmful unregulated products can emerge. Alcohol Prohibition in the 1920s, for example, merely led to demand for illicit supply that had high alcohol content and contained impurities that caused blindness, paralysis and death.

So banning nangs could cause more harm than it prevents. And it could lead to some very disgruntled whipped cream fans as well.

– ref. Explainer: what is nitrous oxide (or nangs) and how dangerous is it? – http://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-nitrous-oxide-or-nangs-and-how-dangerous-is-it-108019

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Tony Walker, Adjunct Professor, School of Communications, La Trobe University

The United States and China have arrived at a temporary truce in a trade conflict that was threatening to further destabilise world equity markets, entrench a global slowdown and cause more damage to a rules-based international order.

Agreement by US President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to allow further negotiations before threatened tariff increases on Chinese imports come into effect is a welcome development.

However, this is a temporary respite, a short-term fix, not a long-term solution to myriad trade and other tensions that have put the US and China at odds with each other.

For their own purposes and in their own interests, Trump and Xi could come away from the Argentine capital with a deal that papers over differences that extend from China’s activities in the South China Sea to its mercantilist trade policies.

Read more: Much at stake as Donald Trump and Xi Jinping meet at G20

As far as we know, China’s ruthless assertion of its sovereignty over disputed waters in the South China Sea was not a material subject for discussion in Buenos Aires except, possibly, in passing.

China’s rise and America’s relative decline ensure these global economic superpowers will continue to bump up against each other.

So, what was achieved and what are the prospects for an accord reached on the sidelines of the G20?

In their efforts to lower trade tensions and prevent a further erosion of global confidence, Trump and Xi agreed to a 90-day extension on the imposition of additional US tariffs on some US$200 billion of Chinese imports.

Trump had threatened to increase tariffs from 10% to 25% on an initial batch of Chinese imports from January 1. He had also flagged his intention to impose levies on another US$267 billion worth of imports if progress was not made in resolving broad-based trade differences.

A joint statement laid out a timeline for continuing negotiations. It reads:

Both parties agree that they will endeavour to have this transaction completed within the next 90 days. If, at the end of this period of time, the parties are unable to reach an agreement, the 10 percent tariffs will be raised to 25 percent.

In return for these temporary concessions, China agreed to:

… purchase a not yet agreed upon, but very substantial, amount of agricultural, energy, industrial, and other product from the United States to reduce the trade imbalance between the two countries. China has agreed to start purchasing agricultural product immediately.

China also agreed to crack down on sales of Fentanyl by making it a controlled substance. The US is battling an opioid crisis in which Fentanyl is a lethal component.

In retaliation for US trade actions, China had imposed duties on US$110 billion of imports. A principal component of this is soybeans, effectively killing one of America’s more lucrative export markets.

Trump has been under huge pressure from his Mid-Western rural heartland over a collapse in the Chinese market for American agricultural products.

The two sides also agreed to address structural problems in the trading relationship. These extend to five areas – forced technology transfer, intellectual property protection, non-tariff barriers, cyber intrusions and cyber theft.

These are highly complex issues and unlikely to be resolved in the short term, if at all.

In the wash-up of the Xi-Trump discussions it appears China has got more out of the deal than the US – at least for now. It has secured a stay of execution for the implementation of tariff increases and forestalled, for the time being, tariffs on an additional bloc of Chinese exports.

In return, it has agreed to buy unspecified quantities of US products and to talk about differences.

Trump’s willingness to compromise after months of bombast reflects pressures from a shellshocked grain-producing constituency and alarm on Wall Street at prospects of a full-blown trade war.

From Beijing’s perspective, China has demonstrated that its growing economic heft has enabled it to avoid the appearance of yielding to US pressure.

If not a “win-win” for China – as Chinese officials are fond of saying – it is certainly not a “lose-lose”.

In a statement at odds with months of fire-breathing rhetoric over China’s allegedly perfidious trade practices, Trump hailed his understanding with Xi. He said:

This was an amazing and productive meeting with unlimited possibilities for both the US and China.

For their part, Chinese officials were more circumspect.

Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the talks were conducted in a “friendly and candid atmosphere”. The presidents:

agreed that the two sides can and must get bilateral relations right… China is willing to increase imports in accordance with the needs of its domestic market and the people’s needs.

Impetus for a face-saving deal in Buenos Aires has been prompted by growing concerns about the global economy. The signs of a slowdown are clear. Trade volumes had begun to moderate in the third quarter, heightening worries of a global retrenchment.

International Monetary Fund managing director Christine Lagarde at the G20 summit. AAP/EPA/G20 handout

On the sidelines of the G20, the International Monetary Fund’s managing director, Christine Lagarde, noted:

Pressures on emerging markets have been rising and trade tensions have begun to have a negative impact, increasing downside risks.

In its October Outlook statement, the IMF warned about threats to global growth due to trade disturbances.

In their final communique, G20 leaders danced around contentious issues on trade to accommodate American objections to having the word “protectionism” inserted in the document.

In the end, participants settled on the need for reform of the World Trade Organisation to describe a world trading system that is falling short of its objectives. Washington has been agitating for a review of the WTO to strengthen its dispute resolution and appeal procedures.

The US has also objected to a continuing description of China as a developing country, with concessions that enable it to take advantage of less developed country status in its access to global markets.

Read more: As tensions ratchet up between China and the US, Australia risks being caught in the crossfire

On climate change, Washington separated itself from the other G20 members. All, except the US, reaffirmed their commitment to the Paris Agreement. The US announced in 2017 it was pulling out of Paris.

Foreign policy specialists will be sceptical about a de-escalation of trade hostilities given the range of issues bedevilling the US-China relationship.

Reflecting a hardening of US attitudes towards China, and in contrast to the optimism that had prevailed for much of the past two decades, Ely Ratner in Foreign Affairs notes:

Even if tariffs are put on hold, the United States will continue to restructure the US-China economic relationship through investment restrictions, export controls, and sustained law enforcement actions against Chinese industrial and cyber-espionage.

At the same time, there are no serious prospects for Washington and Beijing to resolve other important areas of dispute, including the South China Sea, human rights and the larger contest over the norms, rules and institutions that govern relations in Asia.

A stiffening view in the US towards China is shared more or less across the board. In those circumstances, a temporary ceasefire in Buenos Aires is unlikely to be sustained.

– ref. G20 summit bring a truce in US-China trade relations – but it’s likely to be temporary – http://theconversation.com/g20-summit-bring-a-truce-in-us-china-trade-relations-but-its-likely-to-be-temporary-108017

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jake Clark, PhD Candidate, University of Southern Queensland

This is an article from Curious Kids, a series for children. The Conversation is asking kids to send in questions they’d like an expert to answer. All questions are welcome – serious, weird or wacky! You might also like the podcast Imagine This, a co-production between ABC KIDS listen and The Conversation, based on Curious Kids.

What existed before the big bang? Did something have to be be there in order to go boom? – Ethan, 10, Sydney.

Ethan, what a question. To be truthful, we’re not sure what was before the Big Bang. The whole idea of “before” is not as simple as it sounds – as we’ll soon discover.

But before we get into a total head spin of answering your great question, let’s step all the way back to the beginning of our Universe nearly 14 billion years ago.

Read more: Curious Kids: what started the Big Bang?

The Big Bang was not an explosion of metal shards, like in a firework, but the rapid expansion of space itself. Alex Sims/Wikimedia Commons

A quick recap on the beginning

The Big Bang wasn’t actually a bang. It was not an explosion of metal shards, like in a firework, nor any material; but the rapid expansion of space itself.

At the start, the Universe was infinitely small. Everything around us – the stuff that makes up the galaxies, stars, planets, me and you – was all squished together, creating what is known as a singularity. A singularity has been defined as “a point in space-time where the laws of physics as we know them break down.”

For whatever reason, this singularity rapidly expanded into the Universe we now call home.

After this rapid expansion, our Universe started to cool down – leaving a pattern on the Universe known as the Cosmic Microwave Background.

The leftover radiation from the Big Bang tells us how our Universe began and might lead us to what came before it. NASA/ WMAP Science Team

So if the Big Bang caused the Cosmic Microwave Background, did something else cause the Big Bang?

The time before time?

Your question is nailing an important idea in physics, which we call causality.

In the world we observe around us, all effects must have a cause. Take, for example, a fallen tree. Maybe a vicious storm knocked the tree down. Or maybe it was cut down by a chainsaw-weilding madman.

But if you were to zoom down into the quantum world of atoms (the tiny building blocks of everything), you would notice something very different. In this quantum world, effects can occur without any cause whatsoever.

The timeline of our universe. NASA/WMAP Science Team

Long ago in the distant past, our entire Universe was microscopic – just like an atom. Since some effects in the microscopic world do not require causes, it is possible that there was no cause to start off the Big Bang!

And things can get even weirder. It is also possible that time did not exist before the Big Bang. So it may not make any sense to ask what happened “before”. It would be like asking “What part of Earth is north of the North Pole?”. The North Pole is the most northern point on Earth, and so there is nowhere north of it.

A philosophising polar bear may have already solved the conundrum of ‘what is north of the North Pole?’ U.S. Navy photo by Chief Yeoman Alphonso Braggs

But what if something was there before the Big Bang happened?

Beginning the beginning

Some scientists suggest our Universe is the recycled result of another Universe dying and collapsing in on itself. This is known as “the Big Bounce”. This collapsing Universe would meet back to a singularity before bouncing back out, causing the Big Bang and starting off a brand new universe.

In that case, gravity would not only need to stop the Universe from stretching, but bring everything within it back to one single point. Unfortunately, current observations show us that our Universe won’t follow this trend, as it’s stretching out faster than ever before.

Or maybe our Universe is at the other end of a black hole called a white hole. White holes are the hypothetical “opposites” of a black hole, spewing material into space rather than sucking material in.

Could our whole universe really be at the other end of a black hole?

Or maybe our Universe bubbled out of an even bigger universe! The Cosmic Microwave Background image earlier on shows the leftover radiation isn’t the same all over, but has lumps and bumps concentrated in certain areas. Some cosmologists – people who research how our Universe started – suggest our Universe is one of many universes in the grand multiverse.

The fact is, we don’t really know for sure what started the Big Bang. Maybe you’ll be the very person to answer your question. If you find out, can we please be the first to know?

Read more: Curious Kids: Does space go on forever?

Hello, curious kids! Have you got a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to curiouskids@theconversation.edu.au

CC BY-ND

Please tell us your name, age and which city you live in. We won’t be able to answer every question but we will do our best.

– ref. Curious Kids: What existed before the Big Bang? Did something have to be there to go boom? – http://theconversation.com/curious-kids-what-existed-before-the-big-bang-did-something-have-to-be-there-to-go-boom-103742

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra

Scott Morrison faces a major Liberal party crisis after Malcolm Turnbull moved to torpedo the Prime Minister’s plan to protect the preselection of controversial rightwing backbencher Craig Kelly.

Morrison wants the NSW Liberal executive to re-endorse sitting NSW federal members so Kelly does not have to face a ballot in which he would be defeated.

Kelly has threatened to run as an independent if he loses preselection and also at times has left the way open to go to the crossbench.

The Coalition is already in minority government after the loss of Wentworth and last week’s defection of Julia Banks.

Kelly has lost the support of his local branch members, and the moderates have the numbers to remove him. His preselection opponent, Kent Johns, has been under pressure to pull out of the race – as he was persuaded to do before the last election to save Kelly.

Kelly was one of those who scuppered the National Energy Guarantee, in the party meltdown that ended Turnbull’s leadership. He is a constant presence in Sky and used his appearances to undermine the Turnbull position on energy.

After hearing of the save-Kelly plan Turnbull immediately began lobbying moderate executive members not to agree to the cross-factional deal. When his lobbying reached the media, he took to Twitter.

In a series of tweets he said: “Today I learned there was a move to persuade the State Executive to re-endorse Craig Kelly as Liberal candidate for Hughes in order to avoid a preselection – in other words to deny Liberal Party members in Hughes the opportunity to have their say.”

He said he had spoken with “several State Executive members to express my strong view that the Party’s democratic processes should operate in the normal way especially after such a long debate in the NSW Liberal Party about the importance of grass roots membership involvement.”

“It is time for the Liberal Party members in Hughes to have their say about their local member and decide who they want to represent them.”

“It has been put to me that Mr Kelly has threatened to go to the cross bench and “bring down the Government”. If indeed he has made that threat, it is not one that should result in a capitulation. Indeed it would be the worst and weakest response to such a threat.“

He was “strongly of the view that the normal democratic process should proceed.”

The Australian reports that Turnbull told one executive member, NSW Minister Matt Kean, that if Kelly moved to the crossbench it would “force Morrison to an early election and that will save the Berejiklian government”.

Turnbull had said that when he was PM he and Morrison had agreed to a March 2 election – before the state poll later in March but Morrison was reneging.

The Liberals believe that whichever government faces the people first in NSW will get a double whack from angry voters. Morrison indicated last week that the election would be in May after an April 2 budget.

Another NSW rightwinger, senator Jim Molan is arcing up over his dumping to an unwinnable position on the Senate ticket. Molan is also looking to Morrison to do about about his position.

“Let’s see what he does, but I’m not here to be taken for granted,” Molan told Perth radio on Sunday.

“I would make the arrogant statement that the Liberal Party needs me more than I need the Liberal Party.”

– ref. Turnbull versus Morrison in Liberal crisis over Craig Kelly – http://theconversation.com/turnbull-versus-morrison-in-liberal-crisis-over-craig-kelly-108034

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bronwyn Orr, Veterinarian and PhD candidate, University of Sydney

Have you thought about adopting a new pet for Christmas?

Far from dismissing the idea, animal welfare groups now support the practice of gifting a pet for Christmas – so long as it’s done the right way.

With less than a month to go before Christmas Day, here’s what you need to know if you’re to gift a pet a new home, plus seven tips for success.

Read more: Senate inquiry calls for tougher rules on pet food in Australia

A changing message

Opinions about pet ownership are constantly changing.

The old dog dominance theory – that says pet dogs have a pack mentality and owners should be the alpha dog – has long been debunked. Letting animals sleep on the bed is no longer taboo.

Shelters have learned that drastically reducing adoption fees does not increase the likelihood of pet re-surrender, or the level of people’s attachment to their new pet.

Now, just as shelters used to block black cat adoptions around Halloween for fear of dumping afterwards (or worse), shelters that once warned against adopting pets at Christmas are now embracing the idea.

Some shelters are even advocating this time of year can actually be a good thing for both the animal and the new family, as everyone is home to help the new pet settle in.

A Christmas gift

RSPCA Victoria is one organisation that has changed its message regarding pet adoptions at Christmas. Chief executive Liz Walker says a pet at Christmas, or a voucher for pet adoption at a shelter, can be a good idea – so long as it is not a surprise present.

Data from RSPCA Victoria supports this, with no spike in the number of surrendered pets in the months immediately after Christmas, and indeed very few surrenders seen throughout the year because of a pet being an unwanted gift.

This finding agrees with US survey results published in 2013 that found no significant association between receiving a pet as a gift and relinquishment soon afterwards.

An annual ‘cat-astrophe’

Although the number of cats entering RSPCA Victoria shelters spikes annually between November and January, this is because of kitten season.

This is the time of the year when non-desexed female cats give birth to coincide with increased warmth and availability of food. This phenomenon is replicated across the country, placing huge pressure on staff and resources at shelters due to the flood in kittens.

To help stop the enormous number of unwanted cats and dogs entering Australian shelters, it is really important to desex your animal (especially cats before kitten season).

Kittens and Christmas decorations don’t always mix. RSPCA Qld, Author provided

Why pets enter shelters

There is a misconception that most animals end up at shelters for behavioural problems or medical issues. One of the most common reasons for pet surrender in Australia is a lack of pet-friendly rental accommodation.

This is why the current push to change some tenancy laws around pet ownership is so important.

Additionally, with the rise in popularity of certain breeds such as French Bulldogs, puppy farms set up to supply these dogs are often raided due to the horrific conditions the dogs are kept in. These animals then end up in shelters.

Adopt from a shelter

We encourage all Australians considering adopting a cat or dog to visit their local pound or shelter. Sadly, it is estimated more than 175,000 dogs and cats are euthanased annually in Australia.

This figure comes from the Getting to Zero movement which incorporates euthanasia rates from shelters that publish their statistics, such as the RSPCA, and Animal Welfare League (both organisations that don’t euthanase healthy, re-homeable animals).

It also includes an estimate of the number of animals euthanased at the roughly 500 council pounds across the country. Unfortunately, most council pounds do not publish their statistics on euthanasia rates, which makes it difficult to truly assess the problem. Some do try to rehome unwanted animals.

Pets of all shapes and sizes can be found at shelters. RSPCA Vic, Author provided

Seven tips for getting a new pet

Pet ownership is a wonderfully rewarding experience, with many studies showing pet owners have improved physical and mental health and are more social. One study found that Australian ownership of cats and dogs saved taxpayers almost A$4 billion in health expenditure over one year.

So if you are considering adopting a pet this Christmas, here are some tips to consider:

1. Positive training techniques are more effective and humane than punishment techniques. Reward animals for doing the right thing with treats rather than punishing them for doing the wrong thing.

2. If adopting a pet for a child, remember the parent is ultimately responsible for the pet (so be prepared to take care of the animal!).

3. Christmas decorations and ornaments such as tinsel and Christmas tree hangings make wonderful objects to get stuck in the stomach after swallowing, so keep them out of reach of pets to avoid unnecessary and expensive surgery.

4. Dogs can get very sick with pancreatitis after consuming a fatty meal, so no feeding leftover Christmas ham or sausages.

5. Dogs and chocolate don’t mix, so keep boxes of chocolates securely in a cupboard.

6. You must be ready to commit both the time and money required for the lifespan of an animal, which could be up to 20 years.

7. Consider adopting an older cat (eight years and over) or a middle-aged dog (five to eight years of age). Research consistently shows that animals in these age groups are the hardest group to re-home and hence spend the longest time in the shelter.

So if you’re ready to make the commitment, go on, visit your local shelter and make this Christmas one to remember for you or the owner of the newly adopted pet.

Consider adopting an older dog or cat from a shelter – Dookie, at 12 years of age, still loved getting into the Christmas spirit! Mark Westman, Author provided

– ref. Yes, you can adopt a pet as a Christmas gift – so long as you do it correctly – http://theconversation.com/yes-you-can-adopt-a-pet-as-a-christmas-gift-so-long-as-you-do-it-correctly-105286

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sophia Maalsen, I.B. Fell Postdoctoral Researcher, School of Architecture, Design and Planning, University of Sydney

An increasing number of older Australians are living in share housing. A relatively new group to emerge on the share-housing scene, they are choosing to share for financial reasons, but finding unexpected social benefits.

Share housing has traditionally been associated with student housing and media depictions of the share house as dysfunctional, chaotic, “He Died with a Falafel in His Hand” scenarios. But a growing number of older people are sharing housing.

This trend is part of the growth in share housing across an increasingly broad demographic as professionals aged in their 30s, 40s and onwards continue to share house or return to share housing into later life. Generation Rent is fast becoming “Generation Share”.

Read more: Moving on from home ownership for ‘Generation Rent’

The growing trend of share households is attributed to a combination of shifting social norms and a decline in affordable rental properties. This is particularly acute in our capital cities but is also evident in regional centres.

An emerging group of tenants – professionals, couples, young families and students – who cannot afford to buy or rent an entire property of their own are increasingly turning to shared occupancy as a way to afford housing. Home owners are also noted as a group for whom shared occupancy has benefits by generating extra income for mortgage repayments.

Tight budgets affect all ages

My research on share housing across all age groups shows it’s mainly driven by financial constraints. In older age, the experience of this is gendered. Although older men are sharing, women in particular are more vulnerable to significant financial constraints in old age.

Women are the fastest-growing group at risk of homelessness in Australia. Many have limited superannuation to draw upon due to time out of the workforce to raise children or manage the home. This means the ramifications of the gender wage gap are particularly visible in older life – to quote one participant, “a man is not a superannuation”.

Read more: Spirals and circles, snakes and ladders. Why women’s super is complex

A common scenario is people falling out of home ownership after divorce or a relationship breakdown. Without the family home and with limited material assets, share housing is one of a diminishing set of options for living affordably and securely.

Share housing has its challenges

Moving into share housing in later life can be an adjustment. Many older people are in share housing for the first time in their life, having previously owned their own home.

There are obvious social challenges inherent in this situation. These include learning to negotiate domestic spaces in new ways. And certainly many are vulnerable to being exploited by unscrupulous flatmates, head tenants, or landlords.

Similar to share-housing experiences among younger groups, older participants mentioned occasional household conflicts and were aware of the need for personal space.

But there are also social benefits

However, some also reflect positively on the social value of share housing. This has been an unexpected benefit for many of them. At an age when isolation and loneliness increase, this is particularly important.

Older residents value the social aspects and the new friendships that sometimes develop in share houses. Flow-on effects of this include an increase in their sense of safety and security, knowing that they are not alone should anything untoward happen.

Read more: Co-housing works well for older people, once they get past the image problem

Long-term policy challenges loom

Although share housing in older age has social benefits, its rise should prompt us to reflect critically on Australia’s housing market as well as rethinking retirement policy. Share housing is directly correlated to declining housing affordability.

These trends highlight systematic disinvestment in public and social housing for the past 30 years as well as a market that has encouraged housing as a site of investment. The result is a system that has produced housing as a site of profit rather than housing as a site of home.

For older people, the situation is particularly complex. Australia’s retirement policies promote home ownership as the pathway to a financially secure old age. That leaves the growing number of older Australians who don’t own their own home to experience increased financial stress.

The Australian Dream of the owner-occupied home is quickly becoming that – a dream rather than reality for many Australians. The cracks are starting to show. As people fall out of home ownership and the younger generations doubt they’ll ever own a home – they’re not called Generation Rent for nothing – Generation Share will present significant challenges for policy.

Read more: Home ownership foundations are being shaken, and the impacts will be felt far and wide

– ref. Generation Share: why more older Australians are living in share houses – http://theconversation.com/generation-share-why-more-older-australians-are-living-in-share-houses-107183

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Peter Whiteford, Professor, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University

Thirty years after Prime Minister Bob Hawke famously promised that by 1990 no Australian child would live in poverty, Bill Shorten has promised that, if elected, Labor will use a “root and branch review” to lift the rate of the Newstart unemployment benefit.

Two crossbenchers, Cathy McGowan and Rebekha Sharkie, want to go further.

They have introduced a private member’s bill that would create an independent commission to examine the adequacy of all social security payments other than family payments and payments to veterans.

It would make recommendations, rather than set rates.

The Government opposes it. Labor has opposed such proposals in the past. Prime Minister Scott Morrison has said he would like to increase payments, but they would be ones of his choosing – he would lift the pension before lifting Newstart.

But the pension is already much higher than Newstart, and other benefits have fallen behind by more.

What’s wrong with Newstart?

Newstart is inadequate and getting worse.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development raised “concerns about its adequacy” as long ago as 2010.

In a report on Australia it suggested that not only it might be insufficient to live on, it also might be insufficient to enable those on it to look for work.

The relatively low net replacement rate in the first year of the unemployment spell raises issues about its effectiveness in providing sufficient support for those experiencing a job loss, or enabling someone to look for a suitable job.

The main reason why it is inadequate is that it hasn’t increased by much more than inflation since 1994. General living standards have soared during those two and a half decades, as has the pension which is linked to them by being set as proportion of male wages, and which was increased substantially in 2009.

ACOSS

Newstart is now only A$275.20 per week. The pension is A$417.20 per week (A$458.15 with the pension supplement and energy supplement).

Unless it is better indexed, Newstart will slide even further relative to other payments and living standards.

Read more: New budget standards show just how inadequate the Newstart Allowance has become

Since 1994-95 the buying power of the median household disposable income has climbed 55%. The buying power of Newstart has barely budged.

It has pushed people on Newstart further down the income ladder.

In 1994-95 a single person on Newstart received A$24 per week less than a low-earning household at the top of the bottom tenth of the income distribution.

Read more: Will a Newstart boost actually deter jobseekers?

By 2015-16 that single person on Newstart got A$175 per week less than the low earning household.

The Australian Council of Social Service, the Business Council of Australia and a wide range of other community and business leaders including the former prime minister John Howard and most of the parliament’s crossbench have called for a lift in Newstart and a better method of setting it.

There’s more to it than Newstart

The relative decline in Newstart was the result of neglect. It was left indexed to the consumer price index when, over the long term, it should have been indexed to a measure that moves with community living standards.

But in other cases, governments under five prime ministers over the past twelve years have made explicit decisions to cut assistance, most severely for low income single parents.

In 2006 the Howard government made substantial changes to the Parenting Payment Single (PPS) and the Parenting Payment – Partnered (PPP) as part of what it called a welfare to work program.

Read more: How can the government justify a policy that penalises working sole parents?

Single parents claiming the PPS after July 1, 2006 would lose it when their youngest child turned eight. They would go onto the much lower Newstart unemployment benefit, and be expected to look for work.

Partnered parents claiming the PPP would lose it when their youngest child turned six, but for them it made little difference because their parenting payment and Newstart were about the same.

For single parents it meant a significant cut in benefits at the time, and a harsher income test.

Those receiving PPS before July 1, 2006 were “grandfathered” meaning they could continue to receive it until their youngest child turned 16.

Read more: Prejudiced policymaking underlies Labor’s cuts to single parent payments

But in 2013, the Gillard government removed grandfathering, requiring all single parents with older children to be moved onto Newstart or other payments if eligible.

At that time the maximum rate of Parenting Payment Single was $331.85 per week. The maximum rate of Newstart was $266.50.

And a change introduced by Prime Minister Kevin Rudd made the parenting payments themselves less generous.

For many decades, the basic rate of payment for most single parents was the same as the pension.

In 2009 the Rudd government delinked them and lowered the wages benchmark so that PPS was set at 25% of male total average weekly earnings instead of 27.7%.

The 2009-10 Budget also changed the link between levels of the maximum rate of Family Tax Benefit Part A and the married rate of pension, a link originally established following the Hawke government’s child poverty pledge.

These changes have shrunk Family Tax Benefit payments per child from 16.6% – 21.6% of the married pension rate to 14.5% – 18.9%, a difference now of $13 per week for each younger child and $17 per week for each older child – with more shrinkage to come.

In 2014 the first Abbott budget attempted to further wind back Family Tax Benefits.

After a tough time in the Senate, several of his measures finally passed, under Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull in 2016 and 2017.

Family Tax Benefit B has been closed to couple families with children aged 13 years or older and the Family Tax Benefit B income test tightened, the size of the payments to large families has been wound back, the Family Tax benefit A end of year supplement has been withdrawn from families earning over A$80,000 per annum and rates have pay have been temporarily frozen, so that they don’t even increase with inflation.

What’s been the total of cuts since 2006?

The cumulative effects of the policy choices since 2006 on the disposable incomes of single parent families are substantial.

We have compared how much low-income parents currently receive, compared to what they would be receiving if these changes had not been made.

Our calculations are conservative.

We have ignored a number of changes including payments that have come and gone such as the Schoolkid’s Bonus and the Energy Supplement or changes that affect high income families. Nor have we taken into account the loss of payments to families with with four or more children due to the phasing out of the Large Family Supplement from July 2016.

Single parents still on Parenting Payment Single with two younger children have lost nearly $85 per fortnight; about 6% of their disposable incomes. For families with older children, the loss is about $271 per fortnight; a cut in disposable income of nearly 19%.

Read more: One in four children from single-parent families live in poverty

In total there are around 360,000 families with children, Australia’s poorest, who are getting considerably less financial support.

It has happened as a result of actions by both sides of politics under prime ministers Howard, Rudd, Gillard, Abbott and Turnbull.

As with the decision to link Newstart to the consumer price index rather than wages, the effects of their decisions will widen over time. The poorest families, and their children, will increasingly fall behind the rest of the population.

This process is already strongly entrenched.

Read more: Housing affordability stress affects one in nine households, but which ones are really struggling?

Research by Peter Saunders, Bruce Bradbury and Melissa Wong for the joint ACOSS-UNSW report on poverty finds that the transfer of 80,000 sole parents to Newstart in 2013 was associated with an increase in the rate of after-housing poverty among unemployed sole parents from 35% to nearly 60%.

Have the cuts got single parents into jobs?

The stated purpose of the cuts to Parenting Payment Single was to get them into jobs.

First impressions suggest that they have.

In 2005-06 51% of single parent households had social security benefits as their main source of income. A decade later this was 42%.

In 2005 around 49% of lone parent families with a youngest child under 15 were employed. By 2009 the proportion had grown to 59%.

But in both cases the changes started before the changes to benefits, from the middle of the 1990s.

Read more: For single parents, it pays to work

And the proportion of single parents employed went backwards during the global financial crisis, sliding to 53% and only recovering to 55% in 2017, despite the move of families from Parenting Payment Single to Newstart.

It’s time for a proper review

The “root and branch review” promised by Bill Shorten and the ongoing commission proposed by crossbenchers are not mutually exclusive.

An immediate review could be used to increase payments in the shorter term, while an ongoing commission could examine longer-term priorities.

Read more: For richer or poorer: the delicate art of messing with middle class welfare

The scope of these inquiries should not be limited to Newstart.

Parenting Payments and Family Tax Benefits are also a fundamental component of the social safety net.

There is case for going further and examining the entire structure of the social security system.

The most comprehensive examination was the Henderson Poverty Inquiry commissioned by the McMahon government and extended by the Whitlam government more than four decades ago.

Read more: Whitlam’s forgotten legacy: a voice for the poor

A comprehensive review of Australia’s social security system, undertaken in an integrated fashion and including tax as well as payments (including those for childcare and to support people who study and work) is overdue.

We need such a review to consider the design of our safety net in the light of economic, demographic, technological and social changes, and those to come.

It ought to be a key priority of Australia’s next government.

It ought to set up our support systems for the future.

– ref. It’s not just Newstart. Single parents are $271 per fortnight worse off. Labor needs an overarching welfare review – http://theconversation.com/its-not-just-newstart-single-parents-are-271-per-fortnight-worse-off-labor-needs-an-overarching-welfare-review-107521

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rodrigo Praino, Senior Lecturer, College of Business, Government and Law, Flinders University

If someone asks you why you chose the election candidate you voted for, you will likely have a good answer. Maybe you agree with the candidate’s policy stances. Maybe you support his/her party. Maybe you are tired of the corruption, bad policies, or inaction of the people in power. These are all perfectly acceptable answers. One reason you probably will not mention is that you voted for this person because he or she is good-looking. Certainly not. This is not an acceptable answer.

Yet you probably did.

In a study just published by myself and Daniel Stockemer with the help of Victoria Police in Melbourne, we used data on elections to the US Congress to create the faces of six fictional candidates who were “ideal-looking” in terms of physical appearance. We then used statistical modelling and real election results to simulate what would have happened if the loser of some key races looked like one of our “ideal candidates”, but was otherwise identical to the real losing candidate.

In two-thirds of cases, the loser becomes a winner if he/she simply becomes better-looking. To put it simply, we find that if an election is competitive, candidate attractiveness can actually determine the result.

Research shows that candidate appearance travels across cultures, ignoring even racial and ethnic differences. It appears that there is a fairly standard idea around the world of what is an attractive candidate, and voters everywhere prefer good-looking politicians. Research has shown that beautiful politicians are advantaged in Australia, Germany, Finland, the United Kingdom and the United States.

But the story doesn’t end there. Scholars are still trying to understand all possible ramifications of the relationship between physical attractiveness and electoral success. But we know that ideology, institutions and voter behaviour all play a role in this fascinating relationship.

When it comes to ideology, recent research shows that conservative politicians benefit more from physical attractiveness. In other words, right-wing politicians are better-looking than left-wing politicians and, therefore, benefit more from the “beauty premium” at the ballot box.

In terms of institutions, a study published by Daniel Stockemer and myself last year shows that the electoral system plays a role in whether or not candidate attractiveness matters in elections.

In brief, candidate attractiveness matters in majoritarian electoral systems – that is, systems where voters cast their vote for a specific candidate. The impact of candidate attractiveness fades in list-based proportional systems, where voters are asked to cast a ballot for a political party.

We find no evidence that attractive candidates are placed higher in party lists, which means that political parties and their structures appear to be immune to the appeal of candidate attractiveness. The conclusion is that institutions play an important role in determining whether or not candidate attractiveness affects voters’ decision-making.

Finally, when it comes to voter behaviour, the “beauty premium” doesn’t manifest itself only as extra votes gained at the ballot box. In a study published last May, we found that attractive politicians get a “break” when they are involved in scandals. In particular, voters forgive attractive politicians involved in sex scandals, while politicians involved in financial scandals such as bribery or misappropriation of funds have a harder time at the ballot box after the scandal becomes public. Either way, this shows that voters not only generally vote for the most attractive candidate, but also are more willing to forgive those who look better.

So how about Donald Trump? This question pops up a lot, especially from people arguing that Trump is not the most physically attractive candidate to run for office. If we think hard enough, we can all think of numerous unattractive politicians who have been very successful at the ballot box all over the world. The key to understanding how this works is to focus on information.

Read more: President Trump will change the United States and the world, but just how remains to be seen

A few years ago, we ran an experiment using thousands of Canadian students at the University of Ottawa as research subjects. We found that if voters have adequate information about the candidates running for office, they tend to cast their ballot based on this information.

If, on the other hand, voters possess little or no information, then the better-looking candidate wins the election. We concluded that, in high-information elections, candidate attractiveness plays a smaller role than in low-information elections. This answers the Donald Trump question, in the sense that American presidential elections are high-information contests and, therefore, voters know more things about the candidates than their physical appearance, and thus vote accordingly.

The problem is that research also shows that voters all over the world have become less and less informed about politics. For instance, Australians seem to be incapable of answering basic questions about Australian politics; American university graduates in the 2000s knew less about politics than high school graduates in the 1950s; and European citizens do worse than chance in answering true-or-false questions about the European Union.

Read more: If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it: Australia should stay away from electronic voting

In other words, we should expect that candidate attractiveness will determine more and more electoral outcomes in the near future. Of course, the major issue with people voting for good-looking candidates is that physical appearance is completely devoid of any policy content. Voters have no guarantee whatsoever that they will end up with policies that they agree with and support if they vote for someone just because that person is attractive.

After years engaged in this line of research, I have never met someone who confessed to having voted for someone else because he/she was good-looking. At the same time, I am also convinced that people do exactly that, even if unconsciously.

The only solution to this problem is to educate voters about politics, institutions and current issues.

– ref. How a candidate’s looks may be swinging your vote (without you even realising it) – http://theconversation.com/how-a-candidates-looks-may-be-swinging-your-vote-without-you-even-realising-it-107364

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Vincent Ho, Senior Lecturer and clinical academic gastroenterologist, Western Sydney University

So, you’re going on a date and you’re understandably a bit nervous. And then you feel it – a churning and cramping in your gut. Suddenly you’re running to the toilet and wondering why your body reacts this way. How does a case of nerves translate to an upset stomach? What is actually happening in your body?

Feeling an upset tummy when we’re nervous is normal. The broad term dyspepsia refers to any discomfort in the upper abdomen or abdominal pain, and is very common when we’re anxious and stressed. A systematic review pooling data from a number of studies found that around one quarter of people have dyspepsia.

When we get nervous, a number of processes occur in the brain that are passed onto the stomach and affect the digestive process. This is a hangover from our hunter-gatherer days and part of the fight or flight response – a physiological reaction to a perceived harmful event, attack or threat to survival.

Read more: Paralysed with fear: why do we freeze when frightened?

When we’re in a relaxed state, there is more energy for digestion. The speedier movements of our stomach and small bowel (intestines) facilitate better absorption of nutrients. But during stress, digestion and the movements in our stomach and small intestines slow down, while movements in our large bowel (or colon) increase. It’s the increased movement in our large bowel that in some cases has us running to the toilet. Here’s how that happens.

Brief history of experiments

We can thank two patients, who had very rare accidents, for our early understanding of what happens to the stomach when we’re anxious and stressed.

We can thank Alexis St Martin for our early knowledge of how the emotions affect digestion. Wikipedia Commons

In 1822, 19-year-old Alexis St Martin suffered a gun-shot wound to the stomach. He survived, but developed a permanent hole in his stomach that refused to heal. This hole extended to the outside skin of his abdomen.

While undoubtedly awful for Alexis, army doctor William Beaumont saw a unique opportunity. Beaumont used the hole as a window into the process of digestion, conducting experiments to better understand the inner workings of the gut, which included the impact of Alexis’ emotional response on the stomach. When Alexis became angry, for instance, Beaumont noticed his digestion was impaired.

Further observations were carried out by doctor Stewart Wolf on another patient, Tom Little. In 1894, when he was nine years old, Tom drank something that severely damaged his oesophagus. He had a hole created in his stomach for feeding. As with Alexis, Wolf observed Tom’s stomach under periods of emotional stress. He found fear would make Tom’s stomach turn white and a period of depression could virtually stop digestion.

Read more: Stomach and mood disorders: how your gut may be playing with your mind

Fight or flight and the gut

In the early 20th century, scientist Walter Cannon coined the term “fight or flight response” after observing the reaction of animals in response to stressful events. He saw that when cats were acutely stressed, movement in their upper guts, including the stomach and small intestine, was markedly reduced.

This process involved two parts of our nervous system, known as the sympathetic and the parasympathetic. The sympathetic nervous system is activated during times of stress and puts the body on a war-like footing. The parasympathetic nervous system, on the other hand, acts like a brake. It promotes the “rest and digest” response that calms the body down after the stress has passed, and helps conserve energy.

The sympathetic system gets us ready for fight or flight, while the parasympathetic system acts as a brake. from shutterstock.com

When we feel stressed, a region of the brain called the hypothalamus (which helps regulate emotions) produces the corticotropin releasing hormone (CRH) – the key hormone that activates the sympathetic system.

CRH can stimulate the release of another hormone – the adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) – which then releases cortisol from the adrenal gland (found above the kidneys). Cortisol is an important hormone in the fight or flight response. It helps us get ready to fight or escape danger and can lead to slowing down the movement in our stomach.

This is thought to be an evolutionary mechanism as blood is diverted away from the stomach and small intestine to the skeletal muscles and lungs, preparing the body for defence. The movements of the stomach and small intestine as well as digestion accelerate again once the parasympathetic system is activated.

Movement in the small intestine slows down during stress, but in the colon, it speeds up. from shutterstock.com

But it’s different in the colon (large bowel). During periods of stress and anxiety, movement in the large bowel actually increases, though this is not caused by the sympathetic nervous system. It is actually those same parasympathetic system fibres that carry a “rest and digest” response that are thought to deliver the signals to the colon. CRH can be transmitted down those fibres directly to the wall of the colon where it stimulates receptors to produce fluid and increases colonic movements.

This doesn’t ordinarily lead to more poo or diarrhoea during acute stress because defecation requires a more complex and coordinated set of functions. But in some stressful situations, the pelvic nerve can be activated and directly stimulates neurons in the wall of the rectum. This then triggers increased rectal activity and defecation.

Functional dyspepsia?

We now have a way to work out what areas of the brain become active when the stomach is under stress. This is done through imaging the brain. Neuroimaging techniques can measure changes in blood flow in the brain and correlate these changes (or activations) to brain activity.

When a balloon is inflated in the stomach, stretching the stomach wall in healthy people to test its sensitivity, some areas of the brain such as the amygdala and insula that are involved in the processing of emotions become very active. In people with functional dyspepsia – a condition with symptoms such as pain or discomfort localised to the upper part of the abdomen in the absence of a physical cause – these brain areas may fail to deactivate.

Research in functional dyspepsia patients has found that negative emotional memory can affect their brain activity.

Read more: Explainer: what is irritable bowel syndrome and what can I do about it?

If symptoms become abnormally severe and chronic it may be worth seeing a doctor to consider whether further investigations and treatment are required. If investigations such as endoscopy do not show any abnormalities then functional dyspepsia is a possible diagnosis. These patients are the ones most likely to experience upper abdominal symptoms provoked by stress and anxiety.

Strategies tailored to help with negative emotions and thoughts such as cognitive behavioural therapy can be beneficial.

– ref. Nervous tummy: why you might get the runs before a first date – http://theconversation.com/nervous-tummy-why-you-might-get-the-runs-before-a-first-date-106925

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul Redmond, Sir Gerard Brennan Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Technology Sydney

It has taken years, but after votes in the Senate and House of Representatives last week, Australia has a Modern Slavery Act.

It’ll take effect on January 1.

But what difference will it make?

First, what is modern slavery?

Britain abolished slavery on its own soil in 1833. It abolished the most egregious forms of child labour a century later.

But slavery and child labour are still being used to make the products Britons buy, just as they are being used to make the products Australians buy.

Read more: How to keep slave-caught seafood off your plate

Increasing integrated global supply chains have made it hard to tell whether even products that are stamped “Made in Australia” have at some stage used slaves or underage children as part of the production process.

Forcibly detained adults and children work in industries including fishing, cocoa, cotton, clothing, cannabis, construction and prostitution.

The term “modern slavery” refers only to the worst forms of exploitation, and not to other serious breaches of human rights such as the denial of freedom of association or the denial of worker safety, such as at Rana Plaza clothing factory in Dhaka, Bangladesh in which more than 1,000 garment workers died when their building collapsed in 2013.

Read more: Unravelling British wool: how the local and global are intertwined in the making of everyday products

The International Labour Organisation believes that 21 million people worldwide are forced labourers, half of them in the Asia-Pacific region.

What will be required

As with the British Act, Australia’s will require businesses and other organisations above a certain size (consolidated revenue of A$100 million) to report annually on the risks of modern slavery in their operations and supply chains, and the action they have taken to assess and address those risks, and the effectiveness of their response.

Smaller businesses will be able to report voluntarily.

To ensure high-level engagement, the statement has to be approved by the board of directors or equivalent and signed by a director.

Read more: We analysed 101 companies’ statements on modern slavery – here’s what we found

The statements will be publicly available on a central register maintained by the Commonwealth. The Commonwealth government itself, and those of its entities that satisfy the reporting revenue threshold, will also have to prepare a statement.

What will not be required

Two controversial omissions are penalties and independent oversight.

The government was unwilling to impose a penalty for failing to lodge a statement or for lodging an incomplete statement.

This needn’t be fatal. The requirement and the public register means that companies that don’t report properly can be “named and shamed” by non-government organisations. Consumer pressure can itself become a sanction.

Read more: The Modern Slavery Bill is a start, but it won’t guarantee us sweeter chocolate

The UK experience does not encourage optimism as about compliance.

In response to these concerns, Senate amendments have empowered the minister to name and shame his or herself, publicly calling out continued instances of non-compliance and reporting to parliament annually on compliance trends.

Australia’s parliamentary inquiry and a good many of the submissions strongly supported the appointment of an independent statutory anti-slavery commissioner with the authority and resources to oversee compliance.

The government will instead establish a departmental unit to help business address slavery risks and prepare statements.

Read more: Should Australia have a Modern Slavery Act?

The Labor party supports both penalties and the appointment of an independent commissioner.

It is possible that both requirements will be in place before the first modern slavery statements are due on June 30, 2020.

NSW has also passed its own Modern Slavery Act, due to take effect after the Commonwealth Act commences. It imposes a lower revenue reporting threshold of $50 million, and provides for penalties for businesses that do not comply, of up to A$1.1 million.

It also creates the post of Independent NSW Anti-Slavery Commissioner.

What now

American baseballer Yogi Berra said that when we come to a fork in the road, we should take it. Wise advice. We have two ways forward and should take both. In truth, they converge.

First, we need to monitor compliance levels, and determine whether penalties and independent oversight are needed. And we need to set up processes that ensure the reports are of good quality.

The United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights provide a guide. Happily, the Act adopts these principles.

The other path is to address the broader harm that Australian businesses can do, beyond incorporating slavery into products that are sold in Australia.

Read more: We need to combat forced labour and in-work poverty – Brazil and India offer some lessons

The Guiding Principles help here too, outlining the responsibility of businesses to respect human rights and to provide remedies wherever they operate.

This responsibility extends to our mining companies, 200 in Africa alone, who should respect human rights whether or not slavery is incorporated in products they sell back here.

And it extends to technology companies whose platforms put people at risk such as Facebook’s possible role in the ethnic cleansing of the Rohingya in Myanmar.

Slavery is important, but there is more to human rights than slavery.

The Act is a start, quite a good one. We will need more.

– ref. At last, Australia has a Modern Slavery Act. Here’s what you’ll need to know – http://theconversation.com/at-last-australia-has-a-modern-slavery-act-heres-what-youll-need-to-know-107885

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anna-Sophie Jürgens, Postdoctoral Fellow in Comparative Literature, Popular Entertainment Studies and Science in Fiction Studies, Australian National University

Dr Frank-N-furter, the snappy alpha-alien who stars in The Rocky Horror (Picture) Show, is one of the most memorable characters to grace the stage and screen in recent decades.

In his castle-spaceship from the planet Transsexual in the galaxy of Transylvania, Frankie creates a carnal athlete named Rocky and makes a phallic incursion into the innocent lives of Brad and Janet, before being finally killed in an insurrection by his servants.

Frankie is an unusual creature, in equal parts funny and terrifying. My research into the character suggests this is because he is a hybrid of two types of comic entertainers – violent clowns and panto dames.

The Rocky Horror Show debuted on stage in 1973 in at the Royal Court Theatre in London. It was followed in 1975 by a film adaptation. Both were directed by Jim Sharman, who grew up in Australia.

In his autobiographical writings, Sharman vividly recalls being taken to the circus as a small child, to vaudeville and other touring shows. These included his family’s boxing troupe and Sorlie’s travelling tent theatre, a popular attraction which between the 1920s and 1961 (with interruptions) took pantomime, musical comedy, and vaudeville around New South Wales and Queensland.

Panto dames

The Frank-N-furter character, Sharman writes, was derived from childhood memories of Bobby le Brun. Bobby le Brun (born Eric Marshall, 1910–1985) was a well-known, versatile entertainer with blithe natural charm, as his own personal collection in the National Library reveals. He was highly acclaimed for his dancing skills and especially renowned for his comic performances in women’s dress.

In fact, Bobby was Sorlie’s famous panto dame. The role of dame seizes on the early theatre custom of female characters played by boys and men. In pantomimes, traditionally she is an old woman or witch-like character, but can also take on the shape of a young seductive lady, androgynously doll-like and bewilderingly elegant.

The panto dame’s male identity is not concealed, and s/he is never effeminate. Australia has produced many such performers including, for example, Bland Holt, Harry Phydora, Jim Gerald and George Wallace, whose performances inspired Bobby le Brun and, later, Sharman.

Over the last few decades, Australia’s most (in)famous dame-luminary has been Barry Humphries’s Dame Edna Everage, called “a clown in the form of an Australian housewife” by her creator. It is hardly surprising that Humphries occupies a first-class seat in Sharman’s pantheon.

Dame Edma is Australia’s most famous panto dame. TRACEY NEARMY

Defined by scrubby leg hair and outlandish female attire, and engaging in physical comedy strongly reminiscent of the eccentric, hard-hitting (but never vulgar) activities of Bobby le Brun’s dames, Frank-N-furter in Rocky Horror is a blend of these comic traditions.

Frankie has been linked to the panto dame by both Tim Curry (acting in the role of Frank-N-furter in the original musical production and the movie) and Reg Livermore (who in 1974 performed Frankie in the original Australian musical production of Rocky Horror).

In the movie, Frankie exaggeratedly kicks his servant Riff-Raff, rides on his shoulders as if he were an animal, and chases him (and later Rocky) around his lab, pushing everyone out of his way and falling down a number of times. These comic interludes retain the dame role’s funny innocence.

Violent clowns

However, sundry wicked traits and his unceasing libidinous intent also align Frank-N-furter with another tradition: the violent clown. This character starred in many macabre clown plays popular throughout the 19th century (and since), featuring eccentrically performed manslaughter and comically staged immorality.

A poster for the Hanlon-Lees troupe. Wikimedia

One example are the pantomimes by the Hanlon-Lees, a group of acrobats celebrated between the 1850s and early 1900s. Their performances featured funny decapitated heads, and bodies that were used as comic weapons. They staged a coffin maker who, following his own radical business logic, kills his potential clients himself, and a dentist curing a patient by means of a grenade fixed to his tooth.

Contemporary spectators admired their make-up – their “cannibalistic” smiles in particular – and called their shows the apotheosis of comedy. As research into popular art forms shows, this type of performance plot and aesthetics reemerge in clown narratives of the 20th century – including Rocky Horror.

In one scene of Sharman’s film, for instance, Frankie, armed with an ice pick, chases a party-crasher, Eddie, into a refrigerator, where he hacks him to pieces. This is problem-solving à la bad clown: schlock horror rather than panto dame pillow punches. Along with this ice-pick murder, his favourite R-rated pastime activities are forced brain surgery, sexual licentiousness, and cannibalism (he later invites his guests to eat Eddie’s remains).

As well as being a hybrid – an amalgam of identifications and confrontations – of two types of comic entertainers, the dame and the clown, Frankie is an example of the way the pantomime and clown tradition travelled between Europe and Australia.

– ref. Violent clowns and panto dames: the origins of Rocky Horror’s Frank-N-furter – http://theconversation.com/violent-clowns-and-panto-dames-the-origins-of-rocky-horrors-frank-n-furter-104003

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Edward Morgan, Research Fellow in Environmental Policy and Planning, Griffith University

International leaders and policymakers gathering in Katowice, Poland, for the 24th annual round of UN climate talks know that they have plenty of work to do.

They are hoping to make progress on the Paris Agreement Work Programme, otherwise known as the Paris Rulebook – the guidelines needed to guide implementation of the Paris Agreement. That agreement was struck three years ago, but it is still not clear how the treaty’s goals to curb global warming will actually be achieved.

The Paris Agreement was a diplomatic landmark, under which nations pledged to hold global temperature rises to “well below 2℃”, and ideally to no more than 1.5℃.

This requires all countries not only to slash global greenhouse emissions, but also to help the world adapt to the impacts of climate change. The agreement requires countries to develop national climate plans, to report back on their progress, and to ramp up their efforts in the coming years.

The ‘what’ and the ‘how’

Whereas the Paris Agreement talks about what needs to be done, the Paris Rulebook to be agreed at Katowice is about how nations can set about achieving it. Unlike the previous, more prescriptive Kyoto Protocol, the Paris Agreement allows countries to choose their own approach to climate change. But it is important that actions taken by countries are done within an agreed, transparent framework of rules.

Rules need to be agreed about nations’ emissions targets, climate finance (including climate aid for developing countries), transparency, capacity building and carbon trading. Bringing all of this together is a huge challenge for negotiators. They need to establish a common set of rules applicable to all countries, while also maintaining the crucial principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities” that underpins the UN climate process.

Already lagging behind

As well as being difficult, the task is also urgent. There is already evidence that countries are struggling to live up to their Paris commitments.

Analysis of the current emissions targets (known as Nationally Determined Contributions) shows that countries need to do more to reach the 2℃ goal. Meeting the 1.5℃ goal will be harder still and will need ambitious and swift action, as recently highlighted by a special report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Although much of the focus has been on the challenge of bringing emissions targets into line with the Paris goals, our research suggests that climate adaptation efforts are also lagging behind.

Climate adaptation involves managing climate-related risks and deciding on how to manage and prepare for unavoidable impacts, such as increases in intensity and frequency of extreme weather events such as heatwaves and extreme storms, along with slow-onset impacts from sea level rise.

Many countries have developed climate adaptation policies as part of their climate change response. Our recent research analysed 54 of these national adaptation plans to understand how they match up to the intent of the Paris Agreement (as outlined in Article 7 of the Agreement).

We found that most adaptation plans only partially align with the Paris Agreement. Plans were largely focused on the social and economic aspects of adaptation, and were broadly aligned to countries’ existing policy priorities, especially around disaster management and economic development. For developing countries, there was a strong focus on linking adaptation and development.

However, countries are struggling to include environmental considerations into their planning. While the Paris Agreement clearly emphasises the important role that ecosystems play for climate adaptation, most plans are silent on this point.

What’s more, developed countries tended to take a less participatory approach to adaptation planning. Planning in developing countries was hampered by limited access to scientific knowledge but they made more use of local and traditional knowledge. The issue of resourcing and support for developing countries remains a challenge for climate change adaptation.

More work needed

Our results suggest that countries need to build on their existing adaptation plans to meet the ambitions in the Paris Agreement. There are good opportunities to better balance social and economic aspects with environmental and ecological considerations to improve planning.

Many countries, including Australia, have ratified the Paris Agreement, but few are delivering the ambitious action it requires. Besides pursuing deeper cuts to greenhouse emissions, countries need to revisit and update their adaptation strategies. Australia is well positioned to do so, given its economic wealth, its technical abilities, and the extensive climate adaptation research it has already undertaken.

Increasingly, we know what needs to be done to combat climate change. The Katowice summit will hopefully advance an agreement on how countries can do it. But actually doing it on a globally coordinated scale will be the biggest challenge, and there is some way to go to catch up.

– ref. As they meet in Poland for the next steps, nations are struggling to agree on how the ambitions of the Paris Agreement can be realised – http://theconversation.com/as-they-meet-in-poland-for-the-next-steps-nations-are-struggling-to-agree-on-how-the-ambitions-of-the-paris-agreement-can-be-realised-107712